Three weeks ago, I started an A/B test to compare the experience and end product of two crowdsource design services, 99designs and DesignCrowd. I blogged about the contest setups, design reviews, customer service, and the final designs.
Since my day job is being a product owner, I feel very strongly about good user experience and function. So, I'll summarize my comparison of 99designs and DesignCrowd in two ways: 1) how a contest holder can get the most out of using crowdsource design, and 2) how the design services themselves could be improved.
How to effectively use crowdsource design services:
Know what you want before you start. This goes for everything from the type of deliverable (logo, brochure, website, etc.) to the values that you want the deliverable to represent.
Unless you're absolutely sure about a particular aesthetic element that you want, avoid giving instructions about specific features. In other words, leave the creativity to the designers. Just give them enough information about your theme, values, or functions, and let them be creative in how to represent it.
Continuously update your brief as soon as you learn about what you like and don't like.
99designs has the better user experience, hands down. They also have a larger pool of designers. In my case, 99designs gathered 2.5x more designs submissions than DesignCrowd. Also, if you prefer to have designers viewing each others' work so that they get a sense of where your idea is going, then use 99designs.
DesignCrowd may not have an ideal user flow, but they offer a 'blind contest' by default. In other words, designs are not publicly shared throughout the life of the project. 99designs offers this, too, but only to returning contest holders.
How crowdsource design services could be improved:
Responsive design. These days, mobile is key. The biggest issue I had when using both DesignCrowd and 99designs is that the mobile experience on both sites were less than desirable. Responsive design is an absolute must if a contest holder is being notified on-the-go, and he/she attempts to access the design contest from a smartphone or tablet.
Configurable notifications. Whether notifications are through email or a possible app, contest holders need complete control over how and when to be notified. After launching my contest, DesignCrowd inundated me with emails, and there were very limited options for controlling emails. Ideally, contest holders should be able to dictate when, how, and what to be notified about (e.g., immediate, periodic, or once-a-day email summaries of submissions)
Continuous workflow. Organizing content and providing an efficient way to review, eliminate, and/or provide feedback will go a long way for contest holders. The filtering and rating options on 99designs are much better than DesignCrowd, but both sites could be improved by thinking through when and why a user clicks the 'back' button or previously clicked links. Ideally, good workflow should never force the contest holder to go back.
If I had to recommend one site, it would be 99designs. Everything from site experience to customer service is simply more refined than that of DesignCrowd. For what it's worth, however, the logo which I will use for SoundQuest came from DesignCrowd.
In closing, I think crowdsource services are an incredible way of creating an accessible and affordable marketplace for digital services, such as design. I had fun evaluating these two services, and it not only gave me two great designs, but it also provided me with an opportunity to learn about engaging user experiences and the crowdsource business model. I hope that one day my business, SoundQuest, will be able to create an equally successful marketplace.