"Like, Oh My God" = "I Am God": Heidi Dangelmaier and 3iying at AIGA's GAIN Conference
This past weekend, The Roosevelt Hotel, a short walk from Manhattan's Grand Central Station, hosted GAIN, AIGA's conference on business and design. Sold out for more than a month, the conference boasted more than 20 extremely accomplished presenters, including big design names such as Brian Collins and Stephen Doyle as well as a few notables from outside the design world, e.g. New Yorker writer and bestselling author Malcolm Gladwell.
When I arrived at GAIN, the first of Friday's after-lunch speakers had already taken the stage. This was Michael Jager of JDK Design, the studio responsible for the identity and packaging of the Xbox 360, among other trend-setting campaigns. Jager's theme was the importance and complex nature of "collaboration," and he illustrated his points by finding the words within that word: "lab," "ratio," "rat" ("there are always rats in the system"), and even "Borat." When I spoke with Jager a couple of days before his talk at GAIN, he promised surprises. These came at the end, in the form of a one-man band who led the crowd in a folk song about "the collaboration nation." Jager joined in on vocals, as did many of the 700 designers in attendance.
Debbie Millman, national board member of AIGA and host of the internet radio show "Design Matters," presided over this year's 20/20 challenge, in which 20 thriving designers were asked to communicate the secret of their business success in a 60-second visual presentation. Standout participants included Michael Ian Kaye, Julia Hoffmann (of "the MoMA"), and Under Consideration's Armin Vit...but for sheer star power it was difficult to beat Chip Kidd, who told a joke about onanism in a doctor's office, and a personal anecdote about mishearing the phrase "I'm from Target" as "I'm retarded." It was funnier coming from him.
On the Saturday afternoon schedule was a talk to which I had been looking forward: "Girl Market Relevancy. Rethinking Creativity," by Heidi Dangelmaier and 3iying. Dangelmaier launched 3iying three years ago as an "all-girl innovation think tank" designed to offer major brands and agencies "the insights, creative concepts, and strategies they need to succeed" with young women. 3iying (the name combines "third eye" with "ying," as in "ying/yang") is unique in that outside of Dangelmaier, its brand experts are all millennial girls themselves, some of whom are recruited from New York City high schools and put through a rigorous selection and training process. If you're questioning my terminology, you should know that Dangelmaier and 3iying have embraced the word "girl" and use it freely.
Before the conference, I asked Heidi via email what GAIN attendees could expect from her talk, and her response was as follows: "I think people will learn that we need to rethink a vital part of [the] design process, which is how to achieve deep emotional connections with the consumer [...] As consumers grow more savvy and have radically more choices, they also become liberated - they no longer have to accept things they do not like. Choices allow people the privilege of making decisions based on emotions: hate, love, and desire. This new liberation forces design to raise its bar and become more sophisticated. Average will not cut it any more, we have to impress and inspire."
Dangelmaier prepared the crowd for her presentation by placing on every chair in the room a torn-out magazine page bearing an ad that "turned the girl off." (The Reebok ad on my chair, taken from CosmoGIRL!, showed a "boy-crazy" blonde getting freaky with a dorky-chic male model in a library. I assume the silly sexual stereotype was the reason for 3iying's objection. Ads near me were for Jimmy Choo and Simple Shoes.) Accompanied by two 3iying girls on GAIN's stage, she stressed the millions of dollars that are currently being wasted on ad campaigns and communications that don't connect with young women. The 3iying team claimed that design professionals can sometimes settle into an "I Am God" mentality, according to which design skills alone are enough to create a genuine connection with an audience. Dangelmaier's view, however, is that "there are some things you just can't fake." Without the ability actually to see the world through another person's (in this case, a young woman's) eyes, all the technique and hard work in the world won't help you get through.
During the talk, I sensed some resistance to 3iying, even a slow-building resentment of their message among some conference attendees. There were at least a handful of walkouts before the Q&A session, and a pointed silence greeted 3iying's joking description of their simultaneous collaborations with brands and agencies as "threesomes." Later in the day, Stephen Doyle of Doyle Partners injected an out-of-nowhere 3iying putdown into a talk about designing for Martha Stewart Living, saying, "I have one thing to say to 3iying: 'Like, oh my God.'"
I contacted Heidi Dangelmaier by phone this morning to get her reaction to 3iying's reception at GAIN. She had a lot to say on the topic. "It's so easy to be judgmental, biased, arrogant," she said. "I could have made them laugh for an hour, but my talk was about business. I think biases got in the way. Maybe they didn't want business from a girl."
Instead of receiving questions about the substance of the presentation, Dangelmaier was, in her words, "yelled at" by women at the conference who were offended by the sex-tinged humor in her talk. "No one asked about an ad!" she exclaimed. "This is about business: how to connect with consumers, how to be a professional design firm. No one asked about any of that. This is deeply more complex than 'Oh my God.'"
Designers who want to learn more about 3iying's "girl-approved design methodology" will get a golden opportunity next month when 3iying.com launches an online series of monthly lessons on how to reach the millennial girl audience. Asked for details about this initiative, Heidi wrote: "I think I will start with trying to end (once and for all) about 25 cliches that people use when marketing to females. We have collected a pretty big list of design trends that really need to just go away; to use them is to just throw your money out the window. After that we will just keep people in beat to what me and the girls find important - which often has nothing to do with what people are reading in the trend books."
I, for one, will be watching with interest.
UPDATE: (11/17) AIGA has posted video of several complete GAIN presentations, among them Michael Jager's, Stephen Doyle and Gael Towey's, and Heidi Dangelmaier and 3iying's.
In addition to being valuable in and of themselves, these videos may help readers who were not at GAIN to resolve for themselves the debates in the comments below.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: "Like, Oh My God" = "I Am God": Heidi Dangelmaier and 3iying at AIGA's GAIN Conference.
TrackBack URL for this entry: https://mt.webmediabrands.com/mt-tb.cgi/8780
Thanks,
I felt like you too. I get irritated by AIGA's old-fogey, smartypants, crowd-mentality attitude. Too many people up there were talking the talk about designers "changing the world," but in reality they are just trying to look cool.
No way. I was at the Gain Conference and the 3iying presentation was abomindable. Not only was it the weakest presentation in an otherwise amazing experience, it was the weakest conference presentation I have seen in a long time.
It was exruciating watching Heidi and "her girls" and if Heidi does indeed employ these young women for free (as she indicated), I wouldn't be surprised if she is breaking some employment laws.
I was there too, i felt that the girls made some very important
business arguments about the how to approach the changing
consumer culture.....
much more relevant, insightful and challenging then many of the
other talks,
I felt that Dangelmaier's message was lost in the delivery. Joining her on stage were her coworkers, one of which was I think around 17, and the only thing she did was offer up sexual innuendo. What are we supposed to learn from that?
I'm sure it was funny on paper, but overall, the presentation was mostly confusing. The graphics on the slides were too wordy, and the fact that they were simply read back to the audience made it seem as if the group was unprepared. When they came out on stage I could see they were ready to make a statement and shake things up, and I was looking forward to it. But in the end I think they forgot that they were not talking to a room full of teenage girls. If they claim to be able to bridge the gap between "us" and "them," they should have been able to translate much better.
hi. heidi dangelmaier here.
I am stepping in because your comments are not only
inaccurate they are cruel.
To B: regarding hiring girls
Why are you intent on making 3iying sound exploitive, when we
are infact the opposite : we enable young girls here to get involved as professionals in design, and they get a voice and
the opportunity to have a real impact on the things they use and buy.
Girls here get to work with major brands, they write for businessweek, and get to speak up for what is real and important to them
What i said at the aiga event was that the girls go through an apprenticeship/training program, and if they pass and make they team, they are then hired for client work. We work with many of the schools who (college and high school) - these schools believe
in the girls and respect what we are accomplishing together at
3iying.
--------------------------
To M.
We offered a different perspective on the design process -
instead of picking on details like how many words per slide
we did not show design because it was a talk on organization
structures and innovation
what i am far more interested in discussing what you
understood and did not understand about the design
methodology we presented
it was suppose to be a presentation on the design/business-
and consumer change - and that is what our talk addressed
It's fascinating listening to the dinosaurs of design react to a true revolutionary like Heidi. No one can disagree with the central thesis of her presentation: that craft isn't enough to design for a particular audience, especially one as complex and elusive as millennial girls. Instead we see attacks on delivery (what do you expect from nervous 17 year-olds? does anyone think their delivery is going to be as polished as professional presenters like Malcolm Gladwell?), or personal attacks on Heidi as a "corrupter of youth." Who else at the conference got up and shared a truly new model that is appropriate for the design challenges of the 21st century? The answer is: no one. Instead, we watched the so-called "gods" of design expound endlessly on the same junk they have been doing (exactly the same way) for decades. The more their work fails to connect with the new consumer, the more fodder it gives to 3iying to steal the business right from under their noses.
Holy Smokes! About my "out-of nowhere 3iying putdown" I would like to say that it was neither "out-of-nowhere" nor was it a putdown. I believe you are quoting me accurately but without the supporting context. Right after I made fun of Target (in a good-natured way) for having a name derived from the military industrial complex (referencing Brian Collins' metaphors), I said that it occurred to me during the 3iying talk, that there are some languages that I don't speak. This meant 3iying was correct, and I self-deprecatingly referred to myself as a "50-year-old white guy", the gist was that I don't speak 17-year-old girl. To demonstrate the difference, I quoted Billy Collins, former poet laureate, who told me he overheard a haiku on the campus quad:
"I told him and he
Was like "Oh my God," and I
Was like "Oh my God."
The audience laughed. Roared, actually. The humor in his poem was finding meter in ordinary conversation and unfiltered parlance on a college campus. (Do I really need to explain this?) He was enjoying the language for what it is. More than anything, my point was to acknowledge that there IS a new generation with its own language, values etc, and to deliver this idea with a little bit of humor.
"Like oh my God" was therefore quoting back to 3iying the "poetry" of a new generation as reported to me by the national Poet Laureate. It was not a putdown. If anything, it was a salute.
As my kids would say, "Whatever."
I'm sure 3iying has the best of intentions. I was glad they addressed the issue of marketers overgeneralizing and misrepresenting millennial girls. However, I don't think the crowd was upset by this. I didn't see reactions of shrewdness or arrogance. It didn't seem like anyone was offended at 3iying's message, use of young women in the agency, and I doubt many thought 3iying was stepping on their turf. Instead, I think people expected a more comprehensive presentation that clearly outlined their point, provided information to back their point, and proposed solution. Some in the crowd were more confused after the presentation ... not insulted.
What concerned me with the presentation was the oversimplification of the design process, the accusation that design is only a craft, and the insinuated belief that 3iying are being picked on. What they were talking about wasn't revolutionary at all. It's basic ethnographic research. Luis Fitch made the same case for the Hispanic community. What 3iying was pointing out was that millennial girls are poorly understood. So are Hispanics and many other groups of people.
The conference wasn't full of speakers who were "just trying to look cool". You cannot discount presentation. Presentation IS communication and how things are communicated is the very thing 3iying is criticizing. If anything it seemed 3iying was utilizing gimmick than any other presenter.
It bothers me that Heidi takes such offense to criticism. Please lose the victim mentality. Many marketers, advertisers, and designers agree with 3iying and would love for 3iying to provide them with relevant insights into the cares and concerns of millennial girls. Please don't paint us as the evil, old dinosaurs bent on doing things the way they've always been done. It's simply not true.
I think that if Dangelmaier ever wants to survive in such a cutthroat business, she needs to learn to handle criticism. These comments are not "cruel"; they are personal biased opinions. 3iying has them, too. Whether she chooses to agree with them or not is up to her, but it's hard to expect anything less than resentful resistance when you stand up in front of a room full of professional designers and businessmen and tell them that their entire methodology is wrong.
3iying's "revolutionary" tactics are just plain common sense. If you have a product designed for a specific demographic, you'll shove your advertisements in the face of every member of that group as hard as you can. Obvious, no? You could put teen girls in charge of advertising, but why employ your demographic when its base is immature and nowhere near as seasoned as most design proffesionals? This is what focus groups are for.
The fact that Dangelmaier managed to find faults in enough magazine advertisements to fill every seat at the convention brings their credibility into question as well: are the girls at 3iying simply trying to find problems with these advertisements in order to make a point? Are there really as many horrible ad campaigns in circulation as they say? The more 3iying discredits the work of their opponents, the more opportunities for employment they open themselves to. I call shenanigans.
Another thing: where have we seen 3iying's "groundbreaking" work before? If the industry is so littered with garbage, shouldn't they have offered a slew of reparatory and revolutionary advertising after having already dived into marketing some three years ago? Their website offers not much more than a lame explanation of their methodology and a faux bad-ass, in-your-face attitude. Where is their portfolio? They've talked the talk at GAIN, but when have they--or, rather, when will they––walk the walk? This leads me to believe that Dangelmaier is more of a businesswoman than a true artist. "Idea People" are a necessary component of advertising, certainly--but when they aren't paired with capable designers, they couldn't possibly go farther than their word processors. 3iying is in desperate need of some eye candy.
This is my opinion: 3iying is bogus. I'm not being cruel, I'm being realistic. I would be very surprised to see them penetrate the mainstream industry as deeply as they say they will. Without a dedicated team of HIGHLY capable, mature, and experienced "girls" at the helm, the company will begin to take on water rather quickly. If their dreary, wordy keynote presentations and novice-level website are any indication, this ship will be sinking soon.
At least then these interning teens will have an incentive to find real jobs...
To Tim and anyone else interested.
I would be happy to show any of you a very large portfolio of
design innovation - please contact us if you are interested.
We did not not show any work at the event because we were
told to not talk about ourselves and show portfolio, so we
wrote an essay on business.
I suggest that next time any of you start putting a group
down, ask them a question directly first to make sure you
are not operating on false assumptions.
3iying has worked with many notable agencies, including this
year past year : unilever, merck, clearasil, varsity, crayola,
Veet, Jones Apparel, Sunny Delight etc..
This work has included rebranding, 360 campaign , and new product development.
If you are also interested in my history, you would have
learned that prior to 3iying i was hired by many firms for
product design (att, samsung, electronic art) that i
created new entertainment platforms for major entertainment
firms ( cbs, time warner, comedy central, aol, smithsonian)
etc.. etc..
I cannot say anything about the convention, because I was not there. I can say though that the repeated defense by either Heidi Dangelmaier, or mearly someone posting comments under that name, as there is no lock on names, doesn't really endear me to the professionalism of the group. It is one thing to disprove false accusations, and another to argue against criticism.
"During the talk, I sensed some resistance to 3iying..."
A slight understatement. The presentation was silly and just painful to watch. By the end, I was watching through clenched fingers, like a bad (good?) horror movie.
The employees that Heidi chose to bring were part of the problem. It reminded me of "Sarah Palin syndrome": speaking with great confidence and authority about things they simply do not understand. It was foolish to think that a crowd of highly-experienced designers and communicators would react positively to a lecture on the failings of the advertising/marketing/design industry by a couple of high-schoolers. She should not have included them.
And the message...what is radical about 3iying's message? That advertisers really need to get know their audience? How is that radical? Perhaps not all advertisers/agencies are getting right—perhaps focus groups don't work as they should—but step 1 in any advertising/marketing process is, uh, getting to know the audience inside-out. 3iying may have a different approach, but you made it sound like no one is even attempting to do this. This is silly.
It's no wonder you were pounced on by women following the presentation. Any presenter that ends with a chipper "so, if you interested in threesomes, give us a call!" is not going to poll well in a crowd of experienced, capable, and strong women.
OH my god is right!
What is up all you judgemental conservative-extreme
female designers like RA
I can't believe your undies are all in a knot over a joke
the girls made. The threesome analogy was about a
collaborative business model.
Have any of you every turned on a tv or watched
snl - the jokes were harmless and contemporary
Your posts just prove the point 3iying was trying to make,
our own personal issues are getting in the way of us
appreciating and being able to connect to the younger
generations - their needs and their viewpoint
instead of trying to understand the message the girls
were communicating all we can do is get petty
i think it took considerable courage for those young
girls to present their viewpoints - and it also meant
heidi respects young people to invite them to speak
if this thread reflects the level of inquiry and humanity we are bringing into our work - i agree with the earlier post - designers
like to talk the talk of being innovative, but we damn well
don't have the balls or open mindedness to walk the walk
pathethetic
Dear "pathetic":
This wins my "sentence of the week" award: "The threesome analogy was about a collaborative business model." Congrats.
Heidi may have shown "respect for young people by inviting them to speak," but this does not translate to respect for her audience. We are busy professionals who have to evaluate the opportunity cost of attending these events (lost productivity in addition to the actual conference fee). We want to hear from other experienced professionals who are capable of offering up nuanced viewpoints (read—every other presenter at the event). Not, as I said, high schoolers who have been instilled with a bizarrely unrealistic level of self-confidence and attitude by their boss.
I have nothing against listening to a teenager's viewpoint. But not when they think they know better than everyone else.