Crowdsourcing show design

[zigzigZAG]

What has been most excruciating for me to see in the last couple decades is corps with championship talent dragged down by pedestrian, or sometimes bone-headed design decisions made by a very small group of people who have been at the design game for years, and who seem to struggle to be brilliant year in and year out. As you'd expect.

Why hasn't any corps design team had the creativity, vision, and faith in its fans and FMM's to crowdsource its design? Or at least to float or exchange ideas and then have the guts to set egos aside and come up with a new design when

I'll use the Cadets as an example: You can go back and read these forums when design themes and music was announced for several shows over the last decade or so, and most people reacted with apathy, and even dismay, to certain shows when they were announced in the fall. Those shows didn't end up winning, to put it mildly.

I mean, you just KNOW that certain show design packages are going to be a drag on a corps. Did anyone in the universe think that a Christmas music show would ever win gold or be a fan favorite? Clearly the design team didn't think or care to ask anyone for input before announcing this design concept, and the marching members had to live with it, or worse, suffer from it.

Great show designs get an entire corps to perform at the highest level, even performing over their heads, and beating corps who have on average better across-the-board talent, but whose design is dragging them down. Everyone knows which couple of shows this year have the best design, and everyone knows that those corps will end up with gold and silver this year. Deservedly.

We've seen steps toward crowdsourcing made in the past. Look at the Cadets logo, which is among the best out there. That was developed using a crowdsourcing campaign. They got submissions from dozens of fans and FMM's, and chose the best. If I recall correctly, they also used "the crowd" to help make the decision.

Decisions about the design of major architecture projects, or product designs, or corporate image packages, and many other areas, are basically crowdsourced all the time. We use talent contests, advertise for job openings, as a standard, instead of only relying on in-house talent. For a major building, it's common that a few hundred top architecture firms submit designs, and a team of creatives and the stakeholders select the best. Could you imagine how crappy our architecture would be if the stakeholders and executives were also the designers?

Why not outsource design as the same way as above? There are many, many talented designers out there with great ideas, from HS band directors to college graduate students in music to fans to the next great DCI design visionaries who just haven't had their shot yet. There are also many amateurs with great ideas that a design team could take forward and build a great show around. Why not vastly expand your design talent pool?

I can think of a number of shows in recent years that have suffered considerably - and by that we mean the marching members suffer and struggle unfairly with a design package that makes it impossible for them to be their best - because of such close-minded, in-house design decisions being made.

If I were a corps director who want to do the best for his members, and generate the buzz of the year for 2015, which helps recruitment, I'd do the following:

1. Announce that the 2015 campaign will be crowdsourced asap and get their fans thinking. A show design concept need only be a couple pages long - theme, music, uniform concepts, how the design could be integrated into drill, body movement, whatever. They should announce the procedure too - submission deadlines, format for submissions, etc. Crowdsourcing need not be fully public either, just involve as many people as possible. Corps do like to keep a certain amount of secrecy, I realize.

2. Float the top-10 show concepts and design ideas with their fans and see which generates the most buzz among the crowd, and by buzz, I mean not just popularity, but the amount of inspiration in the form of additional ideas suggested for a certain concept. Several of those top-10 concepts could even be by the design team and corps management themselves, though don't need to be identified as such.

3. Commit to the principle that they are willing to scrap everything and change course completely even in late Fall if the crowd doesn't like where the design is going.

I'm 100% confident that the above would work, because it works in many areas outside of DCI.

So why haven't we seen this yet? Ego? Stubbornness? Lack of vision?

In any year, at least 5 corps have the talent to win. It's show design that holds them back. So which corps will take the next step to greatly increase the probability that they will have championship design next year?

[Cappybara]

What has been most excruciating for me to see in the last couple decades is corps with championship talent dragged down by pedestrian, or sometimes bone-headed design decisions made by a very small group of people who have been at the design game for years, and who seem to struggle to be brilliant year in and year out. As you'd expect.

Why hasn't any corps design team had the creativity, vision, and faith in its fans and FMM's to crowdsource its design? Or at least to float or exchange ideas and then have the guts to set egos aside and come up with a new design when

I'll use the Cadets as an example: You can go back and read these forums when design themes and music was announced for several shows over the last decade or so, and most people reacted with apathy, and even dismay, to certain shows when they were announced in the fall. Those shows didn't end up winning, to put it mildly.

I mean, you just KNOW that certain show design packages are going to be a drag on a corps. Did anyone in the universe think that a Christmas music show would ever win gold or be a fan favorite? Clearly the design team didn't think or care to ask anyone for input before announcing this design concept, and the marching members had to live with it, or worse, suffer from it.

Great show designs get an entire corps to perform at the highest level, even performing over their heads, and beating corps who have on average better across-the-board talent, but whose design is dragging them down. Everyone knows which couple of shows this year have the best design, and everyone knows that those corps will end up with gold and silver this year. Deservedly.

We've seen steps toward crowdsourcing made in the past. Look at the Cadets logo, which is among the best out there. That was developed using a crowdsourcing campaign. They got submissions from dozens of fans and FMM's, and chose the best. If I recall correctly, they also used "the crowd" to help make the decision.

Decisions about the design of major architecture projects, or product designs, or corporate image packages, and many other areas, are basically crowdsourced all the time. We use talent contests, advertise for job openings, as a standard, instead of only relying on in-house talent. For a major building, it's common that a few hundred top architecture firms submit designs, and a team of creatives and the stakeholders select the best. Could you imagine how crappy our architecture would be if the stakeholders and executives were also the designers?

Why not outsource design as the same way as above? There are many, many talented designers out there with great ideas, from HS band directors to college graduate students in music to fans to the next great DCI design visionaries who just haven't had their shot yet. There are also many amateurs with great ideas that a design team could take forward and build a great show around. Why not vastly expand your design talent pool?

I can think of a number of shows in recent years that have suffered considerably - and by that we mean the marching members suffer and struggle unfairly with a design package that makes it impossible for them to be their best - because of such close-minded, in-house design decisions being made.

If I were a corps director who want to do the best for his members, and generate the buzz of the year for 2015, which helps recruitment, I'd do the following:

1. Announce that the 2015 campaign will be crowdsourced asap and get their fans thinking. A show design concept need only be a couple pages long - theme, music, uniform concepts, how the design could be integrated into drill, body movement, whatever. They should announce the procedure too - submission deadlines, format for submissions, etc. Crowdsourcing need not be fully public either, just involve as many people as possible. Corps do like to keep a certain amount of secrecy, I realize.

2. Float the top-10 show concepts and design ideas with their fans and see which generates the most buzz among the crowd, and by buzz, I mean not just popularity, but the amount of inspiration in the form of additional ideas suggested for a certain concept. Several of those top-10 concepts could even be by the design team and corps management themselves, though don't need to be identified as such.

3. Commit to the principle that they are willing to scrap everything and change course completely even in late Fall if the crowd doesn't like where the design is going.

I'm 100% confident that the above would work, because it works in many areas outside of DCI.

So why haven't we seen this yet? Ego? Stubbornness? Lack of vision?

In any year, at least 5 corps have the talent to win. It's show design that holds them back. So which corps will take the next step to greatly increase the probability that they will have championship design next year?

Really awesome idea and I agree the corps should try this.

On a side note, it's funny how you use Cadets 2012 as an example because that is one of my favorite modern Cadets shows (post 2000). Just disappointing that DCI couldn't secure the rights to the narration at the end.

[Tommeee]

Cadets actually did do this a couple years ago. There was a contest, and MANY people submitted ideas. Some even wrote basically an entire show.

[troon8]

What has been most excruciating for me to see in the last couple decades is corps with championship talent dragged down by pedestrian, or sometimes bone-headed design decisions made by a very small group of people who have been at the design game for years, and who seem to struggle to be brilliant year in and year out. As you'd expect.

Why hasn't any corps design team had the creativity, vision, and faith in its fans and FMM's to crowdsource its design? Or at least to float or exchange ideas and then have the guts to set egos aside and come up with a new design when

I'll use the Cadets as an example: You can go back and read these forums when design themes and music was announced for several shows over the last decade or so, and most people reacted with apathy, and even dismay, to certain shows when they were announced in the fall. Those shows didn't end up winning, to put it mildly.

I mean, you just KNOW that certain show design packages are going to be a drag on a corps. Did anyone in the universe think that a Christmas music show would ever win gold or be a fan favorite? Clearly the design team didn't think or care to ask anyone for input before announcing this design concept, and the marching members had to live with it, or worse, suffer from it.

Great show designs get an entire corps to perform at the highest level, even performing over their heads, and beating corps who have on average better across-the-board talent, but whose design is dragging them down. Everyone knows which couple of shows this year have the best design, and everyone knows that those corps will end up with gold and silver this year. Deservedly.

We've seen steps toward crowdsourcing made in the past. Look at the Cadets logo, which is among the best out there. That was developed using a crowdsourcing campaign. They got submissions from dozens of fans and FMM's, and chose the best. If I recall correctly, they also used "the crowd" to help make the decision.

Decisions about the design of major architecture projects, or product designs, or corporate image packages, and many other areas, are basically crowdsourced all the time. We use talent contests, advertise for job openings, as a standard, instead of only relying on in-house talent. For a major building, it's common that a few hundred top architecture firms submit designs, and a team of creatives and the stakeholders select the best. Could you imagine how crappy our architecture would be if the stakeholders and executives were also the designers?

Why not outsource design as the same way as above? There are many, many talented designers out there with great ideas, from HS band directors to college graduate students in music to fans to the next great DCI design visionaries who just haven't had their shot yet. There are also many amateurs with great ideas that a design team could take forward and build a great show around. Why not vastly expand your design talent pool?

I can think of a number of shows in recent years that have suffered considerably - and by that we mean the marching members suffer and struggle unfairly with a design package that makes it impossible for them to be their best - because of such close-minded, in-house design decisions being made.

If I were a corps director who want to do the best for his members, and generate the buzz of the year for 2015, which helps recruitment, I'd do the following:

1. Announce that the 2015 campaign will be crowdsourced asap and get their fans thinking. A show design concept need only be a couple pages long - theme, music, uniform concepts, how the design could be integrated into drill, body movement, whatever. They should announce the procedure too - submission deadlines, format for submissions, etc. Crowdsourcing need not be fully public either, just involve as many people as possible. Corps do like to keep a certain amount of secrecy, I realize.

2. Float the top-10 show concepts and design ideas with their fans and see which generates the most buzz among the crowd, and by buzz, I mean not just popularity, but the amount of inspiration in the form of additional ideas suggested for a certain concept. Several of those top-10 concepts could even be by the design team and corps management themselves, though don't need to be identified as such.

3. Commit to the principle that they are willing to scrap everything and change course completely even in late Fall if the crowd doesn't like where the design is going.

I'm 100% confident that the above would work, because it works in many areas outside of DCI.

So why haven't we seen this yet? Ego? Stubbornness? Lack of vision?

In any year, at least 5 corps have the talent to win. It's show design that holds them back. So which corps will take the next step to greatly increase the probability that they will have championship design next year?

Because even if a corps were to try this, they're still not going to please everyone.

My thoughts are that every design team with every corps is bound to have a stinker every so often. There have been plenty of designs where it's obvious in hindsight to ask "WTF were they thinking?!" Maybe it's bad group-think, but more likely it's an experiment that just didn't work out the way they hoped. To use your example, I think that yes, the Cadets team did think that "a Christmas music show would ever win gold or be a fan favorite." They may not have been right, but hindsight is 20/20. I really doubt that "ego, stubbornness, or lack of vision" are part of it. For every example like that there's also an example of shows that might not have been popular had you described them to someone on paper (Crown last year or in 2009 come to my mind) but managed to do just fine.

Also the method you're describing would complicate an already complicated process to the point of insanity. Even if it were crowd sourced the way you describe, that's hardly a guarantee to make it popular and/or successful.

Edited August 3, 2014 by troon8

[pammy25]

Of course ego is a huge part of it. This isn't just with world class DCI. It goes all the way down to high school marching and drumline/winterguard shows. On the one side, it can be chaotic and unproductive to try to listen to everyone's input, but on the other the refusal to even consider outside input can really hinder the growth of a show's design. Believe me, as a somewhat creative but not credentialed person, I know it's very frustrating to have good ideas but not be taken seriously or considered at all. But I also understand and respect that the show designers and directors have to have their own protocol.

Which of this year's shows would have benefitted most from being more open to outside input? The one that sticks out to me is Crown. After winning last year it seems they decided that they had to do something so 'out there' that they didn't necessarily listen to early critiques from fans, etc. There are some brilliant aspects to their show this year - the percussion metal bar feature is one that I really like. But there are others that seem to suffer from a severe lack of taste and editing, to borrow terms from the fashion design world. The frisbees and trampolines? Too much in my view. One or two trampolines used more judiciously would have had more impact. Edit, edit, edit.

Unfortunately, the more opinions that designers have to consider the more confusing and frustrating the decision process becomes. Anyway, a crowd-sourced show does sound like a good experiment for a corps that is brave enough to try it.

[zigzigZAG]

I am only referring to the initial show concept, not involving "the crowd" through the entire design process. That wouldn't be insanely complicated, just vastly expand the number of somewhat worked-out concepts that the corps design team considers.

Which Cadets show was crowdsourced recently?

[ShortAndFast]

Ironically, given the target of your post, the Cadets are the corps that has gone farthest with the idea of crowdsourcing a show.

Most recently, Hop asked for ideas for the side-by-side show. There was also an earlier year when he asked for show concepts. The timing is awkward - most fans aren't paying attention in the winter when you need to solidify your show. By the time every fan on the internet is pointing out how lame your trampolines are, it's far too late to change your show.

[zigzigZAG]

Ironically, given the target of your post, the Cadets are the corps that has gone farthest with the idea of crowdsourcing a show.

Most recently, Hop asked for ideas for the side-by-side show. There was also an earlier year when he asked for show concepts. The timing is awkward - most fans aren't paying attention in the winter when you need to solidify your show. By the time every fan on the internet is pointing out how lame your trampolines are, it's far too late to change your show.

I used the Cadets as an example of crowdsourcing a logo, so I'm giving credit there.

If some of the Side by Side concepts were crowdsourced, I hope that one of them wasn't the Towers, which clearly cost them a shot at gold. Cadets 2013 were a monster corps.

I don't mean only to critique Cadets for design. One need only look at Crown this year, whose design is hobbling a championship-caliber corps, and which will likely result in a 5th place finish as a result.

In industry, virtually NO ONE these days is doing their R&D entirely in-house. They're outsourcing, using open innovation, and accelerating innovation as a result.

I'm elated to hear that the Cadets were the first to crowdsource. I think they should do it every year. What do they, or anyone else, have to lose? I'd bet that the Cadets fan base is more creative (and more critical) than anyone else out there, and clearly they're more involved, based on the amount of discussion of their shows every year.

[oldbandguy]

Interesting...but shouldn't you be addressing your concerns about show design to the corps at the bottom? The designers for those

consistently near the top (ie The Cadets) seem to be doing alright.

[tja273]

Keep in mind that many of these corps (at least the top corps) do not just sit down in September and start coming up with ideas for next year. Many of these ideas have been rolling around in their collective consciousness for several years before they are put on the field.