I started writing this as part of a response to a reader’s question and it ended up being such a rant, I decided to make it a whole new post.

The confusion

This is a confusing topic and for good reason. Here’s as best a response as I can give. When beginners are starting out learning the basics of creating websites, they’re responsible for every aspect of the site. This includes deciding what pages there are, how they look, how they function, etc. I personally started creating websites for myself for fun when I was about 15, and I started charging for them when I was 16 or 17. This seems to be a path that many others follow and at this point it seems only natural to call one’s self a “web designer”. Since you are basically designing everything, it isn’t necessarily misleading and seems pretty straightforward and harmless.

Now fast forward 10 years. This young “web designer” has possibly gotten very deeply involved in one or many of the different fragments of creating websites professionally. At this stage in the game, those fragments, and the titles associated with them look much more specialized.

You now have specialists in areas like:

On the front end:
- wireframe and usability design
- motion and interaction design
- graphic and user interface design
- animation (Flash), video, sound, etc.

On the back end:
- web programming
- database design
- architecting and development environment design

…and the list goes on.

You’ll notice the distinction between “front end” and “back end” here. In general, “front end” refers to the parts of the website a user can see, and “back end” refers to the programatic inner working that drive the site. Herein lies the root of our problem - companies hiring front end specialists say they are looking for “designers”, and companies hiring back end specialists usually say they’re looking for “developers”.

So, even after 10 years of studying, working, honing your skills, becoming an accomplished specialist in any of the front end related positions - you still share the same general job title as a 16 year old. It’s the same with developers who generally come from a computer science or engineering background. They’re likely competent in a few core languages but they share the title “web developer” with anyone who knows any language.

Problems caused by the confusion

One of the problems which makes the question of validating a designer’s qualifications so difficult to answer is that often, after 10 years of producing websites, someone might still only have intermediate knowledge and ability. This is because many people just enjoy doing it aside from a full time job elsewhere. This is fine, and there’s really no purpose for them to start learning anything more because they likely either don’t have the time or desire.

So, asking a candidate for “years of experience” doesn’t necessarily validate someone as capable. It’s best to ask for years of experience “…with technology A”. This will get you a little closer to the truth about whether someone is actually some variant of a designer, developer, or is just a generalist.

One of the core and most dangerous problem arising from this confusion is that people getting into web business for the first time start looking for a “web designer” and end up getting just that “a design”. They think they’re getting a whole site “made” but they end up with basically a bunch of pictures. This usually only happens in rare cases such as:

- the designer is acting predatorily
- the client just doesn’t listen to the designer and the designer fails to really clarify deliverables

In both of these instances, a legal work agreement is likely not present. If it were, it would specify at least the deliverables and that alone would clear up any confusion. Sadly enough, money does change hands with no contract, and people end up getting screwed.

The associated article is here: “What Qualifications to Look For in a Web Developer”.