Business Cards


I try to apply the principles I advocate not only in large things, but also in small. My business cards are a good example.

When we design something, we need to consider the purpose of the thing we design. The purpose of my business card is to:
• make it easy to contact me
• make me memorable
• make the card holder want to contact me

The first item is easy. The contact information on my business card is no different from that of any other business card: Name, occupation, and contact info.

I have stacks of business cards I've got from people I've met, whose faces I don't remember. I often take a snapshot with a camera when I meet someone for the first time, and add the picture to the address book in my computer.

This is a bit of a hassle, so it was a pretty obvious idea to add a picture of myself to the card. I chose a picture of me when I am working. The idea is to show that I do work if you hire me. (The picture also shows that I drink tea while working, but I hope that doesn't put you off. Tea is the fuel driving my creative engine.)

Most business cards are blank on the back side. That is an obvious waste. The question is how to put the space to use.

I decided I wanted to show a little bit about what I do. I do a lot of things, so what should I choose?

Thinking a bit, I thought, wait a minute, why make a choice? If I print the cards in small batches, I can have lots of different back sides. That way, people can chose the card they are most interested in, or take a couple of cards.

I have found that many people like to take two, three, or even four different cards when I tell them it is okay to do so. That is a good thing, partly because it makes our interaction a bit more memorable, partly because they have an extra card or two they can pass along to others.

Sometimes, when I pass my cards to groups of people, they start comparing cards. This is great. One more reason for people to remember me.


I have learned to hold the cards so people see the back side before I hand them over. If I don't, most people will tuck the card away without looking at the back.

I have tested giving people the card with the back side up, and that seems to work well. One person I gave a couple of cards to today looked at them and said: "Ah, your elevator speech."

I made the card to the left this morning. I printed only eight of them. Because I print such small batches, I can tinker with the card design and keep improving it. The next batch of Strategic Navigation cards will be slightly different.








The Innovative = Competitive card was the second card backside I designed this morning. I had the opportunity to pass a few business cards around today, and this one seems to be a winner: The image and heading convey a simple, clear message, and the colors are bright.

I will stick with this one for awhile. It will be interesting to see how many phone calls I get from people who have gotten this one.


Comments

Tobias Fors said…
This is excellent. Simple and powerful: a result of good design thinking.
May 16, 2009 8:53 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Waterfall vs. Agile: Battle of the Dunces or A Race to the Bottom?

Image
The major software methodology wars since the mid 1950’s. Someone was wrong on the Internet, so here we go… In a recent HBR article, It’s Time to End the Battle Between Waterfall and Agile , the author sets up a false premise: There is a war between Waterfall methodology and Agile. The war must end. And finally, you can combine the approaches to get the best of both worlds. This sounds good, but the article is based on a misunderstanding of both Waterfall and Agile. Also, there is no war between Waterfall methodology and Agile. There can’t be, because Waterfall methodology does not exist! Waterfall is a name for large projects that failed in the 1960’s. Waterfall was never a methodology, but a failure to apply the methodologies that existed back then. As I will show towards the end of this article, at least one of the “successful” Waterfall projects mentioned in the HBR article was neither successful, nor a Waterfall project. I got invaluable help from Alistair Cockburn. He fact che...
Read more

Performance Evaluations, Business Strategy, and Agile Methodologies

Image
It is performance evaluation time in many companies. This can be stressful, both to the people being evaluated, and the people doing the evaluation. In companies adopting agile software development methods, the tension can be extraordinary. Individual performance evaluations run counter to agile philosophy, which emphasizes team performance over individual performance. However, managers and corporate leaders need to take a few steps back, and consider the impact performance evaluations have on the organization as a whole. Especially now, in the midst of a recession, it is important to look at a companies current policies to see if they can be improved, or if they are actually holding the company back. So, how can a manager evaluate policy? Performance evaluation policies can serve as an excellent example. I'll confine myself to discussing the so-called ‘rank and yank’ methods. These are performance reviews were employees are ranked using a forced ranking system. It usually looks so...
Read more

Are Nash Equilibriums Killing Agile Initiatives?

Image
Over the past two years I have seen a lot of debate about the success of Agile software development. Agile methodologies can produce great results. This is well documented. Yet, in many companies, they don't. This has lead many people to question Agile. Some reject it altogether. However, the root cause of the problem isn't in the Agile methodologies. The root cause that makes Agile fail is in the companies adopting Agile methodologies. Let's look back about ten years, when Agile was beginning to gather momentum. It was believed that if a company was functionally organized, like this: Introducing an Agile software development method in part of the organization like this: would cause everyone in the organization to reevaluate their strategies, so that the organization could reorganize into a flow organization, like this: It turned out not to be that simple. An important reason is that most business organizations are designed to be in a stable state. All major playe...
Read more