>>http://theoatmeal.com/comics/design_hell
>
>Actually the web designer is a prima-donna. The web designer has confused his role in the client-supplier relationship. He thinks he is an artist and that his "art" has to be respected and remain "pure" or some similar irrelevant (to the client) ideal. But actually he is just a hired hand; hired to develop a website that suits the client and their opinion, not his. The web designer can offer "expert" advice and suggestions but at the end of the day the client's needs and wants need to be serviced and satisfied, not the web designers. The role of IT should be as a service to the needs of business and management/owners. IT can explain, advise, present pros and cons. And then the business owner decides. It's their penny.

The screed is exaggerated for effect, tongue is firmly embedded in cheek. Nonetheless it touches on some interesting topics.

You may have a low opinion of artists and/or web designers but there are experts/professionals in those fields and it's a bad idea to ignore their advice.

A design professional won't be contracted for a job where the client already knows exactly what they want. In that case the client will employ a web monkey or hired hand as you put it. No conflict arises because the web monkey merely implements the client's specification. No opinion is asked or offered.

If the client doesn't know what they want, then they hire the designer. They pay (usually a lot more) for his professional opinions. As part of due diligence the client will have reviewed the designer's portfolio and checked references from prior engagements. They'll have a pretty good idea of the designer's style and skill level.

A properly drawn contract will also define needs and wants. The owner wants the site to be Miffles' vanity project. But does it need to be that, or does it need to sell toast? If the need is the vanity site, the designer will likely decline the gig.

If the need is to sell toast, the client may claim Miffles' site will sell more. There needs to be A/B testing or some other mechanism in place to test such claims and both parties must live with the results. If the client refuses objective test criteria then there's a rationality challenge and the designer will likely decline the gig.

When clients engage professionals, it's not just clients with skin in the game. Think of the word of mouth in this situation:

Scenario 1: Client's Golfing Buddy (CGB) gives Client a call:

CGB: Hey, I see your new site is up!

Client: Yeah, isn't it great?

CGB: No, it's sh*te. I thought you hired a professional designer? Do me a favour and give me his name so I can tell my friends to stay the h*ll away from him.

Client: Uhh...

Scenario 2: CGA Continuing Education seminar:

CGA1: We redesigned our website and sales are up 15% !

Client's Accountant: So did we, and our sales went down 20%. After contracting a "professional", no less.

CGA1: Whoa! Who was that guy?

Scenario 3: Designer angling for a new gig:

Prospect: Okay, question 1. Show us your most recent work.

Designer: Uhh...

With touchy-feely stuff like art and design there are bound to be some differences of opinion. If they're too large, hopefully that can be identified in advance so the designer doesn't take the gig in the first place. But if not, the only sustainable option for the designer is to fire the client at the earliest opportunity.