Build a Design Practice

Proof required

Submit a portfolio page, PDF, or Notion link showing all 3 engagements: the brief or scope document for each, the delivered artifact for each (or a link to the live work), and the client sign-off or payment receipt for each. Include the documented feedback from at least 1 client (written, voice note transcript, or video). Submit a 100-word summary of the most difficult brief and the primary design decision it required.

What gets checked

• At least 2 clients are not prior personal contacts — a portfolio of 3 friends' logos does not constitute a client practice; the brief-to-delivery cycle for a stranger is substantially different and must be demonstrated
• Client sign-off or payment receipt confirms the work was accepted — a completed design that the client declined is valuable learning but does not count toward the 3 engagements
• Brief documents the client's problem — 'they wanted a logo' is not a brief; 'they run a craft bakery targeting professional women 35–55 who want a premium gifting option; they wanted a wordmark that felt artisanal but not folksy' is

Common mistakes

• Briefs that are self-defined or purely aesthetic — 'I designed a logo for my friend and they liked the blue version' is not a client engagement; the brief must document a business or communication problem the client brought to you
• Work that was never delivered or accepted — a portfolio of concepts and proposals with no completions does not demonstrate the ability to close a design engagement
• Client feedback that is purely positive with no documented challenge or revision — at least 1 documented revision cycle with a client is the expected minimum for a real engagement; a client who accepted the first concept without a single change is a red flag, not a success signal

Resources

What a verifier looks for

• Ask the submitter to describe the moment a client asked for something they knew was wrong and how they handled it — genuine client experience always surfaces at least one brief tension; a submitter who cannot name one has not worked with real clients
• Check the client sign-offs: ask the submitter to explain what 'accepted' means for the most recent engagement — was it a single approval or an iterative process?
• Ask what they priced the work at and how they determined the price — pricing is the most avoided part of a design practice and is the most revealing about whether the submitter is running a practice or doing favours
• Ask which of the 3 clients they would most like to work with again and why — this reveals whether the engagements produced relationships (a marker of a practice) or just transactions

You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.

Proof required

Submit the documented acquisition process: the method (content strategy, outreach template, referral script, or platform strategy), evidence it was run at least twice (2 outreach batches, 2 content posts with analytics, 2 referral asks — whatever matches the method), and at least 1 result that converted to a new client conversation. Submit a 150-word reflection on the conversion rate and what you would change in the next run.

What gets checked

• The method is documented as a process, not an anecdote — 'I posted on LinkedIn and got a client' is an anecdote; 'I post a case study every 2 weeks, share it in 3 design communities, and DM any commenters who are at a company in my target sector' is a process
• At least 1 result from someone who did not already know you — a referral from a past client to their colleague counts; a referral to your own brother does not
• Reflection names a specific conversion rate and a specific change — 'I'll do more outreach' is not a specific change; '3/20 cold emails opened, 1/20 replied, I'll test a different subject line focusing on the client's sector rather than design credentials' is

Common mistakes

• A method that only works through warm connections — a design practice that cannot acquire clients from outside a personal network is not a scalable practice
• A single successful acquisition with no documented repeat attempt — the validation that the method is repeatable is the second run, not the first result
• A reflection that attributes low conversion to the platform ('design Twitter is dead') rather than to the specific method — the most common and most avoidable analysis failure in acquisition reflection

Resources

What a verifier looks for

• Ask the submitter to walk through the documented acquisition process step by step — a genuine process can be described in 5–7 steps; 'I just reach out to people' is not a process
• Ask for the specific conversion rate from the most recent run — genuine acquisition validation always produces a number; 'it went pretty well' is not a conversion rate
• Ask what they would do differently if the method produced zero responses in the next run — this tests whether the method has observable failure signals and a response protocol
• Ask who their ideal client is and how the current acquisition method reaches them — a method that cannot be targeted is a pipeline problem in disguise

You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.

Proof required

Submit your M1 portfolio link and M2 acquisition documentation plus the reviewer's written assessment: the pricing challenge and your response, the acquisition method fragility challenge and your response, the hypothetical response, and their sign-off confirming their role and a live session.

What gets checked

• Pricing challenge response names a specific engagement, a specific reason the pricing was too low, and a specific new rate — 'I'd charge more' is not a response; 'for the branding project I charged £800 for 3 weeks of work; the client used it commercially for 2 years, so I'd charge £2,200–2,500 for equivalent scope now with a licensing clause' is
• Acquisition method fragility response names the single most important thing that could break the method — not a long list of risks but the single load-bearing assumption that, if wrong, collapses the method entirely
• Hypothetical response names a specific decision: take the project and subcontract the gap, decline it and refer the client, or take the project and use it as a learning stretch — with a rationale for why in the context of the current practice

Common mistakes

• Pricing challenge response that is defensive about the original pricing — the reviewer is testing whether you can evaluate a commercial decision in retrospect, not whether you made the right call
• Hypothetical response that avoids the decision ('it depends on the client') — the reviewer is testing your decision-making framework, not the right answer; a clear choice with a clear rationale is the expected response
• A reviewer who is primarily an employee designer without client practice experience — the challenge questions require someone who has personally negotiated, acquired, and retained clients

Resources

What a verifier looks for

• The hypothetical brief should be specific — 'a client wants you to design a physical exhibition' or 'a client wants a brand video' are better than 'a client wants something you can't do'; specific briefs reveal whether the submitter's decision framework is principled or ad hoc
• Ask the submitter what their most important professional relationship from M1 is and what they have done to maintain it — a practice is built on relationships, not transactions; this is the most direct test of whether the submitter understands that
• Reviewer minimum qualification: 5+ years of sustained client work as a freelance designer or studio founder; agency employees who pitch but do not personally acquire clients are not sufficient
• Ask what the submitter's niche is and when they decided on it — a practice without a niche is harder to acquire clients for; but a forced niche before having clients is also a mistake; the answer reveals where the submitter is on that arc

You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.