Also agreeing with the above, except in one critical area - the use of themes.
Now, when the budget allows for it, I completely agree that custom is the way to go. Ground up, from scratch, doing personas, mood boards, wireframes, mockups, UX path flows, etc. - there is absolutely a place, market and reason for that.
But I'd argue that there's also a place for doing the same level of business needs analysis - the same depth of research, the same level of UX and planning and strategy, etc. - and then having a professional source a theme that will be specifically chosen to meet the specific needs of the business. One that's well-coded, not bloated, and which has good "bones". And then customizing that theme (and I'm not just talking choosing different colors and slapping in different pictures and logos; I'm talking about extensive information architecture, UX/UI design, going down into the code as necessary) so that it is effective for the business and helps them meet their ultimate strategic goals. From that approach, it's essentially more like outsourcing the initial coding - and allowing the web professional to focus their attentions on the specific business needs in implementation and design.
Automatically assuming that "theme = bad" is a mistake, I think. Yes, it's ideal if every budget can allow for a completely custom product. But there's also a place for the strategic deployment of outsourced (ie. theme-based) work - provided that it's a *strategic* deployment with customization, and not just a "slap on the theme, fiddle with a few buttons in the UI, and call it a day" approach.
It's the overall approach that makes the difference, not the specific tools one uses to do it. A great designer will do all the things that Mick and renny identified - and they'll help you make the right choices, for your brand and your business. That could look like using a theme and customizing it; it could look like using a framework and creating a child theme; it could look like completely custom work.
|