الکامپ

بیست‌ونهمین نمایشگاه بین‌المللی الکامپ در هفته دوم شهریورماه برگزار خواهد شد؛ رویدادی که به‌عنوان بزرگ‌ترین گردهمایی سالانه صنعت فناوری اطلاعات و ارتباطات کشور، نقش محوری این حوزه در توسعه ملی را برجسته می‌کند.

بر اساس اعلام روابط عمومی این رویداد، پیش‌ثبت‌نام الکامپ ۲۹ از ۱۶ خردادماه آغاز شده و شرکت‌ها، سازمان‌ها و فعالان حوزه‌های فناوری اطلاعات، ارتباطات، اقتصاد دیجیتال، امنیت سایبری، هوش مصنوعی، نرم‌افزار، سخت‌افزار، خدمات دیجیتال و استارتاپ‌ها می‌توانند برای حضور در این نمایشگاه اقدام کنند.

الکامپ ۲۹ با حضور گسترده شرکت‌های خصوصی، مجموعه‌های دولتی، نخبگان و متخصصان، بار دیگر ظرفیت‌های داخلی و توان ملی اکوسیستم فناوری ایران را به نمایش خواهد گذاشت. این رویداد با هدف ارائه دستاوردهای نوآورانه، معرفی محصولات و خدمات جدید و تقویت همکاری‌های فناورانه میان بخش‌های مختلف کشور برگزار می‌شود.

در شرایطی که فناوری به یکی از اصلی‌ترین ابزارهای توسعه کشورها تبدیل شده، الکامپ ۲۹ نمادی از اراده جمعی صنعت فناوری ایران برای مشارکت در ساخت آینده‌ای پایدار، هوشمند و مبتنی بر نوآوری است.

 ELECOMP 29 

The 29th International ELECOMP Exhibition is set to take place in the second week of Shahrivar, reaffirming its position as Iran’s largest annual gathering for the ICT and digital technology sector. Despite the sensitive regional climate and ongoing threats, Iran’s technology industry continues to demonstrate its resilience and readiness to contribute to national development and reconstruction.

According to the event’s Public Relations Office, pre‑registration for ELECOMP 29 began on 16 Khordad, enabling companies, organizations, and professionals across information technology, communications, digital economy, cybersecurity, artificial intelligence, software, hardware, digital services, and startups to secure their participation.

ELECOMP 29 will once again host a wide spectrum of private companies, government organizations, experts, and innovators showcasing the nation’s internal capabilities, technological strength, and collective confidence. The exhibition aims to highlight cutting‑edge achievements, introduce new products and services, and strengthen cooperation across the country’s technology ecosystem.

At a time when technology has become a central driver of national development, ELECOMP 29 stands as a symbol of the collective determination of Iran’s tech community to build a smarter, more sustainable, and innovation‑driven future.

What we learned shipping eight brands in twelve months

/در /توسط

Last year, our four-person studio shipped eight full brand and web identities for Series A startups. None of the projects ran late. None went over scope by more than fifteen percent. We thought we’d collapse halfway through. We didn’t. Here’s what made it possible — and what we’d change.

The non-negotiable: scope locks at week two

Every project has a discovery phase. Ours was three working sessions in week one, followed by a written scope document signed by the founder in week two. After that, anything new is a change request that adds time and cost. No exceptions, no goodwill creep.

We held the line on this for six of the eight projects. The two we softened on — both founders we adored — ran the longest and burned us out the most. The lesson held: scope discipline is kindness, not coldness.

The unexpected bottleneck: feedback loops

We expected design execution to be the constraint. It wasn’t. The constraint was feedback turnaround. A two-day delay in client review compounded across six rounds of work on each project, becoming weeks. We started scheduling weekly thirty-minute review calls instead of waiting for async comments. Cycle time dropped 40%.

The thing that broke: archive discipline

By month nine we couldn’t find anything. Project files lived across Figma, Notion, Dropbox, Slack threads, and individual desktops. We spent half a day every week looking for assets we’d shipped six weeks earlier. We rebuilt our internal asset architecture in December. The next year of project starts cost half as much in onboarding overhead.

What we’d do differently

Hire one more person. We treated four as a feature; it was actually a bottleneck. The fifth role — a junior brand designer who could own the long-tail asset production — would have given us another four projects in the same year without the burnout.

Stop hiring agencies. Hire studios.

/در /توسط

The first mistake most founders make when they need brand work is calling an agency. The second is calling a freelancer. There’s a third option that almost nobody considers, and it’s usually the right one for companies under thirty employees: a studio.

What an agency actually is

A fifty-person agency has fifty people’s salaries to cover. The math forces certain behaviors: minimum engagement sizes well into six figures, a senior creative team that pitches the work and a junior team that produces it, account managers translating between client and maker, multi-month timelines built around team utilization, not the project. None of this is a flaw of the agency model. It’s the model.

What a studio actually is

A six-person studio has six people’s salaries. The senior creative who sold the work also makes the work. There is no account manager. The conversation about what the brand should be is the same conversation that produces the file you receive. The deliverable arrives faster because there are fewer hand-offs to get wrong.

This is not a moral judgment. Both models are appropriate, just for different problems. A multinational shipping forty regional campaigns wants the agency. A founder building one brand wants the studio.

The economic difference for early-stage

An agency engagement that produces a brand for $250,000 with a four-month timeline. A studio engagement that produces the same brand for $40,000 with an eight-week timeline. The studio brand is not 16% as good as the agency brand because of the price ratio. They are roughly equivalent in quality and the studio version usually has more directness because fewer people compromised it.

If you’re Series A or B and you need a brand: hire a studio. If you’re Salesforce and you need to launch in eighteen markets at once: hire an agency. Match the structure to the problem.

Why we kill 30% of the ideas we love

/در /توسط

Roughly a third of the design work we love internally never reaches the client. We kill it before it leaves the studio. This is not a quality control problem. It is the quality control system.

The first cut: directional review

Every project has an internal review at the end of the first design week. The team presents three to five directions. The studio principal asks one question: which of these is the strongest position for the company we’re working with? The other directions die.

This sounds harsh. It is. Designers are emotionally invested in directions they’ve spent a week on. The cull is hard. But sending three directions to a client and letting them pick is not a service — it is offloading the studio’s expertise back to the founder, who hired us specifically because they did not have the expertise to make that call.

The second cut: production review

By week four we have a fully-built brand system: typography, color, lockups, motion, applied across mock surfaces. The studio principal sits with the team and asks: would I send this in five years and feel proud? If the answer is qualified — “yes, with some tweaks,” “yes, mostly” — we go back another week.

Roughly a third of week four reviews fail this test. The cost is real. The studio loses a week of margin on the project. The team loses a week of energy. But the alternative — shipping work that is “almost there” — costs the client a brand they will need to redo in eighteen months. We carry the cost so they don’t have to.

What the cull rate produces

The work that survives both cuts is the work the team is unambiguously proud to ship. There is no “I would have wanted to push this further.” There is no “I think this is what they wanted, even though I wasn’t sure.” The work has been beaten on internally for two and a half weeks before the client sees it. By the time it arrives, it is done.

سیر تحولات صحنه پردازینسل تازه‌ای از هوش