I was going through some twitter lists, hoping to find more Phoenix designers for the #phxdc list. I love the idea of having a huge all encompassing list of our local design crew for people to connect with. I noticed something however: Lots of people were mis-categorizing people as designers. (Edit: The #phxdc list isn’t just designers, its those in the design field in Phoenix. I just happened to be looking at lists of “designers” when I noticed this.) Whether this is through a misunderstanding of what design is, or through people misrepresenting themselves, I don’t know. Not important. But when I said something on twitter, I got a lot of feedback (yay!)
What is design?
Design can have a thousand definitions, all nuanced and often blurry in where it ends and begins. When Phoenix Design Week started, there were several conversations about what exactly the “design” part of that meant. While it ended up being primarily visual communication design, there are other areas where I hope we branch off into next year. Here’s my effort to define what it means in the context of my career and Phoenix Design Week.
Who ‘designs’?
As far as industries (not definitions) are concerned, design is visual communication design (often called ‘graphic design’) and industrial design. Thats it! Now, there are tons of sub-categories of these two main headers (motion graphics, print design, interaction design, etc etc) but the main point is that “design” should only mean Visual and Industrial. Fashion design is Fashion. Some people might include Interior Design, but I think that is grouped more with Architecture.
Web designer, you aren’t.
When people say they are “Web designers” they are often mis-categorizing themselves. Web design is when you create the visuals for a website, such as the look and feel, and often includes the way people interact with it. However, if all you’re doing is the development (or for that matter, if that’s what you’re good at, but also happen to make visuals) then you are Web Developer, not a designer.
Devs shouldn’t design.
There, I said it. Web Developers (coders, programmers, 1337ists, whatever you prefer) should not design. I won’t name names, but there are people who call themselves web ‘designers’ who wouldn’t know their Helvetica from their Arihole. Ugly sites with really great code are too often made by people calling themselves “Web Designers.” Stop it! Ask a designer to do the front, and they’ll be more likely to ask you to help them create a backend for their projects. I’ll talk about this more in a future post called ‘Designers are Ninjas, Developers are Pirates”
“Design” is often misused.
Have you ever driven past a ‘hair design’ shop? This is just one example of the misuse of the word, as it relates to the industry. People often equate the word “style” to design. Hair Stylist. Fashion Style. Etc.
Art is not design
Sorry, but its not. They are two distinctly different things, with a lot of overlap, but still completely different. The world’s most tightly grouped Venn Diagram? Perhaps. But, as was talked about on a recent episode of Design Matters: Design has to work, Art does not. Design HAS to function, has to have an end goal. Art doesn’t. Art is great, and designers are often making art, and artists can often jump into design, but Graphic Artists don’t exist anymore. This is true for Illustrators and Photographers too. There can be overlap, and designers can be both, but being one does not make you automatically/easily the other.
Marketing, Advertising, PR: Also not Design
These are NOT design. They are related, and often intertwined, but not the same. Designers need to understand some parts of marketing and advertising (advertising here means media buying and target audiences, not the ads themselves) but they cannot do those alone anymore than a Marketing person can design a website.
Jeff Moriarty asks if he is designing his writing and if programmers are designing when they code, I say “No, you aren’t.” You’re being creative. This is the same reason the ‘Creative class’ isn’t just artists, that its designers, entrepreneurs and anyone who has to problem solve. Creativity ≠ design ≠ creativity.
Can’t I do more than one of these?
Yes. There are some rare instances when people are capable of being equally great at a number of things. Designers who are great at coding, and programmers with an eye for design. Does that change the meaning of the definitions though? No. As Austin Baker puts it, its just a matter of wearing different hats. It’s when people misrepresent themselves as one thing, when they are actually another, that it becomes a problem.
Keep things going
I’m making this a ‘live’ post. I’d love to get some feed back and update it with some more conversational points. What do you guys think ?
Additions to the post
Why does this conversation even matter?
This question kept getting asked in comments and on twitter, so I thought it warranted an addition to the original post.
The way the word design is used is functionally incorrect, not grammatically. Its not just a personal, subjective preference, but a strict need of the design industry as a WHOLE.
Architecture has a diverse and powerful lexicon that puts its status on the level of medical and legal professions. To accept the commonality of how our industry is viewed and spoken of simply keeps us down when we should be taken just as seriously as those professions.
Defining design is a start, not an end. The lexicon of our industries needs to be vast and consistent for it to rise above where it is now. This is again going more deeply than I intended here, but there is a need for design to have a stronger lexicon and an awareness of that language. This is because we are not in a position to have things like licenses and other methods of certifying our skill set. Start with what design is, then continue with definitions of how design is done. Then add how it can be done better. etc etc etc, until there’s literature, expectations and theory. Then design becomes a practice in line with Architecture and Medicine. This is a conversation that started in my university education, and I’ve seen continued in grad school papers, professional journals all the way through to PhD mailing lists from around the world. Rising above the common “Oh, so you are good at photoshop” or “Oh, so you make lamps?” ideas of design is a long term goal in the design field.
Design-Master Mark:
I’m not a designer, but I co-own a design studio with a designer. I eat, sleep, talk, work design all day but don’t design. Can I get on your #phxdc list?
Great post and an important discussion to begin with Phx’s burgeoning creative class. I especially agree with the line creativity≠design≠creativity (and I would add ≠art). There are plenty of ways to be creative, but only a few ways to design. Conversely, one can be a designer without being creative. Compounding the two only leads to confusion.
@leisa If I didn’t know you better, I’d think you were super-sassing me right now.
I edited the post to reflect that the #phxdc list isn’t just “designers”! I didn’t mean to imply that. It was just that I’d been looking at lists called “designers” and there were people in there that were copywriters, or programmers, or bullies!
Good job explaining design Mark!
As a web designer (not a developer!), I’d like to see more interaction design and HTML/CSS/javascript for designers workshops at the next PHX Design Week. I think it could be way helpful if for nothing more than to help designers communicate with developers so they can design whole interactive experiences instead of just the “look and feel”.
Maybe a “Talk to your programmer like he’s from another planet” talk? I’ll even give the presentation!
@sean Totally, and we’d wanted to do a lot of that this year, just wasn’t enough time to get everything in.
why do we need to define a designer? i think it’s subjective, just like the work is. our different skill-sets make us unique and keeps design lively.
Solid post Mark and in record time.
The problem with the melding of design, development and marketing is most apparent to me when browsing employment ads. Companies often think they can get a print designer, web developer and marketing guru all in one individual, which like you said may rarely exist in some individuals but I would rather specialize in one thing than be mediocre in six.
Mark—great question, great discussion, and great post! I firmly believe that if we want to create (and grow) our creative communities we must begin using the same language. And this is not just a debate in semantics. How we see ourselves and then describe what we see matters when we are in a community. In order to communicate we have to start seeing the same images when we use certain descriptors—like “I’m a designer.”
In light of that I believe there is a disconnect in the realm of personal branding when people use the word “design.” Some think graphic or industrial (the setting of physical or perceived physical form to communicate an intended function). Others think “architecture” or “system” and usually in the realm of information (the setting of a system of information creation, manipulation and storage). While there is some overlap in these two thoughts they are not one in the same. One is concerned with management. The other is concerned with communication. Seemingly subtle, brutally different.
This is why we need this post and discussion: let’s define our terms. It really is important.
Mark, I agree with your definition of design completely. But I get so frustrated how designers have to go on a crusade to educate all of those who don’t quite see it the way that we do. I get so frustrated with this debate, in fact, that half of the time I don’t consider nor label myself a designer (I feel it’s rightful for me to feel this way) because of how pompous these crusading designers can be. I understand the reason behind your passion though since the difference needs to be recognized for our value as designers to in turn be recognized by future clients etc. But I feel that if clients don’t respect a designer or a firms body of work, then why would I want to work closely with them to begin with? And I certainly wouldn’t want to educate them when they might end up feeling resentment or conceal their doubts about the value of ‘designers’ that they commission or hire.
I feel there has to be a respect for the way that other people see things, and that through exposure to a designers work potential clients and consumers of design will recognize that designers are not synonymous with artists, developers, etc.
Just my take on things.
When I developed software, I started with a design. I set out an architecture, defined components, and drafted their relationships and interactions. I was concerned with the elegance and efficiency of the data flow, the interface with humans and systems. If I did not design that software correctly, what I would end up creating was cobbled together crapola.
While this certainly isn’t “visual communication design”, it is absolutely design as defined by “working out the form of something.” To me, those who expend creative thought and vision to craft a form around something that does not yet exist – be that technical or artistic – engage in design.
There are many kinds of designers at work in many different fields, and I don’t think the word applies to design in one discipline any more than you can say “artist” only applies to painters. It is only in using this generality that I disagree with you.
While I think this an interesting discussion, I’m not sure that it’s an important one. I just don’t see the benefit of narrowly defining the word. You say “the main point is that “design” should only mean Visual and Industrial.” Why is that the main point? What is the basis for choosing those two areas?
What is the distinction the separates designing an object (Industrial Design) and designing a space (Architecture)? Why is interaction design relegated to being a sub-category of your two main groups when it is concerned with neither imagery nor objects?
To me, design is thoughtful consideration of a problem, and as you say making the solution work. Whether it is applied to graphics, objects, spaces, information or other areas does not matter to me, and no one is causing any problems in doing so.
Social comments and analytics for this post…
This post was mentioned on Twitter by markdudlik: ‘Defining Design’ – a longer post about the conversation that started this morning – http://www.markdudlik.com/words/defining-design #phxdc…
@Jeff
Well, I think what you are saying here as ‘design’ is more ‘engineering’.
But, you are right. There are many instances of the way design is used. While design can be technical, and engineering can be creative, I guess I see them as inherently leaning towards one way or the other. For the same reason that “Information architects” is simply trying to apply the idea of building something, but they are still not architects, I think your use of design is engineering. And, honestly, I like the sound of Visual Communication Engineer, so maybe I’ll steal that.
I guess my main point was that the most common way ‘design’ is viewed is often not aligned with what is actually is. That, while there are cases for defining it through engineering, art and development, these are fringe definitions. The basic, core, fundamental definition and inclusion for design is what needs clarification. I disagree with my generality too!
And as for art/design anything I’ve said here, I haven’t really spoken of any specific mediums. Designers can paint, artists can use photoshop. Or in my case, I can’t do either.
@Joe
You’re totally right. There’s no supremely important reason for narrowing the definition of design.
But, as Yuri suggests, the conversation is relevant for our growing community. If we can define ‘design’ we can better serve that subcategory of people within our city. The same way there is a great developer subset, there is also a need for a more defined design niche. Design Week & AIGA accomplished this in a way, by giving people events that were specifically design related. And while devs and artists attended, it was a majority of designers. The same for Dev events: Designers go, but they’re geared towards a different more general audience.
So, while I agree, there’s no REAL reason to try and define this, I think we can find use for the conversation.
Oh cool =)–then @krandman (Randy) should be on your “Designers” list, but we both can be on your phxdc list, right?
If so, then put us on there–we aren’t there (she says, sweetly).
ALSO–yes, now that we aren’t meeting regularly, I will take all the opportunities to super-sass you that I can. Bully and I will go make our own list, thank you very much!
Bullshit.
Design (v)
1. to prepare the preliminary sketch or the plans for (a work to be executed), esp. to plan the form and structure of: to design a new bridge.
2. to plan and fashion artistically or skillfully.
3. to intend for a definite purpose: a scholarship designed for foreign students.
4. to form or conceive in the mind; contrive; plan: The prisoner designed an intricate escape.
5. to assign in thought or intention; purpose: He designed to be a doctor.
The urban planner designs your city. The architect designs your home. The civil engineer designs your bridge. The software developer designs the browser you use. In a nutshell, nearly everything that gets executed with purpose has a designer.
While we can probably agree that most people are poor at design or try to classify themselves as designers in a field they have no qualifications for, stating that there is only graphic and industrial designer is well.. ignorant…
Design is critical because it intersects nearly every aspect of what people touch on a daily basis. Stop being small minded and divisive by saying design that isn’t what you fancy isn’t design. Do continue to call people out that classify themselves out as competent in areas they are not. Some one designing the next messaging protocol does not possess the same skills as someone designing the marketing materials for it, but both are designers in their own right.
Saying hair design is not correct is an opinion as their use of the English language is correct.
As to your point of lists.. They should just being properly labeled. phxgraphicdesigners or phxindustrialdesigners or phxvisualdesigners or something similar… My two cents.
Hi Mark,
As an artist, I just want to say thanks for writing such an excellent definition of a designer. I’ve been ruminating over my thoughts of what differentiates the two all day, and I think understanding what a designer does is useful. Trying to define “what is art” was the question everyday in art school-never really was answered.
Great post!
Come on Derek, you’re smarter than that reply.
Using dictionary definitions and verbs easily replaced with alternatives that are more relevant? That’s below your debate skills! Look up the definition of douche and tell me if its the way use it 90% of the time? Dictionary definitions are often useful sure, but are more often irrelevant in the face of public ’slang’. So to your first point: Who gives a shit what Merriam or Webster say. (However, I would say that the public definition needs to be adjusted as much as the ‘official’ one.)
In your examples, all of your “designers” are actually just creative individuals. Urban Planners, Engineers, Architects, they all CREATE. You use design as an exact synonym for create, and that’s wholly false. Trying to define something more succinctly is not being small minded OR divisive, but rather its in an effort to connect us all with a more accurate nomenclature.
Here is a better way to structure some sentences of yours:
I am saying that the way the word design is used is functionally incorrect, not grammatically. Its not just a personal, subjective preference, but a strict need of the design industry as a WHOLE.
Architecture has a diverse and powerful lexicon that puts its status on the level of medical and legal professions. To accept the commonality of how our industry is viewed and spoken of simply keeps us down when we should be taken just as seriously as those professions. This, however, is a longer (and long discussed) conversation, not just a ‘fancy’ of mine.
The lists thing was just what sparked my writing this post, wasn’t the point as all. My point in this whole conversation was that we NEED to correct people’s ideas of the word, and whether or not you agree with me, I am right.
We’re not going to get very far by more clearly delineating who’s in and who’s out. We should just focus on being better at what we do, and the differences will become self-evident.
People call themselves designers because they think it sounds cool.
I’m a word designer: smeshnogle is a word I designed. I took existing elements (the letters) and put them together in a new fashion (the spelling). In fact, I can even assign it meaning, which most other designers can NOT do. I will define smeshnogle as a group of highly literate, opinionated people looking to learn and grow from one another.
To the rest of you “designers”, how is what you do any different?
James – In part I agree, but any community is harmed by the actions of a few, no matter how awesome the group is. Agreeing to standards helps EVERYONE succeed.
Mark,
One or even two segments of the vast creative industries cannot take ownership of the word design, because it’s too vague. I love this graphic that IA Collaborative in Chicago designed. http://bit.ly/7YbnVF It features the definition of the word design by a handful of major graphic designers of the last century, it’s fairly recent and I think you should take a look at the broad definition most designers chose to publish.
I don’t know why I am commenting on this still… jezz can my roommate be home already!?
Absolutely sophomoric to interchange too words that are similar but not the same in definition.
You can create something and have no design involved. Creation would making something exist that did not exist before. Designing something however implies creation with artistry, skill and most importantly intent.
That “web designer” that just makes a website work, but puts no thought behind it, is creating a website. However, they are doing anything but designing it. In fact, I think most graphic/visual designers I have worked with are creating and not designing. Most of them can not articulate the purpose/intent of the font they have chosen or the reason for the color palette or why they have spaced things visually.
I have met many software developers that have thrown together shit to create something for someone, but have put no thought into the design of the software. In the software world this too is a MAJOR issue. There the word they have started to use is software artisan or software craftsman. The reason is because not all software developers are truly designing the code the create. Some are just creating code.
This is an important distinction. If you insist in classify someone as a designer by WHAT they do instead of HOW they do it, you are following into a dangerous trap in your profession of graphic design (or industrial design), by saying all creators are putting the same involvement and intent to the works that they produce. This is not good for your industry or anyone elses as it cheapens the value of design as a whole.
Rewriting my sentences to use creativity actually makes them different sentences. That said, I really like the post and that people are talking passionately about what they do.
I think we absolutely agree that the design lists have the wrong people, but possibly for different reasons.
You cannot claim the word “design” as your own. It’s a verb. It’s a noun. It has a wide range of meanings, and it could be considered vague, but it does not need to be fixed.
You believe it means one thing, but you’re not going to have much luck getting the rest of the world to start spinning around your understanding. It is divisive to try to give the word a more narrow meaning — telling a furniture designer that they are not a “true” designer is divisive. And rude. And quite pointless.
If you need to be more specific, just be more specific with _your_ language. Say “graphic designer” or “visual communications designer” or “industrial designer”.
Joe – “If you need to be more specific, just be more specific with _your_ language. Say “graphic designer” or “visual communications designer” or “industrial designer”.”
Yep.
@Derek
I’ve heard the argument that the word “create” should never be used, as its impossible to truly create anything anymore, but that’s another story. My ’sophomoric’ change was only because you had the original definition wrong.
The idea of defining “design” by what we do is not at all my point. Defining design is a start, not an end. The lexicon of our industries needs to be vast and consistent for it to rise above where it is now. This is again going more deeply than I intended here, but there is a need for design to have a stronger lexicon and an awareness of that language. This is because we are not in a position to have things like licenses and other methods of certifying our skill set. This is an issue bigger than Phoenix and I’m not just speaking for myself in this post. Start with what design is, then continue with definitions of how design is done. Then add how it can be done better. etc etc etc, until there’s literature, expectations and theory. Then design becomes a practice in line with Architecture and Medicine. Yes, lofty hopes, and I’m certainly not expecting to make a dent in any way on a global level. But locally, in our community, I think we can do some real good in defining our roles. This is a conversation that started in my university education, and I’ve seen continued in grad school papers, professional journals all the way through to PhD mailing lists from around the world. Rising above the common “Oh, so you are good at photoshop” or “Oh, so you make lamps?” ideas of design is a long term goal in the design field.
Your points about “creating” without “designing” are valid, but my original point that you are still misusing the word stands. If I said “thoughtful creation” or “intentional creativity” I think you’d be satisfied with my change, correct? Obviously I mean creativity with PURPOSE, and I should have said so. But, creativity with purpose is still not “design” in the sense of my industry. We are on the same page as far as the importance of thinking while being creative. But again again again, creativity ≠ design, no matter the thoughtfulness involved.
I think you are trying to assign words to your field that would be better replaced with something more in line with the lexicon of engineering. I think Development/Programming is more technical, yes creative still, but none the less more towards that language than of design. And, I think what works in the world of developers does not always work for designers. I have another post about that draft written too
@Joe
I am not claiming the word as my own. This is an ongoing conversation in many arenas. Graphic design is often now called visual communication design, etc. There is a need to solidify the meaning, not for me, but for us. I’m not sure what field you are in, but like I keep saying (and I added the point to the original post) there is a need for this for the industry.
I am obviously not the person that would say _____ design isn’t real design, but I can, based on the efforts and literature of my peers, express what is an industry standard understanding. As an example, you say furniture designer, which is a subset of Industrial design. Charles and Ray Eames were exactly that. But if you mean furniture manufacturing? No, that’s not a designer. This is an accepted distinction between fields. I’m not being divisive, there is no ill-will towards peoples work, there is only the desire to help make the definitions of who we are within the design world clear, and yes, make it clear who is not part of that group. See the second paragraph of my reply to Derek for why.
Being more specific is obviously important. Someone can be a Professor, before the additional information of what they teach, in the same way that someone can be a Designer, before giving the additional information of what they design. We’re not there yet. If you hear Professor, you had a good idea of what they do. ‘Designer’ needs the same clarity before you end up at the specifics.
Written debates suck… We should discuss in person.
“Then design becomes a practice in line with Architecture and Medicine.”
I think this is my point of contention.. You should be saying Visual Design or Graphic Design or Industrial Design here and not just design. It is ambiguous without the prefix. I think if you had done that every where you used design in the original post I would have taken little exception.
“If I said “thoughtful creation” or “intentional creativity” I think you’d be satisfied with my change, correct?”
Much more so yes.
“But again again again, creativity ≠ design, no matter the thoughtfulness involved. ”
I disagree based on the definitions of the words. I would say there is such thing as BAD thoughtful/purposed creation. Don’t confuse bad design as not being design at all. If someone takes the time and effort to put purpose and thought behind their creation they are in fact going through the process of design. Perhaps their process and or result is utter shit, but it doesn’t make it not design.
If you were to say the only thing we called effort was effort that created valuable results it would be silly. In the same way it is to say the only thing one can call design is something that yields valuable creation.
“I think you are trying to assign words to your field that would be better replaced with something more in line with the lexicon of engineering.”
I am not assigning words to any field/industry/practice. That is my point. The word design stands independent of any field/industry/practice. You are attempting to shoe horn that word to mean something specific to define a field/industry/practice. That is the problem. Using a simple prefix eliminates that problem. I suggest doing so to prevent confusion in conversation, especially with people not in your industry.
“what works in the world of developers does not always work for designers”
Absolutely each industry needs to find ways to express itself, but doing so through the bastardization of words helps no one. For example, Free Software in my industry is completely misleading. Is it free as in price or free as in freedom? In most languages those two meanings have separate words.
That said this is cool conversation regardless. Hopefully it doesnt scare people away from your blog.
I think I see where Mark is coming from on the semantics argument. It’s the difference between a word being used as a verb or as a noun (a profession):
If someone “doctors” a recipe by adding an unusual ingredient, that doesn’t make them a Doctor.
If someone “teaches” you a lesson by using punishment, that doesn’t make them a Teacher.
If someone “programs” a DVR, that doesn’t make them a Programmer.
If someone “designs” a site using a Wordpress template, that doesn’t make them a Designer.
Some more food for thought: people can have a successful career as a designer and never understand basic design principles, where as you won’t get very far as a doctor if you don’t understand medicine. Everyone knows what feeling healthy is, but few know what good design is.
While I agree that “Web Designer” is a label too often mis-applied and I work to carve out a niche for Web Developers/Programmers/etc, I think the crux of the problem is that the Design Industry is separate from design, (verb, noun) but the populace doesn’t appreciate this difference and lines become forcibly blurred.
The most my clients can usually muster is “the website guy” so unfortunately I have to become very creative with my own job titles in order to communicate with potential clients without offending the Design Industry which sadly has denied my membership application three times now.
One way you can distance yourself from the “web designer” who just bought a copy of FrontPage is by picking a descriptive niche like “web interaction designer” or whatever. It sucks to embellish what shouldn’t require embellishment, but then again my email signature doesn’t say “really good computer guy” so we’re probably all guilty of it. (Note to self: change signature to “really good computer guy.”)
I know a lot of great graphic designers who don’t know first thing about web design. They can call themselves great designers, but web designers, they are not. Besides Mark, aren’t you coding your own work? I thought that was the case. Web design (and all its aspects) is a LOT more than just designing, at least to me.
A couple of things:
1. I love the points that you raised. They are certainly not new issues, but to many they ofter are new.
2. I have had a long standing issue with the premise: Art does not equal design.
I believe the thesis is not even an accurate or logical one. It, to me, is the same kind of fallacy as asking if God can create a rock so big that He can’t move it.
why? Art is the same as design, design is the same as art. Aside from when it’s not. Then it’s not. Because when it is, then it is. Let me ameliorate a primary notion in Quantum Physics: X can also equal Y in some states. In the search for a unified theory of both Cosmological and Subatomic ‘everything,’ this duality of states is a serious issue. For some, in a nutshell, it is an issue that wags the dog.
In this same context, design does not HAVE to work. I believe that this unique condition is a well meaning but unenforceable rule… aside from when it has to be. They are distinct only when they are.
3. In regards to the issue of defining terms, I agree that it is important. I think that it remains a bone of contention for many, as the profession HAS NO standards or ‘union.’ With unenforceable rules of terminology, it will always linger. I work hard to clearly define what I am offering to clients and interested parties.
I believe that making the effort to care about proper labels is a good contagion to spread. I work hard to help the students I instruct feel a similar responsibility to the profession.
Thanks for pointing out the issue of a web designer and a web developer. That was one thing the original Refresh Phoenix community got really right. However, web development was coined in regards to all of the various parts that went into the final product, from code, design, photography, etc.
Hooray, a great discussion. thanks Mark
I remember discussing this in my design school days at Arizona State in the early 90’s. And, repeatedly over the years since. It’s an important topic, but by no means a new one. You’ve done a great job with this post, though.
Designers have been the red-headed stepchildren of the creative industry for years. Even in the 21st century market, where the role of design in business is more apparent and critical than ever before, advertising, marketing and PR somehow still remain the holy trinity. I’ve always found that to be strange. Design is the animating principle of the creative process, after all. Advertising, marketing and PR are all creative processes, therefore they all require a foundation of design. What I mean is, they’re all meaningless without design. Advertising tries to convince you to buy a thing while design makes the thing worth buying. You can’t market something unless you’ve designed it, designed its brand and designed the strategy with which you’re executing your marketing. PR is the same. Design comes first. Period.
Problem is that anybody can call themselves a designer if they want to. The proliferation of computers and software has created a flood of no-talent off-the-shelf graphic “gurus”. But, knowing how to use Photoshop doesn’t make someone a designer anymore than knowing how to scramble an egg makes someone a chef. Still, society at large has, over the decades, been presented with so much bad design that it’s grown used to it and is satisfied with mediocrity. Talented designers, trained and skilled in their craft, are viewed as egocentric aesthetes. Truthfully, the stereotype is largely deserved because there are far too many prima donas in our industry. However, that should not negate the validity of design or its importance.
The brightest brands and the bright minds behind them understand the power of design. All one need do is look. Apple, Starbucks, Nike, Harley Davidson and Coke are just some of the iconic brands that get design. Advertising, marketing and PR don’t sell iPhones. Design sells iPhones. The industrial design of the product, the graphic design of the advertising and packaging and the interior design of the retail space combine to design the experience that encompasses every touchpoint associated with the iPhone. That designed experience is what sells the iPhone. And, it doesn’t matter one damn bit how many bad things people might say about the iPhone (or AT&T) on Twitter, because at the end of the day you’ve been charmed by that amazing design and you want to be a part of THAT tribe. Checkmate. Q.E.D.
There will never be accreditation for design. Designers will never have to pass a bar exam to practice. Trained designers will always be forced to compete with hacks who charge less because they deliver less and the misuse and misrepresentation of the term “design” will continue to plague the practice. But, the tide is turning. Design has never been more appreciated than it is today. Designers have finally been given a seat at the grown-ups table. To stay there we just have to learn not to talk with our mouths full.
Wow. Great discussion here!
Let me throw something into the mix.
I have worked most of my career in the creation of embedded systems. These are small computers inside a product or device that give the device it’s function. The controller and software in your microwave oven is a fairly simple embedded system. Similar such controller hardware and software exist in things like musical greeting cards, watches, televisions and Mars rovers. Many, like hard disks drives for example, don’t even have a human interface and the case is mostly defined for mounting and size requirements, not looks.
I work with fellow software engineers, mechanical engineers, VHDL engineers and electrical engineers. When we want to refer to them all as a group they are called “designers.” In fact the official job title for some include the word “designer.”
The creativity required to perform a particular SATA interface command
- within a specific time limit
- with the right signal sequences
- ensuring the integrity of the data
- in 128K of RAM
- through a dozen or more silicon chips
is as much a DESIGN effort as making a company logo with just the right proportions, with just right color, with the perfect font and shape to stir recognition and the right emotion every time customer sees it.
Yes, embedded systems engineers are designers and work in design, even if they don’t know a gradient from a pattern fill.
In my opinion.
someone brought up standards in one of the replies..
here’s a thought on ’standards.’
I agree that they would help a great deal. It would serve a lot of people to have standards that they adhere to.
however, in the arts and creative fields, standards are also a huge roadblock.
in my classroom, standards are extending things like the elements and principals of design, grid theory, etc. The student needs those for obvious reasons.
However, in our context, as a ‘community,’ who among US will set the standards?
When I was with the AIGA board, we would have events, but mostly populated with students.
The people who’s opinions, experience, accomplishment I respect don’t need our ‘community’ and don’t/won’t come.
Cramer Kassult, Campbell Fisher, Moses Anshell, Catapult, Ditko, etc… these people don’t hang out in our community. I’d be far more willing to hear what they would suggest standards be than any of us.
No offense to us or you, but in most instances, our community is a lot of Green Belts talking like Black Belts.
Not to take from anyone’s work, and in no way belittling our individual efforts.
I’m more than happy to take advice and criticism from most of you, but I dont think anyone here has reached the level of dictating standards.
That winds up being ego-fodder for someone, and that’s the last thing we need.