After reading this article

So, where is everybody? Why aren’t people joining in this conversation about Innovation and Design?

Here’s a question: After reading this article on BusinessWeek, what’s your take on the relative importance of good aesthetics and strategy?

Interesting article, don’t you think that Businessweek should switch to a San Seriff font at this point though? I mean it doesn’t have the iconic grab of TIME, and I don’t think they have equity with anyone over 38 or so. But anyway, not the point…

I think there is a deeper meaning to aesthetics. When it is applied as a topical treatment, as in the case of Song and Ted, it is a week veneer over a damaged system… it is styling. But when it is approached strategicly, up front, it can be a major differentiator that communicates brand identity and functionality to the consumer. My take.

Also, why are people not posting in here? Good question. These are design forums right? Maybe the fact there there is a Design and Innovation section seems reduntant, or maybe it is telling, idunno.

Seems like any new forum is going to take some time to get going; find it’s voice and it’s group. I’m not concerned necessarily. But the perception that it’s already failed is maybe more of a concern.

it’ll take a while and maybe innovation is not something right in front line of design as some magazines or analysts talk about it.

most of the “special interest” forums took a minute to get running… and the post/topic counts still pale compared to the top three forums. I’m sure this one will catch on. The levity of it seems to place it in “Design Discussions” but maybe it should really be in “Special interests” with “design research”, maybe not?

The other hang up may be that innovation means different things to different people. In footwear we are always looking at new ways to do old things, from fit, to flexibility, to support. And the challenges of doing this paired with a split manufacturing process (high teck molded lower components, hand sewn uppers) and tight costing is difficult…yet few outside of footwear consider what we do as Innovative for some reason, in my experience.

In order to discuss it maybe we should make an attempt to define it?

stevep I certainly never meant to imply that the forum had failed, I just wanted to see conversation happen on a topic I love to talk about :slight_smile: And pontificate on :slight_smile:

Great! Already bit by bit we’re seeing more traffic and more postings here!

Go for it! We’ve started a bit in this thread

There is no posting because anyone who is innovating is busy working.

ill take a stab at the article :smiley:

It has some good points, but i dont like how they separate “design” as the pretty skin that only works if you put it over a solid frame. Design should be part of the frame, or at least help build it.

In the case of Song and TED, it was pretty clear, and is pretty telling on how some companies still view design. They failed because they didnt undestand the full scope of the design process and simply dressed the hostesses in Kate spade and gave the seats new fabric.

But in the successfull examples, they portrayed design as an afterthought, to make the good structure pretty. Design, branding and infrastructure should all be together in the pot. not adding design in there after the meal is cooked.