You know I am trying to keep an open conversation, and am not trying to stifle his or anyones view points. I am only offering the the view point of a designer who has worked for appreciative clients, other wise every post would be about how unfair, unkind, and unworthy of your time the design industry is. It tends to be vary depressing and discuraging to the students that use this board as their link to the “professional” design industry.
I really hate to get personal but;… In answer to Designer’s questions of :
How many lead/senior designers (after 2 years) out there have had a client call them and have them sit in on interviews for the for the clients new “Head of New Product Development”, or have a client pay for you to stay in Vegas for a week so you could attend and contribute to their team building, and 5 year strategic planning meeting, Or fly you to Tokyo for the unveiling of their new product line. Or have a client release a product with the sales exceeding their expectations, and then give the firm a 5 year exclusive contract and 5% of the additional sales.
Very few.
Question should be: how many lead /senior designers are still in that same position five years later?
Even fewer. They become irrelevant. Why? idealism and ego. How many corporate initiatives were started and destroyed by a guy who wrangled the title of VP of Design before his name AND who put IDSA after it?
Idealism is a good thing, but in the wrong hands its detrimental to the purpose of design, which is creation for industry, not for ego.
Based on your question “Designer,” you have been shown these perks because of your success and they are a reward for those successes. Notice you are flown out for the product rollout, but do they bring you out to talk to the sales force? Distibutors? Retailers? Customers? No, they would bring “Realistic” because he is fully aware of the down and dirty realities of what goes on after the roll out. The follow through. The realities of the purpose of design and industry. Profit and Growth
i have had the privilege of playing “Industrial Design Consultant” to a few places during my tenure at a bay area firm in the heyday of the 90s, when it was all about “form, function, user experience, co -branded analogous usages etc”, but in reality, when you peel the crap back it was about idealism and ego.
you are lucky and gifted for having these oppourtunities Designer, but you need to understand you are the anomaly. Its good to aspire to acheive what you have but the reality is that 90% of ID is not what you do. It is everything and yet nothing special(and that you are expendable).
I am not bitter at all, I have had a sweet ride,(hell I still am) the hi powered idealism is behind me, I prefer to fiddle with widgets and things and make em work better, look better and help my company to grow better. ID is balance: its making cool things better while being fully aware of cost cutting and profit growth agendas.
Based on your question “Designer,” you have been shown these perks because of your success and they are a reward for those successes. Notice you are flown out for the product rollout, but do they bring you out to talk to the sales force? Distributors? Retailers? Customers? No, they would bring “Realistic” because he is fully aware of the down and dirty realities of what goes on after the roll out. The follow through. The realities of the purpose of design and industry. Profit and Growth
Actually yes they did, that was the first step in the development process, informational exchange meeting. A two day brainstorming and project planning session prior to even finalizing the design specs/brief. It is the starting point of all of our programs. But you left out the manufacturing representatives and tours of their Chinese and Australian manufacturing plants and meetings with the engineering management to determine their capabilities and limitations. Listening, interpreting, communicating, and implementing… as stated prior:
IMO ID is the voice of the consumer during development. It is our responsibility to discover, present, and keep in constant view the true needs of the user and consumer. While bridging the gap and brining together marketing, engineering, manufacturing, and management during the research, planning, design, engineering, and implementation phases.
what does y’alls pissin’ contest have to do with this forum?
The only bitter designers I know are the ones who got stroked by CEOs and management only to get kicked to the curb later when cost cutting hit and they got fired. So much for their egos and the power of design.
Sorry forgot to log in and hit submit instead of preview.
Supernaut Thank you for calling me an anomaly, I am sure my wife will agree. However I do not see my self as such. I was lucky and fell into the job literally. I just refussed to let any of my clients see design as a comodity or as expendable, mainly by being involved in all phases from initial planning through the day they decide to cut it from the catalogue planned to be Aug 2006, replaced with the program we are planning now.
I also am far less arrogant an egotistical than many of the practicing designers I come in contact with at local and national IDSA meetings. I just think that if I can find these clients and gain their respect, so can every designer earn the respect of thier clients. And once again raise the image of ID to what Lowey had envisioned.
well. this thread is ruined.
They all get ruined by page 3…sucks.
Designer, YKH, Supernaut, oldguy, and Realistic,
Get back to the thread! What are your definitions of Industrial Design. Not what are your experiances, life stories, or so on within the field!?!?
ID is the unquantifiable process of creation and development, balancing and integrating the wants and needs of consumers with the wants and needs of business and industry; via use, visceral appeal, and experience. (and vice versa…)
It is an act. Not a position. A “process” not a “thing.” Every Practicioner of Industrial Design’s definition of it varies based on their life experiences within the process. This thread clearly demonstrates the varied definitions.
So what is the purpose of the act? Why design? Its in the chase itself, rather than the solution, that the purpose lies. Solutions generate new problems, which create newer solutions, which beget newer problems ad nauseum.
Thats my definition.
Whats yours?
The best definition I ever heard for ID I will butcher here as I try to remember it. It was something like the appropriation of technology manufactured for use by people. It was very simple, and I think I hit on the main points of ID:
-
Manufactured. ID isn’t one off products, that is art.
-
Technology. Even if it is the technology involved in creating a place to sit, it still needs to use some sort of technology involved.
-
Use by people. People need to interface with the results either visually, by touch, hearing etc.
On a side note…the Bauhaus was mainly an architectural movement that also touched the graphic arts. It is barely ID. If you want to know the core of ID, you should read something on Henry Dreyfuss (or Loewy, Bel Geddes, Stumpf, Teague etc). Go on a trip around the world, and you will realize that ID is a very American profession. Since it is populated by many liberal, open minded and curious people who seem to have a fondness for architecture, the Bauhaus has gotten confused with the true heart of ID.
Industrial design is the act of simultaneously making the consumer and the manufacturer (or client) believe that a problem was solved with them in mind.
my 2 cents
Industrial design is the act of simultaneously making the consumer and the manufacturer (or client) believe that a problem was solved with them in mind.
my 2 cents
Wow. I must admit the last 20 or so responses are not exactly the responses or discussion I intended! But if that is what needed to be said, then so be it.
But to bring us back on topic…
Simply a creative mediator specializing in discovering, interpreting, and communitating the needs and desires of consumers and end-users during the development of products, services, and even community centers.
IN RESPONSE: I really admire this approach in terms of allowing ID to ‘serve’ the designers by means of exercising creativity, curiousity and intelligence, but also to ‘serve’ the client by more means that simply satisfying the urge to consume (or maybe that is exactly what you mean by desires) but sincerely considering and addressing need via careful analysis of the culture of the society and individual.
Also, thank you for introducing the term ‘mediator’ to the discussion (ironically enough it seems incredibly appropriate). I agree that the emphasis of the component of open communication (especially across cultures) is integral to our roles as Idesigners especially in this era of globalization and overwhelming consumerism (of which we- as Idesigners- dramatically contribute to whether you want to believe it or deny it).
My students (ages 9-14) have fallen in love with the field of ID the past few weeks of explorations. To be perfectly honest, I hope that they will find this field in a more optimistic, inspiring and hopeful state than several of these postings have labeled the field.
(apologies for the long response) just a couple more things…
Idealism is a good thing, but in the wrong hands its detrimental to the purpose of design, which is creation for industry, not for ego.
IN RESPONSE:
i·de·al·ism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (-d-lzm)
n.
1.The act or practice of envisioning things in an ideal form.
2.Pursuit of one’s ideals.
3.Idealized treatment of a subject in literature or art.
4.Philosophy. The theory that the object of external perception, in itself or as perceived, consists of ideas.
I agree with your cautious nature towards ‘idealism’. But please note some idealist’s visions are intelligent, conscious, creative contributions to society: large or small. I hope that idealism is simply not just looked at in terms of an opportune future of individual financial gain. For anyone looking for some inspiration in creating some worthy ‘idealist visions’ feel free to check out some unbaised news; there are plenty of issues around the world that could use the insight and expertise of a thoughtful Idesiger (props to those that are tackling these issues).
But the ego, self-proclaimed stardom and general lack of any cohesiveness in the profession have left me with one gut awful feeling. Don’t get me wrong, I very much enjoy what I do, but it seems that the profession is either self destructing or (more pitifully) lapsing into irrelevance.
What is ID? The aging body of an unrealized potential. ( Which can be the very worst kind of failure).
IN RESPONSE:
IrrelevancE?!!? As stated in my last response, there is INCREDIBLE POTENTIAL for the Idesigner to make a positive impact.
I hate to preach, but maybe a few words of inspiration are not “too inappropriate” and a good starting point:
“You must be the change you wish to see in the world.”
- Mahatma Ghandi
Thanks for all of your responses. It has been an interesting glimpse into the field. (some aspects of this ‘glimpse’ I will not be sharing with my students…but the honesty is greatly appreciated none-the-less).
Signed,
Mk
(original question post-er) excuse the pun
It is an act. Not a position. A “process” not a “thing.”
Good point.
So what is the purpose of the act? Why design? Its in the chase itself, rather than the solution, that the purpose lies. Solutions generate new problems, which create newer solutions, which beget newer problems ad nauseum.
Interesting. I hope that we all have at least some ribbons to run through at the end or our races though: some goals achieved. But with goals achieved …comes progress? comes success? comes happiness? comes $? Hopefully something will come of our energy spent and our creativity and intelligence exercised.
I guess it all comes down to what we choose to pursue and whether we find it worth the act of pursuing; and each individual Idesigner has to make those choices.
I’m suspicious of your “positive” bias.
Why do you hope that your students will find the field in a more “optimistic, inspiring and hopeful state?”
What if that’s not what’s needed for the field (or the world?)
Viktor Papanek won a lifetime achievement award from IDSA by preaching against harmful design concepts like “planned obsolescence.”
“There are professions more harmful than industrial design — but only a few” -Viktor Papanek
“Before (in the “good old days”) if a person liked killing people, he had to become a general, purchase a coal mine, or else study nuclear physics. Today industrial design, has put murder on a mass-production basis.”-Viktor Papanek
I recommend you and your students read his “Design for the Real World” and listen to us elders about the realities of design in the wrong hands.
I love design, but I also recognize the dark-side and the business realities. You and your students should as well.
cg, my tag just went off. good luck. your on your own.
Mk, it was all too easy to stray from your original question with an existentialist topic like this, bound to resonate strongly within the tormented souls in many of us, still rather clueless about how the rest of the world truly perceives us and what box we fit in.
Sorry to dismay some of you overly enthusiastic to assume the worst, but I am very happy with my design career to date, during which I have contributed to a number of traditional design employers, and some quite a bit less so. However, “making it” on a personal level (whatever that is) does not imply I have to suspend any judgement on the picture at large, and especially on comparing the evolution of the profession since my school days. Obviously, most of us here are talking within a North American context, the situation in Europe differing to a large extent (not always for the better, from what I’ve seen).
After 5 blood-and-sweat years of design school projects, myself and the few survivors around me constituting the graduating class that year were collectively praised for our persistence and firmly reminded we were carefully “selected” to represent the profession due to our maturity, pragmatism and, believe it or not, something the director called “the courage and skills to successfully take on the status quo”. Surely, we took those remarks in stride then, it seemed to us obvious as the sky is blue that we, designers for the industry, only existed to push the envelope as the end user’s sole advocate, tirelessly battling the natural inertia and self-interest of Big Business, of which we were generally quite suspicious.
We thought James Dyson was God’s other son, we all bought Apple computers because they were the brainchild of Steven Jobs, several of us started successful small scale design and manufacturing ventures of their own instead of waiting for entry-level jobs.
Then, along the way, strange things began to happen. The printed media, then TV and the Internet started taking an interest in what THEY considered proper product design. And people like Jonathan Ive (sadly handpicked by Jobs himself in a moment of panic), Karim Rashid, Marc Newson and Co suddenly became star-studded symbols of our glorious material culture, winning prestigious prizes left and right, mingling with the rock stars, and generally happy with making an honest buck while appointing themselves our ambassadors to the world. Glossy popular magazines started publishing 10-page long spreads on how “Design” was so cool, good for all of us, “famous” designers were being interviewed on evening TV specials, we had really hit the jackpot. Or so it seemed.
The older goats among us were staring in total disbelief at the outlandish media blitz on anything design, the $100 cofee-table illustrated bricks on what one should buy, and just shaking our heads at it all, powerless of course to cry out what a total fraud this circus had become. We even dared question the success of Apple’s iBook laptop series sold at premium prices after having successfully circumvented tackling at least three major usability problems typical of all standardized laptops - 1. the never-resolved input interface still made up of the idiotic touchpad (for how many years now?) forcing a travelling user to use a regular smaller mouse (what use is smaller if there’s still no place on an airplane tray to swirl it around!?); 2. the obvious fact that, despite its generic name, a “laptop” is never safe on one’s lap on a moving bus or train; 3. the extreme fragility of the case and all components in the face of dust, shocks, drops or spills. Portable computers for fashion victims, yes, but strictly from desk to desk.
Had any in my class presented as final projects cutesy, self-conscious thin-walled plastic boxes like Apple’s latest products pretending to advance the “state-of-the-art” in the design of that particular product category, we would have been called into the director’s office to discuss potential career alternatives right away.
This is product design today - better known than anytime before but only for all the wrong reasons. Those of you only entering the field are in for a roller-coaster ride at the expense of both your future credibility and anything ressembling job security. In this sense, I and others from the so-called “old school” (you know, where they dared teach us to challenge engineering, management and sales all at once) were relatively lucky. The more strong-headed among us managed to do just that and prove product design was not just a generic word for anything decorative but a rigorous, systematic, highly creative endeavour with the noble goal of translating technology for the common good first, and industry’s bottom line a clear second. In time, some of our employers came themselves to realize that well-treated customers kept coming back for more. We only hoped that more and more firms would actually link profit and responsible design that made products safer, easier and more practical and enjoyable to use. But a trend this has not become.
I couldn’t care less about anecdotal evidence here from a few living design nirvana at the handful of firms subscribing to the above - these are exceptions to the rule. And the evidence is all around us, from the increasingly hideous and poorly resolved overpackaged junk in our stores to the armies of desperate designers bombarding the same potential employers with largely identical-looking portfolios and the old tired shtick about how many software packages they master and what good plastic sculptors they are. Add to this merry-go-round the typical design job offers posted anywhere asking the world for what most often is a glorified technician’s job and you get the picture.
Also, too many on Core are blindly and naively blaming manufacturing shifts to the Orient for their woes. Where the stuff was made used to count far less before professional services themselves, such as Eng and IT, started flowing there too. Yet, by far the most numbing development - at least in consumer products - over the past decade or so, are the dwindling sums being invested in quality design THINKING itself. No product development cycle today can be fast enough, everything is for yesterday and there’s always money to fix things later. This has been the case before to some extent no matter where one worked, but it’s taken on scary proportions lately. Manufacturing quality in Asia has vastly improved actually, while the quality of design itself is on a serious downwards slope, and this few designers are willing to admit. So we should be the last to wonder why we are surrounded by so much cheap, ugly trash that breaks down after a few uses. It is not because the Chinese moldmaker or die-caster is screwing us, it is because we are screwing ourselves by not thinking thoroughly anymore, design time being viewed as an expensive luxury by many businesses. What you see at Apple today is now considered “good design” to be included in museum collections. What next?
Now, this is a missive about what’s wrong out there, I’ll be the first to name the opportunities as well, and they are very many, in a future post maybe. My main lament is not so much the current pathetic and convoluted state of affairs, but more the realization that nowhere, no one is doing anything to change all this. That would mean the bureaucratic inertia of design academia, “professional” bodies and industry have contaminated us to the point of paralysis as many of us respond robotically to client demands for fear of retribution in a slow job market. If being an industrial designer has finally come to strictly holding down a job, you all should stop whining about being misunderstood out there. You reap what you sow in life, and there are plenty of individuals ready to capitalize on ID’s lack of inside consensus and a strong voice.
So much for providing our friend Mk here a clear, eternal definition of ID. Still, Mk, your patience with my diatribe may now pay off as I thought to offer you three time-based brief personal definitions of product design.
-
As it was envisioned to be by the first ID pioneers: the complete architecture of mass-produced goods, overseeing the different actors (specialists) involved to obtain a fully-resolved, consistent end result responding to the designer’s unified vision, creative intent and understanding of the situation at hand, not unlike the role of a film director.
-
As it is today: a bargain, jack-of-all-trades-master-of-none activity utilized to its full potential by various other, higher-ranked company interests to increase market-share, reduce costs, differentiate on an overcrowded market, get easier media coverage, etc.
-
As it will become if the current situation continues: a modern all-inclusive replacement of those some industries employed as technicians and draftsmen, totally subordinated to engineering, marketing and sales. The industrial designer as valuable - now consistently creative - technician capable of liaising with practically all departments, from accounting to graphics, to production. Business has already understood the need and is grateful to the multiplying design schools for producing this new brand of generalist in the age of intense global market competition.
Mk, maybe you’re better off just telling the impressionable kids we just draw up stuff for a living and hope someone buys it from us. No need to scare them off with all this. For them, as for most adults doing the local WalMart aisles, products … just exist, no more.
Peace to all.
rare to read a good post that long.
Here, here, Mr. Realistic. Good post.
There are still a number of classical industrial designers out there doing or aspiring to exactly what you describe: the complete architecture of mass-produced goods, overseeing the different actors (specialists) involved to obtain a fully-resolved, consistent end result responding to the designer’s unified vision, creative intent and understanding of the situation at hand, not unlike the role of a film director.
Like politics, there might be a silent majority.