Design Sojourn | Strategic Industrial Design Blog

A warm welcome to you dear reader! If you have not already, why not subscribe to my RSS feed, or get my latest thoughts on Industrial Design in your Email Inbox for free?

Thanks for visiting and please keep in touch? ~ D.T.

Can you actually quantify something so subjective and intangible as a design or an Idea? Furthermore can it then be a bases to tell you if its a good design/idea or not?

As someone who based most or all my decisions on a “gut” feel, this quantifying concept really got me thinking…

It must be fate, but I had this topic broached to me twice in a day.

The first was in an interview I conducted with a pleasant fellow who is extremely passionate about applying logic and quantifiable methodology in the selection process of designs and concepts. Apparently in very big companies like Nokia, Sony-Ericsson, and Dell, such methodology is common place. Makes sense as it helps justify the subsequent huge manufacturing and marketing investments.

The second time was this article at cph127. The gist of the article was:

How do you measure the effect of design from a business point of view? How do you know that design played a role in achieving business success?

Combining the two instances together we actually cover all aspects of this act of “measuring” design. The first way is by methods in selecting the right design in the concept phase that allows for quantifying within the corporate environment. The second method, as highlighted by the blog, checks to see if the designs have been successful outside of the corporate environment after it is launched.

Either way I think as designers we need to be careful.

Inside the corporate environment
There has not been a day where I have not faced this issue of justifying my designs is some form or another. I’m just intrigue that mankind has never stop finding explanations of the unknown or looked to quantify everything. Just look at the Fibonacci series or the Golden Ratio, not only were these blueprints to nature’s building blocks they also proved to be a basis for artists and designers in the renaissance era to configure their work.

However I digress. My passionate discussion on these tools covers the validity of the use of such methods to justify a concept in the first place. Some mentioned I have looked at have included Value analysis, Pareto Analysis, Six Sigma, and even simple ergonomic usage matrixes. My main issue such methodologies should be seen as a supporting tool and not a set of rules. Furthermore it should not be used to early in the concept phase as it could be a huge hindrance of a potentially great concept. At the end of the day, “gut” reasoning should prevail. Imagine if ergonomic matrixes were used at Apple, do you think we would have an iconic product like the Ipod? In this case does it matter that we all know it’s the most un-ergonomic MP3 player around?

The other issue I have is, undoubtedly many organizations use such concept selection criterias. However in reality, there are only really so many ways you can do something, a right way or a wrong way. Thus strictly following such “obtain the right way” methodologies would mean developing the same old boring products? Case in point, Dell has introduced a HDD Mp3 player to compete with Apple, but they have opted to use a more ergonomic scroll button which has a vertical orientation. Cleverly done, but do you see how many other similarly ergonomic Mp3 players are out there in the market?

Outside the corporate environment
Measuring a success of a design in the market place is something very close to my heart. I have a constant struggle to validate my team’s usefulness within an organization. It’s particularly difficult because it IS an organization, and departments in an organization operate do not operate in a billable hour format like a design consultancy.

I constantly argue that the design team cannot be judged on the sum total success or failure of a product! This is mainly because many other factors are involved including sales and marketing strategy, engineering sourcing of parts, logistical and supply chain management etc. Of cause we do not design in vacuum and consider all aspects, but unless the rest of the operations report to the design team, we cannot be held responsible.

This is not a small matter. I have read reports of companies who, not well versed in the value of design, constantly hold their designers responsible for the success of the products in the market. This is very common in China’s heavily cut-throat mass consumer electronics manufacturing environment.

In other instances, I’ve seen companies ask design consultants to put a clause in a contract that says, should a product not sell well in the market, the consultancy must pay for monies lost. How absurd was that?

What these companies don’t realize, is the designer’s role here is only to make recommendations, the ultimately the responsibility and ownership of the design belong to the client or decision maker. If the design is somehow held responsible, there better be some kind of royalty agreement set up.
Some of the things that I can think of that can help measure the success of a product include winning design awards, or good customer feedback on the aesthetic quality. These are elements designers are directly responsible for. Another big thing is the ability to command a premium in access of the selling price that is more than the cost to apply the aesthetic on that part.

I really don’t have all the answers as this is still a hotly debated topic. However I like designers to be aware, as the world moves towards a knowledge based economy, their role in the greater scheme of things.

Related Posts
Out With the Old, in With the New and a Recap
Everyone has Ideas, How You Execute them is What Matters
Visual Communication Principles in Design
Awesome new Motion Controller may just kill the Nintendo Wii
How to be self critical with your Design Work?
How I Simplified My Life and Became a More Efficient Designer
Be a Better Designer 5: Left/Middle/Right Rule