Interesting talk about design on TED.com from Paola Antonelli.
Just had a brain burp while I watched it though. While I respect the idea that design should be part of process, my gut feeling is that design isn’t a process in of itself. I often question my own understanding of design. Do I get it? Yeah, but do I really get it? Surely I could apply it more? Isn’t it just problem solving? People speak about it as if it’s a black art, but isn’t it just a matter of understanding what you’re trying to achieve and the tools you have available to achieve it? What the fuck is design, anyway?
The idea of ‘design’ is closely linked to a plan, or pre-meditation. It’s knowing what you want to achieve, and trying to do so within the constraints of your environment. It’s not about knowing how to achieve it from the outset (an epiphany), and it’s not about pure experimentation. It’s essentially the application of the scientific method to real life. And in order to engage in that thought process you must first come to the realisation that whatever situation you’re in isn’t ideal. So the antithesis to design must be accepting the status-quo – following rules without question. Ms. Antonelli mentions that designers must be mavericks in order to produce great design, which is another way of saying that design is the process you undergo when you want to take what you have and make it better.
The trouble is, I don’t believe design is something you can teach. Essentially it’s invention, and you can’t teach someone how to invent. Nor can you offer someone a large salary to invent – if they can’t, they can’t.
So what does that make design? A set of tools? A process?
It’s a difficult question. Some would say that design is just a matter of working out what the problem is, and what the solution is, and filling in the blanks in between. Well, what does that make Agile then? Isn’t the entire selling point of Agile that it takes into account that you can never know what the end result will be in advance? Agile is a process, and a tool, but it’s not design. The Waterfall approach is a closer fit to the general idea of design, but why doesn’t it seem to ever work?
What was troubling me during Ms. Antonelli’s talk was that people seem to believe that eventually ‘design’ can solve the grander problems of humanity. Sure, I agree that understanding the issues and deciding to work with what we have to improve life for mankind will be of great benefit. But that doesn’t make the way forward any clearer, does it. That’s just a way of stating what we have to do. It’s not a method, or a process, or a tool. And I don’t think it helps.
I don’t think I get design. But I worry when people try to convince me that design is the key, because when the conversation is over I still haven’t learned anything. Usually the bargain is that for me to learn something about design I have to fork over cash to attend a seminar.
No thanks. I’m a maverick.
