CHRISGEE
08-07-2005, 03:24 PM
Roger L. Martin, Dean of Rotman School of Management, writes a great piece on BusinessWeek Online (http://www.businessweek.com/innovate/content/aug2005/di20050803_823317.htm), comparing the mentality and practices of traditional firms with those of design-shops.
The topic of design is as hot as a pistol these days. Everywhere you look, you see cover stories and conferences. If it's design-related, people are talking about it. Firms everywhere want to revolutionize themselves by turning design-oriented. They look wistfully at the stupendous growth that the iconic iPod has provided previously stagnating Apple Computer (AAPL), and believe that design can help them create their own version of the iPod and restart their growth engines.
Unfortunately, it's not as simple as hiring a chief design officer and declaring design as your top corporate priority. To generate meaningful benefits from design, corporations will have to change in fundamental ways before they can operate like the design consultancies who advise them on how to sharpen their design focus. To get the benefit of design, companies have to embed design into -- not append it onto-- their business.
Design organizations vary significantly from traditional firms along five key dimensions: flow of work life, style of work, mode of thinking, source of status, and dominant attitude. Left unchecked, the stark contrast between traditional firms and design consultancies will impede any attempt by traditional firms to become more design-oriented.
It's a great read and a very affirming rebuttal to the traditional view that designers "play all day". What bothers me is that nothing like this has ever been written by our traditional design publications, Print, HOW, Communication Arts, etc.
How might we designers ride this wave of fascination in all things design to bring companies who are eager to impove the way they approach design into the fold?
The topic of design is as hot as a pistol these days. Everywhere you look, you see cover stories and conferences. If it's design-related, people are talking about it. Firms everywhere want to revolutionize themselves by turning design-oriented. They look wistfully at the stupendous growth that the iconic iPod has provided previously stagnating Apple Computer (AAPL), and believe that design can help them create their own version of the iPod and restart their growth engines.
Unfortunately, it's not as simple as hiring a chief design officer and declaring design as your top corporate priority. To generate meaningful benefits from design, corporations will have to change in fundamental ways before they can operate like the design consultancies who advise them on how to sharpen their design focus. To get the benefit of design, companies have to embed design into -- not append it onto-- their business.
Design organizations vary significantly from traditional firms along five key dimensions: flow of work life, style of work, mode of thinking, source of status, and dominant attitude. Left unchecked, the stark contrast between traditional firms and design consultancies will impede any attempt by traditional firms to become more design-oriented.
It's a great read and a very affirming rebuttal to the traditional view that designers "play all day". What bothers me is that nothing like this has ever been written by our traditional design publications, Print, HOW, Communication Arts, etc.
How might we designers ride this wave of fascination in all things design to bring companies who are eager to impove the way they approach design into the fold?