Design Thinking

[CHRISGEE]

Here is an interesting article about "Design Thinking" (http://www.odannyboy.com/blog/new_archives/2005/03/thinking_about.html), a word that is being tossed around quite a bit these days.

What IS Design Thinking? The author lists his thoughts:



A Focus on Customers/Users. It's not about the company and how your business is structured. The customer doesn't care about that. They are care about doing their tasks and achieving their goals within their limits. Design thinking begins with those.

Finding Alternatives. Designing isn't about choosing between multiple options, it's about creating those options. Brenda Laurel speaks of her love of James T. Kirk's "third option" instead of two undesirable choices. It's this finding of multiple solutions to problems that sets designers apart.

Ideation and Prototyping. The way we find those solutions is through brainstorming and then, importantly, building models to test the solutions out. Now, I know that scientists and architects and even accountants model things, and possibly in a similar way, but there's a significant difference: our prototypes aren't fixed. One doesn't necessarily represent the solution, only a solution. It's not uncommon for several prototypes to be combined into a single product.

Wicked Problems. The problems designers are used to taking on are those without a clear solution, with multiple stakeholders, fuzzy boundaries, and where the outcome is never known and usually unexpected. Being able to deal with the complexity of these "wicked" problems is one of the hallmarks of design thinking.

A Wide Range of Influences. Because design touches on so many subject areas (psychology, ergonomics, economics, engineering, architecture, art, etc.), designers should bring to the table a broad, multi-disciplinary spectrum of ideas from which to draw inspiration and solutions.

Emotion. In analytical thinking, emotion is seen as an impediment to logic and making the right choices. In design, decisions without an emotional component are lifeless and do not connect with people.



What are your thoughts on Design Thinking?

And not to burry it but has anyone taken at look at the site linked in the article for Stanford University's Institute of Design (http://www.stanford.edu/group/dschool/index.html)?

In a way it's kind of exciting to see design being taken so seriously, at long last, and finally starting to be seen as an engine for business growth and innovation. However, it's clear that this new design thinking will create new design thinkers and I reiterate my point that all -- or most -- of those thinkers don't necessarily have to be designers.

Also, to what extend should the popping up of all these design and design thinking schools signal a failing of the conversation of design thought and methodology in our industry? Why would it be necessary to establish NEW schools of design thinking? Why shouldn't these folks simply be attending existing design schools? Why do we designers dedicate so much time on our GD forums to discussions of software and production techniques and so little to design thinking?

We complain that clients think all we do is push buttons and that it's all about the software but I suspect that if a client were to visit one of our GD forums, they'd see far more discussions about "how to get this effect in xyz program" or "having this issue with respect to abc production technique" than much thoughtful discussion about design/innovation methodoligies or best practices.

[PrintDriver]

About that Stanford site...

You know what?
You should work in a custom fabrication facility for one week. All this Design Thinking is old hat to us. My company's been doing it for 15+ years. There are others older than us all over the country been doing it for up to 25 years. How to get a group of people to work on one big hairy project, get it designed and to turn out as the client wants while staying under budget.

Good old "working together to become greater than the sum of the individuals" is something that is being rediscovered recently. Wow. Gee. Whiz. Good luck - with the total ME generation we have up and coming.

BTW-putting it all on a napkin is somehow very appropriate seeing as they don't actually have the d.school up and running yet.

[CHRISGEE]

You know what?
You should work in a custom fabrication facility for one week. All this Design Thinking is old hat to us. My company's been doing it for 15+ years. There are others older than us all over the country been doing it for up to 25 years. How to get a group of people to work on one big hairy project, get it designed and to turn out as the client wants while staying under budget.

Why would I ever want to work in a custom fabrication facility????

I think the jist of the point I was making with respect to design thinking is that at some point, design production began to dominate the debate amongst design professionals, rather than design thinking.

For instance, we often give more thought to HOW we do things as opposed to WHY we do things.

For instance, views and click-throughs for online banner ads have declined steadily for a decade, yet many interaction designers still pump out banner ads with no thought to WHY they're doing it. There is also little debate as to what might constitute a better way of solving the broader challenge that people thought would be solved by banner ads.

But like many solutions, banner ads represent an instance of "thin-slicing", where the best solution we came up with in a new medium was a similar solution we were already familiar with in a completely different medium. Once the inition thinking and solution -- or so we thought -- was arrived at, it then became a question of better PRODUCTION of those solutions, even if data suggested that the solution was no solution at all.

Good old "working together to become greater than the sum of the individuals" is something that is being rediscovered recently. Wow. Gee. Whiz. Good luck - with the total ME generation we have up and coming.

Well creative collaboration was never something that designers did in teams or groups as much as is required today. Especially with respect to multi-disciplinary teams.

The old "crit" method of putting things up on the wall and finding fault with what was produced is not a workable model for fostering team/organizational creativity and the moment we designers are forced to lead multi-disciplinary teams to solve "unframed" challenges, this becomes quickly apparent.

The following graphics from the NextD.org website (http://www.nextd.org/03/media/mindscape.html) represent visually what I'm talking about:

http://www.thepreparedmind.com/pm/images/nextd/slide1_thumb.gif

http://www.thepreparedmind.com/pm/images/nextd/slide2_thumb.gif

http://www.thepreparedmind.com/pm/images/nextd/slide3_thumb.gif

http://www.thepreparedmind.com/pm/images/nextd/slide5_thumb.gif

BTW-putting it all on a napkin is somehow very appropriate seeing as they don't actually have the d.school up and running yet.

At some point, every school was in it's beginning stages. I don't fault them for being in the beginning stages.

[morea]

how come the diagrams all use pentograms?

I think design thinking might be against my religion.

[D-Zine]

I heard that morea! yikes!

[CHRISGEE]

how come the diagrams all use pentograms?

I think design thinking might be against my religion.

LOL! I hear ya.

The mindscapes are a great idea and the full set of mindscapes (http://www.nextd.org/03/index.html) are worth a look.

I can relate to many of them because in my own practice, having come from the old school way of doing things, I've had to shift methodologies in order to be able lead multi-disciplinary teams through design processes. In the old days, I could just get an assignment, go off to my desk and start sketching. I'd audibly growl if anyone came too close to my desk before I was ready to show my concepts, might have even snapped off a finger or two.

Now the process isn't like that. As the mindscapes indicate, it's far more transparent and inclusive. I must get programming teams up to speed on the first day and workflow doesn't resemble the old "baton race" type style it did in the past, where deliverables got handed off once one professional was done with it.

Since I design interaction and behavior, I am wedded to the development process once design "ends". This is why we are seeing so much confusion as to whether designers should know HTML or coding. We design behavior and interactivity and as such, our job doesn't begin or end with sketches and graphics. HOW the user interacts with a product we produce is just as important -- if not more -- as the "look and feel" of the product.

This is best illustrated in the mindscape below:

http://www.thepreparedmind.com/pm/images/nextd/slide6_thumb.gif

[LancasterJohn]

Chris,
I couldn't agree more in that many designers tend to discuss and/or validate themselves with production techniques and software, barely highlighting on the crucial thought processes that separate a designer from a button pusher. Prior to this posting I had never heard the term "design thinking," but it is a discussion that is long overdue. I think if every true designer could go into an interview or proposal with the bullet points (or ammunition, if you will) listed above, perhaps it would create recognition that there is value to what the designer brings to a business model. I think that the value of design thinking has been taken for granted ever since the advent of computers and desktop publishing/design. Hopefully this discussion will shift the emphasis away from the button pushing and back to where the real value is. Our industry is going to continue to erode if this shift doesn't occur.

[LeftBrain Artist]

Interesting discussion Chris. I'm currently analyzing/developing a sales and marketing strategy for our firm. The basic goal of the program we're developing is to increase the demand for our creative services, rather than our technical services. We've got a good idea that will act as a starting point for our program, but our leadership is becoming lost in the details as usual and not condesing this nebula of information and details into a cohesive star. Hence my "unauthorized" analysis of the situation and subsequent visit to this thread.

I'm beginning with an in-depth analysis of our current situation, and am attempting to define with pinpoint accuracy what the problem is, how it developed, and what we can do to solve it. The answers to these questions have to be sought before we develop an entire program, however clever and detailed it may be. I think this thread may hold some keys to reaching the answers I'm looking for.

That demand for the creative services of our firm has declined is obvious. What is not obvious to me, is if this is representative of an industry trend, or if we are just being beat by the competition when it comes to creativity. I would suspect the former to be true, if this forum is any indication of current trends in graphic design. My general line of thinking at this point is that economic slowdown and focus on technical aspects of design has created the lack of demand for creative services.

I propose the following model based on our recent discussions and thinking.

Graphic design is a polar aligned, with "hot" art and emotion at one end, and "cold" science and logic at the other.

My employer utilizes "hot" philosophy - graphic design is a creative process, much like a painting that continually evolves over an undeterminate period of time until the artist "feels" it is complete. In this pole, "design thinking" is the focus.

The opposition to this school of thought is the "cold" philosophy - graphic design is a scientific process of solving problems, and success of the solutions is measured by how the design fulfills a specific set of criteria in the most efficient manner possible. The focus of this line of thinking is to "design production".

In reality, most designers lie somewhere in the middle of these two schools of thought, with a few occupying the extreme poles. We've seen a shift away from "design thinking" in our projects, and are trying to develop a program that brings us back to that creative end of the spectrum. What is being suggested here, if I'm not mistaken, is the emergence the importance of cross/inter/multi-disciplinary teamwork, whichever prefix you elect to employ - and how this new teamwork is related to the polar model of graphic design.

I have to admit, I had some trouble grasping what you were referring to with references to "inter-disciplinary" management in other posts. I beleive now, I see what it refers too. I first saw this concept addressed in much simpler terms at my job at the bronze art foundry. My mentor at that time had told me of his previous job, where the individuals associated with each step of the process had little communication with others involved in later, or previous stages. People in the intial stages of the process were concerned only with getting their job done, and any problems they caused would have to be solved by others involved with the later stages. This business failed, and my mentor was part of founding a new business. He saw this lack of communication as a problem, and saw the solution to be: everyone involved talks to each other. What you are calling cross-disciplinary teamwork.

So we have a polar model of graphic design in which we have currently dropped ourselves toward the cold end. Cross-disciplinary teamwork is a relatively new phenomenon that takes place on the hot end - that is its a tool employed in development of new concepts and creative ideas. Where before creative thinking was the forte of one individual or a group of individuals from a single discipline (or area of expertise), it now derives from a group of people representing multiple areas of expertise. So if we want to increase the prominence of the creative role in graphic design, we not only need to downplay its technical aspects - we also need to push the creative aspects, and learn how to SHARE the concept development with others. This will be extremely difficult for graphic design to accomplish, as the egos of those most involved with traditional concept development will hinder the sharing process. Those who can put aside their egos, or at the very least mask them, will have a distinct advantage over the competition.

Is there anything substantive here, or am I just rambling?

[LeftBrain Artist]

how come the diagrams all use pentograms?

I think design thinking might be against my religion.

They're right side up - so its just Wiccans - they might by a little goofy, but they're pretty harmless.

Watch out for those upside down pentagrams - thats Satan's turf.

[CHRISGEE]

Leftbrain, I think you are on the right track. John also made a great observation as well.

With respect to the problem you and your group is trying to solve, can you tell me which problem-solving tools you are currently employing? I've found that in tackling "fuzzy", unframed problems like the ones you face, tackling the problem with a good session of "Challenge Mapping" helps to shed great insight. Are you familiar with that method?


That demand for the creative services of our firm has declined is obvious. What is not obvious to me, is if this is representative of an industry trend, or if we are just being beat by the competition when it comes to creativity. I would suspect the former to be true, if this forum is any indication of current trends in graphic design. My general line of thinking at this point is that economic slowdown and focus on technical aspects of design has created the lack of demand for creative services.

The demand for creative services has not waned. What's happening is that now more and more businesses are offering those services as part of packaged services. PR firms, consulting firms, ad agencies, marketing firms, printers, tech firms all offer creative services. And in many cases, they are just better at convincing the clients that they can better solve their business problems than a traditional design studio can.

And since we're seen as largely "making things pretty", then why shouldn't any serious businesses who value design as a business tool go with the "strategists" rather than the "decorators"?

And even though we resent that comparison, in too many cases there is little to refute that characterization. Heck, just take a look at the topics on this forum, the HOW forum and any others you can think of.

What's the ratio of threads like this vs. "How to get xyz program..." or "Know any really cool fonts?"

A couple of weeks I asked the question, "with all this talk of a new design heyday going on, why aren't DESIGNERS capitalizing on it in terms of our pocketbooks?" The answer is "because the business community doesn't believe that we are up to the challenge of being more than decorators" and we really haven't shown them otherwise.

Take a look at most designers' websites. We are used to the old print portfolio method of simply sticking work up there for people to look at. We should be moving toward the "case study" model where we introduce what the problem was when we started, our solution and how the solution solved the problem. That REALLY resonates with clients!

When we designed the Jell-O brand site (http://www.cube-interactive.com/portfolio/work_jello_website.htm) a few years back, we created a case study highlighting the project and it's solution, which increased traffic by 300%. For a time, that was the most heavily trafficked page on our site and for about 4-5 months, Google searches for "Jell-O brand" yielded that page #1!

It resonated with clients because not only was it an elegant solution but it solved a concrete, well-defined business problem.

Of course, this comes back full circle because in order to solve business problems, we have to first (a) understand business and (b) have a process that allows us to DEFINE business problems.

Those are the two areas where designers struggle and that Design Thinking must address.

[PrintDriver]

This is exactly what I'm talking about.

Custom fabrication. For audience draw and participation.
But your diagrams lack a hub.

Take a museum exhibit. We manage interdisciplinary scheduling, your little pentagram chart if you will, but with us in the center, where we have a client with a concept. We hire an architectural exhibit designer to create the framework of the exhibit based on his portfolio of work. We hire a graphic designer to design graphics that integrate with the architecture of the exhibit, we hire copy-writers and image searchers (or do it ourselves), we have AV specialists to do video introductions, mini-movies and slideshows based on the overall graphic design, and we have the the game programmers to create educational interactives to teach and inform based on design and concept. To back that up, we have the shop - carpenters, metal workers, painters, printers, millwork, motion control, CNC, and most important, Management that can handle all these different artists to create a single work that the audience will enjoy and interact with.

It isn't a handoff situation. Everyone working on their piece concurrently after the major concept is hammered out with progress meetings and directional meetings as often as necessary.

Does that qualify as Design Thinking?
It certainly is interdisciplinary.

One thing you, as designers, have to realize...not everyone can handle all the major tasks it takes to build an exhibit like this. Or even the perfect website. You have to cooperate. Build a team you can work within if you want the pentagram model to work. Or find a project manager that can help keep all the threads going in the right directions and put him in the middle.

[CHRISGEE]

This is exactly what I'm talking about.

Custom fabrication. For audience draw and participation.
But your diagrams lack a hub.

I still don't get it, but maybe I'm slow. My wife says that happens sometimes.

Does that qualify as Design Thinking?

Not really. Your example pointed out the multi-disciplinary team but didn't tackle the other aspect which is the complex problem solving that occurred within that team. (see below)

http://www.thepreparedmind.com/pm/images/nextd/slide1_thumb.gif

How was your team able to DEFINE the problem? How was your team able to ensure that the problem, as defined, was the real problem, prior to finding a solution for it? What brainstorming methods did your team use? Which tools? There are many.

PrintDriver, I'm not really asking YOU these questions, just pointing out what doesn't get said or discussed by graphic designers on these boards.

Most of us will link to a finished piece, or maybe relate a problem that we encountered along the way with Illustrator or Flash, but the underlying problem-solving tools and techniques employed are not discussed.

This is a mistake because if we're not good at discussing it with each other, we'll never be able to discuss it with clients or teams of individuals.

For an interaction designer hoping to take their fledgling business to the next level, one day they will be faced with their first BIG project. How will they handle it? How will they go about getting the clients' in-house tech team to sign on? How will they solve the complex problems and break them down?

There are methodologies and processes that we each employ in our projects that help us to do these things, even if we're not aware. Others of us have trained in various methods of design thinking, innovation management and problem-solving and we need to share them.

Maybe we need to every once in a while share a case study that outlines the problem we faced, how we arrived at a solution and the result of that solution? I shared the Jell-O case study but maybe others wish to share some?

Doing more of this type of sharing of case studies and discussing design thinking will (a) help edify other designers, especially newbies. (b) Get us used to speaking in these terms to clients and communicating with them on a level that interests THEM.

[PrintDriver]

You are right.
There is a lot of problem solving that goes into one of these shows. Unfortunately, it's a case by case issue and not easily brought up for discussion as what worked yesterday for one thing, may not work tomorrow for something similar.

There is a decision making process. However, collective 'brainstorming' doesn't normally happen though. Design by committee is very difficult and very time...uh...intensive. Someone always takes the lead, whether it is us as the client rep or the client themselves depending on their sophistication. Sometimes, if we are hired rather than hiring, the "architectural" design firm will take the lead. The firms that are most successful at it have those Project Managers I spoke of whose single focus is to make sure the job comes together.

You are trying to get designers to bite off too much. The graphic designer isn't the hub of the universe all the time. Neither is the AV designer or the Web designer...

You speak of two different issues. Design as part of a team and design as creative problem solving. I could bet that almost everyone who has posted in the Showcase here had at one point or another to solve a particular problem be it logo or layout. Maybe if a few more of them had put down what their thought process was in solving the particular problem at hand, others would say, "I see" more than shred it out of ignorance. Or offer other points of view.

[CHRISGEE]

You are right.
There is a lot of problem solving that goes into one of these shows. Unfortunately, it's a case by case issue and not easily brought up for discussion as what worked yesterday for one thing, may not work tomorrow for something similar.

Not the solutions but the process would work over and over again. If we outline the typical design and development process with the 5 D's: Discovery, Definition, Design, Development and Deployment, I'm sure that your project and most others like it, utilized most or all aspects of those development stages.

You are trying to get designers to bite off too much. The graphic designer isn't the hub of the universe all the time. Neither is the AV designer or the Web designer...

True. But the designer is the person who is best able to create a unique experience for the user. Companies are now beginning to understand that the design of a product, like an interactive website for example, isn't merely about bringing in the designer at the end of the process to "decorate" the interface. They are realizing that interactive websites are far more effective and create better experiences when designers are brought in from the beginning and lead the process of designing that site and all aspects of interaction.

I've worked in advertising and seen projects where the motion graphics designer was brought in once the concepts were already decided beforehand by the ad guys and I've seen the results of projects where the motion graphics designer was brought in from the beginning and was able to bring their creativity, insight and input into the entire process. BIG difference! LOL!

I don't think designers should rule the world but designers should absolutely lead design projects. I see slowly where projects that weren't always seen as design projects are now seen that way. Not that long ago, interaction design projects were seen as "tech" or "IT" projects and now they're seen -- rightly -- as design projects.

You speak of two different issues. Design as part of a team and design as creative problem solving. I could bet that almost everyone who has posted in the Showcase here had at one point or another to solve a particular problem be it logo or layout. Maybe if a few more of them had put down what their thought process was in solving the particular problem at hand, others would say, "I see" more than shred it out of ignorance. Or offer other points of view.

I agree 100%! That's why I never participate in online crits. A very beautiful final piece could be an ultimately unsuccessful piece because it failed to solve the problems it was supposed to address. How can we know? How should we judge?

I think for many, showcases and critiques are basically some folks' excuse to get out their frustrations.

[LancasterJohn]

[QUOTE=PrintDriver]You are right.
You are trying to get designers to bite off too much. The graphic designer isn't the hub of the universe all the time. Neither is the AV designer or the Web designer...

PrintDriver,
I am curious now, as I have seen you play the devil's advocate in several threads, as to what it is that you do for a living? Are you a designer?

[CHRISGEE]

Hey John,

I think PrintDriver's sentiments are far from unique.

Suggesting that we're going to have to move away from our love of tools and production techniques is not going to be an easy sell. Getting involved at the end of projects and only having to put "decoration" onto solutions is much easier than getting involved at the beginning of projects where we must define problems and devise solutions.

I'm NOT suggesting that this is what PrintDriver does. I have no clue what he does for work.

In truth, most designers are not trained to take on these projects and rising to meet these challenges means acquiring newer skills and processes.

Tomorrow I'm going to record what should be a VERY interesting podcast with a designer who studied at and until recently used to teach at one of the first D-schools, IIT's Institute of Design (http://www.id.iit.edu/).

I don't want to give away too much but she'll be touching on some of the concepts we've brought up here and will probably express them far more eloquently than I have! LOL!

[CHRISGEE]

Some thoughts on Design Thinking (http://www.noisebetweenstations.com/personal/essays/DesignThinking-Business/) from folks much smarter and more eloquent than I am.

[Broacher]

..

[LeftBrain Artist]

With respect to the problem you and your group is trying to solve, can you tell me which problem-solving tools you are currently employing? I've found that in tackling "fuzzy", unframed problems like the ones you face, tackling the problem with a good session of "Challenge Mapping" helps to shed great insight. Are you familiar with that method?

Not really, I checked out what I could find on it and it seems interesting. Any reading you would recommend?

Take a look at most designers' websites. We are used to the old print portfolio method of simply sticking work up there for people to look at. We should be moving toward the "case study" model where we introduce what the problem was when we started, our solution and how the solution solved the problem. That REALLY resonates with clients!

This is something that was pushed on us BIG TIME in my 2 year associates degree at tech school - oddly enough. University system was more concerned with ... I suppose you could call it the decorative aspects of design. Technical college (which I went to after my B.F.A.) emphasized the problem solving aspects of design, and emphasized the importance of utilizing the case study in advertising and promoting your own services.

PrintDriver is right, this role we're discussing for future designers is a lot to ask of a designer. Should this be a task reserved for the art director? Remember those guys?

And design by committee is usually a nightmarish endeavor, BUT, it doesn't have to be. Design by committee is usually done by a committee of marketing managers (in my experience), or other single disciplinary teams - which frustrates others involved in the process, whose jobs are made more difficult by exclusion from the decision making process, and then have to justify increased labor costs to the decision makers who don't understand why its taking longer. This could have been avoided had everyone involved talked to each other from the get go. Problem is, there's usually one or two very important people involved who don't have the time for initial meetings, and delegate the initial concepting to someone else. But the time comes when they have time to take a look, which often results in drastic changes and addtional costs.

Take the case of this museum exhibit. Are all the teams together and talking to each other to develop the initial concept, or is the shop leader and video guy brought in after the concept has been decided upon and set in stone by the graphic designer and architect? If the shop leader and video guy had been present, they might have contributed ideas to the exhibit the designer and architect couldn't have readily envisioned.

Yes, trying to get the group of individuals to cooperate together, or even show up at the same time, is a feat unto itself - and has nothing to do with graphic design and everything to do with leadership. Not to mention the entire team must be willing to contribute ideas. I think what we're really discussing here is not graphic design, but leadership roles managment of design firms, or freelance designers will need to assume to remain competitive in the corporate marketplace. "Design Thinking" has been and always will be an important part of graphic design. What we're talking about is selling "design thinking" rather than "design production", and selling it to those willing to pay a premium price. To do this, one must first have excellent sales and leadership skills, second be creative thinker, and third have a good understanding of graphic design technical processes.

So, any ideas of a night class or two I can take to "master" sales and leadership skills. I've got a pretty good grasp on the other two.

[CHRISGEE]

Not really, I checked out what I could find on it and it seems interesting. Any reading you would recommend?

Here are a couple of resources that I've found useful:

Simplex, A Flight to Creativity (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0930222199/thepreparedmi-20/104-8736141-7399914?%5Fencoding=UTF8&camp=1789&link%5Fcode=xm2)
Rapid Problem Solving With Post-It Notes (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1555611427/thepreparedmi-20/104-8736141-7399914?%5Fencoding=UTF8&camp=1789&link%5Fcode=xm2)


PrintDriver is right, this role we're discussing for future designers is a lot to ask of a designer. Should this be a task reserved for the art director? Remember those guys?

Well you are right only in the setting of a large, top-down design organization. But 1/3 of all designers in the U.S. are self-employed. 90% of U.S. design firms have between 1-4 employees.

Also, art directors aren't born. They are developed. If these are the tools of art directors, unless designers start to embrace these types of design thinking, design management and design problem-solving skills, how will they ever grow INTO art directors?

Of course, not EVERY designer is going to need to develop these skills. Our industry will always have the equivalent of "bricklayers" and "architects". Of course for all the designers who have complained about being seen as "playing all day" or that business doesn't take us seriously, spreading more Design Thinking and engaging in more "from the neck up" design problem-solving should be a welcome undertaking.

Take the case of this museum exhibit. Are all the teams together and talking to each other to develop the initial concept, or is the shop leader and video guy brought in after the concept has been decided upon and set in stone by the graphic designer and architect? If the shop leader and video guy had been present, they might have contributed ideas to the exhibit the designer and architect couldn't have readily envisioned.

Exactly! As an interaction designer, I deal with multi-disciplinary teams all the time. Even as a small consultancy, there are alway -- whether on the client side or as consultants -- programmers, project managers, writers, marketing professionals, etc., involved during various stages of our projects.

It's always better to do some brainstorming with key members of the team. Problem-solving and problem-identification is key to actually solving the right problem.

Too many interaction designers dream up ideas, then later hand those finished and approved ideas over to the programming team with no regard as to how their ideas will affect the technological devlepment and also the price.

Too many print designers dream up ideas with no regard to prepress or production, then fail to deliver a piece that lives up to the comp.

When I used to do print, I had a relationship with my most steady printers so that I could bounce ideas off them and possibly identify potential problems. Often the printer would propose ideas that I would have never considered.

So, any ideas of a night class or two I can take to "master" sales and leadership skills. I've got a pretty good grasp on the other two.

Not off the top of my head, but check out this blog (http://www.tortorelladesign.com/marketing_mind/) for marketing tips.

Also take a look at any of Seth Godin's books!

[LancasterJohn]

The role we're discussing for future designers is a lot to ask, but I believe designers are and have been playing that role for some time now and without recognition or professional respect. I do not believe that this is an additional expectation of the designer, so much as it is a way to increase awareness in designers and businesses of the essential contribution of the designer. There are always going to be "bricklayers" that have no interest beyond production. If that works for them that's fine and nothing more should be expected of them. However, it seems as if business has lumped us all under the heading of graphic artist (especially with all the downsizing over the last few years). This has enabled businesses to get thinking designers for production pricing and production respect... like squeezing blood out of a turnip.

As far as art directors, what are those? Weren't they killed off with the Jedi at the beginning of the recession?

[PrintDriver]

I'm in a weird little segment of the design industry. Not too far from the advertising stuff but FAR away from the promotional/marketing/distribution/website routine. Call it Show Biz for lack of a better term.

I used to be a graphic designer. Now I'm the guy that makes sure the graphics designed by the graphic designer fit into the show or exhibit designed by the architect and are produced in the process, colors, and size specified in the contract. I work for any number of project managers on any number and type of job at any one time. Kind of a mini-hub. All large format. All custom fab. Jobs range from simple broadsides for a State Park to Museum exhibits to arena-sized stage shows. And the gamut in between. We even work with outside artists who hire us to realize their creations.
'Design Thinking' is a reflex, not a job description.

The best thing to do is be 'up' on your particular industry. Read the trades, not just the How or the Typophile type magazines but also the process industries in whatever niche you are in and become an expert not only on design but output and presentation methods. This applies to the web as well. Not only are you dealing with being thought of as a 'decorator', the output world is changing on a daily basis. Keeping up, or at least trying, is a good way of staying ahead.

Oh, And there is nothing wrong with the payscale in Production, Mr. Lindsey. We have to pay 'the dues' just like designers do and the payscale CAN be commensurate with experience. Just like graphic design you are only limited by your ambition. There is a slightly condescending attitude to your statement there. Even if unintentional.

[CHRISGEE]

As far as art directors, what are those? Weren't they killed off with the Jedi at the beginning of the recession?

LOL! Well you'd think so. There were certainly plenty of bodies along the side of the road, that's for sure!

It seems that after the recession started, the market fell in love with inexpensive young talent.

I started my own firm in 2001 and never looked back, but many art directors and senior designers I knew who had had very successful careers managing teams of designers on extremely lucrative projects found themselves unable to find takers.

That happens in this biz. Experience is not really valued in our industry. Why hire a trained, experienced, seasoned pro who has handled projects big and small when you can hire 2 or 3 kids out of college for the same money -- combined -- and they'll bend over backwards because they want desperately to establish themselves in their career?

Unfortunately, not all art directors make good business people and so not many could take advantage of the huge market for consulting that followed the recession layoffs.

My old agency, after laying off me and the entire interactive team, retained my services for 2-3 years afterward because (a) our clients loved me and (b) they had no one left! LOL!

What's more, other opportunities arose once other laid-off creatives eventually landed in other shops and since they also had thin designer corps, they needed to farm out work to outside consultants.

Not all art directors could handle this and a lot are simply out of the industry by now. Sad but them's the breaks. It's a tough world out here.

[LancasterJohn]

Oh, And there is nothing wrong with the payscale in Production, Mr. Lindsey. We have to pay 'the dues' just like designers do and the payscale CAN be commensurate with experience. Just like graphic design you are only limited by your ambition. There is a slightly condescending attitude to your statement there. Even if unintentional.

My intent is not too be condescending Mr. PrintDriver. We have all done production in our careers and the value of the production artist can not be taken for granted and should certainly across the board be paying higher than it is. With that (hopefully) clarified for you, my point is that business has seemingly removed higher-level design positions (such as creative directors and art directors) and as Chris pointed out, replaced what was a single position with 2-3 kids. In a close acquantance's company, they fired all of the art directors and handed down the added responsibility and directorship to the production staff. No salary increases. No change in title.

What does this tell you about where the industry is headed? You can't just blame it on the economy. This devaluation and generalization of the graphic designer has been going on really since the introduction of desktop publishing and it is only getting worse. This is bad news for production salaries in the long run.

I agree with you in that Design Thinking is a reflex. I also think it is something you hone and refine throughout a career. Maybe not everyone will want to be a design thinker and maybe for some it would feel like biting off too much, but it should be viewed as the attribute of a good designer and a point of differentiation in careers.

[CHRISGEE]

John there is a lot of truth in what you say. However I feel that our industry is ultimately at fault.

Our industry has done a poor job of communicating the value that designers bring to business -- to be sure, we don't truly understand it ourselves. So why should a company or agency pay an art director with years of experience $100,000 per year when it can get 2 or 3 kids for that amount?

If the attitude, as accepted by companies AND design firms, is that you only need one "idea guy" and several young design minions to simply "carry out the idea", why shouldn't you obtain those minions at the lowest possible costs?

So now what we're seeing is a wide chasm forming in design. There seems to be mostly demand for designers who perform more production-oriented tasks on one end or the design strategist at the other end. It doesn't seem that there will be much on the table left for those caught in the middle.

Of course, young designers coming out of school will find it difficult to obtain the knowledge necessary to one day ascend to the art director/design strategist level because of the dearth of mentors available. It's common now to go to agencies and design shops and see 20-something art directors and creative directors!

[LancasterJohn]

Chris, there's no doubt our industry is at fault as a result of lack of communication. As an industry we got sidetracked with technique and software... an inevitable side effect of incorporating desktop publishing. The finer points of being a designer got pushed to the backburner and taken for granted.

I think that as an industry whole we do need to clarify what it is that the designer is bringing to the table. The concept of design thinking sounds like the opening to a long overdue discussion and hopefully a renaissance in the field. The first two places this discussion needs to take place in is within the professional community and in the classroom.

I do agree that the younger designers are being herded toward anything but the pipe dream they were sold in college. With the career lifespan of the designer decreasing so rapidly, how much knowledge and old-fashioned mentoring is going by the way side? At what point will business wake up and realize the mistake?

[CHRISGEE]

I do agree that the younger designers are being herded toward anything but the pipe dream they were sold in college. With the career lifespan of the designer decreasing so rapidly, how much knowledge and old-fashioned mentoring is going by the way side? At what point will business wake up and realize the mistake?

At what point indeed. The good news is that there IS a bigger appreciation for design that is beginning to take hold in the business community. FINALLY.

The problem is that we have to rise to meet those challenges and it's become tougher because of the way our industry is setup. Many designers in in-house situations work in departments that are run by non-designers. In many agency situations, the folks who deal with clients and define design strategy are also non-designers. "Suits" as they are not affectionately referred to.

With experienced designers becoming less and less visible, there are fewer ways for young designers to learn the skills necessary to move up into the roles that the business world is currently seeking for the new, increasing design needs.

So what's happening? The same thing that happened in the early 90's when the Internet started to really take shape. Designers, out of fear, largely eschewed the web altogether and non-designers -- programmers and coders -- stepped into the void and made their own opportunities. It wasn't until years later, when designers saw all the money that everyone was making from web consulting, that traditional designers decided to jump into the fray in huge numbers. Ironically, by then the feeling was in the web industry that traditional designers were unfit for web work and could not make the mental transformation from static print to dynamic interactivity. That a great number of traditional designers flat out refused to learn any HTML, preferring instead to "hand-over" huge, unworkable Photoshop files made that characterization less than unfair.

Just as it happened in the 90's, non-designers are poising themselves to capitalize on the increasing demand for design solutions. If things continue the way they are going now, and we can ALWAYS decide to change our fate, we'll see more design managers/leaders like Steve Jobs. Folks who understand design's value and preach it on every level within their organization, but are not designers. We'll see a new generation of creative non-creatives.

These are the folks who are largely flocking to many of these D-Schools now. These are the folks who are dominating the conversations about Design Thinking while we mostly discuss software and production techniques.

The good news? It's not too late to bring about change. Simply introducing and participating in topics like this on discussion boards, starting a blog that deals with design thinking or even starting a podcast that deals with design thinking can help spread these ideas and bring like-minded folks together.

You're right, there are many designers who will decide that they rather prefer to do what is asked and not involve any strategy or Design Thinking and that's their choice. But for those of us who feel differently, we can't wait for someone else, we have to get things rolling ourselves.

[steve-o]

Interesting discussion. Seems like "design thinking" is simply a movement to make design more "scientific/academic" in nature, or at least a way to incorporate these methods and processes into design.

To do this, I guess design education needs to come out of business, engineering, or communucations departments, rather than art departments.

You know though. I don't think you'd see any "improvement" in design if all of a sudden you get all designers to do this. Any way you approach design, there will always be a few great designers, a few more good ones, a large population of competent/mediocre ones, and many more bad ones.

Just because you know what to do, doesn't mean you can execute.

[LancasterJohn]

...in the early 90's when the Internet started to really take shape. Designers, out of fear, largely eschewed the web altogether and non-designers -- programmers and coders -- stepped into the void and made their own opportunities. It wasn't until years later, when designers saw all the money that everyone was making from web consulting, that traditional designers decided to jump into the fray in huge numbers.

What's ironic is that even today many designers are still not stepping up to the plate and accepting that designing for the Web IS part of the job -- like it or not. I do feel that designers at the "boutique" shops rose to the occasion and accepted their added role as Web designers, while the larger shop designers almost scoffed at the notion. I think that the small shop designer is going to be more open to the idea of design thinking as they have most likely been practicing it all along -- hence the Strawberry Frog case study.


we'll see more design managers/leaders like Steve Jobs. Folks who understand design's value and preach it on every level within their organization, but are not designers. We'll see a new generation of creative non-creatives.

These are the folks who are largely flocking to many of these D-Schools now. These are the folks who are dominating the conversations about Design Thinking while we mostly discuss software and production techniques.

This is certainly a critical time to hold the line, before the non-designer is entrenched as the design manager.

Simply introducing and participating in topics like this on discussion boards, starting a blog that deals with design thinking or even starting a podcast that deals with design thinking can help spread these ideas and bring like-minded folks together.

I did take the time to listen to Podcast #7 and take some notes. What a wealth of insight was contained there! I am still putting my thoughts together, but I can guarantee you that I will be drawing from this in conversations with some of my local fellow designers.

[LancasterJohn]

steve-o, I do not think that this is a way to artificially re-package the designer, so much as to establish the importance of the designer's role in business and to examine characteristics of a good designer. Great designers will always come from an art department, but that doesn't mean their role in business stops at an art level.

You mention "Any way you approach design, there will always be a few great designers, a few more good ones, a large population of competent/mediocre ones, and many more bad ones."

Couldn't agree more with you. However, without recognition that there is higher thinking in design and that more value should be placed on it than currently, I'm afraid there will be little incentive for the few great designers to enter this career. This is all the more incentive for the bad ones to continue to oversaturate the field.

[PrintDriver]

You guys are too focused. There's more to design than brochures, business cards, logos, annual reports, catalogs, and collateral. You don't need to know web design to be a good designer, or a successful one either. There are niche markets, highly competitive, yes, but a good-to-great designer can certainly get by in them very comfortably without doing a bit of web design.

[LancasterJohn]

You guys are too focused. There's more to design than brochures, business cards, logos, annual reports, catalogs, and collateral.

I don't think anyone here is limiting design to the above.


You don't need to know web design to be a good designer, or a successful one either. There are niche markets, highly competitive, yes, but a good-to-great designer can certainly get by in them very comfortably without doing a bit of web design.

Yeah, I would agree with this, but for most designers, knowledge of Web design will and is becoming a job pre-requisite. A lot of designers missed the boat early on because they had the attitude "hey, that's not my job" and dismissed the graphic designer's role in Web development. Now the design industry as a whole is catching up, but the role is secondary to the IT department.

[CHRISGEE]

You guys are too focused. There's more to design than brochures, business cards, logos, annual reports, catalogs, and collateral. You don't need to know web design to be a good designer, or a successful one either. There are niche markets, highly competitive, yes, but a good-to-great designer can certainly get by in them very comfortably without doing a bit of web design.

Well when I say print designer need to wake up to the web, that doesn't mean they need to now start designing websites. They need to, like ALL industries have had to do, start utilizing the web better to enhance how they provide services.

Right now, most print designers still operate the way they did back in the early 90's!

I'll give you an example. At my old agency, the print ad guys created a solution before I was brought in and my interactive group formed, that allowed major global client of ours to access from a wide variety of ad layouts and customize them to different markets and publications.

They could mix and match photos, copy, company logos (they used different logos in different countries and markets), etc. It was a SMART web-based solution that allowed the client more flexibility to serve up PRINT work.

This was an idea that was hatched from the print guys! It just goes to show that even though you do print work, you still need to acknowledge that the web is a tool that must be utilized and is how business is conducted today. The print team didn't design one line of code. They framed the problem: the need for greater flexibility and automation in serving up print ads globally; and designed the solution: the mixing and matching of print content for the campaign, on demand.

IMO, more print designers need to start looking at the way they do business and utilizing the web to bring about better PRINT solutions.