Designer/Consumer

[jonnie]

As part of my course at university, I am to create a journal that investigates the topic "Designer VS Consumer".

As part of this journal I have decided to gather some definitions of the two terms - designer and consumer.

I've gained some definitions from searching on the internet, and now if you'd like to help me I'd appreciate it if you could define what you think a designer and a consumer are.

Any opinions you give will be referenced as your own so there won't be any stealing of ideas going on! I'm really doing this because I'm not convinced by the definitions I've found so far, and it will make my journal more accurate to have various sources of information - especially from various different designers/consumers such as yourselves.

Thank you in advance!

[PrintDriver]

"Designer VS Consumer" sounds like the two are at war.
It's more of a subtle game than that.

In advertising/marketing it is the designer's job to lull the consumer into a false sense of security using visually pleasing images all the while selling him something he probably doesn't want or need to begin with.

Or in a museum exhibit the idea is to make learning appear to be a game by visually appealing imagery and interactive activities.

Or in the case of special interests, to scare or seek pity or any other sway-tactics using emotion-triggering imagery.

The consumer, for the most part, just buys into this.
:p
<what, me a cynic?>

[SurfPark]

I don't know if the designer is always in a conflict with the consumer. Using the term "versus" implies that they have opposing goals. I think they both have the same goal: the designer wants to sell and the consumer wants to buy. The game starts when there more is more than one designer.

Keep in mind that saying "designer" isn't really doing justice to the idea you're trying to get across. A designer implies the pure aspect of design for functional use. I think you'd be better refering to that role as marketer/designer, since marketers typically deal with consumer needs and trends. Designers can be marketers or work with them, but they usually are only one at one time. They have to take off one hat to put on another.

When a person is attempting to maket goods or services they tend to research and use that information to create appeal. Marketing can be done without visuals. For example, a marketer might find the right points to sell to the target consumer and place a radio ad. In that way, they're not a designer. A designer can be brought into the marketing setting to help create a visual representation or interface that support the marketer's pitch.

The only way a designer could directly serve the consumer is by taking an existing product and redesign it. For example, a designer could recreate a wine glass, but they wouldn't be the ones deciding the type of consumer the glasses are being sold to. The designer might come in conflict with the consumer when the consumer disagrees with the function of the product. If the consumer tells the designer that they'd rather have a wine glass they could also serve juice and milk in, the designer might have to change the function of the design to accommodate these alternative functions. The consumer could also be resistant of change in general, asking the designer to not change anything.

[budafist]

Wars can be found in the designer vs. client relationship

[captain spanky]

...or designer vs management team :D

[PrintDriver]

I drink my wine out of the bottle.
I couldn't figure out if the glasses I had were suitable.
:D

[Broacher]

Designers are quickly becoming the 'fall guys/gals' for bonehead management decision. So easy when everything is marketed now as 'designer-this' or 'designer-that'. If it doesn't work-- it's not the brand, it's the brand's designers.

For an example of how this stupid type of thinking is processed, check out:

http://www.businessweek.com/innovate/NussbaumOnDesign/archives/2007/03/are_designers_t.html

[captain spanky]

my brain can't seem to process most of that in my afternoon redbull fuelled euphoria but the bits i can register seem like bollards to me. he's generalising rather a bit isn't he?
Designers are saying that Design is everywhere, done by everyone. So Design is debased, eroded, insulted. The subtext, of course, is that Real design can only be done by great star designers.
This is simply not true. Design Democracy is the wave of the future.
yeah design is everywhere and some of it is really good... but the fact of the matter is that a lot of it is terrible and that's not me being 'arrogant' as he put it... it's people using the little knowledge they know of a package to do somethiung they're happy with... it doesn't mean it's good design!
As the saying goes... a little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing!
I'm feeling myself agreeing with this poster:
This speach was full of tripe. It begins with overgeneralizations and spirals downward with dim-witted myopic comments.
First, arrogance and ignorance are equal opportunity offenders striking many in all walks of life. Aren't the "arrogant" designers partially responsible for the very tools (MySpace, chat rooms, brochures, etc.) you mention in your speech that allow you to express your personal style? Did you miss that? Let me guess; your going to tell your physician how to treat your illness and give your attorney advice on how to solve your legal problem next, right? Designers are trained and hired to consider all and pander. If their ideas did not take into account what the masses desire they would not be employed.

[Broacher]

Generalizing? That's about all this guy's doing. And his environmental arguments were shallow and full of holes and fallacies.

Shows you though how important it is for a profession to cultivate a positive lay-image. I don't really understand the work of surgeons, mechanics, air traffic controllers, teachers, police-- but like most others, I respect what they're doing. You get on the wrong side of that public perception and it's damn difficult to turn it around.

Just ask the lawyers at the bottom of the lake.