Monday, March 30, 2009
resources for product design teaching, but very useful for you guys
http://deseng.ryerson.ca/xiki/Learning/Main:Web_home
Sunday, March 29, 2009
WHAT'S THE BIG PICTURE?
The 21st century a FAQ
Answers to Frequently Asked Questions about the 21st century:http://rs.resalliance.org/category/tools/scenarios/
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
Just Say No To 'Innovation'
BY Gadi AmitTue Mar 24, 2009 at 11:24 AM
Promoted as the "in" word in design circles in recent years, 'innovation' has become a mantra devoid of meaning. Glorified by the likes of Bruce Nussbaum of BusinessWeek and David Kelly of IDEO, "innovation" blurs the boundaries between the worlds of engineering and design. It devalues the real strength of industrial design by forcing an analytical structure over the process of developing a non-analytical design. Similarly, it makes engineering play design, while over-selling its value in defining the "right design".
I was first asked to look at the merits of innovation way back in mid-2000, when Carl Yankowski, then CEO of Palm, called me to discuss design. The talk went on and ended a year or so later with the best selling Palm Zire, yet the point he made was shocking at the time. Carl took the Palm V out of his pocket and said warned me, "Don't you dare design anything like this!"
Carl went on to explain that while the Palm V was a commercial success, the company had had serious problems with how the metal casing had been glued together. Regardless of the merits of the case, the message was clear: over-engineered products may gain success yet become a burden to the company.
A top executive at Circuit City made a similar point to me few years back. After a very successful presentation, he stopped me and said, "This is all very nice, Gadi, yet why is it that so many design projects fail?" With 30 years in electronics, the man knew a project or two and had the pleasure of knowing half the design world as well. After a long discussion the issue was clear. He meant innovation, not industrial design. It was tough to get through the blurred definitions as he was using the design press jargon. He was gunning for the intergalactic-business-making designer-wannabe engineers.
While innovation speaks of metrics and tangible features, design is usually defined by intuition and intangibles. It is far easier to explain metrics and tangibles. It is also assumed to be safer to make decisions based on numbers and engineering calculations. Yet the quintessential question about design is not "is it a 'good' design?"; it's the other question: "is it the 'right' design?"
That's where "innovation" fails. The innovation crowd makes a fundamental mistake: that a complex market problem can be solved by a good analytical design. If you build the "process" right, and put the right "validation" and "methodology" in place, using more technology with more investment in the "process", you'll get a better product--wrong!
In reality, winning a market battle requires a very complex equation of advance performance, marketing insight and appropriate design. We use the term "look & feel" often when talking about the right design approach. Both "look" and "feel" can not be quantified or learned in engineering schools. These terms are intuitive to the knowledgeable and obtuse to the novice. In reality the "look & feel" of a good product is a nuanced, multi-faceted approach to technical constraints, target demographics and trend-forecasting combined with a special sauce--the designer's talent and intuition.
Such a complex formula for design success can not be resolved by analytical methods. Time and time again I see metrics and focus groups fail in predicting the outcome of a design effort. Many times excellent design work is butchered by analytics (Think GM for a minute…). Human culture is ageless, and excellent design always brings technology and our cultural heritage together. The Sony Walkman made music, an essential human need, portable. The Kindle (especially the new one) may become the "Walkman" of reading. With that cultural quality both products are a triumph of design over innovation.
The question is essentially "how do we make decisions about design?" The answer is: "not by analytics alone!" The making of a good design--say a great mobile phone design--is so complex that the only way is by relying on the designer's intuition in solving this nuanced formula. If the issue is the reliability of this method, the answer is the designer's track record in resolving such challenges. Some people have more talent than others--that's a fact of life.
With the economy in dire straits and every development dollar being scrutinized to the penny, design is facing a strong challenge to its philosophical core. If "innovation" wins these few R&D dollars, intuition will suffer badly and with it many more projects will fail. We can't afford to leave the room and the decision-making to analytics alone. Say no to innovation, welcome to intuition.
Gadi Amit is the president of NewDealDesign LLC, a strategic design studio in San Francisco. Founded in 2000, NDD has worked with such clients as Better Place, Sling Media, Palm, Dell, Microsoft, and Fujitsu, among others, and has won more than 70 design awards. Amit is passionate about creating design that is both socially responsible and generates real world success.
Promoted as the "in" word in design circles in recent years, 'innovation' has become a mantra devoid of meaning. Glorified by the likes of Bruce Nussbaum of BusinessWeek and David Kelly of IDEO, "innovation" blurs the boundaries between the worlds of engineering and design. It devalues the real strength of industrial design by forcing an analytical structure over the process of developing a non-analytical design. Similarly, it makes engineering play design, while over-selling its value in defining the "right design".
I was first asked to look at the merits of innovation way back in mid-2000, when Carl Yankowski, then CEO of Palm, called me to discuss design. The talk went on and ended a year or so later with the best selling Palm Zire, yet the point he made was shocking at the time. Carl took the Palm V out of his pocket and said warned me, "Don't you dare design anything like this!"
Carl went on to explain that while the Palm V was a commercial success, the company had had serious problems with how the metal casing had been glued together. Regardless of the merits of the case, the message was clear: over-engineered products may gain success yet become a burden to the company.
A top executive at Circuit City made a similar point to me few years back. After a very successful presentation, he stopped me and said, "This is all very nice, Gadi, yet why is it that so many design projects fail?" With 30 years in electronics, the man knew a project or two and had the pleasure of knowing half the design world as well. After a long discussion the issue was clear. He meant innovation, not industrial design. It was tough to get through the blurred definitions as he was using the design press jargon. He was gunning for the intergalactic-business-making designer-wannabe engineers.
While innovation speaks of metrics and tangible features, design is usually defined by intuition and intangibles. It is far easier to explain metrics and tangibles. It is also assumed to be safer to make decisions based on numbers and engineering calculations. Yet the quintessential question about design is not "is it a 'good' design?"; it's the other question: "is it the 'right' design?"
That's where "innovation" fails. The innovation crowd makes a fundamental mistake: that a complex market problem can be solved by a good analytical design. If you build the "process" right, and put the right "validation" and "methodology" in place, using more technology with more investment in the "process", you'll get a better product--wrong!
In reality, winning a market battle requires a very complex equation of advance performance, marketing insight and appropriate design. We use the term "look & feel" often when talking about the right design approach. Both "look" and "feel" can not be quantified or learned in engineering schools. These terms are intuitive to the knowledgeable and obtuse to the novice. In reality the "look & feel" of a good product is a nuanced, multi-faceted approach to technical constraints, target demographics and trend-forecasting combined with a special sauce--the designer's talent and intuition.
Such a complex formula for design success can not be resolved by analytical methods. Time and time again I see metrics and focus groups fail in predicting the outcome of a design effort. Many times excellent design work is butchered by analytics (Think GM for a minute…). Human culture is ageless, and excellent design always brings technology and our cultural heritage together. The Sony Walkman made music, an essential human need, portable. The Kindle (especially the new one) may become the "Walkman" of reading. With that cultural quality both products are a triumph of design over innovation.
The question is essentially "how do we make decisions about design?" The answer is: "not by analytics alone!" The making of a good design--say a great mobile phone design--is so complex that the only way is by relying on the designer's intuition in solving this nuanced formula. If the issue is the reliability of this method, the answer is the designer's track record in resolving such challenges. Some people have more talent than others--that's a fact of life.
With the economy in dire straits and every development dollar being scrutinized to the penny, design is facing a strong challenge to its philosophical core. If "innovation" wins these few R&D dollars, intuition will suffer badly and with it many more projects will fail. We can't afford to leave the room and the decision-making to analytics alone. Say no to innovation, welcome to intuition.
Gadi Amit is the president of NewDealDesign LLC, a strategic design studio in San Francisco. Founded in 2000, NDD has worked with such clients as Better Place, Sling Media, Palm, Dell, Microsoft, and Fujitsu, among others, and has won more than 70 design awards. Amit is passionate about creating design that is both socially responsible and generates real world success.
Monday, March 23, 2009
what can we recycle, and how?
http://www.recyclethis.co.uk/
crowd sourcing to provide solutions to recycling everyday objects and waste.
crowd sourcing to provide solutions to recycling everyday objects and waste.
Sunday, March 22, 2009
things that need fixing...
http://www.fastcompany.com/blog/michael-cannell/cannell/eight-picks-improving-everyday
something to think about in our context here in the sub-continent. Are there any products that you see everyday and know have the potential to be improved? Post a comment!
something to think about in our context here in the sub-continent. Are there any products that you see everyday and know have the potential to be improved? Post a comment!
Friday, March 20, 2009
the books you need to read....and we have some of them
http://www.designsojourn.com/30-essential-books-for-industrial-designers/#comment-63816
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Should we be worrying about design and the economy?
This article sheds some light...
http://www.metropolismag.com/story/20090318/product-panic-2009
http://www.metropolismag.com/story/20090318/product-panic-2009
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
...and here are Dieter Rams' 10 commandments of design...
Dieter Rams' 10 Commandments can be found on a brilliant website call Design Soujourn: http://www.designsojourn.com/dieter-rams-and-his-10-design-commandments/
1. Good Design is innovative
It does not copy existing product forms, nor does it produce any kind of novelty for the sake of it. The essence of innovation must be clearly seen in all functions of a product. The possibilities in this respect are by no means exhausted. Technological development keeps offering new chances for innovative solutions.
2. Good Design makes a product useful
A product is bought in order to be used. It must serve a defined purpose – in both primary and additional functions. The most important task of design is to optimise the utility of a product.
3. Good Design is aesthetic
The aesthetic quality of a product – and the fascination it inspires – is an integral part of the its utility. Without doubt, it is uncomfortable and tiring to have to put up with products that are confusing, that get on your nerves, that you are unable to relate to. However, it has always been a hard task to argue about aesthetic quality, for two reasons.
Firstly, it is difficult to talk about anything visual, since words have a different meaning for different people.
Secondly, aesthetic quality deals with details, subtle shades, harmony and the equilibrium of a whole variety of visual elements. A good eye is required, schooled by years and years of experience, in order to be able to draw the right conclusion.
4. Good Design helps a product be understood
It clarifies the structure of the product. Better still, it can make the product talk. At best, it is self-explanatory and saves you the long, tedious perusal of the operating manual.
5. Good Design is unobtrusive
Products that satisfy this criterion are tools. They are neither decorative objects nor works of art. Their design should therefore be both neutral and restrained leaving room for the user’s self-expression.
6. Good Design is honest
An honestly-designed product must not claim features it does not have – being more innovative, more efficient, of higher value. It must not influence or manipulate buyers and users.
7. Good Design is durable
It is nothing trendy that might be out-of-date tomorrow. This is one of the major differences between well-designed products and trivial objects for a waste-producing society. Waste must no longer be tolerated.
8. Good Design is thorough to the last detail
Thoroughness and accuracy of design are synonymous with the product and its functions, as seen through the eyes of the user
9. Good Design is concerned with environment
Design must contribute towards a stable environment and a sensible use of raw materials. This means considering not only actual pollution, but also the visual pollution and destruction of our environment.
10. Good Design is as little design as possible
Back to purity, back to simplicity.
1. Good Design is innovative
It does not copy existing product forms, nor does it produce any kind of novelty for the sake of it. The essence of innovation must be clearly seen in all functions of a product. The possibilities in this respect are by no means exhausted. Technological development keeps offering new chances for innovative solutions.
2. Good Design makes a product useful
A product is bought in order to be used. It must serve a defined purpose – in both primary and additional functions. The most important task of design is to optimise the utility of a product.
3. Good Design is aesthetic
The aesthetic quality of a product – and the fascination it inspires – is an integral part of the its utility. Without doubt, it is uncomfortable and tiring to have to put up with products that are confusing, that get on your nerves, that you are unable to relate to. However, it has always been a hard task to argue about aesthetic quality, for two reasons.
Firstly, it is difficult to talk about anything visual, since words have a different meaning for different people.
Secondly, aesthetic quality deals with details, subtle shades, harmony and the equilibrium of a whole variety of visual elements. A good eye is required, schooled by years and years of experience, in order to be able to draw the right conclusion.
4. Good Design helps a product be understood
It clarifies the structure of the product. Better still, it can make the product talk. At best, it is self-explanatory and saves you the long, tedious perusal of the operating manual.
5. Good Design is unobtrusive
Products that satisfy this criterion are tools. They are neither decorative objects nor works of art. Their design should therefore be both neutral and restrained leaving room for the user’s self-expression.
6. Good Design is honest
An honestly-designed product must not claim features it does not have – being more innovative, more efficient, of higher value. It must not influence or manipulate buyers and users.
7. Good Design is durable
It is nothing trendy that might be out-of-date tomorrow. This is one of the major differences between well-designed products and trivial objects for a waste-producing society. Waste must no longer be tolerated.
8. Good Design is thorough to the last detail
Thoroughness and accuracy of design are synonymous with the product and its functions, as seen through the eyes of the user
9. Good Design is concerned with environment
Design must contribute towards a stable environment and a sensible use of raw materials. This means considering not only actual pollution, but also the visual pollution and destruction of our environment.
10. Good Design is as little design as possible
Back to purity, back to simplicity.
and a critique of the film after it's first screening...
http://www.core77.com/blog/business/core77_film_review_gary_hustwits_objectified_12894.asp#more
Monday, March 16, 2009
Any of you interested in post-srishti study...
Money available for study...
http://www.cranfield.ac.uk/sas/competitivedesign/?gclid=COrSuuuKp5kCFRYdewod-XXDqA
http://www.cranfield.ac.uk/sas/competitivedesign/?gclid=COrSuuuKp5kCFRYdewod-XXDqA
Selling the Future
Great article that makes us think about what we are designing in today's current economic climate.
http://www.core77.com/blog/featured_items/selling_the_future_design_and_the_financial_crisis_12853.asp#more
http://www.core77.com/blog/featured_items/selling_the_future_design_and_the_financial_crisis_12853.asp#more
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)