Discuss.
March 31, 2010 4:12 AM Subscribe
It's a sign of the times when The Economist, the house journal of the global business elite, holds a conference in London on 'design thinking' (official Big Rethink site here). Having attended the conference, produced in association with The Design Council and held over 11-12 March, I was left wondering one thing: why is design thinking such a hot topic with business leaders, given that it leaves so many designers cold? ~ via Core77
more inside. rtfa b4 u rite
more inside. rtfa b4 u rite
This post was deleted for the following reason: infini, I honestly don't know what is up lately but I think maybe you need to take a break from mefi for a little while or something. -- cortex
Don't be so cynical, liebniz. All that's needed to solve those flaws is a little synergy.
posted by No-sword at 4:48 AM on March 31, 2010 [2 favorites]
posted by No-sword at 4:48 AM on March 31, 2010 [2 favorites]
All codified design processes are BS. Not just for "products" but also for software, etc. And if there is one that isn't BS, the parts that made it non-BS will be quickly adopted by other process-codifying hopefuls, rendering it BS.
That said, to paraphrase Eisenhower, codifying design processes is still essential. The important part is not what plan you have, but that you plan, period. Think about what you are doing, don't just act mindlessly or from habit.
posted by DU at 4:58 AM on March 31, 2010 [3 favorites]
That said, to paraphrase Eisenhower, codifying design processes is still essential. The important part is not what plan you have, but that you plan, period. Think about what you are doing, don't just act mindlessly or from habit.
posted by DU at 4:58 AM on March 31, 2010 [3 favorites]
Sounds like someone's got a hard-on for IDEO. The entire corporate world understands now that "business consulting" is utter bullshit (from McKinsey to Accenture). So instead of bullshit like the Five Forces, you get words thrown around like design-centric and brand experience.
posted by amuseDetachment at 5:05 AM on March 31, 2010
posted by amuseDetachment at 5:05 AM on March 31, 2010
TL;DR: The CEO got an iPhone and wants some of that sexy.
posted by amuseDetachment at 5:07 AM on March 31, 2010 [3 favorites]
posted by amuseDetachment at 5:07 AM on March 31, 2010 [3 favorites]
"Design thinking" leaves designers (and other creative people) cold because they're already there, already been there, will always be there. Designers don't choose design thinking. They are design thinking: it's in their corpuscles, their bones -- its played out in the desperate arc of their lives.
Design thinking is just creativity, and once a generation or so, some creative person thinks of a new way to sell it to the uncreative people who run things. These uncreatives have so little creativity in their lives that even the slightest exposure to some fast-talking design salesman leaves them in awe, believing that they've encountered some kind of magic. This salesman convinces them that design and creativity aren't just the inborn gifts of random people in the population, but can be purchased by the business leaders, and that the right consultants can use this magic of creativity to solve their business problems.
"Design thinking" lets the people in charge believe that creativity can be controlled, or bought at creativity stores like IDEO, and sprinkled around their companies like modern furniture.
For designers, "design thinking" is nothing more or less than the sad messy exultant business of life. For business leaders, "design thinking" is about cleaning up the mess, making things tidy, creating white space, lopping off all the dangling limbs and bobbling heads.
For designers, "design thinking" is about opening up possibilities. For business leaders, its about closing off possibilities -- either cutting Gordian knots or building Procrustean beds, I can't decide which. It is not unreasonable to fear "design thinking" as a stream feeding into some future authoritarian philosophy. But right now, it's the latest expression of the age-old envy of the powerful non-artist who believes his money should be able to buy him anything, for those who possess the priceless and unpurchaseable gift (or curse) or originality.
posted by Faze at 5:09 AM on March 31, 2010 [5 favorites]
Design thinking is just creativity, and once a generation or so, some creative person thinks of a new way to sell it to the uncreative people who run things. These uncreatives have so little creativity in their lives that even the slightest exposure to some fast-talking design salesman leaves them in awe, believing that they've encountered some kind of magic. This salesman convinces them that design and creativity aren't just the inborn gifts of random people in the population, but can be purchased by the business leaders, and that the right consultants can use this magic of creativity to solve their business problems.
"Design thinking" lets the people in charge believe that creativity can be controlled, or bought at creativity stores like IDEO, and sprinkled around their companies like modern furniture.
For designers, "design thinking" is nothing more or less than the sad messy exultant business of life. For business leaders, "design thinking" is about cleaning up the mess, making things tidy, creating white space, lopping off all the dangling limbs and bobbling heads.
For designers, "design thinking" is about opening up possibilities. For business leaders, its about closing off possibilities -- either cutting Gordian knots or building Procrustean beds, I can't decide which. It is not unreasonable to fear "design thinking" as a stream feeding into some future authoritarian philosophy. But right now, it's the latest expression of the age-old envy of the powerful non-artist who believes his money should be able to buy him anything, for those who possess the priceless and unpurchaseable gift (or curse) or originality.
posted by Faze at 5:09 AM on March 31, 2010 [5 favorites]
I actually got invited to talk at that conference. I gave it up because my grandmother wanted a lesson on how to suck eggs. As has happened more than once before, Will Hutton was asked to step in instead.
Totally true story.
posted by MuffinMan at 5:24 AM on March 31, 2010 [1 favorite]
Totally true story.
posted by MuffinMan at 5:24 AM on March 31, 2010 [1 favorite]
TL,DR but let me tell you all about it this really important opinion I have anyway...
posted by From Bklyn at 5:35 AM on March 31, 2010 [1 favorite]
posted by From Bklyn at 5:35 AM on March 31, 2010 [1 favorite]
As has happened more than once before, Will Hutton was asked to step in instead.
He doesn't strike me as someone who would be an expert on 'design thinking', somehow. (Though given that I've only just heard the term, what would I know?)
And on reading TFA, it seems I'm right " The Work Foundation's Will Hutton took a few bad-tempered minutes to tackle the economic crisis and make the case for more investment in R&D."
posted by Infinite Jest at 5:38 AM on March 31, 2010
He doesn't strike me as someone who would be an expert on 'design thinking', somehow. (Though given that I've only just heard the term, what would I know?)
And on reading TFA, it seems I'm right " The Work Foundation's Will Hutton took a few bad-tempered minutes to tackle the economic crisis and make the case for more investment in R&D."
posted by Infinite Jest at 5:38 AM on March 31, 2010
Good paragraph for playing cliche bingo:
Still, when design thinking began to get a name for itself, most seasoned designers merely considered it harmless hype. But as the hype gathered pace, attitudes began to change. Meanwhile, dark economic clouds gathered. The idea of design as a silver bullet started to lose its currency before the financial crisis, but once the recession bit, the questions for design thinkers sharpened.
At this corporate level design thinking is little more than the latest rebranding of Blairite managerialism, and designers (who tend to be pretty shrewd) are right to be wary of it. I'm a design journalist and I did the preparatory research for a feature about the rise of "design thinking" some time ago. Once you progress beyond some small-scale, worthwhile and interesting examples of service design ... I spent days swinging a machete through amazonian tracts of business-speak fluff, wondering when I would get to the city of gold, and was left doubting that the city existed. I spiked my own piece in the end. Edwin Heathcote wrote quite a good column for us criticising design thinking - it's here, if you'll excuse the link to my employer.
posted by WPW at 5:43 AM on March 31, 2010 [1 favorite]
Still, when design thinking began to get a name for itself, most seasoned designers merely considered it harmless hype. But as the hype gathered pace, attitudes began to change. Meanwhile, dark economic clouds gathered. The idea of design as a silver bullet started to lose its currency before the financial crisis, but once the recession bit, the questions for design thinkers sharpened.
At this corporate level design thinking is little more than the latest rebranding of Blairite managerialism, and designers (who tend to be pretty shrewd) are right to be wary of it. I'm a design journalist and I did the preparatory research for a feature about the rise of "design thinking" some time ago. Once you progress beyond some small-scale, worthwhile and interesting examples of service design ... I spent days swinging a machete through amazonian tracts of business-speak fluff, wondering when I would get to the city of gold, and was left doubting that the city existed. I spiked my own piece in the end. Edwin Heathcote wrote quite a good column for us criticising design thinking - it's here, if you'll excuse the link to my employer.
posted by WPW at 5:43 AM on March 31, 2010 [1 favorite]
At my old agency we decided we needed to be more creative, and planned out a series of workshops and things that might identify how we could take a fresher approach. Instead, the new (non-creative background) MD put a stop to all that and had some A5 picture frames filled with a list of bullet points telling us all to be more creative, and made us have one next to our monitors. It was like having North Korean economic slogans. That's when I started making plans to leave...
posted by dowcrag at 5:43 AM on March 31, 2010 [4 favorites]
posted by dowcrag at 5:43 AM on March 31, 2010 [4 favorites]
I'm talking about design thinking of the management-consultancy kind, not on the level of promoting resourcefulness, which is a different matter and more worthwhile IMO even though it has obvious limitations.
posted by WPW at 5:47 AM on March 31, 2010
posted by WPW at 5:47 AM on March 31, 2010
Business person 1: How do we sell more of our product?
Business person 2: Slap some design on it!
You hear the word 'design, design, design" and it starts to lose meaning. What are these people even talking about anymore? It's becoming like "Synergy" and "Paradigm". Isn't everything designed? I assume they mean good design. But that would imply it's not just a button you can push.
posted by delmoi at 5:50 AM on March 31, 2010 [1 favorite]
Business person 2: Slap some design on it!
You hear the word 'design, design, design" and it starts to lose meaning. What are these people even talking about anymore? It's becoming like "Synergy" and "Paradigm". Isn't everything designed? I assume they mean good design. But that would imply it's not just a button you can push.
posted by delmoi at 5:50 AM on March 31, 2010 [1 favorite]
Metafilter: rtfa b4 u rite
posted by mhoye at 5:51 AM on March 31, 2010 [4 favorites]
posted by mhoye at 5:51 AM on March 31, 2010 [4 favorites]
Design is sexy to business leaders because it represents a kind of devil-may-care abandonment, far away from current pressures, a flighty arty world of possibilities divorced from reality, divorced from a job.
Design is boring to designers because it represents a job.
posted by twoleftfeet at 5:52 AM on March 31, 2010
Design is boring to designers because it represents a job.
posted by twoleftfeet at 5:52 AM on March 31, 2010
delmoi, "design thinking" isn't really to do with improving the design of a company's products - heaven forfend! It's to do with management style and problem solving, getting business people to think like designers or bringing in designers to apply magic design poultices to business processes.
posted by WPW at 5:55 AM on March 31, 2010 [1 favorite]
posted by WPW at 5:55 AM on March 31, 2010 [1 favorite]
Design thinking is just creativity, and once a generation or so, some creative person thinks of a new way to sell it to the uncreative people who run things.
That's what a lot of people, including the authors of this article, seem to think, but that's not what design is at all. This description is not only wrong, but cheapens good design quite a bit.
posted by mhoye at 5:58 AM on March 31, 2010 [2 favorites]
That's what a lot of people, including the authors of this article, seem to think, but that's not what design is at all. This description is not only wrong, but cheapens good design quite a bit.
posted by mhoye at 5:58 AM on March 31, 2010 [2 favorites]
why is design thinking such a hot topic with business leaders, given that it leaves so many designers cold?
For designers, design serves a "functional" purpose in facilitating or directing how the user interacts with the product. For designers, the iPod is an example of good design because nearly everyone can pick up the product and use the device as it was intended without any instructions or training.
For business leaders, design = marketing. For business leaders, the iPod is an example of good design because it demonstrates how even a crippled product with fewer features than the competition can be a runaway success based solely on its looks.
For designers, design equals work. For business leaders, design is a way to avoid work.
posted by Pastabagel at 5:58 AM on March 31, 2010 [2 favorites]
For designers, design serves a "functional" purpose in facilitating or directing how the user interacts with the product. For designers, the iPod is an example of good design because nearly everyone can pick up the product and use the device as it was intended without any instructions or training.
For business leaders, design = marketing. For business leaders, the iPod is an example of good design because it demonstrates how even a crippled product with fewer features than the competition can be a runaway success based solely on its looks.
For designers, design equals work. For business leaders, design is a way to avoid work.
posted by Pastabagel at 5:58 AM on March 31, 2010 [2 favorites]
Ur doin it rong.
Dan Pink speech on design pt 1 and 2.
Or in summary, China and India and make and do stuff rrly rrly cheap so all you can compete on is making your stuff really really nice otherwise your caught in a fight to the death on costs which you will lose. So make better stuff that people will pay more to have because its really sexy and that.
posted by Damienmce at 6:00 AM on March 31, 2010
Dan Pink speech on design pt 1 and 2.
Or in summary, China and India and make and do stuff rrly rrly cheap so all you can compete on is making your stuff really really nice otherwise your caught in a fight to the death on costs which you will lose. So make better stuff that people will pay more to have because its really sexy and that.
posted by Damienmce at 6:00 AM on March 31, 2010
more inside. rtfa b4 u rite
First off, don't fucking tell me what to do. Secondly, your first link contains almost no real info and your "via" link is the meat of the post. Via links are generally meant to indicate where you are reposting from. Thirdly, there is no "more inside" if your post doesn't continue below the fold.
Figure out how to post b4 u post.
As for the content, sounds like more executive level philosophical wankery. Next year it'll be something else.
posted by doctor_negative at 6:05 AM on March 31, 2010 [6 favorites]
First off, don't fucking tell me what to do. Secondly, your first link contains almost no real info and your "via" link is the meat of the post. Via links are generally meant to indicate where you are reposting from. Thirdly, there is no "more inside" if your post doesn't continue below the fold.
Figure out how to post b4 u post.
As for the content, sounds like more executive level philosophical wankery. Next year it'll be something else.
posted by doctor_negative at 6:05 AM on March 31, 2010 [6 favorites]
Faze's comment resonates with me, and I think that this is a larger trend.
Business people are oddly self hating creatures in my experience, at least in the US.
They are constantly trying to pretend that they are imbued with the positive characteristics of other groups,
Consider the ridiculous business books which let fat men in their 40s imagine that they are warriors, rather than insurance salesmen.
Much of technocratic managerialism is just an attempt to impose the dignity and noble certainties of science on an activity as inherently squalid and meaningless as "businesss". As a management consultant (with a scientific background, as so many of us do), this seems quite apparent to me.
This is just another incarnation, Faze is exactly right. After trying to pillage the machismo of the warrior and the rigour of the scientist, they're now trying to wrap themselves in the creative cloak of the artist. It's basically escapism writ large, and largely harmless.
posted by atrazine at 6:07 AM on March 31, 2010 [4 favorites]
Business people are oddly self hating creatures in my experience, at least in the US.
They are constantly trying to pretend that they are imbued with the positive characteristics of other groups,
Consider the ridiculous business books which let fat men in their 40s imagine that they are warriors, rather than insurance salesmen.
Much of technocratic managerialism is just an attempt to impose the dignity and noble certainties of science on an activity as inherently squalid and meaningless as "businesss". As a management consultant (with a scientific background, as so many of us do), this seems quite apparent to me.
This is just another incarnation, Faze is exactly right. After trying to pillage the machismo of the warrior and the rigour of the scientist, they're now trying to wrap themselves in the creative cloak of the artist. It's basically escapism writ large, and largely harmless.
posted by atrazine at 6:07 AM on March 31, 2010 [4 favorites]
Here's some design advice:
1) Stop hating your employees.
2) Stop hating the people who give you money for the shit you make.
As much as it is a cliche, there was a time when pride of workmanship and loyalty to customers meant something. In quite concrete terms, it could be converted into customers' loyalty to you.
If this doesn't sound hand-wavey, new-agey, abstract enough, that is problem #3 for you to fix.
posted by vanar sena at 6:40 AM on March 31, 2010 [1 favorite]
1) Stop hating your employees.
2) Stop hating the people who give you money for the shit you make.
As much as it is a cliche, there was a time when pride of workmanship and loyalty to customers meant something. In quite concrete terms, it could be converted into customers' loyalty to you.
If this doesn't sound hand-wavey, new-agey, abstract enough, that is problem #3 for you to fix.
posted by vanar sena at 6:40 AM on March 31, 2010 [1 favorite]
This is just another example of the back and forth pendulum between control and freedom in management philosophy. In the late 80s, early 90s, it was about empowerment. Then best practices and standards like Six Sigma and ISO 9000 (and friends) became all the rage. Now it's back to freedom, like pushing employees to be "creative" and "think like designers."
In a while, the trend will swing back to strict standards and micromanagement. If you're a real creative professional (businessperson, artist, or whatever), just wait, this will all blow over.
posted by Taco John at 6:40 AM on March 31, 2010 [2 favorites]
In a while, the trend will swing back to strict standards and micromanagement. If you're a real creative professional (businessperson, artist, or whatever), just wait, this will all blow over.
posted by Taco John at 6:40 AM on March 31, 2010 [2 favorites]
Wait a cotton pickin minute! I just went to the wikipedia link, 'design thinking' is an airy fairy version of the waterfall model every Comp Sci grad has been taught since the dawn of time? Economist GTFO'a here.
posted by Damienmce at 6:46 AM on March 31, 2010
posted by Damienmce at 6:46 AM on March 31, 2010
I've just stopped reading this magazine. what was the thread about again?
o yeah, where was I?
And on reading TFA, it seems I'm right " The Work Foundation's Will Hutton took a few bad-tempered minutes to tackle the economic crisis and make the case for more investment in R&D."
posted by Infinite Jest at 5:38 AM on March 31
quite. a gazillian favourites to you, sir
posted by infini at 6:57 AM on March 31, 2010
o yeah, where was I?
And on reading TFA, it seems I'm right " The Work Foundation's Will Hutton took a few bad-tempered minutes to tackle the economic crisis and make the case for more investment in R&D."
posted by Infinite Jest at 5:38 AM on March 31
quite. a gazillian favourites to you, sir
posted by infini at 6:57 AM on March 31, 2010
Excuse me, Excuse me, but "Design thinking", "Ideate" and "codify", aren't these just buzzwords that stupid people use to sound important? I'm... fired... aren't I?
I'm not sure any of these keywords have any real meaning that isn't meant to be purposefully ambiguous in order to allow people to conveniently interpret and embelish them in order to bullshit/impress.
"Web 2.0" for example, doesn't mean anything. Neither does "ideate" or "design thinking."
I like real definitions of words. When discussing something that has a concrete definition but may have many different practical, working definitions like "design" it would be nice to qualify and guide the reader to more specific information by discussing a specific "design philosophy."
I don't mean to be the snark. Perhaps I need help "informatiating" the "link-thought-matrix" present in this "internet-word-expanse."
posted by hellslinger at 7:02 AM on March 31, 2010
I'm not sure any of these keywords have any real meaning that isn't meant to be purposefully ambiguous in order to allow people to conveniently interpret and embelish them in order to bullshit/impress.
"Web 2.0" for example, doesn't mean anything. Neither does "ideate" or "design thinking."
I like real definitions of words. When discussing something that has a concrete definition but may have many different practical, working definitions like "design" it would be nice to qualify and guide the reader to more specific information by discussing a specific "design philosophy."
I don't mean to be the snark. Perhaps I need help "informatiating" the "link-thought-matrix" present in this "internet-word-expanse."
posted by hellslinger at 7:02 AM on March 31, 2010
Design is how North American and European economies are going to compete against a world that can do it cheaper and faster.
and
"The Economist, the house journal of the global business elite"
It's a magazine you can pick up in any grocery store, which hardly makes it "elite".
posted by KokuRyu at 7:05 AM on March 31, 2010
and
"The Economist, the house journal of the global business elite"
It's a magazine you can pick up in any grocery store, which hardly makes it "elite".
posted by KokuRyu at 7:05 AM on March 31, 2010
Ida know Atrazine and Faze, I kinda disagree with both of you on the idea that:
For designers, "design thinking" is about opening up possibilities. For business leaders, its about closing off possibilities.
Business leaders know that competitive advantage dies when you close off possibilities. I'm an artist who has gone on to do an MBA, and now that I'm almost finished, I would argue that the arts and business are shockingly similar - it's about managing ambiguity; trying to make a successful outcome by conceiving and applying a system to something that seems on the surface unmanageable or different to comprehend. And frankly, there are as many weirdo stupid trends and frameworks in the art and design realm as there are in the business realm.
In terms of business trends and how design thinking fits into it - triple bottom line shit seems to be pretty hot right now, and sustainability, and there is the kind of thinking/theory that dudes like Michael Porter put out which continue to be ageless and relevant in the business world. But the notion of 'futurism' - not the art movement, but a business trend, and something that seems to be one of the key tenants of design thinking (look at the New York Times as an example, as they've employed a 'futurist' on staff for awhile) - is something that to me seems really relevant. It seems like something business really needs.
And Taco John, I disagree the trend will swing back to micromanagement. If it was going to happen, it certainly would have started as soon as the economy tanked, and everyone was scrambling for the highest levels of certainty and stability.
posted by jennyhead at 7:05 AM on March 31, 2010 [1 favorite]
For designers, "design thinking" is about opening up possibilities. For business leaders, its about closing off possibilities.
Business leaders know that competitive advantage dies when you close off possibilities. I'm an artist who has gone on to do an MBA, and now that I'm almost finished, I would argue that the arts and business are shockingly similar - it's about managing ambiguity; trying to make a successful outcome by conceiving and applying a system to something that seems on the surface unmanageable or different to comprehend. And frankly, there are as many weirdo stupid trends and frameworks in the art and design realm as there are in the business realm.
In terms of business trends and how design thinking fits into it - triple bottom line shit seems to be pretty hot right now, and sustainability, and there is the kind of thinking/theory that dudes like Michael Porter put out which continue to be ageless and relevant in the business world. But the notion of 'futurism' - not the art movement, but a business trend, and something that seems to be one of the key tenants of design thinking (look at the New York Times as an example, as they've employed a 'futurist' on staff for awhile) - is something that to me seems really relevant. It seems like something business really needs.
And Taco John, I disagree the trend will swing back to micromanagement. If it was going to happen, it certainly would have started as soon as the economy tanked, and everyone was scrambling for the highest levels of certainty and stability.
posted by jennyhead at 7:05 AM on March 31, 2010 [1 favorite]
Taco John: "This is just another example of the back and forth pendulum between control and freedom in management philosophy."
You're spot on there. More specifically, it is an example of the continued muddle-headed thinking that there is some silver-bullet process that can fit any kind of business activity, whether it's making widgets or custom software.
Software houses are particularly guilty of this, because fads spread so quickly that before you can even internalize the best bits of the last one, it's time to bet the company on the next one. Since there's no physical assembly line to retool, it can be tried and dropped even more efficiently.
If there is one management fad that I wish was still in style, it would be the reading of the Mythical Man Month.
posted by vanar sena at 7:06 AM on March 31, 2010 [1 favorite]
You're spot on there. More specifically, it is an example of the continued muddle-headed thinking that there is some silver-bullet process that can fit any kind of business activity, whether it's making widgets or custom software.
Software houses are particularly guilty of this, because fads spread so quickly that before you can even internalize the best bits of the last one, it's time to bet the company on the next one. Since there's no physical assembly line to retool, it can be tried and dropped even more efficiently.
If there is one management fad that I wish was still in style, it would be the reading of the Mythical Man Month.
posted by vanar sena at 7:06 AM on March 31, 2010 [1 favorite]
« Older 8-bit Pink Floyd | Photojournalism in the age of digital reproduction Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
And then they want to apply this to solving real world issues like the financial crises and the UK health system. It's like they can't see the wood from the trees (Hint: superficial redesign to make things sell better is the problem you started with).
posted by leibniz at 4:44 AM on March 31, 2010 [3 favorites]