This is my first blog in over two years. Since this is intended to be a design-centric site, I figure a good way to start off is to address what I think design is and why it is important.

When I was first in the Industrial Design program at Illinois, we were asked to define “design.” I don’t quite remember the definition I had at the time, but my teacher told us something along the lines that it was the aesthetic and functional considering and forming of mass-produced objects. That would be an object-centric outcome of design. There are others who say design is a process, typically including phases like identification of the problem, research, ideation, and refinement. But those don’t fully address the definition of design, the meaning of design. I think to discover what design is requires knowing why design is.


Why design? I will defer to Victor Papanek, a designer, author, and educator whom I greatly respect. To him, design is “a conscious and intuitive effort to impose meaningful order” (Design for the Real World). To me, this is profoundly true and hits the heart of design; we are all seeking order and trying to make sense of this world, which includes the people and things in this world.

Whether it be arranging objects and furniture in a room, putting particular objects in certain pockets, or organizing files and folders on a computer, people are designing the world around themselves every day. We all make intentional decisions to navigate and manipulate our surroundings and experiences in order to make sense of them. We need the world to make sense to us and be relevant to us, and we also need to feel relevant to the world. We need to feel that we belong, that we have an impact, that we have purpose.

The question that arises is who, then, is a designer? I believe the answer to that is everyone. Since design is an activity in which every person partakes and every one of us is an everyday designer, does that mean I should quit now because there’s no future as a professional designer? Clearly that is not the case. The more significant question to me is not just what is design or who designs, but “how is the design?”

Specifically, what are the qualities of an act of design and its impacts? I believe these qualities are found in the relationships that the designer creates and enforces. The value in the relationships a professional designer weaves must be significantly different from that which an everyday designer is responsible for. One way this difference can be explained is that the influence an everyday designer has is centered around himself (or herself, but for the sake of simplicity, I will be using he/him); the arrows of his influence are directed at himself (e.g. he arranges his desk according to the way he likes it and prefers to use it, Figure 2). The professional designer’s influence is centered around his audience, a target market; hence the arrows of his influence point to another person or group (e.g. he creates a specialized desk for college students, Figure 1). But is it enough for designers to only address the considerations of their target audience?

By all means, a professional designer absolutely must fulfill their aesthetic and functional needs. If the designer does not do this, then he is not relevant to his audience; he creates no relationship with or for them. His arrows of influence fail to extend beyond himself. However, even if he does fully address the needs of his target, what about the influences and impacts that are created outside of that? What about unintended social consequences? Environmental degradation through pollution and waste? I agree with Peter Drucker when he says that one is responsible for one’s impacts, whether they are intended or not. These are issues raised by proponents of sustainability. It is easy to conclude that design should provide the greatest good to their primary target while minimizing its destructiveness outside that scope. Perhaps by aiming to make people and design innocuous, we can be “sustainable.”

Innocuous. Sustainable. These words are neither desirable nor inspiring. William McDonough says, “If someone asked me, ‘How is your relationship with your wife’ and I responded ‘sustainable’ what would you think?”

Sure, design must be relevant to its user. Design must make objects, information, and experiences relevant to people. But what about designing to make people relevant?

Again, how is the design? How are the relationships that are formed through the design? Are they healthy relationships? Jonas Salk, who developed the polio vaccine, said that if all insects were to disappear from the earth, within fifty years all forms of life on earth would perish… but if all human beings were to disappear from the earth, within fifty years all other forms of life would flourish. Clearly, people are not doing a good job of being relevant in this regard.

Making design relevant to people turns it into a one-way street. The best that can be done is to meet a set of needs while minimizing the negative impacts. The best possible outcome is to merely be sustainable.

I believe the goal of design must be to make people relevant. The designed object, service, information, space, and experience must do this. They must contribute to making people relevant to other people; design must make people relevant to the world. Yes, that includes the social and environmental dimensions, among other things. Healthy relationships are bidirectional. Only in a healthy relationship can people feel that they belong, have an impact, and have purpose.

Good design is relevant to people; great design makes people relevant. Why? Because all people are invaluable and possess both the need and potential to be relevant.