Design Isn't Dead. Design's Gatekeepers May Be Dying.

"In future there will be no more designers. The designers of the future will be the personal coach, the gym trainer, the diet consultant." ~Philipe Stark

Think about it.  We're living in an age where people now have direct access to brands.  Starbucks wants our ideas—Southwest Airlines talks to me on Twitter, the role of the modern day brand steward may be a little different today compared to 10 years ago.  The meaning of a brand hasn't changed. The way we interact with them has.

So I have to wonder how different this all is for the design community, if you can call it that.  Just as brands have their gatekeepers—the same people who told us that Diet Coke was meant to be enjoyed, not mixed with candy for the purpose of making fountains—the design world also has gatekeepers. Or you could call them guardians, hight priests, guru's, icons—take your pick.  Indeed Philipe is probably one of them.  Design's gatekeepers guarded the secret sauce to what they deemed was "good design".  They were quick to point out that not everybody recognized what it was.  Some, like Stark brought "design" to the masses, not unlike Prometheus bringing us fire in ancient times.  Some brands, like Target helped broaden the appeal of "designer things"—creating a mainstream demand for pretty and stylish things.

Now lots of people can design—and design means a lot of different things to different people (IE, I don't equate design with pretty).  But the tools are out there.  The techniques are easy to look up.  Some have gotten pretty good at design—creating the social platforms that many of us use daily to watch videos, stream content, distribute presentations, share contacts and build personal brands.  Scion's automobiles are made to be customized.  Actually, were they designed that way?  Or was it Scion owners who created a culture out of sheet metal and fiberglass?  Apple can't really control the design and development of both native and Web based iPhone applications—even though they give it a good shot.  And directors can't control how people choose to watch their movies no matter how much they may disagree with it.

No, design isn't dead, especially the really good design that adds value to our lives.  But the notion of design's gatekeepers may need some additional thought as more of us begin to act like "professionals" and take on the sacred role of design.  Where once we had Steve Jobs to tell us what design should be—we now have each other to look to as well.  It's not a substitute—it's an addendum.  For some of us, that's a welcome evolution.  For others—it's like having unwanted guests crash your party.  Which will it be for you?

Comments

[paul isakson]

Completely agree that design isn't dead. In fact, I'd say it's on the rise.

I think Starck is sick with himself and others in the design community for selling out to places like Target and using design not to improve things but to make things look pretty and different so people will buy more of them/pay more for them.

From the same article you quoted: "I was a producer of materiality and I am ashamed of this fact. Everything I designed was unnecessary."

There's a really interesting conversation in the comments to this post from Nussbaum: http://rurl.org/mc1

If you take the article you referenced and what I've just briefly read from his presentation at TED (some more here: http://rurl.org/mc2 ), it appears that he feels design has gone in the wrong direction.

It became about making things cool instead of making things better. Commerce has ruined what is inherently good in design and the design process. Designers have been wasting their time making things beautiful for the sake of beauty when they could've been using their skills to solve important problems.

One of the quotes from his TED speech in the BW/Nussbaum post: "The power of design extends far beyond making pretty things to making a better world."

The quote you referenced reinforces this - "In future there will be no more designers. The designers of the future will be the personal coach, the gym trainer, the diet consultant."

Look at what those people do. They help people live better lives. Healthier lives.

I think he's on to the same stuff many of us are talking about when we talk about user-centered design and utility in the digital world. He's just using a more human example.

So yes. I agree. Design isn't dead at all. In fact, I'd say we're entering a major design renaissance. Marketing and commerce have bastardized design by making it about how things look so you can charge a premium for them. Now, design is returning to its roots as a way to solve problems at a time when we need this most.

More to come...

[Michael Melnick]

Hi David
Thanks from bringing this news clip to my attention. It raised an emotional response that you can read on my blog.

[Crawford]

I love where design is headed. I'm thrilled that anybody can go on Nike ID design their own products. The whole notion of rapid prototyping hooked to solid modeling, being open to anyone and everyone, with or without a formal education, excites me not end. Thank God for Adobe moving to the cloud and for YouTube and any and all communications channels that open up the world of artistic expression.

As gatekeepers fall away, we get to see be part of a huge second wave democratization (first was the printed word). Knowledge is good. Design is gooder. Let her rip.

[David Armano]

Thank you for some thought provinking comments.

Paul, I think you hit Stark's comments head on where I danced around them and introduced a parallel topic. I appreciate your thoughts. I think what's happening is that society is coming back to the idea that things like technology, design, marketing etc. need to serve us, and not the other way around.

We are moving from WORSHIP to APPRECIATION. The worship of beautiful things is fleeting and temporary. But the appreciation of things that help our lives seem less hectic, more enjoyable—is on the rise. And that is a very good thing.

Thanks Micheal. I read it. Made me think of why Don Norman choose the juicer for his book title. I have an idea for a presentation that might compliment that.

Crawford. Nike ID is a case study for the fact that people want to take creativity in their own hands. Some brands will be better at supporting this desire than others.

[Ryan Karpeles]

We've always been creative people. We now have more tools, knowledge and access to the world of design than we have in all of history. As the barriers to entry go down, so too do the gatekeepers.

This isn't something to fear - it's something to embrace. In fact, it can even be a gigantic motivator for professional designers. As the masses catch up - you need to keep improving, keep adding value, and keep finding a way to stand out from the crowd.

Sort of like free-market capitalism for design...

[Jared Spool]

Remember: it takes no skill to design something. Anyone can do it.

It only takes skill to design something well.

As we've seen in other crafts, (writing, filmmaking, cooking to name a few,) the more we open up the craft, the more we see an appreciation for those who demonstrate mastery.

Anyone can make a cup of coffee. Yet that hasn't hurt Starbuck's business.

[David Armano]

Jared,

That's an EXCELLENT point. Could not agree more. It's why the majority of My Space pages are horrible right?

However, I think where this gets interesting is the realm of the opportunities that those who have skill—pedigree or not. How many of us would have been exposed to Hugh's cartoons had he not tapped personal publishing via Gaping Void? How much more are craftspeople getting global exposure at places like Etsy.com? How would we ever have found out about Ze Frank if he hadn't taken his act to the Web using low production techniques that anyone can do with a PC and basic video editing software?

The main difference between this movement and something like Desktop publishing is that we're finding out that more people do in fact have the skills. It's still a small percentage compared to the rest—but we know about them now.

As someone who come from the "professional" side—I find this refreshing and I'm extremely interested in following the movement.

[paul isakson]

DOH! I did completely focus in on that quote and not run with the tangent didn't I. Sorry. A lack of proper sleep last week is to blame, I think.

I'm tracking now.

I've been kicking this around a bit too. I keep meaning to write about it and haven't gotten it down yet. It's just been bouncing around in my head and now you're getting the first outlets of it here. ha!

Gatekeepers & middlemen are in a rough spot right now. And that's an understatement. Just ask the record labels.

The internet has opened the channels for artists and designers to distribute their creations freely and directly. It used to be that they had to go through one of these gatekeepers or middlemen and get their blessing to be deemed good enough.

A design school had to accept them. A record label had to sign them. A gatekeeper designer or company had to hire them.

Now it's not up to their respective industry's royal elite. It's up to the people. If enough people find value in the work, it spreads.

Imagine that. Things that help people, make their day better, make them feel better and/or do good, spreading.

Like Jared was getting at above, (great example w/Starbucks and coffee btw, Jared) the opening up of the distribution channels and making it easier for people to participate only increases the appreciation for those who show a true talent.

It's a very exciting time for people with natural creative talent who lacked access to the gatekeepers for one reason or another in the past. If they're truly good enough, they don't need a gatekeeper to succeed. They just need access to the right distribution channel.

[John Dodds]

Design has been a little self-involved and accordingly has lost friends. But it will be ok after a little therapy and realises it can still be popular as long as it follows the more altrusitic motives of that nice chap - usability.

[Whitney Hess]

I think we forget sometimes that "design" means "to develop a plan." Design really isn't about execution, but about accurately defining the problem in order to allow for the most successful, effective and valuable solution -- given the objectives and constraints of the system -- to emerge.

We create meaningful connections between a series of interactions, allowing the customer/user/visitor to become immersed in the experience without getting lost.

So no, I don't agree that "Now lots of people can design." Now lots of people *do* design, which is why practitioners with good methodologies and clear thinking are needed more than ever.

[Martin Owen]

Steve Jobs took away Hypercard from the "rest of us" because he didn't want us to make HIS "Mac" ugly.....

An act I find hard to forgive.

[gabby]

Oh, poor Phillipe Stark--one wonders if he set out to be Monet and had to settle for being called a 'designer'. Word to Ms. Hess above--design as a term is used so bafflingly that it is all too easy to conflate it with 'art'. To design is to solve a problem. Thus it is not the province of any single individual and cannot be declared dead.

[JSondy]

I've read the articles, viewed the presentations and like to evaluate it in "wal-mart" terminology: have we been sacrificing quality for quantity? Are we turning out more designers, who lack true vision and are mere task-masters?

I'm fascinated by the thesis (can't remember the author's name) that right-brain thinking will play a dominant role in the re-shaping the future across all facets of industry.

Have we become numb by decades of corporate power and greed? Will innovation, experimentation, design and thinking re-emerge to create a new revolution? I for one hope that I live long enough to see it happen and that the freedom of expression & creativity I teach my children will not be suppressed.

[Jon King]

What makes good design is and should be a perpetual debate. One element of that concept however is a understanding of design history, and it's direct correlation with events in society. Events ether fueled by design or design reacting to events. The "gatekeepers" in the future I propose will understand that and represent it in their thinking. Without some structure we will have a very interesting and creative result but it will be like herding cats. If you have ever layout a wardrobe for the day or arranged your living room, you have engaged in the act of design. Therefore in some regard we are all designers... but I propose there will always be recognized design pioneers.

[jkh]

nice article, david.

but starck has never been much of a designer but more of a stylist - and when he says goodbye to design now ... hey, that is a) a proven publicity stunt and b) what one would expect from a thinking individual who does not enjoy to be reduced to the label 'starck' anymore ... i doubt though that we can will see implications of this 'self-doubt' in his work... strack is too much a true professional for that too - a professional who has been repeating himself for a bit too long now... and of course that is what he knows also.

will DesignItYourself de-throne the kings in the long-run? a clear NO from my side.
the more you DesignYourself, the more you appreciate and train your own skills and senses but the more profoundly you also learn to appreciate true masters.

sure the culture is shifting - but do not forget: apple is apple because jobs knows that design = dictatorship and not a childrens' birthday party in a playground.

'style it yourself' is an old story in the automotive industry. i think we all have an idea of the people who enjoy that kind of a hobby... pimping your nissan hardly compares to a bespoke porsche though and it never will.

[Michele]

I had the benefit of starting my architectural career at the start of the digital takeover. I've been able to see how much that technology has really changed the face of the industry. We are a small design firm and, traditionally, firms of our size have had to outsource many things: 3D rendering and model making, graphic and web design, and so on.

Now, with easy to use, free modeling software (like Google's Sketch-Up), and now that even your average Joe Architect can figure out how to build a website - we've been able to keep all our design work in house. Great for us because it keeps our costs down and gives us greater control over the end product. Bad for all the independent "expert" "designers" that lost our business.

I agree that these niche-industry middlemen, or gatekeepers, have already begun to die out in our field.

Still, I don't know that the role of designer will ever be obsolete. In my mind, a true designer will always have one leg up on the computer geek: a unique, creative vision. Sure, anyone can create web apps for the iphone - but could they have had the vision to create the Apple brand in the first place? Out of nothing?

Before, anyone with the tools of the trade could pass themselves off as designers. Now, in the new digital revolution, I think (and hope) that those who are revered and succeed as designers, will do so based on the merit of that creative vision. This is a good thing.

Also a good thing is that now young, budding designers have more opportunities to break into the industry. More tools at their fingertips to make all those thoughts in their heads a reality. And while the loss of the middleman might be inevitable, I think the only ones who will suffer from this are the former-gatekeepers that don't know how to evolve.

[Thomson Dawson]

David--

I am delighted that the conversation on this post has grown far more interesting than the post itself. More evidence of the inherent power of shared points of view. So I'll add to the slush pile:

I began my career as a designer over 30 years ago–long before the convergence of skill, talent and technology... my long term perspective about design as a useful discipline has not fundamentally changed all that much. Naturally, the tools and the methods of design have never stopped changing and adapting to the context of the time they live in. Indeed the playing field has been leveled by the open source nature of the tools we all use... but mastery in any discipline transcends the tools and the techniques. Design is no exception.

As a young designer, my interests were centered on recognition for my work (more by peers than clients). Being a member of the club. Of course, I am now a wise old designer and my focus is now grounded in being of service, adding value, and using my talent and skill to help business create clarity about who and what they are in a muddled, overcrowded marketplace... that is my specialized expertise.

The gatekeepers in any profession have always been interested in one thing– exclusivity for their club. Nothing new there. But in my view, the discussion about the relevance of gatekeepers and middlemen misses the larger more transcendent point– Design is value generator! It is not a decorative act! As long as designers create value, design will always be valued.

My advice to young designers... to thine own self be true. Allow yourself time and space to discover your inherent gifts for value creation and move in that direction. No gatekeepers can block that path.