Discipline makes Daring possible.

Less, but better

“You cannot understand good design if you do not understand people; design is made for people.” Dieter Rams ‘Design by Vitsoe’, 1976

Good Design:

1. is innovative – The possibilities for progression are not, by any means, exhausted. Technological development is always offering new opportunities for original designs. But imaginative design always develops in tandem with improving technology, and can never be an end in itself.
2. makes a product useful – A product is bought to be used. It has to satisfy not only functional, but also psychological and aesthetic criteria. Good design emphasizes the usefulness of a product whilst disregarding anything that could detract from it.
3. is aesthetic – The aesthetic quality of a product is integral to its usefulness because products are used every day and have an effect on people and their well-being. Only well-executed objects can be beautiful.
4. makes a product understandable – It clarifies the product’s structure. Better still, it can make the product clearly express its function by making use of the user’s intuition. At best, it is self-explanatory.
5. is unobtrusive – Products fulfilling a purpose are like tools. They are neither decorative objects nor works of art. Their design should therefore be both neutral and restrained, to leave room for the user’s self-expression.
6. is honest – It does not make a product appear more innovative, powerful or valuable than it really is. It does not attempt to manipulate the consumer with promises that cannot be kept.
7. is long-lasting – It avoids being fashionable and therefore never appears antiquated. Unlike fashionable design, it lasts many years – even in today’s throwaway society.
8. is thorough down to the last detail – Nothing must be arbitrary or left to chance. Care and accuracy in the design process show respect towards the consumer.
9. is environmentally friendly – Design makes an important contribution to the preservation of the environment. It conserves resources and minimizes physical and visual pollution throughout the lifecycle of the product.
10. is as little design as possible – Less, but better – because it concentrates on the essential aspects, and the products are not burdened with non-essentials. Back to purity, back to simplicity.

Imagine if we designed organisations and processes this way too?

“keep the human in view”

In today’s ‘Thought for the Day’ on Radio 4, Tina Beatty told us of an insight by Hilary Cottam, which is that many big ‘social welfare’ projects fail ‘not because of a lack of funding, but because of a lack of attentiveness to what people really need.’  For women without easy access to water, a well in their village is a far better – and far cheaper – solution than building a dam.

As Tina said, this seems so obvious, why is it being viewed as radical?

I think it’s because ‘failure’ depends on which side of the funding you are on.  Take a look at the diagram in this piece by Richard Murphy to see the kind of thing that often happens.

What actually makes Hilary Cottam radical is that she’s suggesting that the ostensible purpose of these projects should also be the real one.

All too often, we mistake what we want for what the people we claim to serve want.

Once you know this, what you do for the people you serve can get simpler.