iNSIGHT

Misnomers – The “Science” of “Good” Design

It isn’t too far to stretch to assume that “science” has an answer for everything – when of course we are talking about physical objects, warp drive, or the newest Porsche 4 track steering system. The big question facing new product development is “why you want it” and for that there is no answer.


The recent article in The Atlantic “The Science of Good Design” makes a very clear case why this is a fallacy and one which more of your colleagues believe than you think. Why? Because design required ego, a masters touch, and a definitive determination of what is valuable that cannot be defined by market research studies or focus groups. Why?

Consumers consume, masters create for consumers. This is the secret of amazing design, and yet the hardest factor for companies and corporations to embrace. Unless of course you are Ferrari or Alessi. Then again, they use focus groups every now and then as well.

 Share on Linked-In  Email to a friend  Share with a friend on Facebook  Tweet on Twitter

###
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

#iGNITIATE #Design #DesignThinking #DesignInnovation #IndustrialDesign #iGNITEconvergence #iGNITEprogram #DesignLeadership #EcoleduBois #LawrenceLivermoreNationalLabs #Harvard #NSF #USNavy #EcoleDesPonts #Topiade #LouisVuitton #WorldRetailCongress #REUTPALA #WorldRetailCongress #OM #Fujitsu #Sharing #Swarovski #321-Contact #Bausch&Lomb #M.ONDE #SunStar

####

← Prev Post Back to Blog Next Post →