Here is the context of this post: Transforming Transformation on Google Group. (Registration needed.)
It is always an easy choice to see numbers with math in order to make decision. As a designer, we have been trying to rationalize design so that our client understands why and how. In other word, we try to make them understand design. When design rationalization doesn’t do well by the designer that is when the client won’t see the points you make and, therefore, they use data and math as a weapon to argue with you.
This thread actually inspires me as how could I talk to my client when they use data and math to deny design. As I see Terry asked Sam the pixel question, I argue with Terry why couldn’t you try it and see which one you like. You can find your design answers by practicing. Here is the point I am trying to make. When the client asking a question like that, they can’t see the different between the options in this case 4px or 5px. What makes a designer a designer is they DO and try and use their ability to see and judge which option creates meanings. This meaning, of course, is the realization in many perspectives, including branding, the relationship to the product, what the client or the designer is trying to deliver to their end users.
The UX lead at Google is just stick with her company’s mentality. At some level she is correct in terms of trying to get everyone’s opinion about a design. The problem is the designer isn’t in the position to do their job trying to explain the why and how. Most awfully, her measurement is based on data without the understanding or the appreciation of the thought process of design. I even doubt that she is involved in that thought process. This is the biggest problem we have in reality today that most design practices are separated from management. (Business Week: Is Design Too Important To Be Left Only To Designers?)
From my experience as a designer for over 10 years, I have found lots of time that your work should really speak for themselves after some iteration of changes. I have experienced many times that my client told me right away they love the work and they don’t even have to hear me saying anything. To me, everyone knows what the best quality of work is look like. We all have seen some great movies, listened to some great music, or experienced with a great product. Do you really have to say something? No, most of the time, again, your work speaks for themselves. To this point, maybe I can argue that the rationalization is a tool to gain constructive feedback from your client and by doing so, the designer has to deconstruct her/his work and rethink the strategy to get to where you think you can satisfy the design objectives that you and your client both agreed upon.
Are we letting data and math to govern? My answer is a big NO unless you can convince me that when Picasso was painting he had a computer sit right next to the work telling him how he perform his every stroke so he created such great work. And I would like to ask anyone who is seeking the aid from data and math to seek the opportunity working directly with the machine for design and if you do come up with some sort of data driven machine that creates a great design please let me know. I will be impressed very much by that. (I think we call that mass production in some cases.)
Kengwei Lu
Director of Design
Idea Couture
{ 0 comments }