Reinventing the Designer

Globalization is perhaps the most significant modern trend affecting the fundamental role of today’s designer. At the same time, the need for universal design is a major factor that must provide motivation for the contemporary designer to work in new ways. I believe that these two influences will combine in a mutually reinforcing way to redefine the designer in today’s post-industrial society.

Product design professor Simon Bolton notes that the rapid rise of Asian markets and production power is having an enormous effect on global competition, in effect neutralizing western companies’ traditional market advantages. He writes, “to compete on a global scale, companies will have to leverage an advantage by creating and exploiting intangible intellectual assets such as brand name, knowledge bases, product-related services and innovative responses to customer needs.” Design, he argues, will play a critical role in this transformation, making it imperative for designers to acquire “a sound understanding of cultural differences so that we can develop product experiences that are appropriate for different cultures and can adapt to local issues” (2004, p. 26).

The idea of adapting a core design to the needs of specific users or markets seems to be a common theme among writers addressing recent changes in design philosophy. Citing Marco Diani’s 1992 text Immateriality Takes Command, design professor Ricardo Gomes explains that the practice of design is shifting from emphasis on one single finished form to that of an initial form plus a broad field of modifications and customizations, “accentuating ‘flexibility versus complexity’—few ideas, many variations” (1997, p. 1). Historically, Gomes argues, products introduced into the so-called global marketplace have brought with them a standard “global identity” which overshadow the unique values and identity of products that represent smaller, non-western countries, and “leave no place for cultural variance” (p. 2).

Bolton and others seem to argue that if for no other reason, this western-dominated approach to global product design and marketing is threatened by the rise in influence and manufacturing power of emerging markets such as China. The question is whether the rise of these non-western global players will alter the globally homogenized industrial product archetype, or merely become a part of it. Gomes, Diani and Bolton each suggest that designers in the new, post-industrial society will focus more on product “customization” rather than “standardization” as in the old industrial society.

This scenario also seems to fit in well with the increasingly popular notions of universal design. As Imrie and Hall explain in Inclusive Design, advocates of universal design prefer that a product be designed with accessibility at its core rather than being added on as an afterthought to the core design; the latter, so-called “compensatory” design method acts to draw attention to the user’s disabilities (1991). While one might argue that the “customization” approach of post-industrial design is more conducive to the former model of adding accessibility to a preconceived core design, I would suggest that the contemporary designer must instead take universal design principles into consideration when developing the core design itself; this, in turn, will make the subsequent customization and localization for various user groups all that much easier. Indeed, “a remit of universal design is promoting the flexibility, adaptability and interchangeability of fittings and fixtures to ensure ‘an adaptable environment, one that can be easily adjusted to meet the needs of any person’” (Imrie et al., 1991, p. 16).

I believe that the combined influences of globalization and the need for universal design will push successful designers to incorporate flexibility and adaptability into their core designs. This will allow products to meet both the needs of diverse global markets as well as those of individual users with special needs in those markets.

References

• Imrie, R., & Hall, P. (1991). Inclusive design: Designing and developing accessible environments. London: Spon Press.
• Gomes, R. (1997, April). Liberating the cultural variance of global design. Paper presented at the IDSA Design Education Conference, Washington, D.C.
• Bolton, S. (2004, Winter). Asian influence on European design education: Same recipe, different flavors. Innovation, 25-29.