...when 140 characters are not enough http://jaysteele360.com Most recent posts at ...when 140 characters are not enough posterous.com Sat, 19 Dec 2009 14:25:00 -0800 Brand Messaging : When everything is special, nothing is [via kaplusa.com] http://jaysteele360.com/brand-messaging-when-everything-is-special-no http://jaysteele360.com/brand-messaging-when-everything-is-special-no

The quote above is from a blog post on the Kristian Andersen + Associates website. I started to post a reply and it got rather long to be just a "comment". Before you read the rest of my post, you might want to go read what Janneane has to say.

I really liked her band analogy. Loudness is clearly not the only solution. As I was reading her blog post, I had to smile because it brought back many memories from work I have done as an audio engineer - a.k.a., the sound guy. The reason I bring this up is because I think there is another element of the analogy that relates directly to the role of the designer.

In my experience, most bands and music groups don't place much value on the role of the person sitting at the sound board. Most of the time, they are just the dude back there who moves buttons and knobs so the band members don't have to keep walking back and forth. Unfortunately, that perception is often completely justified.

This tends to lead to the "more me" syndrome. You know, the lead vocalist saying they can't hear themselves so they want "more me" in the monitor. This usually sets off a vicious cycle as each band member is trying to hear themselves in the monitor mix, resulting in an even louder mix. Of course, a louder monitor mix messes up the house mix so then you have to turn up the house. And if the house levels are getting louder that even compounds the problem. And so it goes.

My guess is that if you talked to those really "great" bands Janneane was referring to you would find a really great sound person as well. Further, the band's perception of them would probably be different thatn the stereotype. Great musicians know that the audio engineer can make or break them. They appreciate real talent and the respect is mutual. Great audio engineers (can we call them "designers" ;-) take an active role in the delivery of the product. They interact with the band members. They go up on stage and listen to the monitor mix so they know what it sound like up there rather than relying in some headphones that are conveniently located back at the sound board. They watch the musicians for tell-tale signs like a head tilt or cupping their hand over their ear and respond appropriately. They take an active role in creating the monitor mix rather than just sit in the back taking instructions.

Whenever I run the audio mix, I always start with the monitor mix. I know that if the musicians are not getting what they need to do their jobs, I am not going to get what I need. Once I achieve that, it makes my job much easier for the rest of the night. And by the way, a "live" mix is not one of those set it and forget Ronco products. Janneane pointed that out in her post. The objectives of the audio engineer and the musicians may be distinct but they are also mutually compatible.

I tell this story to emphasis the importance of understanding what makes a great designer. If a designer is just perceived as the person who is hired to "make it loud" then that is a relationship destined to be empty, hollow, disappointing and probably short-lived. If they are willing to speak out and use their talents and abilities, trusting on their instinct and gut feelings, and really focusing on helping their clients accomplish their objectives then they will earn the respect of their clients, peers and, perhaps most importantly, they will respect themselves.

In her blog post, Janneane said "Designers know that you can’t make EVERYTHING bold or PoP! because you lose all sense of hierarchy and emphasis." Unfortunately, not ALL designers know this and that is what leads to many of the problems. This is what creates the stereotypes that we have to work so hard to overcome, not unlike the same issues I faced when mixing sound.

I am grateful for Janneane's blog post, Kristian Andersen + Associates and many other firms like theirs that are getting this message out. I am excited for what I see going on in the design industry these days. It is due in large part to the work that these great folks are doing. Design is not just about making everything loud. It is a craft that has great value when applied properly. I always felt that if I was doing a good job mixing sound, the audience would never even think about me. Conversely, if the audience IS thinking about me, it is probably because I just did something stupid or am doing a very poor job. I think that design is a lot like that.

I hope that this blog post is worthy of receiving your attention. Take care.

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

]]>
http://files.posterous.com/user_profile_pics/553531/jay-profile-05072010.jpg http://posterous.com/people/PXBRU0bGHn Jay Steele Jay Steele Jay Steele
Sat, 17 Oct 2009 19:46:00 -0700 Design is... analytical creativity http://jaysteele360.com/design-is-analytical-creativity http://jaysteele360.com/design-is-analytical-creativity

I continue to read through "Design Expertise" by Dorst and Lawson. We are still in the preliminary stages of defining design expertise. As is expected, it is necessary to define some of the fundamental terms so as to reduce confusion and find some common ground before going deeper. Dorst and Lawson define "design" by looking at the design process from several different perspectives. It is their intention to construct a composite that will be pieced together, resulting in an accurate definition. It is interesting that they note this is the same approach we (designers) typically use to understand our own design problems.

Design thinking is not one way of thinking. It has been called multidisciplinary by some and others have gone as far as calling the design discipline "transdisciplinary". Designers employ analytical and creative thinking - not necessarily in sequence or in a linear fashion but rather in an integrated, almost simultaneous manner. We live between two worlds with one foot planted in the world of science and analysis while the other foot is firmly grounded in the creativity of the arts. We don't fit entirely within either one. We often find ourselves engaging in our own game of tug-of-war with our peers as some members of the design community try to become more like one discipline or the other. Yet, this balance serves us well in coming up with solutions to all types of "wicked" problems.

Designers focus their energies on the solution, not the problem. They approach problems as if there is no structure to the problem and do not attempt to analyze all the data. Rather, it is a fine balance between analysis and creativity. Experienced designers place constraints on themselves. Perhaps they will limit the amount of time to conduct analysis (research) before moving on to generating concepts and ideation.

As a result of this hybridization of disciplines found in design, designers are often misunderstood. Dorst and Lawson actually compare us to the platypus, an animal that many considered to be a hoax when it was first discovered. The platypus did not fit within the norms and standards that were then known to biologists. Fortunately, this didn't bother the platypus. They didn't know that they were an anomaly and a challenge to the scientific thinking of the day. They certainly didn't make any effort to change who they were in order to fit within the existing conventions. Perhaps we as designers can learn a few lessons from the platypus. If we do, we might find those in other fields less resistant to accepting our authenticity.

Coming up, we examine several of the other perspectives presented by Dorst and Lawson as we continue to construct a working definition of what design really is.

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

]]>
http://files.posterous.com/user_profile_pics/553531/jay-profile-05072010.jpg http://posterous.com/people/PXBRU0bGHn Jay Steele Jay Steele Jay Steele
Wed, 14 Oct 2009 12:06:00 -0700 What is the nature of design expertise and how do we create and develop that expertise? http://jaysteele360.com/what-is-the-nature-of-design-expertise-and-ho http://jaysteele360.com/what-is-the-nature-of-design-expertise-and-ho

I am currently reading "Design Expertise" by Kees Dorst and Bryan Lawson. The question in the title is posed in the introductory chapter.

This leads to other related questions. We are all designers and we design things every single day, if only to pick out (design) the outfit we are going to wear.

  • What are the defining characteristics that differentiate design experts from the rest of us?
  • Is design ability a "talent" only found in the few or is it a skill shared by most of us?
  • If we can all learn to develop our design skills, how does that benefit us in our everyday lives?

It is my intention to continue the exploration of this topic through multiple short posts as I work through the text. It is also my hope that many of you will add your thoughts, insights and ideas by posting comments below so as to facilitate a dialog that we can all benefit from.

What are your thoughts regarding these questions? I look forward to hearing from you. Thanks for stopping by.

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

]]>
http://files.posterous.com/user_profile_pics/553531/jay-profile-05072010.jpg http://posterous.com/people/PXBRU0bGHn Jay Steele Jay Steele Jay Steele