The challenges facing design in flux
by industrial designer Hannu Kähönen
08.11.2010 13:15
Design is still evaluated from almost exactly the same standpoint as in the 1950s, at least in the public, and sometimes it feels as if design has become a prisoner of its own historical image. When products are examined in the media on the basis of images alone, without the presence of the physical materials they are made of, understanding their shape requires an increasing amount of judgment and criticality.
The level of design provides telling insight into the mental state of the corporation or organization that produces it. For Finland, design has been a success factor of national importance in the industrial age.
Nevertheless, in the new global distribution of cultures, production, natural resources and economy, we should focus on how good design can be created in a way that is mindful of human well-being and the future with its many challenges.
It is difficult to evaluate design unequivocally. It is largely a question of who perceives it and from what perspective. Individual evaluation of design is primarily based on feeling: when the feeling is right, design has succeeded in its task - or at least one might think so. The user experience may, however, change things if an aesthetically pleasing tea pot drips water on the table, food packaging turns into problem waste in the household, public transportation timetables are difficult to comprehend, a computer fails to co-operate due to a badly designed user interface or a pile of wood refuses to turn into a bookshelf despite detailed instructions for assembly. If a product or service makes its user feel stupid and daily activities are interrupted by expletives, the criteria for bad design is met.
At its best, design provides positive experiences, usually through identifiable objects, but design my also be successful when it is barely noticeable. Things such as public services from forms and payment terminals to the interior decoration, signage and furniture in hospitals are often not even recognized as falling within the sphere of design. However, the significance of colors, lighting and acoustics can't be underestimated and, as such, design should be incorporated as an integral part of the development of public organizations. Despite the significance of design, it is unlikely that any hospital, public office or municipality would have a separate unit or budgetary allocations for design. Outsourcing design is still seen as a risk and integrating design into other functions is problematic for the majority of organizations.
Evaluation of design should also include consideration of the culture in which the objects are used. At present, there is a tendency to try and create ”consumer-focused” products for people on the other side of the world with the consequence that products can barely be told apart without looking at the manufacturer's label or logo. The tedious similarity of hundreds of objects threatens to make our attitudes towards our living environment increasingly indifferent and sometimes even irresponsible. Perhaps it would be wiser to take a cue from nature and focus more on the diversity of products, creating products according to where the producer's strengths lie and relying on the consumer's own judgment.
Originality, like progressivity and quality, seem to have been forgotten amidst today's focus on urgency and competition. Sometimes it even seems that producers forget why, for whom and with what consequences their products are made. There appears to be no time to think products through, test them and to make them aesthetically pleasing.
Bad design turns an object into a disruptive force and the joint impact of dozens of poorly designed objects can create an ill feeling in daily life. I believe this also plays a significant role in job satisfaction. Newspapers seem to be full of notices of product recalls resulting from technical errors. In my experience, there should be at least as many recalls based on poor design. Of course this is not the case, as the paralyzing effect that poor design can have on senses and feelings is more difficult to measure or recognize than the shock from a faulty power cord.
In the Finnish national character, other people are traditionally taken into consideration quite well. In difficult circumstances this has manifested in a sense of community and working together for the common good. It is even reflected in the best of Finnish design, as exemplified by the works of Alvar Aalto and Kaj Franck. In examining design from the perspective of interaction between human and object, we must also be conscious of a third factor, one that was largely forgotten during the industrial century: the environment in a role that is more than simply being a source of inspiration. Objects have an impact not only on people, but also on nature.
Reckless energy consumption and the growing amount of waste are carrying an ever-larger price tag for society. This is the consequence of products that are poorly designed, have short life cycles and are generally nonsensical in the light of present criteria. Fortunately, ethical information concerning the environment and the manufacturing background of products is changing the way we look at objects and evaluate design. The concept of design therefore has the opportunity to find new life through the growing amount of information people have concerning the consequences of the entire value chain associated with a product and the emphasis on social and environmental responsibility, where welfare is not simply measured on the basis of the quantity of goods but rather mental well-being as part of the global community.
CEO, industrial designer and Artist Professor Hannu Kähönen is the founder of a Helsinki-based design agency Creadesign and a versatile design professional. In 2008, he received the Kaj Franck Design Prize, which is the most important design award in Finland.