The aim of this document is to capture my thoughts on design. 

I want to understand: 

• What I think design is, where it came from, and where it is going. 
• What it means to be a designer today in general and, 
• How this applies in a working business environment today, specifically from an experiential perspective as a product designer

To do this I am going to:

• Review my knowledge of design theories
• Document my own experiences and understanding of design as a working professional
• Share my thoughts on different frameworks and methods for product development
• Set a vision for myself as a designer 

Crude philosophical foundation

To ground my thinking, I want to quickly outline, very crudely, my philosophical foundation. There are multiple accounts of differing definitions of Philosophy from all types of philosophers. The 2 types that interest me will centre around critical thinking, specifically, reflecting on reality, and an approach to life or in our case design. 

1. Reflection on reality 
2. An approach to life (or design in this case)

A Definition Of Design

To establish a foundation for my theory, I will begin with three definitions of design. These will ground my thinking and allow for a deeper understanding of my perspective.

Herbert Simon defines design as “the process by which we transform existing conditions into preferred ones.” This definition is strong because it starts with the current state and highlights design as a change agent aimed at creating more desirable conditions. However, it also implies that design always aims to improve the world, which isn’t always the case. Design outcomes can be positive or negative, and intentions can vary. 

Design, as a verb, is an act everyone engages in—it’s about determining change. What sets professional design apart is the strong intention, purpose, and structured approach behind it. Professional designers follow formal processes, gather information, make sense of it, ideate creatively, and have ethical considerations. This is similar to the difference between a layperson diagnosing a cold and a doctor doing so. The doctor, with their extensive training and credentials, is trusted over the layperson. The layperson could be correct in any instance, but over time the average will decline. Professional designers, likewise, design with a level of expertise and ethical responsibility that lay people do not.

Charles Eames once described design as “a plan for arranging elements in such a way as best to accomplish a particular purpose.” This definition appeals to me because it emphasises intentionality and organisation, applicable to various design fields (communication, urban, UX, interior, etc.). It subtly introduces the concept of conscious decision-making, crucial for professional designers.

Victor Papanek, in his book “Design for the Real World,” defines design as “the conscious and intuitive effort to impose meaningful order.” This blends elements of Simon’s and Eames’ definitions but stops short of specifying the reasons or methods for imposing order.

These three definitions provide a base for understanding design as done by the general population versus practised by professional designers. A professional designer consciously and purposefully determines changes for the better, guided by ethical principles. In contrast, non-professional design tends to be more haphazard. Professional designers should adhere to ethical standards, akin to the medical profession, aiming to improve the world through their work. Therefore, Herbert Simon’s normative claim that design should transform existing conditions into preferred ones holds significant weight in the context of professional design.

Approaches

Herbert Simon’s Rational Approach: Herbert Simon, in “The Sciences of the Artificial,” advocates for a methodical, systematic approach to design. He views design as a problem-solving activity that relies on logical processes and scientific principles. This approach is grounded in the belief that following structured steps can lead to optimal solutions. Simon’s underlying thinking is reflected in frameworks like the Double Diamond and Design Thinking and for this is popular in business contexts because it offers a clear, predictable path that can be easily understood and implemented. It is particularly effective in scenarios where variables are known, innovation is not the primary goal, and the environment is relatively stable.

Donald Schön’s Reflective Practice: In contrast, Donald Schön’s perspective, detailed in “The Reflective Practitioner,” emphasises an experiential and iterative approach to design. Schön introduces the concepts of “reflection-in-action” and “reflection-on-action,” where designers continuously reflect on their actions during and after the design process. This method values learning through doing, where insights are gained and refined through practice. Schön’s approach is dynamic, focusing on the ongoing nature of learning and adaptation. It is particularly suited to complex, uncertain environments where creativity and continuous improvement are essential.

Both Simon’s and Schön’s approaches are valuable in their own right. Simon’s structured methodology provides clarity and efficiency in well-defined contexts, while Schön’s reflective practice offers flexibility and adaptability in more ambiguous situations. As a design professional, understanding and integrating both approaches allows for a more comprehensive and responsive design process, tailored to the specific needs and challenges of each project.

My Working Definition

I hesitate to write anything as a definition because I think the lack of an agreed definition is a strong point for design. It can be different in different contexts. It means the profession is constantly exploring and pushing. But for the sake of fun and the idea behind this blog being that I engage and form opinions, I took a punt:

Designing is the cycle of defining /redefining and structuring of conditions with the aim of meeting a specified outcome/s.

This is where I am right now. Based on the above writers, and others, and my experiences. The elements that resonated with me were:

• Design as an iterative learning process which tends toward an outcome / mission
• The realisation that design cannot guarantee an outcome, rather it’s the setting up of conditions. Its like the Brian Eno perspective, ‘Think like a gardener, not an architect: design beginnings, not endings’.
• Having freedom to choose between approaches, depending on the context, knowns and unknowns.

Practice

As an aside I often split work into these two categories. Complicated and complex. Complicated can be done using Herberts Simons approach by a more junior designer. If the steps and rules are followed a level of success is achieved. Whilst work which is new and unknown I categorise as complex and this lends itself to Schön’s approach. In this way, work can be allocated and expectations determined beforehand. Sometimes complicated work is complex and sometimes complex work is actually complicated, but that is just a matter of recategorising and changing expectations.