>
> "Kontra" wrote: >
> Just three examples of your classic CEOs tone deaf wrt design.
> Destroyed in the marketplace.
All three examples Palm, Motorola and Creative, are competing against Apple,
a company started by two men who quit their jobs at big companies (Steve
Jobs quit Atari and Steve Wozniak quit HP) because they thought they could
make something better on their own, and they were right. They fit the
question I asked before: why do so few designers start their own companies?
Apple is a great example of what can happen when they do (although to be
fair, I doubt Jobs or Wozniak would call themselves designers. Certainly not
when they started).
Palm et. al. are not losing because they are tone deaf to design - they are
losing because someone is making a superior product. All three companies,
in the grand scheme, have been quite succesful.
> I'm not complaining. I've also run a company. The point is that
> quitting a corporate organization run by design-averse people to
> establish their own firms cannot possibly be a viable solution for all
> dissatisfied designers. Again, not all lawyers/accountants/etc quit to
> set up their companies. I'm all for restructuring corporate America,
> too, but sometimes/most of the time one has to work in it.
I agree quiting a job is extreme, but the attitude is not. If the person in
power over your project doesn't grant much power to design, and refuses your
advances for influence, then make it your goal to replace the person in
power - become the general manager for the project, instead of the
specialized manager of designers. It's in general management that strategy
is defined and if more designers would become general managers that's how
change will happen. Even to discuss this as a goal with your general
management boss ("What skills do I need to develop to have a job like
yours?") will reveal tons about their perception of you and assumptions both
sides are making that you can take action on, even if you stay in your
current role.
> The reaction is to the obvious double standard whereby designers are
> called to justify their existence where as CEOs/accountants/lawyers/etc
> are not. This is aggravated by the notion that a few courses on 'design
thinking'
> can be grafted onto an MBA to obviate designers/design.
I don't think it's a double standard. It might be stupid, but it's not a
double standard. Anyone who comes to an established, succesful table and
asks for an equal voice will always be questioned and challenged to prove
their value - this is human nature, and has almost nothing to do with design
or designers. The first marketer, the first tester, the first usability
engineer, the first whatever in any organization will describe the same
tensions. And the sooner designers realize it has less to do with design and
more to do with group dynamics, power and politics the more successful
they'll be in overcoming these challenges.
-Scott
Scott Berkun
www.scottberkun.com
________________________________________________________________
Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
To post to this list ....... [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
