Design as a driver of economic growth and well-being
One of the biggest changes of our time is the realisation that creativity has become the new valuable resource. The economy is no longer based on production of goods and services that could be exchanged and consumed. The economy measures the amount of resources that can be converted into money, and growth is dependent on doing that. This was an appropriate method of calculating economic growth during the industrial revolution when humanity was dependent on the manufacturing of physical products, which was the situation during the first 150 years of the industrial revolution. However, that is not the case anymore; during the 1900s the creative economy would have been dependent on industrial designers who engaged in the making of physical products for consumption, but today the creative economy is based on knowledge. John Howkins in ‘The Creative Economy’ talks about a new economy that uses knowledge and information as tools and materials for creativity. In our society today knowledge is created through services; networks are created through communication; our relationships are created through our experiences with services. Thus our society is starting to value experiences over physical products therefore a good design is no longer a design that sells but a design that can be valued for the experience it helps us to achieve.
Before this new demand for valuable experiences, there was a demand for new physical objects that enhanced the quality of life – a pseudo-demand created by industrial designers for fuelling the depressed economy. The products of 1930s America saw styling of products as a medium to increase consumerism to relieve the Great Depression. So in the early 1930s America embraced streamlining which soon became America’s hallmark of design. Streamlining products was the new, modernistic style that promoted new buying by displacing good and still functional products to become boring and out of fashion. This stylistic obsolesce disappointed consumer with their possessions and encouraged new buying. Some of the pioneers of streamlining were Walter Dorwin Teague, Norman Bel Geddes, Henry Dreyfus and Raymond Loewy. They revolutionised design and as streamlining commercialised, it spread from non-vehicular objects to everyday generic items, for example Lowey’s Teardrop pencil sharpener to Teague’s service station for Texaco. One of the most influential pieces of the time was Norman Geddes’s ‘Horizons’ published in 1932, it was filled with science fiction visualisations of objects shaped as a teardrop. Horizons struck a responsive chord in the automotive industry and amongst the railway executives. Companies such as Chrysler Corporation used Geddes’ Horizons to make streamlined automobiles such as the Airflow automobile (1934). Airflow pushed the streamlining fad among people and convinced companies, such as Ford and General Motors, to employ it as a styling device to sell their cars. It also inspired the railway executives who aimed at saturating rail travel with modern, in fashion design to pull consumers away from the futuristic looking automobiles. Streamlining spread rapidly affecting everyone; Americans were buying modernised products and re-decorating their standard of living. Although streamlining was an excellent medium to get rid of the depression it gave industrial designer power and regard (something they had not experienced before) that allowed them to corrupt the design world. Some thought of it as a “blind concern with fashion… (that) made it difficult to take the ordinary industrial designer seriously”[1]. Designers of the time could defend their work on a technical level -the materials they used, such as sheet metal and plastic allowed objects to have rounded edge making products durable but it was seen by some as a popular style that developed in America. Although the designers liked to justify streamlined designs as using science and fast moving vehicles it was commercial styling that was used as a fuel for the American economy.
Since the 1930s the creative economy and so has our society has changed. Before, designers were able to manipulate consumers by using styling as a medium to raise the goods from being boring to being distinctive, but today consumers are no longer influenced by the “distinctive”. As Robert Foster said in ‘The Work of the New Economy’ “Value is: connecting with the world’s passions”[2]; “to create experiences for new consumers, that are rewarding and true”[3]. So where did this new significance of value of experience evolve? Richard Florida’s ‘The Creative Class’ suggests that as the creative class in our society rose, their behaviour, norms and values were reflected on rest of the society. The creative class believed in individuality, meritocracy, diversity and openness. This attitude of the creative class, I believe, inspired the rest of the society to shift their attitude from “survival” to “self-expression”. This means there has been a shift in what people want out of life, work, religion and family. Also today we live in an economically developed society where we have a variety of choices. We do not live in a world of scarcity but in a world of abundance – known as “postmaterialistic…means that we no longer have to devote all our energies just to staying alive, but we have the wealth, time and ability to enjoy other aspects of life”[4] Thus consumer’s expectation from object that contributes to all aspect of life has changed, they expect products to help them achieve more than a higher standard of living. They demand products to be “distinctive” that is: products that can be valued for the experience it provides.
To deliver this demand designers are using knowledge and information to come up with new and innovative products. For example, Coors Light Bottles now have labels that turn blue when the beer is chilled and Huggies’ hand soap bottles flash light to show children how long they should wash their hands for[5]. The fashion industry is another example of how mass manufacturing can have a “fordist” aspect to it. For example Calvin Klein and Tommy Hilfiger they are designers, they do not manufacture clothing but are believed to manufacture state of the art pieces. Other examples, that have not yet been mass manufactured, are projects such as bio-jewellery (2003 – 2005) by Tobbie Kerridge, Nikki Scott and Ian Thompson. This was a project for couples who wanted to exchange more than their wedding vows and wedding bands. Couples donated their bone cells which were seeded onto a bioactive scaffold. This encouraged the cells to divide and grow, resulting into tissue that took form of the scaffold, which was ring shaped. This tissue was then combined with precious metal giving couples rings that were made with the tissue of their partners. Similar projects such as Elio Caccavale’s Utility Pets (2003) and Biopresence by George Tremmel and Shiho Fukuhara (2003 – 2005) have been conducted, although these products are not widely available, they show the direction in which design is heading. These projects help customers to connect with the product and help them to express themselves rather than the designer; thus increasing the interaction with the product and so increasing the value of the item.
Designers have always had a vital role to play in our society, during the 1930s they helped with the Great Depression and now they are trying to revive the economy again. The economy is fuelled, an always will be fuelled, by consumer’s demand and capacity to spend. Although the system of an economy will always be the same, the definition of good design might change. Designers could either cater to the needs of a society or they can influence a society to follow a design trend. In 1930s America designers influenced the society and forced the idea that good design was a design that sells. Today good designs are the kinds that enhance the value of a product by providing an enriching user interaction. This attitude is still in process. But I believe it will certainly play out once the society decided what kind of life and what kind of society they want to pass on to the other generations. This could either be influenced by the creative class who control the creative economy or this could be negotiated by the society itself. But good design will always be the type that supports a society’s need.
[1] Jeffrey L.Meikle, Design in USA,( Oxford University Press, Oxford,2005) pg.124
[2] Robert Foster, The Work of the New Economy, consumers, brands and value creation, pg.719. Taken from an electronic document,
(Last accessed on 1/12/2011 at 20:11)
[3] Robert Foster, The Work of the New Economy, consumers, brands and value creation, pg.719. Taken from an electronic document,
(Last accessed on 1/12/2011 at 20:11)
[4] Richard Florida, The Rise of the Creative Class. (Basic Books, New York 2005) pg.81.
[5] Louise Story. Product Packaging Now Shout To Get Your Attention for New York Times.
Taken from an Electronic Document, URL: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/10/business/10package.html.
( Last accessed on 30/11/2011 )
You mentioned the Chrysler Airflow - it was an epic step in design and in manufacturing. Manufacturing such components was a big deal back then. The assembly line needed to be modified as well.
ReplyDeleteRight now the designers are working with the engineers on 2 things -
1. Mass customization - the consumer can order whatever he wants and we'll make it for him
2. Design to optimize the Supply Chain - this design includes everything from manufacturing to transporting it.
Designers have a lot more power now, and by combining with engineers and economists they are changing the way we perceive the world. Look at the iPhone for example. That design has propelled Apple to be bigger (in terms of value) than Microsoft and Google combined! Some designs are revolutionary, Lamborghini Miura for example, and taking them forward is a responsibility that i hope the designers take seriously.
thank you for your comment.
DeleteIt is true that designers have a lot of power. With upcoming field such as experience design,social design, service design etc we certainly hope the world would be a better place. Yes, it is a huge responsibility,but we got to trust designers a bit like how we trust politicians when we vote for them.
You trust Politicians????
DeleteDo you trust designers?
ReplyDeleteDo you trust them to deliver what is socially moral? For example do you trust graphic designers who are so powerful with their advertisements; making us think that we need materialistic wealth in our life.
No I do not trust politicians totally. But when there are people with power and authority sometimes you just need to have an element of trust. You might not trust them a 100% but when but when you allow them that authoritative/powerful position in our society we give it to them with a small hint of trust/faith. Don't you?
I trust designers.
ReplyDeletegraphic designers - their designs are moral to a sect of people and unmoral to a different sect. Its all relative you see. Some people love materialistic wealth - how else will corporations grow? how else will we make a living. if you can show me a better way - I'd love to walk on it.
People are in power because we allow them to be there.
In the book Tuesdays With Morrie, the author describes a simple thing, here is an excerpt- "You see, . . . you closed your eyes. That was the difference. Sometimes you cannot believe what you see, you have to believe what you feel. And if you are ever going to have people trust you, you must feel that you can trust them, too — even when you're in the dark. Even when you're falling."
I will leave it at that.