Design is...

what was the question again?

Welcome to A Bicycle for Design, a newsletter that will explore how automation and software are changing the nature of design in the architecture, engineering and construction industry. To kick things off, I will be sharing a few posts looking at a very fundamental question: what is design?

If you ask 10 designers what design actually is, you will hear at least 23 different answers. It can be a very emotional question, with the answers often wrapped up in questions of professional identity and excellence.

While we may not be able to define ‘design’ to everyone’s satisfaction, we can find a definition that helps us think through how design is changing. To acheive this, the definition should:

1. differentiate between design and other types of activity, and illuminate the context in which it exists.

2. guide our consideration of a second question: what is good design?

3. clarify what unifies all the disparate design disciplines (architecture, fashion design, graphic design, etc...).

4. establish a fixed point to understand all the changes that are happening in the design world today.

Many definitions of design include phrases like "user-centric", "progress", "objectives". These are inspirational, but don't clearly delineate between design and the rest of the value chain; they jump to answer the question "What is good design?"; they are themes across the design disciplines, but don't point to a unifying foundation; they give us something to aspire to, rather than a base to build from.

To more forward with clarity and confidence, I propose this simple definition:

---

Design is the process of deciding what to make, as a separate activity from making.

---

How does this definition fit our 4 criteria?

1. Design exists in the context of making things. Design, though part of the whole, is not the whole activity of making things.

2. Design is a set of decisions, so we can assess the quality of a design by the quality of the decisions.

3. Design disciplines all exist in the context of making things: buildings, clothes, graphics. In each case, the designers are responsible for the decision making.

4. No matter how technology advances, we do know that humans will keep making things, and will need to decide what these things are. This definition is general enough to be a fixed reference point as we explore everything that does change.

There are two points I'd like to emphasize:

First, though this definition is simple, it does not imply the design is a simple, linear, deterministic activity. It is the process of deciding what to make! It ends by communicating a specific decision, but it starts with imagination, research, opinion, simulation, experimentation, modelling, and so many more open-ended activities.

Second, designing is to making as planning is to doing. We all plan from time to time, and we can all design, too. There are professionals who can produce better designs more quickly and can imagine radical departures from the status quo, but the fundamental act of designing is open to all!

Over the coming weeks, I will explore each of the four above criteria in more detail, then will turn to the changing face of design and what we can do to shape that change.