The complete statement usually goes something like “I’m no designer and I can’t tell you guys how to create a great design but I know one when I see it.” Regardless of whether they actually express it openly, when important design stakeholders subscribe to this sentiment, your organization may have a significant design culture problem.

How long would an engineering leader typically last who said, “I know nothing about engineering but I know good engineering when I see it.”? Would such a person even be considered for filling an engineering leadership position? Yet companies who claim design is a strategic part of their business frequently treat design as a subcomponent of engineering or product management. If your strategic product development stakeholders, especially ones that “own” a design team (e.g. Engineering Director, Product Management Director, Eng VP…), feel this perspective sufficiently qualifies them for design ownership then you probably have an ailing, even hostile, design culture and here’s why.

“I’ll know it when I see it” leaders don’t understand how design works at the grassroots. Their lack of basic operational understanding makes it difficult for them to effectively support stable design teams and reliable design/development practices. They have no real design management tools at their disposal so they often rely on unnecessarily costly, brute force design practices. Designers are commonly required to work at a feverish pace producing lots and lots of design iterations (aka “burn em and churn ’em). These rapid-fire designs are often reviewed in tense, largely uninformative, and highly opinionated review sessions that miss the design targets most meaningful to real users. Not surprisingly, high designer turnover becomes common and the level of daily tension skyrockets. Ironically, the (largely unnecessarily) harried pace and high employee turnover are often touted as evidence for the high quality of the design culture. In reality this is more often a testament to the lack of design management know-how.

High employee turnover compounds the tension and further reduces the effectiveness of the design teams by constantly leaving them short-handed and in a perpetual hiring mode which robs more time and resource from design work. This creates intense pressure to do more with less and their output suffers. The design focus changes from trying to address users’ needs, to appeasing the nebulous sensitivities of a single, or even worse, a few, key internal stakeholders. Rather than engaging in deliberate intentional design, designers rapidly forge permutations that might satisfy stakeholder(s). This leads to even more reviews, more “shoot-from-the-hip” feedback, and more project delays.  In the meantime, frustration spreads beyond the design team as engineering and marketing are impacted by the constantly changing design proposals.

Then, in efforts to speed up the process, “I know it when I see it” leaders will often initiate a second source of design concepts from another team. Sometimes this is done covertly, and other times it is done publicly in hopes that the added pressure will speed up the process. In either case, it rarely works. In fact, this tactic typically slows down the process, doubles the number of people, doubles the review/decision-making overhead, confuses the organization and destroys teams. If left unchecked, the design team’s output becomes pedestrian and top talent becomes impossibly difficult to recruit/retain until some inevitable re-org takes place which promises a renewed emphasis on design.

However, if the root cause is not diagnosed and design is once again placed underneath an “I’ll know it when I see it” executive leader, the process will repeat ad infinitum. As a result, the perception of design as a costly time sink and a perpetual “problem child” becomes solidified. Of course, design is really very cost effective when managed effectively. Unfortunately the mismanagement of design by those who don’t understand the fundamentals of good design management, is extremely costly and all too common. Rarely is the true cause of an under-performing design team correctly diagnosed, much less correctly treated.

In the “I’ll know it when I see it” management culture, design is poorly managed because very few executive, and mid level management, “owners” of design teams ever worked as full time designers. Important product development stakeholders saying, “I recognize good designs when I see them.” is like me saying, “I should be a record producer because I know good music when I hear it”. Today most mid-management levels, executive ranks, and board rooms are filled with former sales, engineering and marketing personnel, but there continues to be a dearth of design professionals occupying similar strategic roles. Rather than standing on equal ground throughout the command chain with the other strategic skill sets, design is typically “owned” by engineering or Product Management.

Any organization who expects to leverage marketing, sales and engineering for competitive advantage will reasonably fill its ranks with marketing, sales and engineering leaders who had successful hands-on experience in their fields. Likewise, organizations who wish to leverage design as a strategic competitive advantage must install executives, strategic leaders, and design owners who were once successful designers. This is a first step in moving away from the costly pitfalls of a brute force “I’ll know it when I see it” management culture, to a more intentional, cost effective, and successful design culture.

Mar. 03, 2016