To think outside the box you first have to know the box (= rules). And to be honest: a Designer is – at best – only a part time philosopher. So what do you want to be? A full-time Designer or half-time Designer?

Even Photoshop doesn’t mean Designers are no human beings anymore.

On that note, I am currently reading Wally Olin’s Brand Handbook and it is quite a read. Branding is so deceivingly complex.

I think it a good saying that we should design to sell, design to invent, and design to achieve consumer satisfaction.

In other words, we want to sell a product so it must continue to be appealing. To be appealing we can’t always be creating new trends. There are times we must design based around the client. A designer should never oust the client after hearing their feedback, say for a web design, concerning the design phase and bring a web design that is completely out of Scope and way off the AI. The client would then say “Um, I didn’t ask for any of that, what happened to the meeting minutes and notes we discussed, the look and the feel that I had asked for? (Rough example)

Secondly, we can design to invent new standards, trends while channeling the attention to past clientele as well as “wooing” prospective consumers. I think Wacom did a great job concerning this particular aspect. Most everyone I have talked to in the professional design sector that uses any for of tablet seemed to be in their late 30’s. From my point of view, with this new design they may grab the attention of an even younger generation than previously witnessed.

Lastly, we always want to achieve consumer satisfaction. Now, please keep in mind, this is not always the case and you can’t please everyone, that’s a given. However, one should keep in mind the pretense, when designing, that consumer satisfaction plays a major role in the purchasing of a product. A client isn’t just going to hire a design firm because they have great trendy designs, but what any major client is going to look for in a design firm is their character, their virtue, their readiness and ability to create a design that lets the consumer know “we are here to meet your needs”

I use Wacom as an example, I love the new brand and because of it I am going to further pursue them in an attempt to see the greater uses of a tablet in my work. Again, please keep in mind that this isn’t always the case with every design. You can have a perfectly good product with a poor design. I am sure if you were to look up stats or even did a survey you’d see that better design entails much more clientele.

Anyways, just my thoughts. Thanks for the article bro!

Sky

Also see the comment to you and Michael at the bottom of this comment.

Antonea,

if we are all following the same trends and never allow new ones to evolve we will never have that chance to learn and grow. I hope all designers take these redesigns as a learning experience and grow from them.

Thought it was worth mentioning again. Thanks Antonea.

Preston Lee,
It reminds me of this poll that I saw a while back: http://isgraphicdesignart.com/

Is graphic design art?

62% (9752 people say yes and 38% or 5893 say no). Personally I believe, no graphic design is not art.

Briana,
Good is a very subjective term so it is hard to measure… it really comes down to if the intended message was communicated or not.

Pau,
A fashion movie that comes to mind is “The Devil Wears Prada”. This movie was quite eye opening, although I am not entirely sure how true to life the move is. It is all about setting trends in the fashion industry. Consumers, I believe, do have a say in trends, they won’t buy clothes they don’t like.

Mrs. Onion,
Eye candy?

Michael & Adrian,
This was a topic that many of the designers mentioned in the book ‘How to think like a graphic designer’ – how nearly 99% of all design is done for financial gain.

Adrian, you also bring up some interesting points, certainly not leading down a dead end – I think it raises even more questions and hopefully some more feedback from those on the Designism side of the fence.

I didn’t bash capitalism, I just briefly (very briefly) talked about where the need for logo change arose. I was also briefly addressing Jacob’s question to me regarding designing for consumerism or social change.

Keep trying to crack those codes …

@Jacob Cass
I misrepresented artists and designers.
Both can influence change in the world.
The source for change comes from two entirely different manifestations: 1. from the singular self (the artist) 2. from the plural selves (the public, with the designer as the researcher and interpreter).

In capitalist consumerism, I would say more often than not, that designing for the consumer, inherently by nature, is driven primarily by the company first, and by the consumer second. After all, why would any company invest in branding themselves in the first place unless they were benefiting from some sort of return on a product or service they were offering?

Designing for social change is an entirely different beast.
The above 5 logos are highly questionable examples of positive social change, they are capitalist consumer driven – even the Olympic Games logo with its good intentions, is still driving advertising that largely supplements a world-wide vacation destination for 2010 in London.

A truly good design, I think, will be liked by designers and non-designers alike.

As some comments have already pointed out, there is a difference between art and design. My comments are about design only, art is a whole other beast.

Design without a purpose or without tring to satisfy consumer need is simply art. On the flip side, Design tailored completely to what the client or consumer may want is generally BAD art.

The key is to find a balance between the wants and needs of the consumer, client, or whoever you are doing design work for and the principles and strategies of marketing and design that you know will work.

Surprisingly, it does make me happy to see these types of designs. We never know how the public will react to anything until we publicize it. Clearly, the designers who redesigned these logos felt very passionate about them. It is important to take risks in design. It is important to create pieces of art that you feel strongly about even if others don’t, and if you fail you try again. Many people feel like all of the logos featured in that post failed horribly, yet they have us talking don’t they? They have us learning from their mistakes so we don’t make them ourselves. Designers should learn from one another, and if we are all following the same trends and never allow new ones to evolve we will never have that chance to learn and grow. I hope all designers take these redesigns as a learning experience and grow from them.

Jesse,
Designism sounds odd to a lot of people judging by the comments left on the articles I’ve linked. I don’t think that executives would begin hiring designers based on political motives alone however if this ‘movement’ does begin to take off, it may just be a contributing factor.

John,
Another good point, and one that many of the great designers bring up, in particular Peter Saville. In the book How to think like a great graphic designer (linked in article), Saville talks on the topic of how many aspired students and designers start doing design because of what they see in pop culture design, ie. record sleeves, fashion and the ‘new’, ie. they love these sorts of designs so they want to do the same, however, when doing so they fail to see the underlying principles of what design is actually all about, which often leads to people not understanding their role as designer, which in part is what I can see coming from this ‘Designism’ movement – a better understanding. What do you think?

Antonea,
Definitely, which is one of the main reasons I posted this article… which makes me wonder what your opinions are on the 5 recent rebrands? Does it make you happy to see these types of designs, or are they too far “a step out of the box”?

Marc,
Apple is quite an example, a very innovative company indeed, however in most cases they are their own client, so this example wouldn’t be applicable to all areas, especially because it’s their choice to what the message they want to convey. On the other hand, when you have a client or committee, like you suggested, you have a message that you have to communicate & that is most probably given to you by the client. The key is finding the right balance between the two. What’s your opinion?

Pau,
Trends can come from anywhere, though it’s not always designers who create them which is the whole topic of this article – design consumerism… who is the victim? Also in regards to your fashion statement, I would have to disagree, consumers still have a choice in my opinion.

Also, I would like to quote Jeff Fisher, in regards to trends:

“When a graphics industry expert proclaims something a current ‘design trend’ it is a ‘breaking news’ message to designers everywhere that the specific ‘trend’ should be avoided from that moment on – rather than followed by a thundering flock of design sheep.”

Michael,

Designers create solutions for the need of others.
Artists create solutions for their own internal need.

I suppose that designers do design for others (excusing self produced projects) however when should a designer be designing for the consumer or for social change? Also, I wasn’t entirely sure of what you meant by your last sentence, were you implying that artists try to change the world, not designers? Or if not, can you please clarify, thanks!

If designers designed for themselves all the time, they wouldn’t be doing their job.
If you think you are a designer and think you need to change the world with your ideas, maybe you need to rethink your position, you are an artist – be proud of it.

But they consistently excel at what they do.

By letting innovation and inspiration guide the way, rather than mass demand, you can create things that are beyond the imagination of the average consumer. I guess what I’m saying is that designing for consumers (ie. The Masses) is a bit like design by committee, and that’s never a good thing.

On the designerism front, I think we’re here to communicate a message – what that message is, isn’t up to us. It’s up to the client.

To make a change and to be a good citizen I got involved in politics, and worked as a campaign manager, and sat on municipal committees.

My political career and design career don’t often meet, and that’s the way I like it.