Spring 2024
Towards the Rise of
Design in UX
Spring 2024
Towards the Rise of
Design in UX
User experience (UX) design is bankrupt because neither users nor design seem to play a role in a discipline dominated by design charlatans and process fetishists. As a result user experiences are homogeneous, impersonal and mediocre. It is time to elevate digital design to an applied art form in a way that form, brand and craftsmanship become leading. The paradigm of 'the user' then becomes redundant and can be thrown in the trash bin. Through design power, the digital applications that people use every day become more aesthetically pleasing and user-friendly. There is a task for training institutes and organizations to shape this change.
User experience design (UX) has continued to grow since its 'invention' by Donald Norman in the early 1990s. Every large organization nowadays has its own in-house UX design studio. Numerous courses focus on human-centered design.
If we take a tour of the digital applications we use in our daily lives and map them, two things stand out:
This raises the question of whether, despite all the effort put into mapping the user, we can even speak of user experiences here. User experience design is a discipline in which user and design do not (seem to) play a significant role. How come?
If we read the aggregated definition of user experience design, it appears to mainly be about a 'process'. Wikipedia says: “User experience design is the process of defining the experience a user would go through when interacting with a company, its services, and its products”. The iconic image that represents this discipline is indeed a team sticking post-its on the glass partition walls of office buildings. 'Design thinking' and 'agile scrum' are also manifestations of this process fetish.
The second part of the definition says: "Design decisions in UX design are often driven by research, data analysis, and test results rather than aesthetic preferences and opinions." This is problematic because aesthetics are equated here with 'preferences' and 'opinions'. German designer Dieter Rams, Braun's chief designer, once said the following: "The aesthetic quality of a product is integral to its usefulness because products are used every day and have an effect on people and their well-being. Only well-executed products can be beautiful."
In the context of user interfaces, aesthetics refers to visual hierarchy, typography, composition, color, shape, movement and sound, whether or not produced by algorithms. These are knowledge and skills that are hardly taught in digital designer training courses, let alone practiced on a daily basis. Without FORM, as we summarize these aesthetic qualities, designing a pleasant user experience is impossible. The digital designer training courses push generations of young designers into the market empty-handed and are thus partly to blame for the bankruptcy.
User experience design as a discipline should be declared bankrupt, but after a major restructuring it also deserves a restart in a new form so that we can experience a true renaissance of this essentially beautiful field. To achieve this, both the institutions that train young people to become design charlatans and the process fetishists who hold creative teams hostage in organizations must be re-educated. The system that generates UX design is in need of a recalibration and renewed focus.
In an 'added value' economy, as a company you lose market share when the user experience is no longer distinctive. This is broadly the conclusion of the research conducted by Forrester. As a recommendation, the report 'The Cost of Losing Creativity' advocates bringing the brand to life in service design. And that requires exactly the same focus on the aforementioned aspects of design craftsmanship.
The process fetish is understandable from the perspective of product owners, marketers, project managers and scrum masters, but it is a curse for the UX experience. The agile scrum method kills any form of creativity, spontaneity, craftsmanship and quality. Often an MVP (Minimal Viable Product) is 'good enough' and no attention is paid to an MLP (Maximum Loveable Product). The team is assessed on output which is tested in AB form without taking into account specific KPIs focused on the experience. Often only in general form such as Net Promoter Score. The team itself is not sufficiently trained to assess real design other than through AB tests. Exploring the various possibilities that can lead to a truly new user experience is therefore not done. Together with an education system that pays no attention to form, aesthetics and craftsmanship, it leads to a scorched earth where nothing (user-friendly) can grow anymore.
Aesthetics has little to do with 'preferences' or 'opinions'. From the point of view of psychology, the experience of beauty can be objectified. In practice, people are not that different from each other and what they have in common is that value is attached to pleasant working digital applications that we use every day in our lives. These are tidy and lovingly designed interfaces with a good visual hierarchy. There is a direct relationship between what we experience as beautiful and enjoyable and the design craftsmanship that makes this possible. And this can be made measurable from both a user perspective (easiness of use) and a business perspective (loyalty, adoption and ROI).
The user experience design, which has fallen into bankruptcy, can learn a lot from the classic disciplines of fashion and architecture if it is given a new start, in a transition phase that has been placed under guardianship. Fashion because of its exuberant focus on beauty and style and architecture because of its outspoken ideologically driven form and style statements. This concerns academic disciplines. This means that design is rooted in an in-depth knowledge of theoretical frameworks from the humanities and art sciences. An architect or fashion designer also takes account of the past by building on a rich tradition in buildings or collections. Good design is 'referential', a characteristic that we do not (yet) see in the digital world.
Fashion and architecture are applied art forms, as are industrial design and graphic design. It is good to realize that user experience design is not an applied art form. The essence of applied arts is the application of design to everyday objects with the aim of making them aesthetically pleasing. This does not play a role in UX design, which means that the promise of 'human centered design' cannot be fulfilled. User experience design can take a huge step forward by positioning itself as an applied art form. User experience designers then actually DESIGN user experiences that make the world a bit more beautiful.
User experience (UX) design is bankrupt because neither users nor design seem to play a role in a discipline dominated by design charlatans and process fetishists. As a result user experiences are homogeneous, impersonal and mediocre. It is time to elevate digital design to an applied art form in a way that form, brand and craftsmanship become leading. The paradigm of 'the user' then becomes redundant and can be thrown in the trash bin. Through design power, the digital applications that people use every day become more aesthetically pleasing and user-friendly. There is a task for training institutes and organizations to shape this change.
User experience design (UX) has continued to grow since its 'invention' by Donald Norman in the early 1990s. Every large organization nowadays has its own in-house UX design studio. Numerous courses focus on human-centered design.
If we take a tour of the digital applications we use in our daily lives and map them, two things stand out:
This raises the question of whether, despite all the effort put into mapping the user, we can even speak of user experiences here. User experience design is a discipline in which user and design do not (seem to) play a significant role. How come?
If we read the aggregated definition of user experience design, it appears to mainly be about a 'process'. Wikipedia says: “User experience design is the process of defining the experience a user would go through when interacting with a company, its services, and its products”. The iconic image that represents this discipline is indeed a team sticking post-its on the glass partition walls of office buildings. 'Design thinking' and 'agile scrum' are also manifestations of this process fetish.
The second part of the definition says: "Design decisions in UX design are often driven by research, data analysis, and test results rather than aesthetic preferences and opinions." This is problematic because aesthetics are equated here with 'preferences' and 'opinions'. German designer Dieter Rams, Braun's chief designer, once said the following: "The aesthetic quality of a product is integral to its usefulness because products are used every day and have an effect on people and their well-being. Only well-executed products can be beautiful."
In the context of user interfaces, aesthetics refers to visual hierarchy, typography, composition, color, shape, movement and sound, whether or not produced by algorithms. These are knowledge and skills that are hardly taught in digital designer training courses, let alone practiced on a daily basis. Without FORM, as we summarize these aesthetic qualities, designing a pleasant user experience is impossible. The digital designer training courses push generations of young designers into the market empty-handed and are thus partly to blame for the bankruptcy.
User experience design as a discipline should be declared bankrupt, but after a major restructuring it also deserves a restart in a new form so that we can experience a true renaissance of this essentially beautiful field. To achieve this, both the institutions that train young people to become design charlatans and the process fetishists who hold creative teams hostage in organizations must be re-educated. The system that generates UX design is in need of a recalibration and renewed focus.
In an 'added value' economy, as a company you lose market share when the user experience is no longer distinctive. This is broadly the conclusion of the research conducted by Forrester. As a recommendation, the report 'The Cost of Losing Creativity' advocates bringing the brand to life in service design. And that requires exactly the same focus on the aforementioned aspects of design craftsmanship.
The process fetish is understandable from the perspective of product owners, marketers, project managers and scrum masters, but it is a curse for the UX experience. The agile scrum method kills any form of creativity, spontaneity, craftsmanship and quality. Often an MVP (Minimal Viable Product) is 'good enough' and no attention is paid to an MLP (Maximum Loveable Product). The team is assessed on output which is tested in AB form without taking into account specific KPIs focused on the experience. Often only in general form such as Net Promoter Score. The team itself is not sufficiently trained to assess real design other than through AB tests. Exploring the various possibilities that can lead to a truly new user experience is therefore not done. Together with an education system that pays no attention to form, aesthetics and craftsmanship, it leads to a scorched earth where nothing (user-friendly) can grow anymore.
Aesthetics has little to do with 'preferences' or 'opinions'. From the point of view of psychology, the experience of beauty can be objectified. In practice, people are not that different from each other and what they have in common is that value is attached to pleasant working digital applications that we use every day in our lives. These are tidy and lovingly designed interfaces with a good visual hierarchy. There is a direct relationship between what we experience as beautiful and enjoyable and the design craftsmanship that makes this possible. And this can be made measurable from both a user perspective (easiness of use) and a business perspective (loyalty, adoption and ROI).
The user experience design, which has fallen into bankruptcy, can learn a lot from the classic disciplines of fashion and architecture if it is given a new start, in a transition phase that has been placed under guardianship. Fashion because of its exuberant focus on beauty and style and architecture because of its outspoken ideologically driven form and style statements. This concerns academic disciplines. This means that design is rooted in an in-depth knowledge of theoretical frameworks from the humanities and art sciences. An architect or fashion designer also takes account of the past by building on a rich tradition in buildings or collections. Good design is 'referential', a characteristic that we do not (yet) see in the digital world.
Fashion and architecture are applied art forms, as are industrial design and graphic design. It is good to realize that user experience design is not an applied art form. The essence of applied arts is the application of design to everyday objects with the aim of making them aesthetically pleasing. This does not play a role in UX design, which means that the promise of 'human centered design' cannot be fulfilled. User experience design can take a huge step forward by positioning itself as an applied art form. User experience designers then actually DESIGN user experiences that make the world a bit more beautiful.
Contact us for bookings or inquiries by sending an e-mail to info@schoolofform.com
© 2024, School of Form. All rights reserved.
Contact us for bookings or inquiries by sending an e-mail to info@schoolofform.com
© 2024, School of Form. All rights reserved.
Contact us for bookings or inquiries by sending an e-mail to info@schoolofform.com
© 2024, School of Form. All rights reserved.