Hooked on design
When helping SMEs understand the benefits of design-led innovation, we often rely on a standard roster of case studies from multinational players. The latest Innovation Leaders survey by Innovaro is a veritable “who’s who” and even though there are great approaches in there, as well as the Eleven Lessons published by the Design Council, I fear we alienate smaller organisations. Are we painting a picture that only the largest companies can afford meaningful innovation and effective design management?
It was breath of fresh air to hear Irena Fonda discuss her choice to invest in design to drive their family-owned fish business forward in Slovenia at the DME Conference. Fonda feeds their fish by hand (only the best food) for four years before going to market. Since they control the feeding, their fish can have 13 times less mercury than wild fish.
Working with LUKSstudio, Fonda incorporated family values and created a brand around old family photos. The “mustache” in the final logo is applied to the family portrait in a humorous and memorable way. You can purchase fresh, tagged fish on the Internet and have it shipped directly to you in a packaged experience. A panel of Italian chefs preferred their sea bass to that caught in the wild in taste tests and within a year of the launch, their fish appears branded on menus in the best restaurants in Ljubljana. Quality product. Authenticity. Design. That should put an end to the term “fishy business.”
Irena referred to design as one of many business tools, and she made the decision to spend on design. That’s a story to get out to other small operations looking for the right investment when spending (literally) their own money.
(The Fonda site is currently not available in English.)
February 12th, 2008 at 9:18 pm
Justin as both a producer and consumer of design (depending on what hat I’m wearing!) I think there are three problems that affect howSME’s respond to design.
The first is a DIY mentality. As with other specialist areas of business services small companies who only need a service occasionally may be tempted to ‘have a go’ without appropriate skills and experience. This is particularly so in a field like design where proficiency with tangible tools of the trade may be the only upfront evidence of ability to deliver something worthwhile. CAD jockeying can be confused with design abilityby people who are design-naive and just want a result.
The second is narcissism with the ‘design industry’. Design is sometimes represented by elements of the ‘design establishment’ as being a mysterious, intensely creative, highly-strung, unique avocation. As a natural engineer who grew up in a family with three consultant doctors with somewhat messianic views about the profoundity of their professional efforts I’m very sensitive to narcissism. And people who run SME’s often adopt a ruthlessly commercial perspective towards designers, architects, consultants like me and all other breeds of hired help! The truth of course, behind the red dot awards, glossy graphics, vorsprung durch technik etc is bloody hard work and lots of process. Plus talent! Better transparency about where good design comes from, a more collaborative approach to actual designing and greater willingness to share some client risk would help.
The final point I’d make is the suborning of the word design by interlopers. My own profession regards design as a branch of the engineering profession. Software architects regard their activity as design, as do financial planners, media people and various others. Clients often confuse design with innovation, or with 3D CAD. It doesn’t help.
What to do? As always, the answer is to strive to be relevant to SME’s. That means using everyday language to describe it, educating clients just enough to sell them something decent, taking responsibility for outcomes and trying to ensure that every project is not just operated professionally but is also an uplifting experience for the client team. End of rant!
February 25th, 2008 at 11:23 am
Thanks for your comments, Tony.
We spend a great deal of time differentiating between “design thinking” and “design practice.” We feel passionately that all organisations should h”ave a go” at design thinking to better understand their user needs and develop those insights into better products, services and brands. Unless they have specific in-house expertise, most people should turn to a specialist design practitioner when it’s time for development.
To your second point, the design industry doesn’t do a great job dispelling the “dark arts” of design consultancy. I rarely get brochures from agencies that speak in a language that companies of any size, especially SMEs, can understand. Even fewer provide information on the economic benefit that their work has generated. Companies have a choice to invest in many things, why design?
The design word. And how. We often get lost in dark corridors trying to define design. It isn’t what it is, it’s what it does. It’s all about value! Creating value around consumers needs drives demand for products and services, which in turn, generates value for companies.