Whenever I write about design on this blog, it is specifically about what users get to experience. You can call that user experience design or user-centered design. With that in mind, let’s proceed.

Say you were taking a stroll in the forest when, suddenly, you injure your leg, and it has become difficult to walk. By sheer cosmic coincidence, you notice a thick branch on the ground strong enough to serve as a crutch. After trying it out as a crutch, you notice it is impractical to hold onto. After doing a bit of crafting with a pocket knife, it became easier to use, allowing you to hobble your way back home.

I’d say that’s about it. The act of crafting that branch into a crutch was design. Personally, I don’t find the definition of design to be particularly interesting. Good design on the other hand.

Good design serves well.

What does it mean to serve well? It is understood that design fulfills a purpose. If it does that well, then is that good design?

There can be problems with the design that go beyond simply not achieving its purpose. Unexpected, negative consequences may result.

Problematic Design

When is a design problematic? Suppose you were designing a videogame. At the very least, the videogame should be engaging. During the development, it’s possible the game fails to be engaging. Is that problematic? Well, it doesn’t filfull its purpose, and therefore, it’s not good design. But it’s possible for it to achieve its purpose, and also not be good design.

Suppose the videogame is finished and the end product is as engaging as you had hoped. The game sold very well. They’re even talking about it on the news. But wait. These news reports are about… deeply frustrated players throwing their controllers at the screen with such velocity that it destroys their television. Ah, well, sometimes, videogames can be a bit frustrating! Unfortunately, the reason why this became a news report, is that it seems to be happening an awful lot with this particular videogame. Not before long, it is known as that game, the game that causes so many people to obliterate their property in fits of rage and frustration.

Is this problematic? It’s starting to sound like it. Does that mean you cannot consider this videogame to be good design, despite filfulling its purpose? At which point, exactly, do you decide that the design is problematic? These are difficult questions to answer.

Design serves. Good design serves well.

Are the people in the above example served well? They dealt with frustration. Other designs could lead to more severe problems, such as environmental degradation. If a design’s purpose is achieved well, it serves well. But if that same design is problematic, there is a disservice. If that disservice is large enough, the positive aspects will be negated. If so, you will have served, but not served well.

The User

Why is good design so hard to achieve? In no small part, it is because user-centered design is meant to accommodate human beings, and human beings are complicated creatures.

I’ve wondered: Would designing for a simpler creature make things easier? Maybe. But what is a simpler creature? Even creatures that you could think of as simple, like ants, demonstrate complex behavior. They, like us, underwent evolutionary processes over a vast period of time. If that’s what’s responsible for the complexity, then good design for any living thing at all is bound to be a difficult endeavor.