to give form!

Design is a topic on everyone’s mind and will remain so in the coming years. According to the dictionary, the word originally comes from the Latin verb designare, meaning “to mark out, point out, devise, choose, designate, or appoint”. Additionally, it has roots in signare, meaning “to mark,” from signum, meaning “identifying, marking, or sign.” French adopted both these senses from Italian in different forms and passed them to English, which uses the term in all senses. It has been used since the 1540s to mean “to plan or outline, form a scheme,” and since 1703 to mean “to contrive for a purpose.” The transitive sense of “draw the outline or figure of,” especially for a proposed work, appears from the 1630s, while the meaning “plan and execute, fashion with artistic skill” dates from the 1660s. The intransitive sense of “do original work in a graphic or plastic art” goes back to 1854. Initially, design was all about devising, and the artistic aspect of signing or drawing was incorporated later on. 

I have tried several times to clarify the term ‘design’ myself, but I always encounter new and different interpretations and definitions. The synonyms for design are also numerous and include, besides draft and creation, terms such as shaping, styling, articulation, form-giving, conception, sketching, blueprint, construction, decoration, modeling, plan, layout, objective, purpose, definition, vision, and format. This list could continue. Is design so broad that it covers all these aspects? Or just some more, others less? Or only some and not others? Which terms clearly belong to design?

When asking professionally trained designers, they usually choose draft or concept first, then vision, plan, objective, and form-giving. They tend to mention sketching, shaping, or styling less often, even though these terms most closely correspond to the core of their professional skillset.

If you ask managers or engineers, they will choose form-giving first, then shaping, styling, decoration, sketching, and drafting. The fact that designers also conceptualize is secondary, as many other professionals do this as well. Creating concepts or devising actions is not mutually exclusive to designers.

The interpretation problem is clear: Designers are professionals who participate in design activities, which include other professionals as well. 

So, if we place the terms “concept” and “form-giving” alongside a development process that aims to create an outcome in a specific (strategic) way, it becomes clear that both are integral to design. Design includes everything from conception and drafting to shaping, definition, and styling. The “designers” take on various tasks in this process, but not all of them. They focus mainly on the form-giving part. As soon as the product becomes more complex—such as manufacturing a smartphone instead of a chair—the design aspects also become more complex. Still, they remain consistent in terms of technology and process. A master craftsman can handle all aspects of design when building a kitchen table for their client. However, in companies, designers are not solely responsible for design. The entire industrial process is too diverse and complex, covering not only design, creation, and manufacturing but also sales, communication, service, and advertising. 

For this reason, companies competing for customers must not only understand the concept (what the customer needs) but also the form (what the customer prefers and how they choose you among many providers). Concept and form come together to win over the customer; together, they are called design. Design is a process that involves clarifying relevant aspects in order to create effective outcomes. Within companies, those who design what the customer needs are typically a team of engineers, marketers, salespeople, and designers together—each with their own skills and responsibilities. When “designers” claim responsibility for this entire design process, it can be very ambitious and, with all due respect, quite megalomaniacal. So, it’s important to return to the core idea and use design for what it genuinely is: a process that leads to the customer or the result of a process that creates value for customers. But it is not simply a description for a specialist who designs in isolation—unless they are a master craftsman producing and selling their own work.

I support giving designers more recognition as professionals and emphasizing their essential role. Designers should actively participate in the design process and take on their often-critical task: shaping outcomes properly! They shouldn’t fear being seen as mere decorative accessories because their contribution is essential in inspiring customers and users. A chair or smartphone can be conceptualized quickly, and its suitability for users’ needs can be tested empirically if the right questions are asked. However, formal design, which turns a set of benefits into something with emotion, culture, and character, requires a professional approach. Customers quickly notice when a company tries to attract them with superficial aesthetics and culture. Changing a logo can break a company. If the design doesn’t match the brand’s personality, if there are inconsistencies across products, and if employees act in ways that contradict the company’s values, customers will turn away. Not because the product isn’t durable or the offer isn’t suitable, but because it simply doesn’t resonate with them.

Companies must provide services that genuinely meet people’s needs. The qualities of products and services and their perceived value have always been both a philosophical and psychological phenomenon that can also be measured in tangible and economic terms. Over 2,000 years ago, Vitruvius explained that things must not only function reliably but also be useful and attractive. The three key requirements for architecture (and all other creations by “architects”) – firmitas (stability), utilitas (usefulness), and venustas (beauty) – must all be satisfied equally and in harmony. Even when machines replaced human work and enabled new functions, the triad of function, relevance, and aesthetics persisted. This triad, like the legs of a stool, forms the stable foundation of a productive and efficient organization. If one leg is uneven, the entire structure becomes unstable and cannot serve its purpose.

So, dear designers, there you have it: you are a supporting pillar of companies. Without your expertise, there is no “Venustas,” no balance, no culture, and no emotion. So instead of watering down or downplaying your contribution (design is more than just beautiful!), you could devote yourselves to beauty and help companies regain their balance. Your customers will thank you for it, and so will the companies!