
Reframing the debate: It’s “Pretty plus Functional for a Purpose.”
It seems to be the subtext within the digital design community that “pretty” designs don’t solve problems. That speculative design cheapens the value of design. That form always follows function.
I’ll see this argument, and raise it: A design will only be as strong as its purpose is clearly defined.
Perhaps designers on Dribbble are not trying to solve for a known business problem, but they are solving for a felt need as a user. The designer on Dribbble may be expanding their portfolio, but can they explain the purpose for every headline, button, and text block (they should)? Their answers don’t have to be the actual problems, but they are likely to spark a new idea that could drive an innovation (or at least investigation). We must always question the convention.
There is no such thing as purposeless design. Purposeless design is another word for randomness.
Aesthetic engages humans at the seat of emotion and communicated at a subconscious level.
It is more than “pretty” (although I believe this is the best word that non-design practitioners have to describe the deeper concept of aesthetic). Aesthetic affects the designer’s use of space to help shape how a person reacts to the functionality. People will react, but don’t we want the strongest reaction to the most people?
Speculative design with the purpose of exploration demonstrates what’s possible.
It would be great if product owners could have perfect design vision of the future. Yet, I see it time and time again where seeing something is what communicates the idea. Now, do these ideas have legs? How do people respond to them? Better? Worse? Let’s find out.
Form and function follows purpose.
You can start with form, or you can start with function, but you must always start with purpose and end with both. Just like humans are both rational and emotional, we are creating a whole product where both “pretty” and function must come together in their strongest form possible.

