A 3-Ingredient Recipe for Good Design
Making With Pertinence, Proficiency, and Personality

For a few years now, as I’ve been plunging into a more dedicated study of graphic design, I’ve been itching to distill its principles into system diagrams. (I suspect that my deep-seated drive to create descriptive models in general is one of the lingering side effects of a chemical engineering education… but more on that another time.)
One concept that’s proven promising is this: a quick, three-ingredient recipe for qualifying good design work. I use it to interrogate my own process and design production. It is, to my knowledge, simple but exhaustive, and as far as I can tell, thoughtful consideration of all these qualities is a common thread in design that I admire. And it fits a familiar, convenient, easily-digested Venn diagram.
My hope in modeling this is to provide an easy tool for intentional reflection in the design process. Asking yourself if your design meets all three basic criteria will encourage you to celebrate its strengths, while helping to clarify what improvements you should make.
Without further ado:

It’s difficult to say if there’s a defining, core element among these three. (I’m open to thoughts on this!) This model pretty much assumes they’re all equally necessary. Any one of them, though, can be the initial focal point of a new concept or creation.
Let’s get down to what all of these mean in a design context. In no particular order:
Pertinence
Does the design solve the relevant problem for which it was intended, or otherwise fulfill its initial purpose as defined in the creative brief?
Pertinence communicates mission, ensures longevity, and solidifies connotations. This ingredient answers “why?” — the question we ask to comprehend the meaning or intention behind a particular decision.
Without this ingredient, a design will be confusing, misleading, or even pointless. It may be technically excellent and uniquely creative, but without being pertinent to its purpose, a design fails.
TL;DR: does it do what it’s supposed to do?
Personality
Does the design have a unique visual or structural characteristic that sets it apart due to its marked creativity or novelty?
Personality attracts attention, invites engagement, and evokes a visceral emotional response. This ingredient answers “who?” — the question we ask to identify a singular entity according to recognizable, distinctive features, including emotional and physical identifiers.
Without this ingredient, a design will be boring, generic, and/or lifeless. Even if viewers comprehend the purpose and the design is well-executed, the lack of personality hampers its ultimate effectiveness and memorability.
TL;DR: does it stand out in a unique way?
Proficiency
Does the design demonstrate a mastery of objective skill that inspires confidence and ensures workability?
Proficiency expedites the creative process, confirms a measure of authority, and assures quality for would-be beneficiaries/clients. This ingredient answers “how?”—the question we ask to understand methods of production, or the way a thing came to be, frequently to determine quality and confidence.
Without this ingredient, a design will come across as amateurish at best, and disastrously ineffectual at worst. A design can communicate its intended purpose, and even take a novel and creative approach, yet be rendered ineffective if it fails to adhere to proper technical specifications, or even basic industry grades of excellence.
TL;DR: does it show an understanding of tools and standards?
Okay, so how does this help?
To reiterate, my hope is this diagram enables you to (1) identify areas of strength and (2) more precisely address areas of weakness.
On a personal level, for instance, your technical skills may be par excellence, but you may be hampered by creative block; rather than assume that you need to take more skill-level classes, the answer may be to engage in more imaginative, brain-expanding exercises.
Or consider a smaller, less systemic use: on a project level, that logo you’re working on might be hitting all the right technical and creative notes, but there’s client dissatisfaction that seems confusing until you realize it’s not pertinent enough to the actual brief. This model can assure you that it’s not due to a failure to convey personality or exhibit proficiency, but, rather, that there’s work to be done in capturing the purpose.
I want to be clear: the goal of this model is not Total Perfection™, or to inspire obsession over potential inadequacies. No design is going to perfectly encapsulate all three things, and that’s totally okay — even necessary! I believe it’s the pursuit of ideals that aids practical excellence, that minimizes blind spots and encourages growth.
I’ve avoided suggesting any subjective practices here; even though I believe there are certain universal principles of design, I want to acknowledge as well the incredible breadth of styles, philosophies, etc. that rightly exist for such a creative field. Hopefully, the themes I’ve used — pertinence, personality, and proficiency — can be understood and accepted as basic necessities open to a wide range of implementations.
I hope this tool is of some small help to anyone who, like me, is always interested in working on their understanding of design. Thanks for reading — now go forth and make!
