Good or Bad Design Bank: Intro
What is good and bad design?
The answer might seem straightforward, but many designers disagree over it.
Hence, I’m starting a Good or Bad Design article series to hone my design thinking and design sense. It will be interesting to look back on these in the future and review if I still stand by my decisions.
This Design Bank is curated based on my interests — and its most probably a product, service, or web I am find fascinating, affects the lives of many people, or would like to design for.
First this article will attempt to show how good design is subjective.
A general definition of good design will be a combination of any of these:
- Design that fulfils its purpose efficiently
- Design that is playful and gives an emotional aesthetic
- Design that is ethically and environmentally responsible
- Design that is a *recent* breakthrough of current standards which provides an added utility
Just to illustrate how difficult pinpointing good design can be, here’s a basic water bottle.
It is meant to carry water from one location to another. It fulfils its purpose well, but is that enough to call it a good design?
I’ll say yes in the most basic sense of design, but somehow it is not quite satisfying.
Next, a water bottle in the shape of R2D2. Its definitely playful and fun, as well as fulfils its basic function of carrying water, but can we call it good design?
Or silly bottles in the shape of basketballs, funny faces, and bombs…
I’ll say that there is design, but only in the most superficial sense. A purely aesthetic design adds nothing to an existing efficient design, simply make it more interesting to look at.
Additionally, there is a tradeoff in efficiency in order to add in the aesthetic — lesser water is stored for the basketball water bottle, and unnecessary weight is put on for the R2D2 and poison bomb bottles.
The designs are cool, amusing, fun, but not necessarily good. Personally, I feel that they are bad designs for having to trade off important functionalities of the original water bottle.
Third, the ethical and environmental component.
These bottles are made of glass with a plastic case around it, reusable, free of toxins and BPA, and recyclable.
Will that be an example of good design? It fulfils its basic function, and not only is it designed with pretty colors, it is also ethical.
Logically, I would say that these water bottles are well designed. However,I’ll still instinctively say no, because I personally don’t like the design, and ethical design is not a priority to me.
You can already see how personal bias is starting to creep into an analysis of good or bad design.
Fourth, additional utility. This is my favourite category of good design.
Here are some water bottles with designs that have an additional utility to its basic function.
First, a collapsible bag design which allows users to minimise space the bottle takes up, then two types of bottles which design allows you to infuse fruit flavours, a bottle with a hidden compartment for you to store keys and money, and finally a bottle with a carbon filter that allows you to purify your water.
I think they are all examples of good design. However, if I were to rate them, I will have to rate them according to my needs.
In my case, I love fruit infused waters, so the strawberry infuser will be my top choice for good design.
However, a sporty person will value the hidden compartment for keys and money much more, while a person who lives in a place with unsanitary water will feel that the carbon filter design is the best.
Conclusion
I feel what good design boils down to, is whether this design is able to address the most pressing needs of its target market in a engaging and beautiful way.
To illustrate — these are three great designs that help to filter water:
The 321 water bottle, the drinkable book, and the life sack.
The 321 water bottle allows easy filtering — fill the bottle, and plunge the centerpiece to filter the water, and it is done!
The drinkable book goes one step further — each page of the book is a piece of filter, with instructions and water safety information. The book case will then be used to contain and filter water.
Lastly, the Life Sack allows large scale filtering, while doubling as a sack for grains and staples once the water is used up, and can also be carried as a backpack.
In terms of aesthetic, the first two will win all votes for being gorgeously designed.
However, the Life Sack ranks first in my good design list, for addressing the vital needs of the community that most needs it. The other two are not able to quickly filter enough water for a family in need, which is an issue I determine as most vital to life in poverty stricken areas with contaminated water sources.
It is ethical design that serves its purpose in the most efficient way — and has added functionalities that address other crucial needs as well.
In conclusion, it seems that in order to determine what is good or bad design, you’ll have to first determine the target audience, and its most vital needs, to be able to pinpoint the top contender for the good design award.
What do you think? Let me know in the comments below!
