Michael Roller

This is Brilliance: An interview with strategist Neal Mabee

As a part of an upcoming project interviewing a broad range of designers, I had a particularly nice conversation with strategist Neal Mabee. Because I edited his interview for the project, I wanted to share it in full on the blog. Enjoy this uncut version!

Neal Mabee moved to New York after graduating from the University of Cincinnati’s DAAP program in 2003. For the past 4 years, Neal worked at Studio Red at the Rockwell Group doing design and strategy. More recently, he began contracting with an internal Johnson & Johnson design team. His clients include Kodak, Palm, Coca-Cola, P&G, J&J, and his true loves are mid-century furniture, sneakers, and Skyline chili.

How do you define of good design?

Measuring the success of “good design” is a challenge. We get paid to produce solutions that meet our clients’ business goals. If our work doesn’t do that then we won’t have any clients So in a very curt way I could say that good design needs to be measured by whether or not it (what’s being measured) is successful in meeting the business goals laid out for the project. Traditionally, design’s goodness is defined by very academic evaluation of proportion, poetry, function, wit etc. I would argue these are tactics, things that we believe will help us to compel consumers. We have to recognize that in an economic environment design cannot really be measured independently of related marketing and engineering efforts. All of these efforts merge to yield a solution that either compels the consumer or doesn’t. If we are unsuccessful in compelling the consumer the product fails; if we are successful, only then could you argue that the design was “good”. At that point, however, you’re really talking about the collective effort, not just the design. This begs the question of whether good design is even related to the beauty of the solution or whether good design has more to do with collaborating with our partners in a way that ensures compelling solutions (recognizing that sometimes those solutions arent perfectly elegant from an academic or pure design perspective).

In short, in our business, design is good when it sells…period. Anything else assumes that design is inherently and independently valuable detached from economics. I know that’s risky to say and a lot of people will disagree but i don’t know how you can say design is good if you basically designed it for yourself and the subscribers to ID magazine.

What is your favorite part of the design process?

My favorite part of the design process is identifying and mapping the intricate dependancies and tensions in a project. Design to me is like a puzzle – in a sense figuring out what you can’t do is directly connected to what you can do. The more things you can accomplish in a single move the better you are at solving the puzzle.

What challenges you most as a designer?

The most challenging part of my job is related to the part I enjoy the most. Most designers would recognize that “designing” stuff isn’t a linear process. To really produce a great solution someone (ideally everyone involved) is able to see the whole picture, all of the variables, at once, and be able to recognize and manage all of the tensions, dependancies, and compromises in real time. On top of that you kind of need to be able to do it IN YOUR HEAD. Diagrams and strategic maps are only tools to help you remember and communicate your thoughts, ultimately you have to manage this stuff with your gray matter. That is a lot to ask of a human, but this IS the trick.

Brian Wilson claims to be able to manage six simultaneous harmonies in his head and adjust relative to one another without writing down a note. This is brilliance. The design equivalent is understanding all of the variables and managing them in your head all at once in real time.

I believe true brilliance to be the ability to see all things at once, brilliance is clarity. This is the hardest part though. Figuring out ways to manage massive amounts of information and all of the potential scenarios at once. It has been said that Mozart could hear the whole song before he wrote it. Brian Wilson claims to be able to manage six simultaneous harmonies in his head and adjust relative to one another without writing down a note. This is brilliance. The design equivalent is understanding all of the variables (consumer behavior and reaction, engineering realities, business goals, operations and distribution limitations, the impact of new productts on the market place) and managing them in your head all at once in real time. I will personally probably not get there but I try every day.

In short, understanding the connections between all relavent variables and being able to propose a solution that will optimize those variables is the hardest, and most enjoyable, part of my job.

In the context of your job, how do you define success?

Success really is different than whether the design is good. For us to stay sane, success has to be measured on multiple levels. On one level you have to ask if your efforts were successful relative to what was asked of you by your client (or yourself). This can happen not just at the end, but throughout a project. Obviously you can measure market success but a lot of projects never hit the shelf. We have to be able to celebrate the wins along the path. It is here that you might be able to say that a product that doesn’t sell is “good” design.

What has been the most unexpected part of being a professional designer?

Finding out that I actually like the business, not just the designing. Also (and maybe it’s just New York), where the hell are all the old designers? I better find something else to do. Everyone is 20-30 something….it’s scary actually.

Thanks, Neal!

Tags: definitions, interviews, philosophy, strategy

Aloft

Last weekend, we visited Nashville to see the city, hear local music, eat famous pancakes, and see a Death Cab show. We stayed at the Aloft, a little sister to Starwood’s more well-known W Hotel chain. Aloft is meant to be a more affordable, accessible version of the W. It reminded me of the hotel equivalent of IKEA or Target: modern design at low prices.

We chose to stay at Aloft primarily they allow dogs in the rooms. This is a great example of providing services that consumers value, but don’t necessarily expect. I was impressed with the high level of quality and detail in the lobby, bar, and room. This was not a W, but it felt like one in disguise. We had a huge flatscreen with an A/V box that allowed us to play our portable devices through the TV. The bed was a comfortable king with enough room for the me, my wife, and our dog to sleep as “X’s.”

All in all, we realized that what sets Aloft apart is not their design or service approach, but their real estate strategy. It was about 10 miles away from the urban core but otherwise looked and felt like a modern, downtown hotel. Balancing location, service, and design, Aloft was able to deliver a great experience at only $99/night.

To keep up with Aloft, check out their blog.

Tags: interior design, strategy

Four Essential Members of a Great Design Team

Have you ever wondered why you can successfully collaborate with another designer in your office? Maybe you share similar ideas, but there’s also a good chance you’re nothing alike. At Kaleidoscope, some of the designers (including me) are organized and analytical. Others think freely and contextually. How can we coexist? My analytical thinking pushed me to break down and understand how these differences can be complementary. What I ultimately realized is that a successfully diverse design team requires four key members.

The Evangelist

A design team without a visionary leader is like a church without a preacher. The Evangelist focuses on design at the highest level, developing strategies and processes that push the limits of design and business as a whole. Contextual thinking helps him understand how design fits into a larger business plan. As a former Dreamer, he loves to push the boundaries and question assumptions of the products and categories he leads. The Evangelist won’t ever be an operations specialist, and may even lead activities that feel counterproductive to more analytical thinkers. Although possibly his greatest challenge, he will come through in the end and prove that his dreaming offers real business value. With a great Evangelist leading the charge, firms can be proactive, trendsetting, and highly valued for their ideas.

The Conductor

To complement the Evangelist, every design team needs a leader who directs the finishing touches on each project. The Conductor’s analytical mind helps her to ensure that no detail goes unconsidered. Like directing an orchestra, she brings together all the little details into harmony, making sure everything has been figured out and nothing taken for granted. She probably has the highest standards of any designer in the office and ensures that every project is top quality. Often the team doing the first 95% of the work is exhausted or checked out by the end, and the Conductor plays a key role in making the final push to finish the project right. In more corporate roles, she shepherds projects through to production and defends key design details that might otherwise be lost. The Conductor may wish she was still a designer, struggling to find the appropriate level of feedback or adding unnecessary work for her team. At her best, the Conductor is the key to creating consistently solid work that will have clients or consumers coming back for more.

The Dreamer

When analytical minds struggle with paradoxical design constraints, the Dreamer cuts through it all to offer a surprisingly fresh attitude. He avoids the technical boundaries of a project in favor of contextual experimentation. A great design team deploys Dreamers to brainstorms where blue sky thinking is necessary, and keeps them involved when the end product must push category boundaries or create brand new ones. The Dreamer becomes easily frustrated when not allowed to exercise fantasies, so don’t expect him to handle detail-oriented work or anything that is heavily constrained by technical requirements. The wild ideas he contributes won’t always become part of the final product, but the Dreamer is essential in setting the stage for innovation as well as offering an entertainment value to novelty-seeking design managers.

The Surgeon

Whether it comes down to aesthetic or ergonomic excellence, so many great pieces of design rely on details. A great design team relies on the Surgeon – an analytical thinker who cuts up and dissects design problems to find the best solutions. By definition, she breaks down a product into its components, considering the pieces of design and then reuniting them into a cohesive whole. The Surgeon isn’t always the best decision maker, because she can end up thinking in circles or frustrated by a project’s lack of clarity. When it comes to making sense of complex design problems, a Surgeon is your best bet to make sure nothing falls through the cracks.

The Jack of All Trades (Master of None?)

Every team has designers with diverse skill sets, but the Jack of All Trades might be the most talented person in your office because he can truly do everything. He leads a range of projects, solves tricky problems, and dreams up big ideas. Recent graduates make great “Junior Jacks,” because they can contribute on a variety of levels while they gain experience and become more aware of their greatest strengths. Don’t confuse a real Jack with someone whose strengths are not prevalent or ambiguous. In reality, the rare Jack of All Trades might not be essential to have, but will feel essential to any team that has one.

I hope this helps you make better sense of how you and the people around you fit into a design organization. How well do the designers you know fit into these buckets? How could this concept be stronger? In coming posts, I’ll look at how different combinations of these five members help execute the different strategies that design businesses use.

Tags: business, strategy, teams

Thoughts on Auto Design Strategy, Interview with Drew Smith, Part 2

Tags: interviews, strategic aesthetics, strategy, transportation

Thoughts on Auto Design Strategy, Interview with Drew Smith, Part 1

Drew Smith is an automotive design strategist and journalist. He offers a refreshing take on car design with his blog DownsideUpDesign. Strategic Aesthetics interviewed Drew to get a better understanding of the transportation design from a strategic point of view.

Please tell our readers a little bit about yourself. How did you become a transportation design strategist?

The second is Mazda, a company which I covered recently on DownsideUpDesign. The caveat here is that I’m referring to their Nagare series of concept cars, which as of today, have still not been transferred into production. Mazda set out to achieve a truly unique Japanese sense of premium with these concepts and they achieved it, without question. The real difficulty has arisen when they have tried to translate key design elements into production vehicles and it suggests that either it’s too expensive to do properly or they aren’t trying hard enough! The grille of the new Mazda 3 MPS, for example, is meant to be a direct translation from the Nagare cars into the production realm. Sadly, it just ends up giving the car a rictus grin. No manufacturer in recent memory has spent so much money or, more importantly, design effort on creating such a beautiful series of cars based on a superbly strong design theme. My fear is, however, that if they can’t get really tangible examples into production soon, the effort will have been wasted.

As far as real design strategy is concerned, which, when it com es to the automotive industry is about looking at ways to solve both issues of long-term sustainability and urban mobility, nobody has really stepped up to the plate with a convincing, visible commitment. Toyota has been playing at the edges for a few years now with their iUnit/iSwing/Winglet concepts and BMW has outlined Project-i which will provide “premium” urban mobility solutions starting in 2015. From where I sit it’s still not enough. Toyota is aping the questionable Segway model, BMW is focusing on too small a customer group and nobody is taking a really hard look at the whole-of-life impact of building and selling new cars.

Tags: interviews, strategic aesthetics, strategy, transportation

Mazda Kiyora brings concepts closer to production

If you haven’t been following Mazda design recently, they’ve been doing the most interesting and unique concept cars over the past few years. They’re getting close to some production vehicles that will reflect this approach with vehicles like the Kiyora. DownsideUpDesign provides great insight into Mazda’s design strategy:

Take a look at the section through the door…and it shows an ease of form that would have the guy that devised the old BMW Z4s front quarter panel laughing in your face. Thoroughly pressable and undeniably sexy.

What bodes well for Mazda is that the Kiyora is an alternative take on what a premium urban vehicle can be. Audi has the thoroughly orthodox A1, BMW the practical-looking (but highly impractical) Mini while Mercedes pursues the gussied-up MPV look in the form of the A Class.

Check out the whole article here. Mazda Kiyora images © Andrew Philip Artois Smith 2009.

Tags: strategic aesthetics, strategy, transportation

Three Ways Saab Can Be Like Apple

Autocar recently reported that Saab will try to become the ‘Apple of car brands’ after they become independent from General Motors. I think this is a great idea, for two reasons. First, I don’t see a clear leader in terms of a holistic differentiation strategy in the auto industry. Sure, there are plenty of high quality products, but no brands truly differentiate across every touchpoint. Second, Saab has always had that je ne sais quoi that I think it will take to get there. But let’s be honest, this is an extremely lofty goal that won’t be achieved without some solid strategic thinking. Because I’m such a big fan of Saab, I offer up this advice:

#1 Brands like Apple need people like Steve Jobs

Solid brands require consistent, high quality interactions from top to bottom. The best brand leaves no room for error and then delivers on it. Execution of every Saab touchpoint will require a visionary who can stare in the face of naysayers (both internally and externally) and demand only the best from his team. Jobs’ ability to do these things is infamously captured, and Saab will need a leader who can provide this direction.

#2 Saab will need more than great products

It’s easy for designers to get caught up in Apple’s ability to create great products. We can then make the inaccurate correlation between simple, easy to use products and strong love for a brand. Design is only one of Apple’s strengths. Besides great products, Apple has a great business strategy, great marketing, and great human resource management to name a few other strengths. Without the handcuff of GM’s platforms, Saab can probably make some great products, but they’ll need to do much more to become a one of a kind brand.

#3 Independent thinking also needs to be relevant thinking

Don’t confuse Apple’s stream of recent innovations for novel ideas wrapped in cool styling. Each of Apple’s recent successes was carefully conceived to grow the brand in a specific direction that furthers their vertical integration. The iPod, iTunes, and iPhone weren’t just cool new products, they offered real benefits that users didn’t see coming but immediately understood. Especially in our current economy, Saab will need to aim their independent energy at the future needs of their audience.

Tags: saab, strategic aesthetics, strategy, transportation

Define Strategic

I recently left a comment over at Design Sojourn that forced me to better consider the definition of “strategic.” I typically associate something strategic with something that has long term value, but the truth is it doesn’t have to. After considering this, I realized that there’s no point in creating my own definition when Michael Porter has done such an excellent job. Here is his definition:

Strategy is choosing to perform activities differently than rivals.

As Finn McKenty summarizes, Porter highlights three specific elements of strategy. First, strategy is about purposely choosing to do things differently than your competition. Second, strategy is about actions, not just statements. Finally, strategy should be unique. Finn puts it best: That means that operational excellence is not strategy unless you implement it in a way that is better than all rivals (Wal-Mart). If you want to read more about Porter, check out his work at the Harvard Business Review.

So for design to be strategic, businesses need to use it in thoughtful, actionable, and unique ways to beat their competition. With this definition in mind, what businesses best use design strategically? I’ll give you Apple, now name another one!

Tags: definitions, strategy