Image © Jose & MidJourney
I graduated in Lisbon with an Industrial Design BA in 1989. I went to check the syllabus, we were taught about Theory of Color, Technical Drafting (with Rotring pens clogging all the time), Descriptive Geometry, Image Reading and Analysis, Typography, Psychology, experimental Drawing (with the great Espiga Pinto), Art History, Design History, Environmental Design, Material Technology, Semiotics (learning about Klaus Kripendorf), Anatomy, Project methodology, Project Execution, Graphic technologies, Furniture History, Marketing, Photography and Video. No human centric research, no Empathy training.
I then did an MA in London 1993, went to check their syllabus. Because their diploma does not spell it out, all I have is ChatGPT telling me “The course is described as continually re-appraising the relevance of industrial design by engaging with a broad range of problems and contexts, emphasizing the need for critical and socially responsive approaches. This includes leveraging insights from various disciplines such as behavioral science, environmental studies, and more, to inform and transform design practices towards better societal outcomes.” Great. But no mention of human centric research, nor empathy training.
I understand, this was a long time ago, and things might have changed. We did learn that design was human centric, from human factors to semiotics, it did revolve around human beings. We were already aware of the impact of consumerism in the environment, somewhere in the WWW there might be a TEDx presentation I did in the early 90’s talking about the washed upon the shore toothbrushes that led industrial designers to start thinking we were part of the problem and the solution. But I really learned about human centric research while working with either designers that went down that rabbit hole from start, or from human centric research professionals, mainly commercial ethnographers, and anthropologists (in 2018 I went to the “WWNA Why the World Needs Anthropologists” conference with a keynote titled “For Human Centric Design: Work with Human Centric Specialists!”). But, to be fair, the best qualitative researchers I have worked with were not exactly empathetic, they compared their process to being a detective, or a journalist, and both these professions don’t pop up in my head as the epitome of empathetic professions, not when you compare to social workers or care givers.
But unless someone is prepared to say designers are born empathetic, I assume empathy is a quality that some have, and some have less (I hear only if you have specific brain damage you will be 100% unable to be empathetic). I was professionally raised in a consultancy context, you go in and you go out, you learn as much as it is necessary to be able to have a credible opinion, you visualize and communicate, and you jump onto another assignment. No mechanisms nor time to really empathize, you get to engage, understand, make sense, sometimes even live it for a while, but I am not sure we get to empathize. Later in large corporations, you understand the roles and responsibilities, the trade-offs, the incentives, you identify those that have a love for art & design and you connect with them (your tribe), you align with their KPI’s and you work with them so they can succeed. But I am not sure this would be called empathy, feels more like a hybrid of the art of nudging with an instinct of survival.
This past week I was happy to be a part of the event Prof. Benjamin Little organized at MassART, aligned with the Boston Design week, under the banner of “Design + Nature”. I did a short keynote on Light and Lighting that went pretty well (I experimented…), but I was in the room just before my keynote when the very smart Karyn Georgillies Becker did a keynote on “Mission Vs. Money: Giving Your Best Design a Fighting Chance”. Karyn asked two main questions (I am not paraphrasing):” Why do Businesses Act the Way They do”, and “What can Designers Do To Make Business Do What They Want Them To Do”. When explaining why businesses operate the way they do, especially CEO’s of large traded companies, she stated that designers were often more focused on empathizing with users and other stakeholders than with their internal business partners and top leadership. Then she reminded us that , among other ways to explain the phenomena, these folks have a “fiduciary responsibility to serve first and foremost the interest of the shareholders”, and by fiduciary it means they could end up in jail, instead they get booted out by the Board of Directors, faster and cheaper. This was a great reminder of why businesses and top leadership team operate the way they do.
What I found awkward was the use of the term “empathy” in this context, but I guess this exposes the misuse of the term in general. I can understand this context, I can even understand that many CEO’s might want to do things, or act in certain ways, that go against their fiduciary responsibilities, so they don’t. But I cannot empathize with them, I cannot even “try to be in their shoes”, just like I cannot be in the shoes of their customers and other stakeholders. What I can do, and what I believe many designers do, is they take sides, they understand that someone must stand with users in getting better solutions, better services, better value for their money, better understanding of their needs. They take the side of the unseen, the under served, the extreme users. They take the side of future generations by taking the side of life in this planet. And while you do need to understand the entire organization, how it operates, how it makes money, why do people decide the way they do, if there is any sort of empathy, it needs to be aimed at those that are many times treated like a number, those that need to use these products and services to get their jobs done, those that silently comply or abandon companies without complaining, or complain and risk being booted because they are seen as trouble makers. And you know what, when this is well done, it is good design, and it is good business.
Don’t get me wrong, I loved Karyn’s presentation, and I think every designer should see it and reflect. Like I did.