3 ms·

On the flip side, you could see a person selling their labour as having some right/stake in doing something which interests them. These outcomes are then compr

On the flip side, you could see a person selling their labour as having some right/stake in doing something which interests them. These outcomes are then compromises which give something to the producer, as well as to the customer.

atoav 8y ago
I completely agree. This is exactly why I said, if this happens you didn’t choose the right person for the job. The same person who butchers your UI might be very good for creating print designs that above all need to sell the company CI. For critical redesigns you need a designer who is mostly about analyzing and rethinking the user experience behind it. Better even, split it in two: one entity should only do the analytical part and guide the direction, the other should implement it with a little bit of wiggle room. Make sure there is some overlap between the two
- QualityReboot 8y ago
  I think I agree with you, but how are you supposed to assess designers to choose the right person? The main difference I've found between bad/good designers is flexibility and willingness to ask for help. There's typically a lot of organizational knowledge about where pain points are. If a designer addresses those, then people are generally happy. Maybe splitting the job is a good idea, but it seems like you shouldn't need a split if the designer is listening to the whole team. Also, sometimes the designer is fine, but they've been explicitly told by management what to do, so no designer would have been able to fill the position and do a good job. Even on my failed projects, I really couldn't tell you if it was the management or the designer that caused the resulting design issues.
- rexpop 8y ago
  > you didn’t choose the right person for the job This is, however, the state of the entire economy, when organic individuals are cribbed into roles defined by firms with abstract goals. A good counterexample might be the Montessori system.

atoav 8y ago

I completely agree. This is exactly why I said, if this happens you didn’t choose the right person for the job. The same person who butchers your UI might be very good for creating print designs that above all need to sell the company CI. For critical redesigns you need a designer who is mostly about analyzing and rethinking the user experience behind it. Better even, split it in two: one entity should only do the analytical part and guide the direction, the other should implement it with a little bit of wiggle room. Make sure there is some overlap between the two

QualityReboot 8y ago
I think I agree with you, but how are you supposed to assess designers to choose the right person? The main difference I've found between bad/good designers is flexibility and willingness to ask for help. There's typically a lot of organizational knowledge about where pain points are. If a designer addresses those, then people are generally happy. Maybe splitting the job is a good idea, but it seems like you shouldn't need a split if the designer is listening to the whole team. Also, sometimes the designer is fine, but they've been explicitly told by management what to do, so no designer would have been able to fill the position and do a good job. Even on my failed projects, I really couldn't tell you if it was the management or the designer that caused the resulting design issues.
rexpop 8y ago
> you didn’t choose the right person for the job This is, however, the state of the entire economy, when organic individuals are cribbed into roles defined by firms with abstract goals. A good counterexample might be the Montessori system.