Success is measured by the original aim. This is exactly what the article is talking about, designers making something while forgetting the original aim, focusi

Success is measured by the original aim. This is exactly what the article is talking about, designers making something while forgetting the original aim, focusing on the wrong thing. If I make something with the intention to sell it and try to sell it with a huge marketing budget and it doesn't sell, it's a failure. These things have seemingly got no penetration. They didn't even hit a niche. How is that anything other than complete failure? You seem to be redefining the meaning of success to be how pretty it is which is precisely the problem the author is tackling: In order to avoid losing its place atop organizations, design must deliver results...A “great” design which produces bad outcomes —low engagement, little utility, few downloads, indifference on the part of the target market— should be regarded as a failure.