Why, the core.
Exploring how design solutions, from personal rides to public transit, are shaped by human goals and contexts, emphasizing that the success of each solution hinges on its ability to fulfil.
It is 8 AM. There is a rush in the city. Almost everyone left their houses to go somewhere: work, school, both, etc. The only thing that relates all of them together is the type of action they took — move. The rest of the attributes of contexts are as individual as people are. Some use public transit, others take personal rides while the rest choose their own vehicles. Imagine you are one of them, going to work. What would you choose in that case? It depends, right? It should and always.
The ways we choose to achieve our goals can vary. The changing weather, time of the day, or even personal choices define how we do things. But the only element that remains exactly the same is the goal itself. In every case, we still want to get to work. It is also how we define our experiences and interactions on a daily basis — asking how. Since everything is designed, it is also the first question asked when we want to understand the designed solution.
Design is, in most cases, how the solution works. Suppose that, you have to be at work and lead your meeting. You pick a personal ride. That is because it is how the taxi is designed to work — move you somewhere, fast, comfortable, and maybe a little expensive. It is how we can define a taxi in terms of its design. But this definition still needs more clarification as there is no concrete object. Taxi is a fast, comfortable, and expensive option for transportation. It is better now. It is an alternative way of moving with some built mechanical system. An alternative you may consider when specific contextual actions occur.
Now, beyond how we defined what the built solution is. It can be anything: a fast, comfortable, and expensive alternative for moving to the city; an easy way of paying bills; or a fun option to mix the cake mix. Although there can be instances, we can still formulate the pattern for this definition.
A fast, comfortable, and expensive (adjective) — This part explains how the solution is designed for specific contexts such as fast, secure, ultimate, etc.
An alternative (noun) — This part defines the designed solution in terms of objects such as way, alternative, cloud structure, etc.
To move (verb) — This part defines the end goal that the solution is designed to achieve such as, moving to the city, learning a new language, not burning your cake, etc.
By analyzing this pattern we can say that almost all design solutions are different approaches to similar goals. Each design can solve the same problem with a different approach to an adjective or noun parts of the pattern. The only constant part is the third one — the verb. This part is about the actions the people can take or the goals they can achieve by using the suggested solutions. It is also the function of the designed solution. Function — what it does at the end. What defines the function of the solution? Why do designers choose specific actions or goals and build solutions for people to achieve them? Let’s see what we did earlier.
We picked a personal ride based on our context. Personal rides are there for a long time now as a fast, comfortable, and expensive way of transportation. So, people use them for moving since they become an option. Also, we still use public transit. It is a much more cheap, slow, and less comfortable option. But, they are here even for a longer time than other options. So, each option is still being used for the same goals in different contexts. The main element of the design is its usefulness. The designed solution exists and performs while it is being used. Considering these nuances, we can say the way and how the solutions are designed are not the first definitions when evaluating solutions’ success. As both solutions perform well and are being used there must be other causes for the success and failure.
The part of the pattern that defines the usage of the solution is the third, last, verb one. Every solution is designed to make someone do something. Even if we design the easiest and most usable way of making someone able to achieve their goals, unless they want to, it is waste of time and effort. The function of the design is defined by the ability it brings to people. Also, the pattern we have defines the verb section as the why. The why of the design defines its function. All the alternative transportation options are made to enable people to move. They will work only if people want to move. Once there is desire and willingness for the action, people then search for ways — solutions to make it happen. This is why both alternatives of moving in the city are successful. Because people have to and want to move.
By saying so, we can define design as a step between people’s needs and their success states built by available elements of the system. Once people’s needs are defined the solutions can be designed to move them to the success state defined by their motivations, understanding of success, and the barriers between the two states. On the other side, the secondary element of the solution space is the available tools. Systems consist of elements that are available both for designers and people. The designer’s role is to build something that solves the defined problems within the system using its elements that are accessible and usable for the people. By considering the why’s of the problem space and available elements of the solution system we can design solutions that have an impact. So, the core of the impactful design is the need for it.