The entrepreneur who picks a logo off the shelf to use, solely because it appeals to himself or herself, is more likely to fail in business than the entrepreneur that engages in a full design process. This isn't just because self-reflection can sometimes be a smokey mirror. A full design process can be defined many ways, but for this post, lets say it is is one with research, symmetrical communication between the organization and its stakeholders, and sound design thinking with evaluation. Designers know the value of the design - but how can this value be articulated and understood by those outside of the industry?  How do you define the value of design?

Business is based upon a trade of value - or an exchange.  The fundamental concept behind it is that we, as a society, are better off if one specializes individually and then provides the expertise of specialization to others in exchange for money or barter. This relationship is built on trust, and - I imagine, in the old days, much of trust was based on and delivered by face to face meetings in a market or private store of some sort.  Without that trust, you could not be certain that you would get what you paid for; the exchange may not have value in that case. We will be having a guest post from Matthew Politano (Oculus Design + Marketing) on the subject of design and trust which will elaborate much more on this subject.

Business has grown far beyond the original model of exchange into a global system of giving and receiving between people that may never meet or even speak.  A gap has grown between those who make or provide, and those who consume or participate.

In this gap, intention, character, relevance, value, and relationships themselves become elusive.  How do consumers connect and level with the merchants that they need to?  Who - or more accurately - what is speaking to consumers in an age where so much business is done, literally, in seconds across the entire world?  The subject of design, amongst other business practices, speaks volumes as to how organizations establish themselves, connect with their intended audience, and maintain a relationship.  Indeed, design has elevated to the limelight of worldwide attention by becoming the hands and face of the modern business.  In this sense, it appears to be a pretty remarkable noun.  But what else is there to it - why can't an entrepreneur buy a logo off the shelf and expect to have consistent and reliable success with it?

Is design technology doing what we need it to do?  New products are everywhere, but is technology helping with quality products or obfuscating design's purpose with quantity of products?  Are those responsible for rendering our designs doing so in a timely way?  Finally, is infrastructure for cloud computing ready for what designers will need it to do?

When I started designing, technology was looking for ways to catch up to design.  Programs were popping up for illustration, photo manipulation, colour, pantone integration, tablets, etc.  After a while, the software and hardware caught up, and (not for the first time) changed everything about the way we produced design work.  Some more time goes by, the technology passed us, and the world of design moved far beyond typography, grids, shapes and the colour wheel to a lot of really technical, software and server oriented advancements.  Fine, learn some code.  Wait a year or two, and then no longer was simply knowing HTML enough to make websites, you had to evolve again with technology.  As a designer, it was a question of not if I could learn a new programming language or program, but whether the particular language or technology was niche, or indeed the wave of the future.  We, as designers, evaluate all new things this way.  This, I imagine, is because we are not just designers, but also business people - people who evaluate a skill on the marketability of the skill in question.  At some point you have to make a choice - either you're going to continue learning every single program coming out, or you're going to start doing what you love - which is to say, designing things for people that need it with the skills that you have.  

For example, when Flash was new, I pondered learning it - and I did, a bit, but demand wasn't there, and I wasn't too interested in making animated websites that required a plugin to function.  At the time, many people weren't even allowed to install it, so it seemed like a poor idea.  Over time, flash has certainly grown in appeal to me, but it's still a niche so far as what clients actually need in terms of visual communications.  Certainly it is more useful to certain types of industry than others.  I digress.  I love flash, it just wasn't in demand in my area.

I don't really want to make examples out of any specific software that I consider to be less than useful because it isn't productive.  The people who make the software know it's not (because they see the numbers) and you know when you come across a piece of software or hardware that is not, in the foreseeable future, going to be of any use to you or anyone you know.  The reasons why this irrelevant technology gets made in the first place could fill a whole blog post, so lets just say that there are reasons.  The reasons themselves are not as important so much as the noise to signal when we're looking to advance our skill-sets, and ultimately make visual communication pieces for our clients.  

Lets talk about some technology that has jived with design, shall we?

How do you balance the sit-at-desk nature of design work with the need for physical activity in your day-to-day life?  

Personally, I go for walks at lunch, and sometimes I'll do the 4 kilometer walk home.  If I'm lucky, I'll get some tennis in - but there doesn't seem to be a lot of time for that.  I used to take intermittent breaks and do 20 pushups at a time and get back to work.  Of course, not every office space allows for this, and it doesn't really seem appropriate for the workplace in retrospect.  Still, how can I  regret getting that exercise?

If the interface from the Minority Report because a reality soon, we could strap weights to our arms and get a decent upper body workout while working.  That would be awesome.  Maybe we could hook up treadmill-like devices for scrolling up and down.  The point I am trying to make here is this: if we are going to be spending all our time designing, shouldn't we be looking at ways for it to actually *be* incidentally good for us?  With the rise in popularity of gesture-based input systems, I can see benefits arising from some integration with design applications.