See it. Report it.  NEW
1
Report typos or grammatical errors
by highlighting the text.
Learn more
×

What does it means to be a good designer?

A couple months ago, I reached a conclusion that a good designer (in my opinion) is a designer that makes the most out of his/her opportunities. The definition had to be detached from seniority, job titles, or companies; and so it seemed to fit the criteria well.

However, today, I was skimming through Principles by Ray Dalio and found this excerpt which read:

“To be “good”, something must operate consistently with the laws of reality and contribute to the evolution of the whole; that is what is most rewarded. For example, if you come up with something the world values, you almost can’t help but be rewarded. Conversely, reality tends to penalize those people, species, and things that don’t work well and detract from evolution”

Although what Ray is referring to here isn’t entirely aligned with jobs and designers, it struck me that a good designer is a label given by others to someone who provides values to stakeholders.

A good designer provides value.

It’s true that designs must solve problems. An elegant solution provides more value compared to an inelegant/ stitched up solution. This implies that great designers create valuable designs.

I am more fond of this value based definition (ValueBD). OpportunityBD is flawed in that there can be no comparison between individuals. You cannot evaluate with certainty whether one is a “good-er” designer. How good a designer is relative to his/her potential.

ValueBD on the other hand can be an objective assessment of the value that you have provided through your existence, from the tangible designs created by you, to the delivery of the design assets.

Again, I am more happy with the valueBD. It has certainly shaped my thinking when joining a product team as a designer to improve their onboarding experience. I could design an experience that requires radical change, or I can design an experience that fits their current technical infrastructure while adequately solving the problem. Sometimes, teams don’t need radical solutions. They just need something that works.