3 steps to great product design

*Step 1*: Find the best, most experienced, most professional product designer you can.

*Step 2*: Ask them what to do.

*Step 3*: Do what they say.

Profit! Ok, maybe a little more detail would help.

For *Step 1*, your goal is to find the person with the most experience designing products that will work with you. This may or may not be someone with the title “designer”; if you find a “product manager” or “engineer” who has successfully led a dozen projects to good results, that might be the best person to trust. You’re looking for quantity of past work (remember [the ceramics class](http://russelldavies.typepad.com/planning/2007/02/quantity_equals.html)) and quality (defined by whatever metric is most important to you and the project–innovation, aesthetics, market success, reliability, etc). Whatever their title, you should make it clear to everyone on the project that *this* person is the lead designer.

Don’t know any great designers? Ask everyone you know who their favorite designer is, then ask that designer about the best person they know. Repeat until you run out of time and/or money.

*Step 2* is pretty straightforward but often forgotten. In the heat of the moment, most people revert to voicing their own answers rather than asking questions. Designers work best when their opinion is sought out, not when they have to shout to be heard. Their job is to make design decisions, so bring them everything you can. A good designer will be humble enough to say they don’t know when that’s the case.

The wrong way to interpret *Step 3* is to assume every lead designer should act like a dictator–shouting orders and demanding obedience. A great designer will first set up a design process that includes everyone on the team in the right way. They’ll probably ask more questions than give answers (see Step 2), and will want to understand all the various options and known constraints.

But at some point decisions have to be made (specified in that process) and at that point you have to follow the person you’ve entrusted with design authority. A project where only half a design is followed can turn out worse than one with no design. A great design is holistic and integrated, and if you choose to compromise it–through impatience, penny-pinching, or simply lack of appreciation for the design quality–your product will not be great. On the other hand, products that do fulfill their designed form and function are a breath of fresh air and a shock to a world accustomed to mediocrity and imitation.

Three steps. Easier said than done…but worth trying.

Swapping manufacturing jobs for design ones?

U.S. manufacturing is rapidly going away, exemplified by [this story about Apple](http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/22/business/apple-america-and-a-squeezed-middle-class.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all) which shows the power of scale and cultural advantages in China and other Asian countries. Thus ends a century of American innovation in manufacturing, starting in the days of Henry Ford and the assembly line and reaching its zenith in and after WWII.

I’ve always felt like design is a more sustainable industry for nations, as no one can better design for a culture than its own citizens–and I say that as someone whose current job is to design for other cultures. As Apple itself shows, design “alone” can create huge amounts of wealth for companies and individuals. But it’s still unclear whether a culture can sustain itself by only designing, and outsourcing the manufacturing of, the products and services it uses.

Of course there’s no guarantee at all that the number of jobs in the world will exactly equal the number of people in it. I just hope that the work we’re doing to evolve design practice provides enough fulfilling work for enough people to get us to a sustainable place–worldwide.

Learning and survival

> People in organizations don’t change until their fear of survival exceeds their fear of learning – Organizational theorist [Edgar Schein](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edgar_Schein), [via](http://fora.tv/2010/10/16/Long_Conversation_with_Stuart_Candy_and_Katherine_Fulton) [Katherine Fulton](http://www.monitorinstitute.com/about_team.html#fulton)

The 6 killer apps of prosperity

[Niall Ferguson explains the key elements that make a society prosperous](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xpnFeyMGUs8):

1. Competition
2. The Scientific Revolution
3. Property rights
4. Modern medicine
5. The consumer society
6. The work ethic

Comparing political and economic proposals by how they impact these metrics seems like a good way to keep your society on track. He makes a good point that the West pioneered many of these but has been steadily abandoning them as the rest of the world picks them up.

Notes from “I’m Feeling Lucky”

I found [this book](http://www.amazon.com/Im-Feeling-Lucky-Confessions-ebook/dp/B004X7SYQI) fascinating, as it not only contains stories from the earliest days of Google, but does so from the perspective of someone in a creative role–[Doug Edwards](http://xooglers.blogspot.com/), Google’s first head of marketing and a person who helped set the tone of Google’s design and communication.

His insights are remarkably similar to what it’s like to design products there today–both the good and the bad. Fortunately, having Doug’s stories to draw on really help me understand the culture better and hopefully improve my work. I only wish I had read this book (and [his blog](http://xooglers.blogspot.com/)) 6 years ago!

*Notes and quotes* (with Kindle locations)

“Your greatest impact as an engineer comes through hiring someone who is as good as you or better,” he exhorted everyone who would listen, “because over the next year, they double your productivity. There’s nothing else you can do to double your productivity. Even if you’re a genius, that’s extremely unlikely to happen.” – 776

“That’s because marketing likes to lie,” Larry let slip. He smiled when he said it, but I sensed we were being held to account for everything engineers hated about the nonquantifiable world, with its corrupted communications and frequent flyer programs. God help anyone who offered a marketing opinion as if it were a scientific fact. – 815

“Let’s do a gap analysis,” I used to say at the Merc. “What’s the unmet need? Where’s the market opportunity? How much share can we gain?” Engineers hate that kind of thinking. If you’re an engineer with a brilliant idea, seeing it dumbed down or abandoned because it doesn’t test well is like watching a bully pull the wings off a butterfly. The right thing to do is build it regardless, to prove that you can and because building cool things is—well, you end up with cool things. – 1055

Google’s official office dress code was “You must wear clothes.” – 1620

A week later we changed the label back to “cached” and I plotted three new data points on my Google graph: Nothing was final until Larry said it was. Larry communicated directly to the people who could implement his decisions. Larry erased what he had etched in stone if the walls crumbled around him. – 1792

The madness was not without method. Not only did Larry and Sergey’s hyperbolic proposals force us to reason more tightly, but starting at the ideological antipodes exploited the full value of the intelligence in the room. After Larry or Sergey made one of their outrageous suggestions, nothing that followed would seem inconceivable. – 1945

Larry even hated the stiff black cardboard that agencies used to present creative campaigns—each concept perfectly center-mounted to convey greater gravitas. To Larry, a good idea was self-evident, even if scrawled on a wrinkled napkin in blotchy ballpoint. Ad agencies, he hinted, were full of bumbling simpletons and evil dissemblers. – 2495

“‘An order of magnitude is qualitative, not quantitative.’ When you go up by an order of magnitude, the problem is different enough that it demands different solutions. It’s discontinuous.” – 3008

If you want to make a killing trading tech stocks, find a friend in the t-shirt business between San Francisco and San Jose and ask to be alerted any time a rush order gets placed. – 3150

“Larry and Sergey had certain things they wanted worked on,” Gmail creator Paul Bucheit explained, “and there were these standing groups that were making up their own things and not doing whatever it was Larry and Sergey wanted.” – 3984

“So … what I underestimated,” he went on, “is that managers always make judgment calls. They have to in order to function. If you’re in a highly technical area, you can’t make good judgment calls if you’re not highly technical yourself. We changed at that point our strategy for hiring managers—away from coordination to saying that what matters most is technical leadership.” – 3994

Part of the power of Google’s brand was the cluelessly geek chic it projected, as though a site serving millions of users around the globe were being run by a handful of nerds who didn’t know any better than to put whatever struck their fancy on the homepage. I think I had a pretty good ear for that nerd voice and was able to channel it into the communications I crafted, but I also know that I always wanted to smooth out the rough edges and make things flow a little more nicely across the screen. It was the English major in me. Sand down too many protruding bits, though, and you end up with a perfect sphere that’s not terribly interesting. – 4322

> Does design do the same thing?

When users posted multiple correct translations, they earned editorial power to overwrite awkward or incorrect submissions made by others. – 4502

My role still had value, because I worked on the language that went into the product itself. But thinking about how users perceived the product, and the company as a whole, was a low priority. The product would speak for itself, so what mattered most was the technology and the cool things that could be done with it. – 4940

The day after the deal went live, John Bauer added code that boldfaced the keyword a user had searched for when it appeared in an ad, making it obvious that the ad was relevant. That single improvement increased clickthrough rates by four hundred percent. One engineer. One change. Four hundred percent. – 5296

For the rest, they gave the okay to go ahead. I quietly rejoiced. I had sold a branding campaign from the nation’s hottest ad agency to two guys who hated anything to do with marketing. It had taken four years, but I had figured out a way to work the system. – 6155

When I first arrived at Google, I felt strongly about things and was often wrong. Fortunately, Larry and Sergey ignored my ideas. I had learned from that experience. Now I felt strongly about things and was often right. Unfortunately, my ideas were still being ignored. I wasn’t sure which slight was more painful, but I suspected it was the latter. – 6340

To launch a radically new product from an established company, Paul asserted, you needed someone who not only believed in it but also was able to make the organization “do the right stuff.” – 6359

Realistic GTD

[Tony Schwartz shares some realistic tips for getting important things done](http://blogs.hbr.org/schwartz/2011/05/the-only-way-to-get-important.html).

I like the idea to plan your first activity the night before, and spending 90 minutes on it before thinking too much about it.

His philosophy of limiting your conscious decisions also rings true; [as Flaubert said](http://www.ryskamp.org/brain/?p=225):

> Be regular and orderly in your life so that you may be violent and original in your work.

Clever people

Just found out that a single coworker of mine:

1. [Played drums in They Might Be Giants](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UtTBzj9yGAI)
2. Created [Wordle](http://www.wordle.net/)
3. Built [a tool to discover accidental haikus in Twitter](http://mrfeinberg.com/twaiku/)

I think he wins the internet.

Why I design at Google

Google is an amazing company, but it’s not always known for design. I thought I’d write down the reasons I’ve enjoyed designing products at Google for the past 6 years. As always, I speak only for myself, not for the company.

There are lots of reasons I like working at Google besides design¹. But I’ll mostly focus on the specific reasons I *design* there.

My main professional goal right now is learning how to do great design work. I’m still early in my career, and while it’s nice to find some success, I’m mostly focused on learning and growing my skills. Most of my reasons for designing at Google are centered around this.

*1. The huge variety of work*

In six years I’ve worked on online and offline advertising, desktop and mobile communication products, B2B commerce, science-fiction-style interaction concepts, entertainment and media services, and now products for African and emerging markets. As a designer, this gives me a lot of experiences to draw on in my future work. It’s almost like having 10 different jobs, but seamlessly transitioning between them without interviews or moving.

At the same time, I’m able to stay involved with and observe past projects to see how my design work did or didn’t influence their success. One drawback to a consulting role is the disconnection after a design phase finishes; at Google I’m still in touch with (and responsible for!) projects long after my main effort has wrapped up.

*2. Support for conceptual design*

My short-term design goal is to improve my abilities in conceptual design and the early-stage design process. Google’s scale and scope means that I can work on a big variety of product concepts while still building a foundation of resources and collaborators within a single company.

Additionally, a large, established company supports speculative, long-term thinking in a way other companies cannot. In a startup, for example, you probably wouldn’t have a designer spend much time spinning out concept ideas and doing open-ended, foundational research. At Google’s scale, this is valued and supported.

*3. A global presence*

Google’s global footprint is also a great resource. In the past year, we moved to Switzerland and I’ve traveled to our offices in China, Ghana, Nigeria, Israel, Senegal, and England, and I’m soon headed to Kenya. As a designer, it’s incredible to have coworkers based in dozens of places around the world, and to easily travel to and base research out of our offices there. With a single email, I can get people worldwide to contribute research and opinions on my design challenges. These global perspectives make my designs better.

*4. Because it’s hard*

It would be the easiest thing in the world to just design by myself. Designing at Google is training me to do great design in a challenging environment.

Google is, fundamentally, an engineering company, and it excels at building advanced, innovative technology platforms. Design leadership at Google isn’t forced on teams from the top, and there isn’t a long-established history of how design works there. Design and designers have to prove their value every day, in ways that our engineering culture respects.

There’s a lot of debate about this, but in the end I appreciate the challenge. Long-term, I want my design work to influence the direction of large groups and societies, and to do that I need to learn how to work with and persuade people who aren’t inclined or required to listen to professional designers.

Designs at Google must pass through a gauntlet of smart criticism from diverse people, intense quantitative testing, and a culture where everything is shared openly. Good designs become great when they are honed and sharpened by this process, which focuses ideas to their core and makes them ready for the real world.

Of course, this kind of treatment can sometimes discourage designers from trying controversial new things, but if you keep an ambitious attitude and your team wants to innovate, it can be an environment that strengthens rather than weakens your designs. Recently I’ve been learning from business analysts and marketers how to blend compelling business proposals into my design work. After initially fearing this would dilute my product vision, I’ve realized instead that these perspectives helped concentrate it further.

*5. Building my dream team*

When I joined, the user experience team (designers and researchers) was about 15 people. It’s grown to 200+ during my time, and I’ve been part of shaping its growth. As the team grows, I learn more and more from the new people who join. I’ve had an informal rule that I don’t recommend hiring someone unless they’re a better designer than me in at least one way (fortunately they’re often better in several). Over the years, this has led to a tremendous group of collaborators and mentors, constantly reinforced by new people as the design team grows.

And even today, the group is driven primarily by the individuals within it. I’ve always been able to choose what I worked on next, and to define (or invent) my own working style and methods. Designers at Google have the freedom to explore and practice new ways of working, and to redefine how design is done in the company.

*6. The future of design is interactive and networked systems*

It’s a safe bet that technology will continue to infuse itself further into every part of our lives (read [Kevin Kelly](http://www.amazon.com/What-Technology-Wants-ebook/dp/B0043EV51W) if you’re not yet convinced). Design in this world will require an understanding of advanced technologies and how large, interconnected systems and societies work. Even my other long-standing design passions in cycling and transportation will be completely transformed by interactive technologies (see [Strava](http://app.strava.com/athletes/1307) and [the Google cars](http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/10/science/10google.html) for a preview). At Google, I’m learning to design interactive systems at a global scale.

Of course, many of these pluses are also minuses. Variety brings distraction; global scale breeds confusion; difficulty can lead to discouragement. Each of these is a tradeoff, and designers have to choose what challenges they want to face next. At some point it may make sense to move elsewhere as my goals shift and the company continues to change. But for now, Google is a great place for me to learn and grow as a designer, and I’m enjoying the challenge.

¹ Some of the reasons I like working at Google, besides design:

* Google is a big company, with tremendous resources. It takes on challenges no other company can.
* I get to see one of the defining companies and cultural forces of our generation from the inside.
* Free food, great facilities. More generally, Google takes care of people. I even came in to the office when I was on sabbatical for three months, to use the gym, machine shop, and cafes. Google supports a great lifestyle.
* I’m a geek, and Google actively encourages and cultivates things that geeks like me enjoy ([Androids in space](http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/nasa_sends_android_phone_to_space.php), [self-driving cars](http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/10/science/10google.html), [organic micro-gardens](http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/05/growing-our-connection-to-food.html), [solar-powered Priuses](http://www.google.org/recharge/dashboard), etc, etc)
* I admire and respect our ambitious mission: [to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful](http://www.google.com/intl/en/corporate/).

KidZania

The perfect business model? Parents pay for their children to work and be advertised to. And it actually sounds pretty fun!

http://www.themorningnews.org/archives/profiles/state_of_play.php

Peter Drucker on priorities

> Develop your priorities and don’t have more than two. I don’t know anybody who can do three things at the same time and do them well. Do one task at a time or two tasks at a time. That’s it. OK, two works better for most. Most people need the change of pace. But, when you are finished with two jobs or reach the point where it’s futile, make the list again. Don’t go back to priority three. At that point, it’s obsolete. – [Peter Drucker](http://www.forbes.com/2004/11/19/cz_rk_1119drucker_print.html)

Reminds me of [Merlin Mann’s “true priorities”](http://twitter.com/hotdogsladies/statuses/1492464753):

> You eventually learn that true priorities are like arms; if you think you have more than a couple, you’re either lying or crazy.

Recognize the one or two things you really need to do each day, and don’t look back.