Good Design is a Solution to Bad Design, Until it Isn’t!

Design is often celebrated for its ability to solve problems and improve lives, but it’s also criticized when it falls short. What if, instead of judging a design as inherently good or bad, we viewed it as a reflection of its time? Good design addresses the challenges of its era, often improving upon what came before. Yet, as the world evolves, yesterday’s solutions can become today’s problems. This isn’t a flaw, it’s the natural process of progress.

When Good Design Fails to Adapt:

Some designs excel in their moment but fail to meet the demands of the future due to a lack of room for iteration. Consider the roads in cities like Bangalore. When many of these roads were constructed, they were designed to accommodate the population and traffic of that era. At the time, they were practical and effective solutions. However, as the city grew and the number of vehicles increased, these roads became congested and inadequate. What was once a well-thought-out design now struggles to support a rapidly changing urban landscape.

Another example is the Kodak digital camera. Kodak invented the digital camera in the 1970s, but its business model was built around film. The company’s initial camera designs didn’t adapt to the shift toward digital photography, and despite having the technology, Kodak failed to embrace the transition fully. This led to its decline while competitors like Canon and Sony thrived.

These examples highlight an important reality: even good design can falter over time. It underscores the need for revisiting, adapting, and reconstructing designs to meet evolving demands. Bad design isn’t always the result of poor planning; sometimes it takes years for its limitations to become apparent.

Right Design at the Right Time:

Great design isn’t just about solving problems; it’s also about aligning with the audience’s readiness to embrace it. Consider the contrast between the Pocket Crystal, conceptualized in 1989, and the iPhone, released in 2007. Both were groundbreaking in their way, but the Pocket Crystal, a multifunctional device envisioned by Marc Porat, failed to resonate with consumers. It was bulky, ahead of its time, and entered a market unprepared for such innovation.

Conversely, the iPhone, crafted under Tony Fadell’s vision, debuted at an ideal time. By 2007, technological advancements, shifting consumer behaviors, and the demand for sleek, integrated devices had aligned perfectly. This timing was essential. Although Porat’s vision set the stage, it was Fadell’s timely execution that turned the iPhone into a revolutionary success. This highlights an important design principle: innovation must coincide with the audience's readiness to achieve true success.

That said, bad design doesn’t always emerge with time. Poorly designed solutions can be apparent even at the moment. A lack of foresight, flawed execution, or misplaced priorities can result in decisions that immediately fail users. These designs don’t just reflect their time; they reveal missed opportunities or a fundamental misunderstanding of the problem.

When Design Has No Future:

On the other hand, some designs are flawed from the start, prioritizing aesthetics or novelty over functionality. Take Apple’s Magic Mouse, for example. While its sleek, minimalist design has been praised, its charging port placement, on the underside of the device, is a glaring functional flaw. Users are forced to stop using the mouse entirely while it charges, interrupting workflow and causing frustration. This isn’t a case of good design aging poorly; it’s a case of prioritizing form over function, leading to bad design that’s evident even today.

Evolving with Users:

One of the most fascinating challenges in design is how users often interact with a product in ways its creators never anticipated. This divergence between a product’s intended purpose and how it’s used highlights the concept of “jobs to be done.”

People don’t just buy products; they “hire” them to solve specific problems in their lives. Over time, these “jobs” can shift in ways the creators never imagined. For instance, Instagram was originally designed as a simple photo-sharing app. However, users repurposed it as a platform for influencers, e-commerce, and storytelling. In response, Instagram iterated, adding features like Stories, shopping tools, and analytics.

This evolution underscores an important truth: good design isn’t just about solving the problem you set out to address. It’s about understanding how people interact with your product and adapting when their needs shift. A design that clings too tightly to its original purpose risks becoming obsolete, while one that listens to its users can grow and thrive.

The Lifecycle of Design

Design often follows an innovative lifecycle. A problem arises, a solution is created, and for a time, it works. It reflects the challenges, values, and technological advancements of its era. Good design addresses the issues of its time, but to remain relevant, it must evolve.

This ongoing cycle of progress is not just a feature of design, it’s a reflection of humanity itself. Instead of striving for perfection in a single moment, we should aim to create solutions that are modular, scalable, and flexible, capable of evolving alongside new challenges.

Conclusion: Embracing the Cycle of Design

Good design is always a response to bad design, but it’s also a stepping stone to the next challenge. Instead of resisting change, we should embrace it. By understanding design as a reflection of its time, we can approach it with curiosity and adaptability. Today’s solutions will shape tomorrow’s challenges, and in that ongoing cycle, true innovation thrives.