Steve Duenes, Fernanda Viégas, and Andrew Kuo are among the many designers who organize, prioritize clarify, filter and interpret information graphically. They’ll be discussing their notable work as information designers tomorrow at IN/VISIBLE. I queried them each to get a sense of their unique perspectives on information graphics and their approach to working.

STEVE DUENES manages the 30-journalist team in the graphics department at The New York Times which creates the diagrams, maps and charts for the newspaper and the Web site.

Who decides what stories require information graphics at the Times

It varies, but mostly the graphics department. There are graphics editors who coordinate our graphics for the news desks like Metro, National and Foreign. Those graphics staffers discuss the coverage with each desk to determine which graphics are required.

How do you test the designs to see if they communicate as intended?

There’s a fair amount of peer editing in our department, so we all look at graphics and offer feedback to one another. In addition, each graphic goes through a round of editing that generally includes the reporter, line editor, copy editor and news desk editor. The sheer number of people looking at each graphic serves as a pretty good test.

Are there cases when a piece of information graphics has been statistically accurate but the audience interpreted the content incorrectly?

What seems to happen with more noticeable frequency is that readers will ignore the explanatory text that accompanies a chart, so they think they know what’s being plotted, but really, they’ve misunderstood. We occasionally hear from these readers and can point them in the right direction.

How important is capturing the attention of a reader with information graphics?

It’s sort of important, but it’s not the most important thing. We’re shooting for clarity. If we are good reporters and editors, and we find compelling information, then we’re pretty assured that we’ll capture reader attention. But if the data stinks, no amount of decorating will make the graphic worthwhile.

What role does narrative play in information design?

It plays an important role. After all we’re telling stories just like writers are. With process graphics, narrative is sort of built in, but with data-driven pieces, we often have to develop the structure of the graphic so that readers can “walk through” the data. It can be a challenge, but it’s important.

ANDREW KUO‘s work attempts to categorize un-measurable human emotions and address how we process them. He’s created an obsessive chart-based retelling of music events which have been featured in the New York Times’ music section.

How do you deal with information glut?

I ignore what I don’t like and take in what I do (which seems like a lot these days). It’s easy to ignore things.

What makes information graphics resonate with you?

They look cool! Sometimes charts can simplify and complicate

things at the same time. I guess that’s what it is.

Have you ever felt manipulated by information graphics?

No, not really. unless the data is a lie. That’s not quite ‘manipulation’ anyway. It’s just lying.

Why is humor an integral part of your work?

Because humor is an integral part of my life! I’m glad it finally found its way into my work.

FERNANDA VIÉGAS is a research scientist in IBM’s Visual Communication Lab. At the MIT Media Lab, her research focused on the visualization of the traces people leave as they interact in online communities.

How do you deal with information glut?

Most of the time I try to make use of technology: RSS feeds, filters, recommendation systems, etc. Other times I just simply disconnect from the world and accept that I’ll be behind on things; it is quite liberating.

Why do you connect with information graphics?

I’m a graphic designer by training, so visual communication has always been at the core of how I make sense of the world around me. When I got to MIT, I realized that there was something called “information visualization” that could turn millions of numbers into meaningful, revealing images. I was hooked.

Have you ever felt manipulated by information graphics?

A few times: for instance, when presenters attempt to show “dramatic” results in graphs without showing a baseline. Or when someone gratuitously uses perspective on a 2D graph to distort proportions. These are dirty tricks. Most of the time, though, when a piece of infographics bothers me it’s usually because it’s poorly executed (the display technique is not the best fit for the data being shown, or the use of colors is unfortunate) instead of something that was done with the intent of manipulating the viewer.

What are the responsibilities of an information designer?

One of the main responsibilities is finding a direct route between the data that needs to be conveyed and its representation. That’s a hard challenge.

Designers are good at adapting/transforming things that are too complicated (or too big) for us to wrap our minds around. I believe this ability is crucial for the success of information graphics. If you want to empower your viewers, you need to provide them with good tools for sensemaking–that’s where design can play an important role.

Steve Duenes, Fernanda Viégas and Andrew Kuo will discuss the visual ethics of information graphics at IN/VISIBLE the evening of FRIDAY SEPTEMBER 23. The conversation will be moderated by John Maeda. Event information and registration available here.

What is Athletics and how does it work, structurally?

Matt Owens:

It’s basically a collective of partners that do work together and separately. It’s kind of like a mini-Pentagram model, where each person is the best at what they do. It’s less of a top down structure and more of a horizontal structure.

Did that structure emerge organically, or did you sit down and say “okay, let’s form this flat structure, collective design studio”?

MO: I ran a more traditional design firm for about 5 years. During that time learned a lot from running a company. I sat down with Jason [Gnewikow] and James and we started to sketch out a different model.

James Ellis: We arrived at the collective model out of the working relationships we already had. It was an extension, in a way, of what we were already doing.

MO: We just made it more formal by being under one roof.

JE: After we were all under one roof, we decided to give ourselves a name and formalize the organization. Thus, Athletics.

What’s the story behind the name?

JE: Our original space (also in Williamsburg, Brooklyn, where we are now) had been an old boxing gym. There was a big boxing ring in the middle of the space where sweaty dudes would train. We renovated the space a good bit (painting out the sweat smell) and set up shop. Athletics seemed an appropriate name.

MO: When Jason and I looked at the space, we pretty much decided on the name right then and there.

Jason is a third member. Has the business expanded to include additional members as well?

MO: Once we got rolling, we have asked people to join that we felt would round out the dynamic.

Does working in the collective structure affect your creative output? If so, how?

MO: I have more free time than when I ran a company independently. Now I can rely on others to make a project the best it can be, because there is a shared liability. I feel that I can be more creative. I have more resources at my disposal, because we all have different areas of expertise.

JE: Compared to traditional organizations, I would say the collective removes structure. It’s easier to do the type of work you want to do. If you want to tackle big, blockbuster client work, great. If you want to screen print t-shirts, that’s fine too.

What type of project takes advantages of the variety of resources and your ability to rely on other people?

MO: Almost all projects have an aspect of shared liability and shared resources.

JE: Cartel is a regular client of ours and is a good example of a big project with multiple moving parts. They are an up-n-comer teen rock band. They’ve released two full-length recordings and have done reasonably well for themselves.

JE: We’ve now done a number of projects with them: music videos, record packaging, t-shirts, websites, etc.

MO: There were many skill sets involved, all of them in-house.

JE: We might have folks working to direct/shoot/edit a rock video and another team that produces a record package or website. Depending on the project, we’ll assemble teams that fit.

Do you have a single person that manages schedules or is that also a shared responsibility?

JE: That’s also shared.

MO: One person cannot do it all, but the collective can.

Do you find that you need to communicate how the collective works to your clients?

JE: Yes, we explain the organization to new clients up front. It’s addressed in project proposals as well.

MO: If they read the about page on our website, it’s pretty self explanatory. We have never had an issue with clients not “getting it.” For clients, knowing that we have the talent resources and professionalism is all they require.

JE: I think our clients seek us out because they see the work and want the same. We keep things professional. They’re never too concerned about the specifics of how we’re organized. The collective aspect has little impact on the project from their perspective.

MO: For me, I enjoy the flexibility to take on a wide range of projects knowing the resources are available to us in house.

Knowing the resources are available, has that enabled you to take risks on projects you wouldn’t have otherwise?

MO: I think so. I just had a person write a song for me for a motion project. If James and Jason were not in the studio i would not have access to music resources, I would never had done something like that. Their skills and knowledge allowed me to take a risk knowing they would have my back and make sure it was good.

JE: For me, being primarily a web development person, I really enjoy being able to bring in and manage projects outside the bounds of sometimes repetitive web work.

James, you focus on web development. Matt, what’s your area of expertise.

MO: Design, project management, business development, and illustration. Sometimes, I’m “studio dad” considering I’m the oldest. I make a great guacamole as well.

Matt Owens and James Ellis, along with Jason Gnewikow, will discuss the business of Athletics at SMART/MODELS on SATURDAY 17 MAY. Event info and registration available here.

You consult with many different types of designers and businesses, what do they come to you for?

My clients come to me for many reasons. The primary reason is that they have been in fire-fighting mode, working under a business model that has been driven largely by clients. They allow clients to shape how they run and manage their business. I get a call me when they’re finally ready to take control and learn how they can better plan and manage clients, staff and projects.

This often happens after an emergency happened (a client got mad, didn’t pay, the economy has impacted their business, they are ready to hire, etc.).

How much do the clients a creative firm has (or wants to have) determine the business model? How much depends on the personalities of the business principals and employees?

It depends not only on the personality of the principals but also on their unique skill sets. For example, if the owner is horrible at new business development, organization, or finanances, this shapes their business. The skill set of employees is important, but I try to determine how we can leverage existing resources in shaping a new or revised structure. Sometimes this does require tough decisions.

What are some examples of tough decisions?

The biggest one is saying “no” to a client or pushing back and aligning thier expectations. Designers often allow clients to recieve far more services than initially budgeted for. They allow clients to delay schedules and expect tight turnarounds. Clients need to be trained and educated.

The second tough decision is determining who your ideal client is and what to do with the clients that no longer are qualified clients. Another is increasing salaries within a small firm, as ultimately you reach a ceiling and great staff can outgrow the business’s needs.

What are the characteristics of a business that has model that fits well? Do you look for happiness, profitability or growth?

Most firms or creative departments are run largely by creative individuals that don’t always have great business skills (sometimes they do). The symptoms come from the creative personality itself: they typically prioritize emotional, instinctive thinking over more logical approaches.

I look at what are the firm’s overall drivers are, asthey are unique for each firm. Some firms are driven by doing only great work, profitability if less important. Others,= are driven purely by money. I try to shape their business around everything—passion, profitability, creativity and great work/life balance.

And you help them re-align those priorities?

I do try to help them re-think their priorities, or at the very least, recognize their strengths and weaknesses and show the related impact on their business. Do you know the expression, “the fish stinks from the head down”? Well, that truly applies to most creative businesses.

It’s a great expression, but my clients don’t like it!

The truth hurts! Do you see industry-wide trends or changes in what models are most prevalent and those that are most successful?

As an active member of the AIGA and frequent speaker I see first-hand that the industry-trends change really really quickly. Currently, the trend is that clients expect far more integrated services from a designer—writing or editorial leadership, strategic thinking, marketing advise, etc. I help my firms to address these needs.

What do you think has led to this expectation? Is it because designers have made it clear they perform those services well? Do the clients not have anywhere else to turn?

The challenge with this trend is how a small firm (which most firms are) can provide all of these services, if they should, and how they manage alliances.

I think it’s related to the success of our profession in proving our worth, but on the opposite side, it also is a result of clients still not understanding the difference between agency-models and design-firms—or more accurately, that difference is becoming harder to define. Design firms in general have really split into two groups: those that design and execute a client’s visions/directions and those that are more strategists, visual thinkers. My clients have a tendency to fall into the latter group.

I think most designers will find that encouraging. I certainly do!

Design firms get paid higher fees if they can provide more high-level services. Other firms are beating their prices on design and execution, but client are willing to pay for the other services if they see it’s impact on their business.

Therein lies the challenge of allowing your clients to drive your business direction.

What do you hope to learn (and what will attendees learn) at SMART/MODELS?

I think it’s important for the audience to learn that their isn’t one right way to run your business, but rather ther are many inspirational models. What I want them to see is that they control their business far more than they allow themselves to. In this conference they will see five different possibilities and the related challenges along the way. I hope they leave inspired.

Myself, I hope to learn more about each firm’s unique challenges—what lessons they learned and how they managed to move forward.

Cohen will facilitate and frame the conversation on creative models for creative businesses at SMART/MODELS on SATURDAY 17 MAY. Event info and registration available here.

Formerly a web-design studio, 37signals now develops a handful of web applications—ranging from project management to real-time chat—each of which fastidiously shuns features and options in order to focus on getting things done and keeping it simple. DESIGNY had the chance to catch up with 37signals president and founder Jason Fried to get some insight into how the Getting Real philosophy permeates their products and their business.

When did “entrepreneur” first enter your vocabulary? Was it something you always planned on or did you fall into it?

I’ve been working since I was 13, but I think I started my first business when I was 15. I sold stereo equipment to some friends via a distributor. My grandfather was an entrepreneur, so I think it’s in my blood. I can’t imagine doing anything else.

That seems a common thread among entrepreneurs. Do you consider the rest of the team at 37signals entrepreneurs?

I know David [Heinemeier Hansson] is a work-for-yourself kind of guy. As much as we can, we try to make everyone feel like an entrepreneur. We give people a lot of freedom. They mostly set their own deadlines and make their own decisions.

How important do you think having a financial stake in the business is to motivating employees?

Well, I think it’s up to the individual, but ultimately money is a good incentivizer. We try to bonus out generously at the end of every year. We prefer to loosely tie bonuses to financial performance, so everyone shares when things are going well.

You’ve recently taken your “less” idea into the work week by cutting it to four days. When you make choices like this, is it in response to an identified need internally or is it an excercise in testing the “less is less” theory?

We decided a couple years ago to do that in the summer. Everyone had fridays off in the summer because, lets face it, working Friday’s in the summer is pretty much a lost cause anyway. We figured we’d see what would happen if we took the day off. And it didn’t seem to hurt the company in any way. Plus, it helped everyone quite a bit. This year we decided to try it all year long.

How did it help?

Who isn’t helped by a three-day weekend? Basically it allowed people to rest up a bit more, enjoy life a little more. If they wanted to work they could, of course, but it wasn’t required.

I learned about your four day work-week and countless other operation details from your blog, Signal V. Noise. 37signals is constantly sharing how its business operates. Does sharing help you have a different perspective on how business is working?

We share for a variety of reasons.

1. It feels good
2. It’s good marketing/pr
3. We want to see other people succeed too
4. It forces us to think about our ideas since we normally don’t write stuff down unless we blog them.
5. We get external feedback (in the form of comments) which are always interesting.

Does the blog feel like a part of your internal dialogue as well?

It definitely is. What often happens is this: We’ll be discussing something in Campfire [a web-based chat application built by 37signals], and I’ll say “Shit, that’s a good point. That’s an blog post.” And that’s how it happens. We try to share everything we can. I think it’s good to be open, transparent and clear. It’s good for business and good for your own thoughts. It’s good to air things out.

You’ve also published many of your working methods and perspectives in the book Getting Real. When doesn’t the Getting Real approach work. Who shouldn’t run a business the 37signals way?

I’ve tried to make it a habit not to speak for other people. I think there are a lot of ways to do a lot of things. We work the way it works best for us. I suspect a lot of what we do can be done elsewhere, but people have to have the courage to try.

A lot of people are immediately dismissive, “That would never work at our company…” And maybe it wouldn’t, but how happy are you really with the way things are going at your company? Are you really thrilled with being pushed to the limit all the time? Working more hours than you want? Spending a lot of time on things that never see the light of day?

I think there’s a lot of opportunity for people to try different ideas. Maybe 10% will work. Maybe 50%. Maybe more. And maybe there’s something new they’ll discover that they will share with the world. We can all learn a lot from each other if we’re willing to listen.

Do you think people often settle on something less than ideal?

I do think a lot of people settle. I settle. We all do. But you have to pick your battles.

Some things are worth fighting for. I’d say your happiness is one of them. There’s a reason why “the pursuit of happiness” was in the Declaration of Independence.

It sounds like you’re advocating a happiness-driven model?

I absolutely am. That doesn’t mean we’re all jolly and carefree, but it’s a good goal. Happy people do better work. Which leads to better products. Which leads to better profits. Simplistic? Yeah, but I do believe it.

It sounds like common sense, which is strangely absent in much business thinking.

I think almost everything is easy; it’s people that make it complicated. We make things so much harder than we need to. So stop making things hard on yourself.

Fried will share his experience as a design entrepreneur at SMART/MODELS on SATURDAY 17 MAY. Event info and registration available here.

How did you get to be involved in founding The Smoking Gun?

In 1997, my husband, Bill Bastone, asked me to design a website so he could post documents plucked from the huge collection he’d amassed working as an investigative journalist for the Village Voice. “No one will care,” I said, hoping to avoid unpaid labor. I eventually caved, whipped up a mediocre design, and now when someone writes about the site and reproduces the home page, I wince. Unfortunately, it’s been seen by a gazillion more eyeballs than will ever see any of my other work.

Did you ever have a vested interest in celebrity dirt?

Celebrities schmelebrities. It’s satisfying when The Smoking Gun can knock them off their pedestals or turn their mugshots into temporary tattoos.

You’ve worked on self-initiated projects, directly with clients, and as a consultant to some of the largest branding and advertising firms. What common thread runs through all of these relationships?

You need the same set of conceptual, analytical, and formal skills for each of those situations, but the way you navigate the process is quite different. In advertising, your observations and creative strategies are presented as rational, objective truths, while in work for cultural institutions, your concept can be seen as a subjective, personal interpretation. Coming up with constraints for self-initiated projects is paralyzing, which is why, aside from a personal allergy to self-promotion, I still don’t have a real website or business cards. However, when it fills a non-negotiable need, like producing the annual Smoking Gun holiday gift, I only have to answer to my own standards and it is deeply satisfying.

You’re a principal of Heavy Meta and a mom—how do these two roles jive together? What have you learned in one that helped the other?

Patience! Since I have very little time to spare, I’ve become a much more efficient designer. In order to simplify my design practice when my son was very small, I limited it to media and project types we had previously explored, and focused on finding long-term projects that were easier to manage, like book design. This also addressed the interests of Beverly Joel, the talented and book-hungry designer who worked with me at the time.

I am always on the lookout for opportunities to collaborate with my son on design projects, whether it is translating his first words into icons, making a book documenting his classmates’ collections of 100 objects, or creating iron on t-shirt graphics.

What does your role as a design educator bring to your professional practice (and vice versa)?

Teaching is a constructive outlet for my deep, nerdy passion for graphic design. The classroom is a place for me to attempt to articulate the many things I love about visual culture, form-making, and conceptual strategies. Highbrow and low, we engage in passionate conversations about modernism, vernacular dialects, or the best way to render a pile of poop. Designing assignments is like constructing a box for students to think in and, when it works out well, it’s deeply rewarding.

And it may be cliche to say, but I am always inspired by my students.

Give us a little taste of Polylithic Graphiphilia and Other Strategery.

It doesn’t taste like chicken!

Barbara’s talk is sold out at the moment, but those of you aching to get in might do so through on-site registration. Seats are first-come-first-served, so come early!

Tuesday 6 May 2008 6:30–8:00PM

Bumble and bumble, 3rd floor auditorium

415 West 13th Street Between Ninth Avenue & Washington St.

Making Policy Public is a “fold-out poster series” that aims to share and rouse interest in public policies. Posters already in print are The Cargo Chain, “an organizing tool for longshore workers,” and Social Security Risk Machine, which explains “where the money comes from and where it goes” in the Social Security system. Designers and advocates are selected by a jury of experts for each poster.

Sound interesting? I caught up with Rosten to get some details on Making Policy Public.

What initiated the Making Policy Public project? When did the need for these collaborative publications manifest itself?

The Making Policy Public series is really an extension of the kind of work that CUP had been producing and continues to produce “in house” (for example our television show about Public Housing (PHTV) or our Housing Rights Posters.) We’d long had some really wonderful graphic designers involved both internally (Stella Bugbee was one of CUP’s founding board members) and as collaborators (too many to name here, probably). We’d been developing great collaborations with other designers and community-based organizations for years. As we grew as an organization, we were looking for ways to make it clear to people who weren’t already involved with CUP projects that we were interested in getting more people involved, that we weren’t just a closed “firm” but an organization that was dedicated to promoting art and design that had a truly “educational” (and therefore political) power. We developed the MPP series as a way to a) formalize CUP’s ability to act as a beacon for designers who wanted to create collaborative work that engaged social issues. and b) make our own process more transparent and open. We hope that the net effect in the design community will be to create more and more opportunities for designers who see these kinds of collaborations as more than “good works” but actually rich opportunities to create engaging, meaningful works of design. I think this is what draws designers to CUP already. MPP is a way for us to organize some of that energy (and direct resources towards it).

Are there specific kinds of people that would benefit the most from these publications?

Well, we hope there are a lot of specific people that will benefit! Most immediately, each publication is designed with a specific distribution plan, and target audience in mind. Our most recent issue, The Cargo Chain, is meant to be used as a teaching tool for workers who are involved in the shipping and manufacturing economy. At the same time, we do hope that the publications achieve a broader or more “meta” goal, which is to highlight the really interesting opportunities for design to help explain and involve people in social decision making (aka politics).

How is CUP reaching them?

Well, each pamphlet has (at least) two different kinds of audiences. We’re relying on our advocacy partner to do the heavy lifting of distribution to their audience. The Longshore Workers Coalition (LWC), one of the partners on The Cargo Chain, raised money to print an additional 9000 copies of the poster and distributing it to their rank-and-file coast to coast. Another partner, Labor Notes, has been distributing the poster through their network. The railworkers’ network requested about 50 of the pamphlets, one for each of their stewards. The steelworker’s union are working on an international solidarity project with the West Coast longshore workers, dockworkers in Australia, and miners is South Africa and Australia. They are using the map as a framework for thinking about their own project. They’ll be distributed at the Labor Notes conference in a few months to about 1000 union leaders. CUP is handling the outreach and distribution to the folks who are interested in the series as works of art and design. We’re working with independent stores and distributors like Printed Matter to get the series out to those audiences.

A lot of great designers and collaborators are involved in “Making Policy Public.” What is the process like in selecting talent?

Well, for these first two the process has been informal, much like all of CUP’s projects. We reached out to friends and friends of friends and asked them to participate. The goal of the MPP series going forward is to establish a more open process. Our gambit is that there are a lot more interesting designers committed to this kind of work than we know personally, so our process is really designed to engage the people we dont know yet. So, going forward, collaborators (both on the advocate side, and the designer side) will be selected by a four person jury, made up of professionals from the art and design and organizing and advocacy fields. We’ve just opened the call for proposals to advocates, we’ll be selecting four proposals and posting them to our new site in May. At that point we’ll be opening our call to designers and we’ll have our teams selected by July.

Finally, what kinds of designers are strongly encouraged to participate in the project. Any special skills or interests?

We’re looking for designers who are interested in truly collaborative work, more than an “over-the-fence,” “make-this-information-pretty” approach. Outside of that, I think we’re open to a lot of different design talents and approaches.

Thanks, Rosten!

Admission to Rosten’s talk at Apple is free. Please come by!

the Center for Urban Pedagogy (CUP)

Wednesday 19 March 2008 6:30–8:00PM

Apple Store, Soho

103 Prince Street

New York, NY 10012

There’s much to learn from Stefan Sagmeister’s recent book and exhibition at Deitch Projects, and you can be sure that Mr. Sagmeister will have just as many universal truths to impart at his upcoming presentation for AIGA/NY next Tuesday evening.

I’ve caught up with the busy designer, teacher, and artist to tease a few more bits of things he’s learned, out of him.

What was your very first job?

I was starting to write for a left leaning youth culture magazine named Alphorn and quickly discovered that I liked doing the headlines (from donated old Letraset sheets) and layout (IBM electric typewriter) better than the writing part itself.

The magazine also organized all sorts of concerts so there was an opportunity to design small posters, bring them to he printer and put them up all over the city.

And the most poignant lesson you learned from it?

When all the lower case e’s are missing from a Letraset sheet, it’s easier to draw the entire headline by hand than trying to remake them out of the few remaining letters.

You’ve shown an affinity for sharing your found knowledge about working with graphic design — through teaching and lecturing, extensive Q & A on your website, and your book, Things I Have Learned In My Life So Far. How has this sharing helped you form as a designer? As a person?

When answering questions I am forced to think about a subject properly, so it often comes into focus.

In the foreword for Adrian Shaugnessy’s book, How To Be A Graphic Designer Without Losing Your Soul, you mention taking time between clients to pause for some self-reflection. Are there any specific exercises you can think of and recommend to young designers to aid this kind of self-reflection?

Yes, easy: Go on a trip to a place you have never been before. By yourself.

Finally, is there one question you’d like to ask young designers?

What touched you in design lately?

The Glass House Visitors Center (image from Pentagram)

Crouwel and Vignelli spoke to the permanence of architecture and the importance with which it is imbued. “If only…” I think to myself, “graphic designers had that kind of power and influence.”

James Biber, architect and partner at Pentagram, reveals that it’s probably more complex and nuanced than that. I asked Biber about the challenge of working with graphic designers.

Which project of yours has been especially difficult?

Our own office. It’s the hardest project I have ever done.

Is it difficult to express architectural ideas with graphic design collaborators?

I spend more time than I would like to excusing the behavior of architects. They can be a difficult lot.

What do enjoy most about working with designers across disciplinary lines?

They are usually smarter than I am. It’s good to play tennis with better players.

Looking forward to Biber’s upcoming Small Talk, I was curious about his own experience with lectures.

Do you recall a presentation that’s had a lasting impact on you?

I remember Philiip Johnson and I.M. Pei on a panel with David Rockefeller, discussing architecture and their careers. The true balance of power became abundantly clear when David Rockefeller began a sentence with “when Father donated the land for the Unitied Nations”

This Wednesday, James Biber speaks on the intersection of architecture and graphic design, including his work on the Visitors Center for Philip Johnson’s Glass House and many other projects.

The event is sold out, but there may be seats available for on-site registration. They’re first-come-first-served, so hesitate not!

For event information and location, click here

Tobias Wong’s Silver Pills, filled with real silver

It’s surprising, though it shouldn’t be, to see them sharing a line-up with Steven Heller (no stranger to humor or wit) and Kid Robot founder Paul Budnitz. Add to the mix Ze Frank as moderator, and you’ve got yourself quite an entertaining conversation about design. That’s exactly what Core77’s upcoming offsite event looks to be. Curious about all this funny business, I asked Core77 partner Allan Chochinov about his intentions and hopes for Design, Wit, and The Creative Act.

You’ve put together quite a witty bunch for this conference. How did you come to build a design event around the theme of humor?

One of our points of departure was our desire to create a half day conference that was going to be really happy. A lot of design conferences are so sobering. There are so many big problems going on right now, and it can be really daunting. So very intentionally, we wanted to provide a day that would be life-affirming. That led us to this notion of wit and humor. Combing those with design, there’s actually a lot to learn from thinkers, writers, and practitioners.

Kelly Dobson’s blendie, in which the object coerces the user into speaking in the object’s language, is a great example. You growl at the blender and it will respond to the ferocity of your growls. I think this is such an amazing twist on interface design. It’s really a sweet spot of where design and culture collide, which is how we want to frame a lot of what we do.

A conversation with a blender! Are humorous designs like this limited to experiments and provocations, or do you see them entering the commercial realm?

That’s what we hope to address at the event. We ask in our pitch for the afternoon, “are there limits to commercializing this kind of design or are we seeing new opportunities for the provocateur in an ever commoditized world?” We don’t mean to sound crass. We don’t feel there’s a mandate to commercialize all design. I think the basic promise of the day is to discuss the ways to speak to people along an emotional spectrum without trying to sell them something new or novel…to speak to a place in their hearts. I think Kelly’s piece is an example of changing the terms, the language, and ultimately that discourse.

Then Ze Frank seems to be the perfect choice for moderating this conversation.

I think Ze Frank and his work change the terms all the time, as any humorist or comedian does. Both in terms of putting unlike elements together in a surprising way, but also really toying with language and the interpretation of language. I think the languages of design (products, graphic, branding, communication, architecture…all of them) are about trying to find a space in the language to talk to people. I’m hoping this day is going to talk about all the different ways creators and audiences can talk to each other.

You talk about the challenge of designing across culture and the lack of shared experiences. Is it your proposal that humor is one of those things that can bridge that gap.

This came up in working with Ze to frame what the day would be. He said one of the challenges of humor is that a lot of it depends on a shared cultural experience. I’ve long heard that the final step in learning a language is humor.

So it my not necessarily be an answer, but it’s something to consider as a strategy.

One of the hottest issues in design and branding is how to take products, services, customer experiences and translate them across cultures in this global marketplace. Everybody’s looking for repeatable strategies that they can count on. It involves a lot of ethnography, but also perhaps, a light touch and some empathy. Quite a healthy does of empathy actually. This is something that larger corporations are struggling with all of the time. I think this afternoon can help move that dialogue a little bit.

What does the format of the event bring to the table?

It’s a half-day event, with presentations, then a moderated panel and Q & A, followed by a cocktail party. This time, we’re holding the event on Friday, so everyone can enjoy the cocktail party. We want to encourage the networking and socializing elements, which are very often some of the great things that happens at these events. We want to end that day on a very high night note after what’s going to be a very inspiring and design-affirming afternoon.

Core77 presents

Design, Wit, and the Creative Act:

Leveraging the power of humor towards great customer experiences

Friday 9 November 2007

2:00PM-6:00PM

Art Directors Club, 1106 W 29th St.

More Info: www.core77.com/offsite

Every designer brings their own approach to the design process. As that process grows to engage more disciplines and is fed by a multitude of skills, the task of harnessing diverse creative potential and directing it toward a common goal is not a task to be taken lightly. Rie Norregaard is tackling just that and spoke with us about leading collaboration and the skills designers need to succeed.

Rie Norregaard is Creative Director in the New York studio of the esteemed international design firm, Frog Design. There she guides teams and is in charge of digital media and digital design. She works closely with design analysts, strategists and industrial designers on projects focused on interaction and visual design.

In a forecast for the design industry, are you able to identify trends that you see from your perspective.

We’re an interdisciplinary firm—we have many disciplines of design and design thinking under one roof. I interview a lot of designers, and in them we look for the ability to think outside the set of tools a designer might have from school or one particular work experience is being challenged. Designers need to continue to add to their skill-set all of the time. I see that becoming more and more relevant for designers, not just in this environment, but in other environments also.

I don’t think that’s a surprise to anyone, but the ability to really stretch is becoming more and more important. Not just the ability, but also an active interest in doing that. So there’s a continuous process of learning, both in term so tools and in new areas of design. We find that very useful and necessary in the way that we work. It’s not easy to come by, frankly.

Do you see that happening with traditionally trained designers, or are you seeing other people with those outside skills already, adapting to design roles

I think it happens in both directions. Right now, we see people who are steeped and trained in technology taking on design roles and taking responsibility for design, which is interesting because their process is somewhat different and they arrive at solutions differently. On the other hand, people who are trained “traditionally” (whatever that means in design right now), also need to be very interested in technology, for instance, in order to create good and relevant solutions.

That’s what we’re seeing a need for more and more. The people that are most successful have that ability to move in and out, not to be experts, but to be interested and eager to collaborate in meaningful ways.

How is working with designers who collaborate this way improved the development of projects compared to past methods?

We have a lot of projects that span from web-based and application-based solutions into packaging and out-of-box experience. That’s the breadth of touch points for a brand, for instance. It’s very powerful for us when one designer is able to give input along all of those touch points. It can be challenging to understand an out-of-box experience and how a brand is perceived and dealt with in that way and also understand what that means in a web-based environment. The designer must translate values across the various experiences that we want to create.

Do you find in those situations where some of the touchpoints are very technical and others are more emotional a challenge to resolving the tension between aesthetics and mechanics?

Both aspects are part of the craft of design. It’s also very much dependent on how a particular designer approaches design. It takes all kinds. Different people have different ways of approaching a process and we try to create an environment here that allows for that variety. It’s the tension between different working styles and different ways of arriving at a solution that nurtures an extremely creative environment.

So, you’re embracing very personal design perspectives within your process?

Yes. And that’s a good thing to know about yourself as a designer—to know what you’re process is like and how you best arrive at solutions. This is especially true when you work with other people. Somme people, somehow, internalize information and based on informed intuition come up with a solution or a part of a solution and they’re able to share it. Other people use a much more analytical, step-by-step process This can be easier to follow, but for some people that’s just not how their their design brains work. It’s important to accommodate both types of processes in a creative environment.

You’re responsible for helping those processes coalesce into one cohesive process.

Yes. The goal is to create enough structure so people can communicate and work together. Allowing for differences of approach is very, very important.

Rie Norregaard joins Etienne Fang, Elizabeth Pastor, Leslie Wellott and moderator Chee Pearlman at The Future of Design in a Global Market, a panel discussion on what’s driving change in the design industry.

Wednesday September 5 2007
7:00-9:00pm
Cooper Union’s Wollman Auditorium
51 Astor Place
more info