T

Design Council Issue 1 46/47

Magazine Winter 2006

one day all designers may be this shape

The T-shaped designer sounds like another hunk of

American business jargon but, says Rhymer Rigby, if
designers, educators and business leaders don’t pay
heed to it, the UK could lose a crucial competitive edge

In an age when management buzz words come and
go so fast that by the time they have been run up the
flagpole the world is already saluting something
else, the idea of a T-shaped designer sounds like
a jargonistic conceit. But there is a meaning behind
the mantra, as Lesley Morris, head of skills at the
Design Council, explains: “The stem of the T is the
depth of knowledge in their specialist subject while
the horizontal cap of the T represents the breadth –
their ability to make their method, skills and thinking
work in a different context.”
Like 97% of such buzz words, the T-shaped
designer originated in America, where design
consultancies like IDEO and Jump have identified
a need for, in IDEO’s words, “specialists with a
passion and empathy for people and for other subject
areas.” The T motif taps into another of the hottest
management trends in America: design thinking or,
to put it another way, the use of design processes and
methods to foster innovation and grow businesses.
There is some debate about whether design
thinking is simply an extension of traditional design
skills or a new discipline. The best designers, from
Jamie Hewlett, the award-winning designer of the
cartoon rock band Gorillaz, to Ralph Gilles, the
creative genius behind Chrysler’s über-saloon the
300C, have often driven innovation and added
financial value.
But the application of design thinking to an array
of corporate and social problems does represent
a cultural and educational challenge to British
designers, to the system that educates designers and
to British industry. As Morris says, “The idea that
design is a way of thinking about a problem and not
a purist skill hasn’t caught on in Britain as much as it
has in the US.”
There is some concern among designers that this
new breed of polymaths or hybrids will dilute what
makes design distinctive. One man’s polymath is
another’s jack of all trades and master of precious
little. “Some designers won’t want to broaden out,”
says Morris, “they’ll be happier remaining in their
specialism.” Jonathan Ive, the British designer
behind the iPod, is of this school. The world of
MBAs and general management didn’t suit him.
Yet this attitude hasn’t stopped him joining the
 T
The Stanford view
George Kembel, executive
director of Stanford University’s
d. school, on why we need
a different way of learning.
Why is the d.school important?
In the 21st century, it will be
impossible to run innovative
businesses without being
more human-centred and
prototype-driven. Universities,
businesses and countries are
all hungry to figure out how to
be more innovative and are
very receptive to the idea that
A snapshot of life at Stanford
University’s d.school, where
design thinking is considered
the glue that binds multiple
disciplines together. This
design thinking can help create What type of projects do you 48/49
an innovative culture. work on?
Real-world messy problems
How do students learn? where solutions are not
By doing. The students do obvious, such as lighting for
most of their work in developing countries or water
interdisciplinary teams, get out systems for rural farmers.
in the field, make observations
and iterate prototypes. Are there disagreements within
Students are guided by the multidisciplinary groups?
industry executives and Yes – then the students must
experts. We want students to decide what’s important and
leave confident in their how to move forward. This
personal innovation process helps create future innovators
and with greater empathy with who will be breakthrough
different disciplines. thinkers and doers.

In the specialism of design, our schools are probably better than America’s… But
approach has begun to find
favour in the UK

Apple board as senior vice president of product.
But design thinking – and the idea of the
T-shaped designer – has led some American business
schools to broaden their curriculum, some American
design schools to change their approach and even
inspired b-schools and d-schools to collaborate. The
French business school INSEAD is now allied with
the Pasadena design college, Art Center. Design
The report, from Sir George Cox, chairman of the
Design Council, proposed a network of regional
centres of excellence that offer multidisciplinary
courses combining management studies, engineering
and technology with design and the creative arts. The
word ‘centres’ conjures up images of actual buildings
but, Morris says, “they could vary from new types of
courses – possibly in design or design management –
they’re better at the broader picture where design thinking fits into innovation
about being sympathetic and sensitive to the needs
of those who work in them.”
In IDEO’s view, vertical specialist depth was
acquired at undergraduate level while the horizontal
understanding of other disciplines and professional
contexts could often be developed in a post-graduate,
masters-style course or through early experience in
the workplace.

Lesley Morris, head of skills, Design Council

thinking has begun to influence design education in
some of the UK’s EU rivals, with design academies in
Eindhoven and Helsinki pioneering this approach.
This poses something of a dilemma for the UK
because – and let’s have no false modesty here – when
it comes to the quality of design education Britain is
a world leader. Equally, complacency isn’t an option –
note the use of the word ‘still’. The trouble with being
near the top of the pile at anything is that, if you sit
back, there’s only one way to go. Britain has a proud
and productive tradition of producing design purists –
people who are great at design, wonderful craft-based
solo specialists.
British designers are among the world’s most
famous. Apart from Ive, the most famous include
IDEO’s president Tim Brown and Ford’s head of
design, Peter Horbury. All three now work in
America, a fact that has caused some patriotic
agitation. But their Atlantic crossing seems as
inevitable as Michelangelo’s move to Rome, once he
had decided he wanted a chapel ceiling to paint.
Strong as the system that trained them is, this doesn’t
obscure the fact that, says Morris, “the Americans are
better at the broader picture where design and design
thought fit into innovation.”
Strengthening the link between design and
innovation was at the heart of last year’s Cox Review.
to creating virtual or physical centres that use
multidisciplinarity as a driver of innovation.”
To make sure that Britain was up to date with the
best practice in multidisciplinary education and
assess how relevant and adaptable these models were
to the UK, Morris led a fact-finding delegation of staff
from UK design and business schools to America in
September 2006. On their five-day trip the delegation
visited Stanford University’s well-known d.school
(led by David Kelley, the co-founder of IDEO), the
Illinois Institute of Technology’s Institute of Design
in Chicago and the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology, all of which have successfully combined
design and business.
So what did they learn? For some, the spectre
of gifted designers being turned into mediocre
T-shaped hybrids receded. Professor Penny Sparke,
pro-vice-chancellor (arts) at Kingston University, was
convinced that the UK should learn from what the
delegation saw at Stanford’s d.school, which takes
students from the university’s other masters
programmes. “We need to introduce a much more
multidisciplinary approach in design schools. In
Stanford’s d.school, design isn’t a single discipline.
We need to train specialists, but we need to teach
them to have their feelers out. It isn’t necessarily
about training people in all disciplines. It’s more
Martin Binks, professor of entrepreneurial
development and director of the Institute for
Enterprise and Innovation at Nottingham University,
favours a model where “design becomes part of what
you’re working on,” which, he says, gets students out
of their comfort zone and allows the transfer of tacit
knowledge, so you get something akin to the Stanford
approach but in three dimensions.
“The basic part is that tacit knowledge is a three-
dimensional activity and that’s where the future lies.
The focus is on trying to do that on a larger scale.
Entrepreneurship is very close to creative design.”
The danger, he admits, is that multidisciplinarianism
can be taken too far. “Some American courses try to
give you both an MBA and a full design qualification.”
John Miller, director of design at University
College Falmouth, believes that the UK has always
produced skilled collaborators. But he does concede
that places like Stanford do a better job of
communicating this through such concepts as their
T-shaped people. The Institute of Design in Chicago
has deliberately set out to ‘demystify’ design to bring
Lessons from America: Apple’s
it into mainstream business practice. Jonathan Ive, top, thinks
The failure of communication, Miller believes, designers should be designers,
may even extend to the graduates themselves. while David Kelley, IDEO co-
founder, believes in combining
“Designers need to learn to speak a different language design and business at
which is neither design-speak nor the sort of Stanford University’s d.school
T
Changing spaces
One of the less expected
themes that recurred
throughout the UK educators’
fact-finding mission to the US
was space.
In essence, educators and
designers felt that having the
right space – the kind of
informal area that has made
Starbucks increasingly popular
with American teenagers – was
key to creativity. For James
More, dean of design at
Northumbria University, the
Best of British: Jamie Hewlett,
who designed Gorillaz (top),
and Burberry’s Christopher
Bailey have scooped up
awards and, unlike such
compatriots as Tim Brown and
Jonathan Ive, have not had to
leave the UK to prosper
type of accommodation at the
schools and agencies visited
strongly affected the process
of innovation. The d.school,
which moves to a new building
in 2009, is planning to
incorporate sofas, coffee
tables, large tables, common
areas, flexible spaces (walls on
wheels) and breakout spaces.
Collaborative, non-territorial
space is easier to legislate for
in a land as vast as the US but
it’s a lesson British educators
would do well to heed.
of what you’re working on. Entrepreneurship is very close to creative design
We need multidisciplinary environments where design becomes part
consultancy-speak coming out of Stanford or the IIT’s
Institute of Design.” Miller agrees with the Cox
Review that designers need to interact with businesses
of all sizes. “Our graduates need to be able to go into
companies with 50 or 100 employees, understand
their needs and show how design can address them.”
Martin Binks, professor, Nottingham University
Professor Clare Johnston, head of the textile
department at the Royal College of Art, admits:
“There’s still something of a problem with how
business and design interact. Rather than being seen
as a craft, it needs to be seen as part of the division of
labour. At the moment, design seems to see itself just
in terms of creativity. We need to take it one step
further without taking the pizzazz out of it.”
The intricate way higher education and business
are entwined in America may, to some extent, be a
cultural thing. An MBA is a prerequisite for many jobs
in the US in a way that it still isn’t in the UK. America
is blessed with a large number of multinationals and
wealthy individuals with the means and the will to
sponsor schools and universities. The scale of
sponsorship is so vast and continuous that some
programme leaders actually refer to their industrial
sponsors as their ‘clients’ and their students as their
‘product’. For Miller, such sponsorship is not the main
aim of collaboration but he does admit, “We need to
be smarter about attracting this sort of funding.”
The absence of such strong links in the UK isn’t
necessarily the fault of designers or their educators.
The MIT Media Lab has an intriguing sponsorship
model. Companies donate around £100,000 as part of
an industrial consortium sharing intellectual property
and have access to the MediaLab’s pool of talent.
Innovative as the MIT model may be, the institute
has found it harder in Europe, where fewer
Creative thinking in action at
the Illinois Institute of Design.
But is British business ready to
welcome a generation of
design thinkers, as opposed to
technical purists?
multinationals have such deep pockets and business
culture is more inward-looking and secretive.
In Britain, where the Design Council’s research
suggests that eight out of ten businesses don’t see
design as a strategic advantage, design thinking is
almost as much of a challenge to business as it is to
designers. Many business executives might agree
with the US design agency who said that watching
designers give business advice was like “watching
a cat bark”. The irony here is that IDEO’s Tim
Brown, the poster boy for design thinking, learned his
craft in the British design education system. But his
gospel is yet to spread through British boardrooms.
The obvious danger here is that, even if Britain did
groom thousands of Brownalikes, they would, like
Brown, have to cross the Atlantic to make their mark.
If design thinking is really going to sharpen
Britain’s competitive edge, T-shaped designers have
to find kindred spirits in T-shaped business people. In
an economy where, according to a survey by the Work
Foundation, 57% of employees think their bosses
lack vision (and where even the Chartered Institute
of Personnel and Development concluded, this year,
that British firms were hampered in the global market
by a dearth of effective leaders), finding business
leaders who can see beyond their vertical strength in
manipulating Excel spreadsheets might prove more
problematic than in the US.
British business will soon be put to the test. The
Higher Education Funding Council for England is
currently studying proposals from various parties to
fund varying kinds of centres of excellence. “Some of
what Cox stipulated is already happening,” says
Sparke. “We’re seeing the Royal College of Art
linking up with Imperial College.” Other projects –
50/51
notably the ambitious redevelopment of
Northumbria University – are steps in the direction
that Cox outlined. At the same time, the Design
Council is reviewing basic design education to
examine how that too needs to change.
Looking at design education as a whole – at school
and further and higher education level – Morris says,
“We don’t have the option of maintaining the status
quo.” Johnston believes that the UK must not lose
the depth for which it is world-renowned – just add
the breadth offered by rivals. The specialisation of
British designers is a global draw. That’s why so many
young designers come from overseas to study here.
Johnston says: “The quality of what we offer explains
why some businesses are almost obsessive about
hunting for UK graduates.”
But after touring the US, Johnston thinks there is
one lesson that British educators need to heed. “One
of the things that struck us is the extraordinary
confidence they have in the system and the amazing
PR and gloss.” This is not, she says, intended as
a criticism: it is simply an observation that the
traditional British approach of dissembling, blushing
and trying above all not to draw attention to yourself
may not be the best way to do business in a global
economy where others are perfectly happy to shout.
Ultimately, the driving force behind the need for
change is the global economy, especially the massive
investments in design now being made by China,
India and Korea. But, as educators in China and India
privately admit, too many of their young designers are
taught to ask how and not why. The ability of British
designers to ask why – and for that question to be
heard in a broad business context – could prove
a serious competitive advantage.