Comments

• 

  Derek

  13 years ago

  Z

  Z

  Reply
  I realized after reading Mike's comments that I may have been blunt in my critique. Spend too much time with corporate management tends to do that to you. My comments were designed to provoke students and graduates like Krystal to do better, not to discourage. I understand all too well the frustrations of fighting the good fight, which is why ambitious young designers like Krystal must have their A-game and understand all aspects of sustainable design/production, especially since she is targeting fortune 500 CEOs.
  
  I say the same thing to my interns: If you had 15 undisturbed minutes of a CEOs time, what will your pitch be? What will you say that his team of consultants haven't already said? My interns are fortunate enough to get 45 mins of our CEO's time every quarter to present their ideas. These 3rd and 4th year design students operate at an extremely high level and present well thought out arguments addressing issues like scalability and factors such as local environmental impact restrictions on materials used.
  
  P&G, Pepsi Co and Johnson and Johnson's has very sharp IEEE sustainable teams in-house. Her hit list are full of companies in the food/household goods market all of whom are very active in sustainable product research.
  
  I whole heartily encourage young designers like Krystal to aim large, but always keep in mind when you are given the opportunity "what are you going say that they don't know already". I recommend graduates like Krystal to try to get internships with firms like Fuse Project, McDonough or Nike, where they can truly learn the business end of sustainable design ... ultimately polish their A-game.

  !Report as spam
• 

  Mike

  13 years ago

  Z

  Z

  Reply
  I agree with Derek on most comments but would like to point out that as a graduate most likely that person has not come to terms with the routine business practices these days and see's only what needs to be changed, regardless of why it just isn't that simple. I know because I have been going through this same phase in my own experiences. I look at packaging for instance much like Krystal and ask myself "why?" then I answer my own question with "well because its cheap to do it that way" and I go on with my day. Its taken me a long time to get to this point without becoming extremely frustrated. But to say that a proposal like this could damage the credibility of design is where I have to disagree. You mentioned that most consumer companies have a sustainable design office or at least a consultant that provides research and guidance. I think this campaign is just a suggestion that this aspect of their company needs to be improved upon. And as far as numbers not scaling for major manufacturing I feel Ive heard this over and over again and what young designers like Krystal understand is that this is where change will have the largest impact seeing how they are the largest producers for consumer products and goods. I know things don't change over night but these concerns are something that we have brushed off and said are unrealistic and are not economically sustainable.
  I believe that Krystal is a designer who is rooted in "operational reality", the reality in which if we do not change are routine of mass production,consumption and disposal very quickly we are going to be sitting in our own mess because we will have run out of other countries to send it to. I do like and agree however that business courses should be implemented into design, they go hand in hand along with sustainable design and business practices.

  !Report as spam
• 

  Derek

  13 years ago

  Z

  Z

  Reply
  While I think this is admirable, it's very naive and misguided. Having spent the last 25 years working with several top CEOs of major consumer goods companies and retailers, I can tell you a CEOs concern at a fortune 500 level is not so much sustainable design or industrial design per-say, CEOs are aware of this. The issue at hand are the economics of sustainable design, where is the cost benefit analysis. When you're dealing with a product line that can cost north of 20 to 60 million dollars a year CEOs want the numbers on a large scale. Most consumer products companies have a sustainable design office or at minimum have consultants on hand that provide research and guidance.
  
  When I talk to students about cradle to cradle or cradle to grave design they have tons of wonderful ideas, many applicable to a local or small scale production. But, where things fall apart are plans that try to address major manufacturing where the numbers just don't scale.
  
  This is the problem when new graduates approach companies raw, without the proper business understanding. This actually tends to damage the credibility of design and reinforces the misconception business owners have that designers aren't rooted in operational reality.
  
  I'm a big advocate for MBA programs to incorporate some level of sustainability coursework and for design (in particular) ID programs to have at least a fundamental business course.
  

  !Report as spam
• 

  Matt

  13 years ago

  Z

  Z

  Reply
  Would you prefer the phrase "stuff that lasts long and doesn't produce a lot of waste" ? There are multiple words in the English language for a reason.
  
  Sorry, as soon as I read your comment my mind started wondering what kind of person can't look past a single word in an article.

  !Report as spam
• 

  SPent

  13 years ago

  Z

  Z

  Reply
  Sorry, as soon as I read something about 'sustainable' design, my mind shuts off, I stop reading and forget whatever it is I just read. I hate that word. What is it with designers and the darn word 'sustainable'?! That buzzword has been driven into the ground. I don't even remember what it was I was posting about...

  !Report as spam