

Design is becoming a competitive advantage for startups - nwest
http://venturebeat.com/2011/10/05/design-is-becoming-a-competitive-advantage-for-startups/

======
lkrubner
This article seems ahistorical. It suffers from a lack of awareness regarding
how far back some of these trends go. The inaccurate emphasis here is on
something unheard of and new:

"Technical founders have already become prerequisites in the world of tech
startups. Now get ready for the designer founder. The combination of this new
duo is going to change the world of tech forever."

But this trend is not new for startups. 37 Signals has been preaching this for
a long time now. I can not easily find the original blog post that I'm
thinking of, but there is this:

"At 37signals, designers lead the teams. Each development team is made of up
three people – two programmers and one designer. The designer also manages the
project. In addition to designing the screens/elements, you’ll keep the team
focused and make calls about what’s important."

<http://37signals.com/svn/design?n=25>

But I recall quotes on the 37 Signals blog from as early as 2004 where they
were essentially saying the same thing. Since they first began talking about
Basecamp, they have talked about this style of development. This is not new.

~~~
anigbrowl
Back in the 90s I switched from Yahoo to Google because of the clean
uncluttered look as much as the quality of the search results. And while UI
guidelines have always been enforced fairly rigidly on Apple's platform, the
quality and consistency of icons, toolbars, etc. on windows applications have
always been a good proxy for the reliability and utility of the underlying
code. ANSI or command-line software has a strong design element; _Norton
Utilities_ , _Lotus 1-2-3_ and _WordPerfect_ were winners in their respective
markets because they had robust visual grammars, and even a batch file or
shell script needs some design to the extent that it's user-facing.

Recently I've been using a terminal to some ancient AS/400 database to look up
property records at my local city hall, and it's an excellent reminder of how
even the simplest task can become completely user-hostile if design is
overlooked.

------
ggwicz
It's always been an advantage, we're just becoming aware of it.

Like, being fit has always been an advantage for organisms. But until
organisms came along who developed language and became able to communicate
that it was valuable (aka humans), nobody was saying "it's a competitive
advantage to be healthy".

~~~
chrisdroukas
It's interesting, for sure. I'm not much of a programmer – I come from a print
design background – but people here demo amazing weekend projects. In some
cases, it seems like the sole difference between a weekend project and a
marketable product is comprehensive design.

------
DanI-S
Building a product is composed of two (blurry) stages: creating something that
solves a problem, and adapting that solution to suit the person who will be
using it.

Arguably, without design, there _is_ no product - by making decisions that are
necessary to take something from paper into reality, you are going through a
process of design.

Design is most acknowledged in consumer goods, but it is present everywhere.
Imagine you are building a widget that forms part of the internal mechanism of
a space probe. It will likely only be seen or touched by a few technical
people, it probably doesn't need visual appeal, but you must still design it
to be feasible to manufacture and convenient to handle during assembly.

You will have to make decisions above and beyond its basic function - does the
form fit the assembly worker's perceived model of what it does? Can it be held
in human hands safely and without risking damage? Would any damage or
incorrect installation be visually evident?

There is a false dichotomy between engineering and design. Modern technology
is closing the conceptual gap. Whilst we need a certain degree of
specialization, I strongly believe there should be no such thing as a 'pure'
engineer or designer. If we want to create usable tools, we all need to know a
little of both.

~~~
tedkimble
I enjoy the discussion between engineering and design.

I used to think of myself as an engineering-type person. I _engineered_
solutions. Indeed, my undergraduate education was in math and physics. But
then I began a lengthy graduate design education in architecture and, in the
process, began to _design_ solutions. I had become a design-type person.

Yet when I reflected on these two types of tasks -- engineering and design --
I realized they were not different types of tasks at all. Rather, engineering
and design are two different approaches to the singular task of creation:
design is creation in which decisions are based primarily upon qualitative
metrics; engineering is creation in which decisions are based primarily upon
quantitative metrics. I was instead simply a creative-type person, just one
with an ability to approach problems with both engineering and design eyes.

Perhaps my most important observation is that engineering and design are
fundamentally more similar than different. And by improving your abilities in
either, you are improving your abilities at that which is similar: the
creative process itself.

------
Neputys
...The use of that last phrase, “style over substance” has always been, as
Oscar Wilde observed, a marvellous and instant indicator of a fool. For those
who perceive a separation between the two have either not lived, thought, read
or experienced the world with any degree of insight, imagination or connective
intelligence...

Stephen Fry

~~~
gerrit
That's a great quote as it shows aesthetics are part of what the product is,
rather than something you can "add later".

But most people's preconceptions are of design being primarily concerned with
aesthetics and visuals. I find it helpful to show that there is another kind
of design that deals primarily with functionality. You could label the two
graphic design and interaction design. And of course both are interwoven and
interdependent, but they often involve different skillsets and methods..

------
richardw
I think it's useful to look at a different industry - cars - to see how this
could play out.

Initially it was mostly about figuring out how to make them work. Later, it
was making them work better and how to make more of them in a shorter time.
These days a car needs to be able to sustain performance for many years with a
tiny amount of failures or there's a lawsuit.

Design has clearly become more important. It's probably easy to say that
design is the 'most important thing' since engineering is all good, but even
now it would be wrong. Some marques need passable engineering and design, and
focus on price. Others focus on great engineering with passable design (Volvo?
IMHO). Others on great engineering and great design but passable price
(Porsche, say, vs Bugatti). Toyota is much more about engineering and price,
than design.

This mirrors Porter's 'generic strategies' [1] where different companies can
compete in the same overall market, each embodying different principles by
which they compete.

Similarly, I suspect that the design/engineering issue won't be 'answered'.
Each niche and market will have different requirements. Different solution
providers, each with a different design/engineering mix, will succeed based on
how that mix and the resulting solution match the specific needs of the
customer.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porter_generic_strategies>

------
omouse
Did you know that the left/right sides of the brain theory has been debunked
and hasn't been seriously considered for the last few decades? Stop using it
to talk about different types of skills, it just makes you sound stupid.

edit: just in case you need more info about this...
[http://scienceblogs.com/neurophilosophy/2007/10/the_left_bra...](http://scienceblogs.com/neurophilosophy/2007/10/the_left_brain_right_brain_myt.php)

------
fortes
"There is, however, a shortage of good startup designers, at least when it
comes to people who have both interaction and product design experience and
skill sets. Designers today are being asked to do more than simply build
visuals and hand them off to engineers. They are evolving into experts in user
research (customer development), information architecture (IA), interaction
design (IxD), visual design, and storytelling (copy writing and messaging).
They also possess back-end skills and have a thorough understanding of the
technology stack that the product is being built on. "

It seems that the definition of a "good designer" includes various technical
skills / knowledge, while the definition of a "good developer" does not
include design. I've noticed this a few times in startup culture, where people
are hesitant to hire UX/designers that do not code.

------
ssharp
It's pretty startling how some traditionally B&M institutions will neglect the
UX of their online products. Banks, for instance, will spend lots of money and
attention to their physical customer touch-points, but banks' online banking
is woefully without character and lacking in usability.

I think things are improving, but the fact that design is still a strong
competitive advantage (in many types of businesses, not just startups) shows
how lacking it is. Companies understand the importance of their brand, but
they seem to undervalue how the digital experience affects the brand.

------
sgdesign
My problem with this type of article is that while it says design is
important, it still propagates a false dichotomy between code and design (or
form and function).

The takeaway shouldn't be that you need to find a designer co-founder that
cares about design, it should be that YOU, as a technical founder, need to
care (and learn) about design.

Developers who launch their startup need to learn about running a business
even though that's not their main domain of expertise. So why couldn't they
learn about good design as well?

------
cateye
You can not make something "without" design.

You can find something ugly. You can try to make something more aesthetically
appealing for a certain group of people.

If these people have "aesthetic appeal" as a criteria, you can have a
competitive advantage. Unless you are selling jewelry or other luxury
products.

But most of the time, aesthetic appeal is not a key decision factor. People
may not decide really rationally but they are not going to buy something
without any function that solves a real problem for them.

------
itmag
Is the design co-founder becoming the new technical co-founder? (In terms of
perceived difficulty of acquiring them).

So the difficulty of finding a co-founder would go like this: business <
technical < designer.

I certainly feel a little like this. I am looking to start a startup, and I am
MUCH more interested in hooking up with a really good UX/design person than a
business person.

------
mtgentry
"There is, however, a shortage of good startup designers, at least when it
comes to people who have both interaction and product design experience and
skill sets."

As a design/product guy I'd love to work at your startup IF the problem you're
trying to solve is compelling. A good number of startups fail that litmus test
for me.

If your idea is awesome, I'm in.

------
kingsidharth
Very true. My co-founder pays a dollar extra for each domain (he has around
100) just because GoDaddy's design sucks.

------
int3rnaut
For me, design needs to be taken into consideration from all sides. Technical,
creative, everything needs to be put together just right for a project to take
off--being good in all fields is a competitive advantage. Design in the sense
that this article writes about is important (and as a not very technical
founder I appreciate vb pumping my tires) but never forget the other parts of
the machine that help make it run.

From the lens of a role-playing gamer (big fan of Bioware games), I think this
realization can best be described by the distribution of attribute points. You
can drop all your points into strength, and sure enough there will be times
that you excel as you bash things with swords, but there will be times when
you think, boy it would be nice to have a bit of magic or better charisma or
whatever to solve this problem (usually bad guys) and then you start going all
magic... usually the best builds that provide the best overall advantage are
the ones that are balanced. So again, as much hype as these Design people
might be getting now, don't forget about the other "attributes" as it were.

------
pbregman
This is why there needs to be an easily accessible hub for designers and
coders alike to present ideas and find people to work with. The idea of
bumping into the ideal business partner while in school, at work, or out
socially is somewhat arcane.

~~~
mtgentry
I've had great success finding talented programmers here:
<http://builditwith.me>

(not an ad, I just really like the service)

------
_pius
Becoming?

~~~
rhizome
It's common for personal discoveries to be interpreted ahistorically. It's a
function of ignorance.

------
Swizec
Design has always been a competitive advantage for startups doing anything
with consumers.

Case in point, Apple vs. every other small PC manufacturer in the 70's and
80's ... hell, even now.

~~~
wmeredith
What? I'm pretty sure Apple got their arse kicked all over the block in the
70's and 80's. I strongly agree that it is a competitive advantage, but I
don't get this comment.

~~~
defen
Apple had "the biggest IPO since Ford" in December 1980, so they certainly
weren't getting their arse kicked in the 70s. Things were pretty grim from
85-97 though.

~~~
marquis
Yes, but that wasn't design related. They had desirable technology and
software for the time and they marketed aggressively.

~~~
defen
Well, Jobs' desire for a small, quiet (fanless) machine drove them to hire Rod
Holt, who designed the switching power supply for the Apple ][. Jobs quote
from the bio (it's unclear when he said this): "That switching power supply
was as revolutionary as the Apple ][ logic board was. Rod doesn't get a lot of
credit for this in the history books, but he should. Every computer now uses
switching power supplies, and they all rip off Rod's design."

Would the Apple ][ have been as successful without the switching power supply?
Hard to say. But even at the Apple ][ stage, Jobs' design sense was making its
way into Apple products.

~~~
marquis
We may be at conflict with what we mean by design. I would consider the
switching power supply to be an example of desirable technology, not design.

~~~
defen
My contention is that they wouldn't have had the switching power supply if not
for Jobs' design aesthetic. They would have just used whatever was standard at
the time, making the machine bigger and noisier.

------
billpatrianakos
It's very hard to tell when design or functionality makes or breaks a site. I
think we shouldn't be asking that question at all. The whole thing is
completely situational.

For Craigslist the function is most important and credit should go to the back
end guys. Something like Twitter would give it to the front end guys. I'm
leaving scaling out of the equation for now and assuming all sites will
perform the same under any load.

A site that is ugly doesn't get used. People always judge a book by its cover
especially these days. But if the pretty site doesn't work then you're also
screwed. I really hate this debate over who is more important: front or back
end. You need both. Period.

I also hate the whole "design is easy" / "no, programming is easy" argument.
Neither one is easy. They're different animals. The way you approach the front
end and back end are totally different. I'm a generalist but lean toward
design. I'm in awe of the back end guys but then some are in awe of me. We
have totally different goals in mind when working. The back end guys are
concerned with functionality. Security, scaling. The front end is all about
beauty, load times, SEO, user experience. At one point in our work we do end
up in the middle. That middle is when we're both thinking about the the front
end is interacting with the back end and how will we code everything so that
A) we can easily connect the two and B) we can efficiently extend the front
end to accommodate new back end features and vice versa.

I understand the article wasn't exactly pitting programmers against designers
but there's always that subtext and people always start thinking about it.
It's a shame that the designers haven't gotten as much credit until recently
but at the same time, even as a designer, I must give huge props to the back
end guys as I understand the pains they go through.

But can we put the whole front vs. back debate to rest already? You just can't
have one without the other. Period.

~~~
rhizome
_A site that is ugly doesn't get used._

This, right after talking about Craigslist, a site that enjoys a monthly cycle
of "Craigslist sucks, it's so ugly!" ranters who are reliably and continually
proven to be clueless.

~~~
imjk
As mtgentry replied, Craigslist had a huge advantage in being first to market.
But now as Craigslist is being supplanted by more niche focused sites, you
better believe that good design will be an integral part of those new sites.
Refer to [http://thegongshow.tumblr.com/post/345941486/the-spawn-of-
cr...](http://thegongshow.tumblr.com/post/345941486/the-spawn-of-craigslist-
like-most-vcs-that-focus)

~~~
billpatrianakos
Yeah. I knew someone would call me out for saying the thing about ugly sites
right after mentioning Craigslist but I think my point still stands. The only
reason I felt I could safely say that was because of your point exactly, imjk.
Thanks for saying it better than I could.

~~~
rhizome
No, your point doesn't stand when it's predicated on imjk's skills at
predicting the future and a rhetorical interpretation of Craigslist's life so
far.

Both history and reality confirm for us that ugly sites other than CL do just
fine.

