In a conversation recently I mentioned how I am really a non-designer designer. (My friend Martin calls me an Analyst Designer.)

My interest is in using design (and technology and people-skills) to solve problems, to make lives and work easier, to make a profit, to make a difference…

The traditional definition of “design” is, and has always been, too limiting for where I want to take my work. And I am increasingly having this reinforced in various conversations.

I define design as: A structured way to creatively understand and solve problems; leveraging insights from as many diverse fields and sources as possible.

The conventional definition of design is heavily skewed towards the creation of visual or tangible outcomes – like objects, printed material, and interactive/tappable/pinchable experiences. In different circumstances and times, any of the following is seen as “design”: blingy/shiny things, trendy/stylish things, curvy things, blocky things, brightly coloured things, pastel things, black things…

So what is non-designer design? More in future posts.

Charles and Ray Eames come to mind as the quintessential non-designer designers.