“Design can take a moral position. But the moral position should not be to go on strike. The best way to pursue your arguments is to be inside the system.” Konstantin Grcic.

Which tied in nicely with the recent comments on one of my older blog posts Toilet designed by a fashion designer.

I thought this quote neatly summed up the challenge to the next generation of fashion designers …

Designers should be advocating for end users; these being the users of the actual final outcomes (a product, a process, a services etc), and not the users of the designer’s services.

It can be all to easy to get caught up in advocating for the users of the designer’s services – also called the client. Especially if the client is the noisier wheel. Doing so is detrimental to the …

“A German magazine has taken the ‘brave’ decision to use real women as models. … a ‘revolution’ going on in fashion. A ‘new era’ has dawned …”

This is so laughable and when compared to the other design sectors – it really shows how out of touch with reality many fashion “designers” are, and how the whole industry, including customers, participate in this grand denial.

Imagine these headlines:
“Architects specify …

This is a great reminder to everyone post the Christmas buying craze and as we head into the new year. Let 2010 be the year we reimagine and reinvent the way we live. Consumerism and the materials economy is so post-WWII. The Story of Stuff illustrates this beautifully.

Governments pander to the needs of big corporations – businesses …

Would telemarketers do what they do if they were subject to their own practices?

Clearly not for at least one establishment:

Another example is the manufacture and use of recycled slop oil (with gross pictures).

A good test of ethical business must be: would you (the owner of the business) use your own services or products?

There are some business models that are by their nature single-use.

These are wildly successful (make lots of money without huge effort), but only work for a short period of time. What comes to mind are the scams and the cons. The successful ones seem to be amazingly simple to execute in retrospect, playing on our basest desires and drivers like fear and greed. For the perpetrator at least, …

“Greed is a game played with logic only and no morals.” Scarlett Thomas.

I spotted a few books in Borders recently that dealt with clinical techniques to achieve various ends without dealing with the moral aspects: How to get women, How to win wars, How to get power…

I can’t remember the author unfortunately. And subsequent visits to Border yielded no illumination. If you do please share it below.

Anyway, …

“The Donald Trump pseudo-big way: How much do you make? What things do you own? Who have you conquered along the way? ” From The Think Big Manifesto by Michael Port.

The assumption that for me to win, someone else must lose, and that winning by at the expense of someone is somehow more valuable (and perhaps more “manly”). That there is never going to be enough to go …

“Kia-su” is Hokkien (the Chinese dialect commonly used in Singapore) that literally means “fear of losing”. According to the unkind, this “fear of losing” is allegedly a Singaporean trait – though I would postulate that it is more of a universal trait when it comes to how some practice business.

“Kia-su” has its basis in fear. The fear of scarcity. Which in turn drives greed:
Take it even if you …

Wow – what a great (sub)title!

Business is personal. When I first started saying this in 2003, people were amused or sceptical. It is good to know that other (more notable!) people have said it before me, and that many more voices are saying the same thing today – I keep seeing this phrase in various books.

How many times have we all heard the opposite: …