I think there is a lot more to this discussion, more than about “just making things simple and easy to use”. Why are some objects simple and easy to use but end up limited and boring? Why are some objects, like the iPhone, simple to use but somehow able to have many layers of more complex functions? Is this what they call simplexity, or an “emerging theory that proposes a possible complementary relationship between complexity and simplicity”? (via Wikipedia)

Recently Tim Brown muses with his colleagues at IDEO that simplicity in form, also called minimalism, is about a surface treatment or style that is “…limited in its usefulness”.

My own view is that minimalism has come to represent a style and as such is limited in its usefulness. It represents a reaction to complexity whereas simplicity relies on an understanding of the complex. This is an important difference. One is about the surface, about the stuff. The other is about our experience and requires a deep appreciation of how things work so as to make them just simple enough.

So we can achieve simplicity when we are able to understand, distill and appreciate the complex enough to extract the simple. The Guru of simplicity: John Maeda, expands on this at his Laws of Simplicity blog. John writes:

Image from Laws of Simplicity

Muji expresses their point that achieving simplicity is deceptively complex because it is a thoughtful process.

I thought the description of Muji’s process pretty much nails it. But perhaps, the Harvard Business Blog’s Ron Ashkenas says it best by putting simplicity in a commercial context with his post: “Selling Simplicity — Not Just Marketing It“.

The reality is that simplicity is highly appealing in a world that is getting more and more complex — where consumers have too many choices, where technology is constantly evolving, and where the political and economic environment is unpredictable. In the midst of all this instability and change, people want to get back to basics. They want uncomplicated products, straightforward guidance, and things that work quickly and simply the first time, without lots of extra effort.

What is interesting about this phenomenon is that it is in sharp contrast with the thinking of the past few years — which was that consumers wanted unlimited choice so that they could customize their products and services to fit their own unique needs and lifestyles. As such, technology companies pushed for more and more bells and whistles, while other firms drove towards mass customization. The result was a huge array of choices that became almost overwhelming and costly.

The hardest part of simplicity is when a designer or product manager has to take a conscious effort to limit functions or specifications of a product to the most crucial ones. The process of achieving simplicity is highly complex one. I would say it requires a good combination of anthropological studies, analyzing consumer behavior and two secret ingredients, a designer’s problem solving skill and critical insight.

I agree with Ron that now more so than ever, the focus on consumer profiles and segments will continue to be very important in our product development process as it drives designs that are created from a consumer perspective. Better still, it really shows that we are listening to them.

I hope you enjoyed this mini research exercise as much as I did. Looking forward to reading your comments!

Piano Staircase:
”Take the stairs instead of the escalator or elevator and feel better” is something we often hear or read in the Sunday papers. Few people actually follow that advice. Can we get more people to take the stairs over the escalator by making it fun to do? See the results here.

This video really made me smile.

It was created by The Fun Theory an initiative by Volkswagen “…dedicated to the thought that something as simple as fun is the easiest way to change people’s behaviour for the better. Be it for yourself, for the environment, or for something entirely different, the only thing that matters is that it’s change for the better.”

It is great to see examples of design or designers succeeding in encouraging people to recycle or take the stairs, get healthy and perhaps save some electricity by shutting down the escalators. Check out another of my favorite below for inspiration in your next sustainable project.

Bottle Bank Arcade Machine:
Many of us return our plastic bottles and cans. Noticeably fewer recycle their glass. Maybe that’s because we don’t get any money in return, as we do for cans and plastic. Can we change this attitude by making recycling glass fun to do? So you are not just rewarded with a good conscience, you also get a smile. See the results here.

Check out the rest of their videos at The Fun Theory.

Commenting Rules: I love reading your comments as it allows me to interact and learn from you. Being critical is fine, giving constructive criticism, even better. However if you are rude, I will delete your comment. Repeat, and I will blacklist you. The world is full of negativity, so I don’t need anymore on my blog, which I consider my online home. Would you encourage Neanderthal behavior in your home? Neither would I.

Finally please use your personal name or initials and not your business name. By doing the latter, it comes off like spam, and that’s an auto delete. Thank you and I hope you enjoy being part of the conversation!

How true it is. If you consider your blog/website as precious as your home, deciding to delete or spam certain comments gets really easy. I practice a zero tolerance rule against spammers and flamers, but fear not, I often dig through my spam box and fish out the legitimate comments.

Here’s to the never-ending improvement of your experience at Design Sojourn. Thank you!

This was inspired by Tim Ferriss who was in turn inspired by Brian Oberkirch.

If you don’t have the time to watch the 19 minute video, check out Michael’s 5 secrets which I have reproduced below.

1) Listen first, then design

2) Don’t avoid the obvious

3) The problem contains the solution

4) Indulge your obsessions

5) Love is the answer

What I also found particularly interesting was how Michael started his talk by claiming that he is not creative at all. (Shock, horror!) He then goes on to describe himself more like a “doctor” waiting for “patients” to come to him with design problems to solve. This echos my believe that design or creativity cannot exist in a vacuum.

Via: Behance’s 99% Conference

Check out this visualization of the Design Process taught at the Stanford D-School . The photo was taken by Nina, a senior at Stanford majoring in product design.

The visual is familiar, logical and strangely alluring. The design process made sexy? Just follow the curves!

Via: Young and Brilliant.