Writing

My design philosophy

Writing

My design philosophy

Writing

My design philosophy

Writing

My design philosophy

I don't care how much this joke gets made, I still laugh at it.


But I'm going to take the stance of "that one guy on Twitter who doesn't understand the joke". Even when designing simple things, we're moreso creating cubes, not rectangles.

Rectangles are 2D and can't hold a lot. They appear far more finite than a cube. Cubes are 3D, and even with their constraints, they are substantial and can actually hold stuff.

Because even when you are doing this (not recommended):

Your design work is so, so much more than what the end result appears to be, even when it ends up basically looking like a rectangle:

The button

I don't care how much this joke gets made, I still laugh at it.


But I'm going to take the stance of "that one guy on Twitter who doesn't understand the joke". Even when designing simple things, we're moreso creating cubes, not rectangles.

Rectangles are 2D and can't hold a lot. They appear far more finite than a cube. Cubes are 3D, and even with their constraints, they are substantial and can actually hold stuff.

Because even when you are doing this (not recommended):

Your design work is so, so much more than what the end result appears to be, even when it ends up basically looking like a rectangle:

The button

I don't care how much this joke gets made, I still laugh at it.


But I'm going to take the stance of "that one guy on Twitter who doesn't understand the joke". Even when designing simple things, we're moreso creating cubes, not rectangles.

Rectangles are 2D and can't hold a lot. They appear far more finite than a cube. Cubes are 3D, and even with their constraints, they are substantial and can actually hold stuff.

Because even when you are doing this (not recommended):

Your design work is so, so much more than what the end result appears to be, even when it ends up basically looking like a rectangle:

The button

I don't care how much this joke gets made, I still laugh at it.


But I'm going to take the stance of "that one guy on Twitter who doesn't understand the joke". Even when designing simple things, we're moreso creating cubes, not rectangles.

Rectangles are 2D and can't hold a lot. They appear far more finite than a cube. Cubes are 3D, and even with their constraints, they are substantial and can actually hold stuff.

Because even when you are doing this (not recommended):

Your design work is so, so much more than what the end result appears to be, even when it ends up basically looking like a rectangle:

The button

How I Design

Spoiler: I can't tell you precisely how I design because it changes depending on the project, but this is a way to illustrate how I think about the process generally.

(con/di)verge

iterate

collaborate

Scope

Define

Discover

Deliver

Entropy

I could make several of these cube graphics and still not fully express everything that goes into a set of final design decisions. Brand itself could be broken down into something like the above. For now, I'll just stick with high-level process.

Distinct phases (the faces above.. man there's an opportunity for a pun here) are discovery, definition, and delivery. They contain the whole of the project. Convergence/divergence, iteration, and collaboration are what connect the phases together. Scope is essentially appetite; it's the volume of the cube. I won't bore you with defining these things since I'm definitely not breaking new ground here.


And then there's entropy, which I don't think gets enough credit. Creative work is inherently going to create all manner of stuff that doesn't make it to the end product. It could be anything from archived explorations to wanting to try out a new design tool in the middle of a project just for the heck of it. Those explorations could eventually make it into the product, or that design tool could eventually be picked up by the whole team. Entropy is not waste.

My favorite talk of all time, given by Ben Chestnut, is the reason I will forever think about creative entropy.

Why I Design

Anything designed requires a significant process that allows the designer to navigate complexity. Even a product's button could be peeled back like layers of an onion.

That's a big reason why I really got into design, and why I am still a designer. Solving complex problems is fun (even if most are never truly 'solved'). I won't lie though, I originally pursued digital design because I thought it would be a great way for me to make money being creative while I listened to music all day. That turned out not to be the case, but I loved it anyway.

Visual design is what drew me in, and interaction design is what kept me interested early on. I've long been the kind of person who is willing to debate, go deeper, and alter my worldview based on better data. UX methodologies gave me the ability to have greater conviction and impact, thanks to better data. And the reason I find products and businesses fascinating is empathy. How could I possibly leave out the 'e' word from a piece on design philosophy?


I want my focus, as a designer, to be this: help people become better and more efficient at something they love, or something they do often. These are the kinds of people I've helped so far:

  • Bankers

  • Accountants, Controllers, and CFOs

  • Health & wellness content creators

  • Small & medium business owners

  • Front-of-house staff at restaurants

I look forward to adding more to the list 🚀.

Go back Home →

Matt Baird is a Digital Product Designer currently looking for his next role

Matt Baird is a Digital Product Designer currently looking for his next role

Matt Baird is a Digital Product Designer currently looking for his next role

Matt Baird is a Digital Product Designer currently looking for his next role