In the fall of 2012 one of us has conducted an informal survey among colleagues and friends on and off campus. This kind of research has of course no pretension whatsoever of scholarly value. Not now, not at this stage. It is presented here as a conversation tool, to ignite a debate on design and decision making processes. Depending on the outcome and feedback, a proper investigation might be in order. Still, even in its simplicity, the anecdotal survey provided some interesting food for thought. Here is how it worked, in the voice of Goffredo:

I asked people to consider the following scenario:

Imagine the world exactly as it is now. The only difference is that you are the ruler of the world. Respected by everybody. You have the ultimate word on every decision, on every global issue, on every political problem, worldwide. Everything in the world depends on your judgment. It is a titanic task for an individual, so you can rely on a panel composed by three professionals to accompany you in your leadership. What kind of professionals do you bring in to sit next to you? What kind of experts?

How did it go?

I have had the most interesting answers. A pattern of reasoning emerged: the vast majority of respondents set a scenario in their mind, prioritizing world emergencies and answering consequentially; so if the persons happened to be concerned about world redistribution of wealth, they’d choose the economist, a biology expert in food and genetics, and an agricultural expert. Similarly, I got the political advisor, the economist and the diplomat, when the respondent was thinking about world peace as the most important issue at stake, and so on.

The interesting finding to me is not in who that are there but in those that are not there.

My dream team would be composed by a copywriter, an art director and a student of interface design: people trained - and training - in problem solving and in communication. This does not imply that, as a Ruler of the World, I will by default know everything except how to communicate: I would rely on the experts in their respective fields for all the questions that go beyond the possibilities of a small panels of individuals, while keeping constant conversation with the people whose job is to communicate effectively: misunderstandings in communication are extremely common and no matter how good a decision is, it needs to be properly presented, shared and understood to be successful. Very few people thought about having a communication expert, a copywriter or a visual designer as primary assistants. Very few considered an expert in cognitive studies. When questioned after the survey about that, several people admitted that they felt they need the expert people to assist with the decision making process on issues they were non knowledgeable but that they can handle the communication by themselves.

This is hardly surprising: the unexpressed rule of thumb apparently is that everybody can do “good communication”. Especially visual communication. How hard can it be? And what is the harm in some bad visual design here and there?

Indeed. My claim, again, is that visual design plays a major role in decision making processes and that such an attitude is hence wrong: visual design is a serious matter. The perceived easiness, the transparency, so to speak, of good design and the ubiquity of bad design, make this claim counterintuitive to grasp. Let me give you one example:

You just landed in Paris; you don’t know the town. In a peaceful frame of mind you walked through the passport check, claimed your luggage and moved on to get a train to the city center. You purchased the ticket, via the touch screen automatic kiosk using your credit card, proceed to get some cash at the ATM, and off you go. Everything happened smoothly and once in your hotel room you already love the place. Visual Design is nowhere in your mind to be thanked for that, not for a minute.

Still this experience is totally dependent on carefully applied visual design on tens and tens of artefacts expressed through different media: the size of the sign informing you which conveyor belt will have your luggage and its relation to the physical built environment; the multilingual information panel, its position, the clarity of its display; the intuitive interface of the ticketing and ATM systems, and many other aspects of that specific branch of Visual Design called Environmental Graphic Design, played a role - the key role! - in your first experience in the new city. You did not even notice how easy it was and you did not think how different it could have been, if only that signage were not that clear. And when you get into a taxi, barely 13 minutes after landing at Orly2, you already love Paris before seeing it. When you realize you have wasted two hours, ending in the wrong queue for the Visa office three times consecutively, you already hate Muscat before seeing it. The effectiveness of an extremely complex and detailed visual design system, communicating a huge amount of data and variables, is evident and measurable with scientific accuracy, but the merit of the design system goes completely unrecompensed. As it was supposed to be. As it was designed to be. This is the counterintuitive aspect of the appreciation of visual design which is usually apparent to designers only: Adrian Frutiger, the designer responsible for the design of some of the most striking contemporary typefaces and of the Paris Roissy Airport Signage System, once said about book design and typesetting:

“... if you remember the shape of your spoon at lunch, it has to be the wrong shape. The spoon and the letter are tools; one to take food from the bowl, the other to take information off the page”.

This applies to the whole realm of visual design as well. The implications of good and bad design should be the focus of attention of experts and scholars from other disciplines as everyone gains when the designer sits next to the King: Visual Design makes life better for everybody - for those whose appreciate it and for those who do not.

In short: You do not need to be a designer to experience the positive effects of good design. Typomaniacs and graphic design nerds can gape in awe in front of the Berlin U-Bahn diagram redesigned by Erik Spiekermann; the rest of the world just gets on their trains and loves Berlin even if they are not sure why.