Design Isn't special anymore
so what next?
In Alexandra Deschamps-Sonsino's article, The End of the useful idiot, she thoughtfully reflects on the current state of design, particularly the challenges the industry faces as "design thinking" evolves into what she calls its "mid-life crisis." Alex’s reflections resonate with many experienced professionals who have witnessed design evolution over the last two decades. She astutely identifies several critical issues plaguing the field. While her tone may sound frustrated, her words have wisdom and a genuine desire for improvement. This critique offers a sobering diagnosis of the state of design but also presents potential pathways for the discipline to renew itself, inspiring hope for a brighter future in the design industry.
The Erosion of Design's Uniqueness
One of Alex's central observations is that "design isn't special anymore." This is not merely a lament for a time when design was an esoteric discipline but rather a reflection on how the accessibility of design methods—particularly design thinking—has diluted its impact. She mentions the ubiquitous "post-it session", symbolising how design thinking has become commodified. Many who have been asked to participate in these workshops view them as performative exercises, often far removed from the substantive work of creating value.
I said on Bluesky about my disappointment recently that I had found myself being asked to perform UX Theatrics.
rightly reminded me that this happens in other parts of businessland. Maybe we should expect it to always be part of our lives from time to time.
The suggestion here is clear: the more design becomes a routine process, its power diminishes. When clients see designers as plumbers—called in to solve a specific issue without much engagement—there's an underlying problem. Deschamps-Sonsino highlights how frustrating it can be when, after having worked with multiple agencies, clients become jaded with the same techniques. The 'magic' of design becomes lost in repetition, routine, and overly familiar processes.
She's right, of course. Design thinking was once heralded as a revolution for solving complex problems. Still, as it becomes standardised, it loses its cutting edge. As designers, the challenge is to avoid becoming stuck in a pattern of replicating what worked in the past. Fresh thinking and constant evolution are not just necessary; they are vital to keeping design relevant, robust and inspiring innovation in the industry.
When clients see designers as plumbers—called in to solve a specific issue without much engagement—there's an underlying problem
The Absence of Apprenticeship and Institutional Memory
Another critical point is the lack of apprenticeship opportunities in design, which she describes as a missing "ramp" between education and professional work. This is a vital insight. The creative industries, particularly design, often need to pay more attention to the structured development of young professionals. The absence of a clear pathway for younger designers not only deprives the field of fresh talent but also stunts innovation. Alex notes that without young people to challenge established methods, the industry risks stagnating, recycling ideas from the 1990s without any meaningful progression.
In recent years, I have worked with several enterprise-size consultancies that suffer significantly from being top-heavy. Everyone is a lead, leading nothing and nobody. I’ve moved from conversations of the mid-weight rut, which catalysed the creation of The UX Coach podcast, to a new discussion of the mid-weight chasm and the absence of junior, new designers in the same organisations.
To address this top-heavy culture, I worked with universities and colleges to increase the pipeline of foundational capable designers ready for employment; Deschamps-Sonsino created a graduate scheme to fill this gap. Still, she acknowledges that such initiatives are rare. This is a significant issue that needs addressing across the industry. As in any profession, an influx of new perspectives is vital for pushing boundaries and fostering growth. The ecosystem suffers when young designers are denied the opportunity to participate in live client work or are not adequately supported.
This dovetails with her broader criticism of the "death of institutional memory." Alex points to the public sector's backlogs as a (perhaps flawed) attempt to maintain collective memory. She imagines a scenario where organisations retain records of decisions made during design processes, enabling them to learn from past work rather than repeating mistakes. This memory loss leads to inefficient commissioning and frustration for designers and clients.
In 2021, I worked on a fascinating project exploring the viability of using machine learning to curate corporate knowledge by analysing petabytes of unstructured data from emails to jpegs, documents and everything in between. We developed interfaces that enabled you to review the history of a decision that makes a government policy a reality. A participant in a user research round reflected on the exercise to me. “We are destined to repeat the mistakes of those who came before us in different ways. An organisation is a collection of people at that point in time; once those people go, it should lose (the organisation) that knowledge because it is no longer that organisation of people. Instead, it should embrace new ideas, not dwell on past ones.” It's an interesting take, and maybe one that’s not wrong when considering how many times you make the same missteps.
Everything is art, Everything is politics
Design, Politics, and the Changing Role of the Designer
One of the most thought-provoking sections of the article is Alex's assertion that "designers hate politics." She argues that while designers are highly skilled in using their tools and techniques, many need to recognise the importance of politics in their work. This is a crucial point, particularly as the role of design in society continues to evolve. Designers are not simply problem-solvers; they are also change agents, and practical design requires understanding the political, social, and cultural contexts in which it operates.
Alex's citation of Ai Weiwei's quote—"Everything is art, Everything is politics"—is particularly relevant here. Design is inherently political because it involves persuading people to change their minds. It is not enough to create beautiful or functional solutions; the real challenge is convincing stakeholders to adopt those solutions. According to Alex, this often requires a deep understanding of organisational dynamics and navigating power structures, a skill many designers lack or ignore.
There's a valuable lesson here for designers: technical skill alone is insufficient. To succeed, designers must communicate the value of their work in a way that resonates with decision-makers. This requires emotional intelligence, empathy, and an understanding of politics. Alex notes that advertising and architecture designers grasp this more intuitively. Still, for many, the love of technique can lead to dogmatism. Technique is essential, but it's not the end goal. Changing minds and influencing decisions is where the true impact of design lies.
The Rise of AI and the Future of Design
Finally, Alex touches on the looming presence of artificial intelligence and the potential for AI to supplant human designers in certain aspects of the field. She imagines a scenario where computers take over design work because they "ask fewer questions" and don't require post-it notes. Given AI technologies' rapid advancement and growing role in creative industries, this is a timely observation.
While AI may offer efficiency, Alex's concern appears that the human element—particularly the questioning and iterative nature of design—could be lost. Design is more than efficiency; it's about understanding human needs, navigating complexity, and creating meaningful change. AI falls short in these areas, at least in its current form.
The future of design will likely require a balance between human creativity and machine capabilities. Designers must adapt, not by fearing AI but by recognising where their unique skills—particularly empathy and persuasion—can complement technological advancements.
Where next?
To rejuvenate design, we must rethink how we work and the frameworks that shape it
Alex offers a nuanced and insightful critique of the state of design today. Her reflections on the commodification of design thinking, the lack of apprenticeship schemes, the erosion of institutional memory, and the necessity of engaging with politics all point to the need for a significant shift in how design is practised and valued. The future of design lies not in clinging to outdated methods but in embracing fresh thinking, fostering young talent, and understanding that the real power of design is in changing minds, not just making things.
Design feels commodified and uninspired, particularly in fields focused on social impact rather than profit, because our current working models constrain creativity. The structures and systems driven by capitalist priorities stifle the potential for innovation with a genuine social purpose. To rejuvenate design, we must rethink how we work and the frameworks that shape it. It’s time to build new kinds of businesses—spaces that nurture the next generation of creative thinkers and allow them to push boundaries, showing us what design can achieve when it’s freed from the confines of traditional commercial expectations.