“Feeding the Lion:” One Internal Design Group's Odyssey

Abstract

Premise In the 1950s, Thomas Watson, the CEO of IBM, said, “Good design is good business.” This forward-looking statement recognized the intrinsic value of graphic and industrial design to IBM, and acknowledged a company ethos that embraced design as one of several critical factors in the success of any business enterprise. Though the validity of Watson’s statement seems obvious, there continues to be a curious reluctance by most corporations to embrace it. Companies often regard design excellence as difficult to identify, manage, and measure; and not worth the unknown investment or effort. Settling for “just good enough” makes sustaining a good design initiative difficult for any external consultancy that services them. It can make it almost impossible for an internal design group within these companies to do so. In corporations that provide tangible products—especially in the consumer products sector—internal design groups have had a dramatic impact on their performance and visibility. Nike, Philips, Sony, and Starbucks historically have shown that consistent brand strategies shaped and implemented by internal design groups are possible. The critical difference is that many of these corporations decided to have their internal designers develop the specifications and strategies of design, and then outsource the actual implementation to external consultancies. More often than not in the non-packaged goods sector, most internal design groups are identified as a marketing support function, generating the myriad communication products that corporations need. Usually reduced to reactive service organs, internal design groups provide “stuff”—a repetitive event to incrementally improve the ideas of the business staff. There are many examples of internal design groups as amalgams of marketing, graphics, and production units that provide the flotsam and jetsam of corporate ephemera. Like a lion that needs large amounts of food to sustain itself, internal design operations satisfy relentless requests for “product.” While there has been an effort to professionalize internal design groups to the level of an external design firm, it has not been consistent or widespread. The author would like to thank Elizabeth Nelson, Nate Burgos (formerly of Morningstar’s internal design group), and Marilyn Dawson (formerly of Continental Bank’s internal design group) for their comments and suggestions.