Constructive works: part I. Lost half of the design

The design is, primarily, designing. And only secondarily — the appearance, style, and decoration.

Read this article in russian

Two components of the design

There are different definitions for the term “design”. Many of them speak of a dual nature.

• the first — the accordance with the purpose of the created thing. Detection of structural and functional relationships that transform the system into a consistent whole.
• the second — an artistic, aesthetic part, aimed at the external form. Decoration, ornamentation, styling.

There are methodologies for identifying goals — interviewing users, focus groups, monitoring the use of the product, and other attempts to find out the goals and proposed scenarios. But here there is a risk to face the same thing that Henry Ford was talking about:

If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.

Perhaps you will not get the best possible option. This applies both to goals that the user sets himself (and he may be mistaken, thinking that achieving exactly this goal will meet his needs), and ways to achieve this goal (scenarios and functionality).

In the interface, implemented goals laid by the designer. Goals are set by the business. And let’s be frank, the goals of the business and the user may be not the same.

There are methodologies for achieving goals. Persons, empathy, design thinking, and others. But among them, there is not a single formal, analytical method in design. Nevertheless, such an approach is organically obtained from the achievements of the constructivists.

Tectonics, faktura, and construction as methods

In accordance with the concept of “Signs and properties”, each user’s goal has signs that reflect its properties. Applying this approach to tectonics, faktura, and construction — the methods of constructivists, described in 1922 by Alexei Gan in the article “Constructivism” of the same name, you can move towards a formalized method that allows you to create effective systems.

Having cleared the description of Ghan from the influence of time, we can formulate these three methods like:

Tectonics — show signs that match the properties of the goals.

Moreover, as soon as possible. What will happen: a non-target audience will leave, users will understand what goals are achieved at each step of the interface. From here we reveal the following principle:

Faktura — a change in the signs of a goal as a result of a change in properties.

One thing changes — the other changes at once. Adjust the signs available to the user during the process, in accordance with changes in the properties of his goal (or set of goals).

Construction — consider the relationship of signs.

Nothing extra. The mutual position of objects bears the meaning.

The function determines the form

If we more fully deploy the entire chain from the user’s goal to the design, then the sequence of statements will be as follows:

Goals determine situations
The situations determine a purpose
The purposes determine a function
The function determines a form
The form determines a design
The design determines the goals

Constructivists were talking about this a hundred years ago, developing the formal method:

“…the new architect analyzes all sides of his task, all its special features. He dismembers it into its component elements, groups them according to functions and organizes his solution on the basis of these factors. The result is a spatial solution which can be likened to any other kind of rationally conceived [razumnyi] organism, which is divided into individual organs that have been developed in response to the functional roles which each fulfills.” (Moisei Ginzburg’s “New Methods of Architectural Thought” (1926) // From Sovremennaia arkhitektura, 1926 (no. 1, pgs. 1–4)

And why this principle cannot be applied to interfaces? The approach to the design of buildings and objects is perfectly correlated with the preliminary elaboration of interactions, the interface and any system in general, by analysts and designers, the construction of diagrams (UML, CJM, whatever):

The schedule of movement and equipment scheme, designed with such care, give a truly scientific picture of the production process. The more accurately these diagrams are found, the more correctly the task is specified. In essence, the production process has already been resolved by them. But in practice, the production process should be spatially isolated, materially protected from the outside world. It should receive an architectural shell, should be included in the volume dimension, the edges of which are walls, floor, ceiling. The simplest case of the causal dependence of the production process and its encompassing architecture, where the architectural envelope is almost likened to a glove encompassing a hand, are hangars for airships. (Moisei Ginzburg’s “Target setting in modern architecture” // // From Sovremennaia arkhitektura. 1927. № 1. — С. 4–10.)

Soviet and Russian art historian, S.O. Khan-Magomedov writes:

The engineer considers the form as a derivative of the function, construction, and technology, and for the artist (architect, designer, applied artist) the form is not only the end result of a rational solution of functional and technical problems but also the initial impulse in the creative process. The artist not only harmonizes the resulting form, moving in his creative process from function, design, and technology to form but also influences them through the form. (S.-O-Khan-Magomedov Pioneers of Soviet Design — Moscow, 1995 — Introduction.)

Starting to create a design of any product or system, always think about the goal. What is the goal? What features are needed? What should be the result? A properly asked question and a full answer will enable to design a solution that effectively achieves the goal.

“ Without a precise and newly defined concrete utilitarian goal, a functional architecture is impossible. … The goal, which is often determined by one word only: factory, club, housing, etc., must, after a careful analysis, be concretized and dissected by the architect into a system of clear production-domestic processes.” (Moisei Ginzburg’s “Target setting in modern architecture” // From Sovremennaia arkhitektura. 1927. № 1. — С. 4–10.)

Creating interfaces, like any other system designed to achieve the goal, by performing its functions should go from the inside to the outside. From the essence, meaning, destination, to the outer shell. The UX, the interface, the structure of the elements are the consequences of the originally intended purpose.

“The main merit of Malevich and Tatlin is that they “put questions of art on the analytical path. They are analysts. In order to build their system, [they] had to put the problems of form, color, space. “ (S.-O-Khan-Magomedov Pioneers of Soviet Design — Moscow, 1995 — p. 340)

The design is, primarily, designing. And only secondarily — the appearance, style, and decoration.

Turning to the works of constructivists, we see the results of the emasculated use of only the first part of the term “design”. They didn’t think about business goals, conversion, and sales figures or users ’wishes, but the Soviet Party’s objectives. But the approach was the right one.

Looking at modern sites, products and interfaces we see, mainly, only the second part of the same term “design” — decoration.

To do “beautifully” — it is quite possible to do this after a clear system design has been built.

Then automatically disappear:

• elements that carry the signs of the button, but which that are not it is (an example can be found here);
• users’ questions like: “what will the system do if I click here? Send a letter, open a new window or silently sign me up for the newsletter?”;
• interfaces, which look like a dog’s breakfast, and unclear what to click to achieve to the goal. The article “UX Refactoring. What it is and how it differs from a redesign” describes two types of disadvantages in detail;
• interface elements that hang idly in the interface and seems like, are not needed for anything. Which immediately reduces the visual congestion of pages.

Maybe we should go back to basics and first construct, and only then do it beautifully?

For more up-to-date information, join us to social media:

• Facebook: facebook.com/lessplusmore
• Twitter: twitter.com/lessplusmore
• Telegram: t.me/lessplusmore
• VKontakte: vk.com/lessplusmore

And clap the article, if you like it!

Special thanks to Wova Roodnyy for ideas and consultations.