later Niels Diffrient’s Humanscale,
served as standard reference
materials for product designers
for decades; the best available
source at the time, but contain-
ing information gathered largely
from studies performed on rela-
tively fit military populations—
making application to consumer
products dubious, if not inappro-
priate. Even well into the 1980s,
when designers said they were
doing “research,” it often meant
they were going to a library to
look through various regurgita-
tions of that same military infor-
mation. Either that or they were
browsing design magazines.

Design Versus Marketing

Photograph courtesy of Smart Design / www.smartdesignworldwide.com

For most, then, design research
is relatively new. To get their
feet wet, designers initially were
invited (or forced) to participate
in marketing studies. Usually
this meant sitting behind a
glass window in a focus-group
facility, sucking down M&Ms,
and saying rude things under
their breath. The bad attitude
was often justified—these ses-
sions could be more aggravat-
ing than helpful. Perfectly good
companies, it seemed, were
trying to drive forward by look-
ing out the back window; many
sessions focused on ways to
position existing products, or
methods of “spinning” in order
to paint a negative in a positive
light. Designers usually reacted
by abhorring research, label-
ing it as meaningless. But in
a few cases, a more proactive
reaction took place. Designers
retaliated by conceiving and
conducting their own research.
These proactive steps were
tempered by a lack of resources;
with little training (an under-
standing of statistics, for exam-