Complex Problems
Dan Ward 's book, F.I.R.E (Fast Inexpensive Restrained Elegant), speaks to how minimizing complexity and removing unnecessary components can be key to achieving a solution within teams under many constraints. In reflection on this, I find myself continuously exploring the role of design in problem-solving and how we can learn to remove complexity and focus on what truly matters.?
In all actuality... I am probably getting this all wrong. So feel free to stop reading now.
Design is often seen as the process of creating something aesthetically pleasing. However, at its core, design is about problem-solving. It is about finding solutions to complex challenges and creating products or systems that meet the needs of users.?
?In many cases, the problems we face (or, rather, I have come in contact with) are complex and require complex solutions. But complexity can also hinder, making it difficult to understand, use, and maintain a product or system.
I believe that complexity is not a sign of good design but rather the result of effort. Making something more complex is easy; it requires time dedicated to ideating on possibilities that may or may not impact the problem itself. However, creating something that is simple, elegant, and effective is not as complex as we believe it to be. It requires a deep understanding of the problem at hand, as well as the ability to distill that complexity down to its essential components.
At its heart, good design is about simplification. It's about removing unnecessary components and focusing on what truly matters. I believe this is the essence of Dan Ward's F.I.R.E approach: Fast, Inexpensive, Restrained, and Elegant. By prioritizing speed, cost-effectiveness, and simplicity, designers can create products and systems that are effective and easy to use and maintain.
领英推荐
So how can we apply this approach to our own design work? The first step is to identify the core problem you're trying to solve. What is the essential function of the product or system you're designing? Once you've identified that core function, you can start to look at the various components that make up your design. Are there any components that are unnecessary or redundant? Can you simplify the design without sacrificing functionality?
In many cases, removing complexity requires a willingness to let go of our preconceived notions of what a product or system should look like. We may be tempted to add features or components simply because we think they're necessary or because we want to impress our colleagues or customers. However, this kind of thinking can lead to over-engineered, bloated designs that are difficult to use and maintain.
Instead, we should focus on what truly matters: the user experience. A good design should be intuitive, easy to use, and require minimal maintenance. By prioritizing these attributes, we can create products and systems that not only solve the core problem but also enhance the user's experience.
Of course, this doesn't mean that all complexity is bad. There may be situations where a more complex solution is necessary to solve a particularly challenging problem. However, even in these cases, we should strive to minimize complexity as much as possible. We should always be asking ourselves whether a particular component or feature is truly necessary or whether it's just adding unnecessary complexity.
Design plays a critical role in solving problems, whether we are creating a new product, process, or system. At its core, design is the process of finding elegant solutions to complex problems. However, in our quest for answers, we often allow complexity to get in our way, hindering our ability to solve problems effectively.?
?Complexity is the result of effort, not skill.?Often maybe too much effort (in my opinion). A truly sophisticated design is one in which complexity is minimized, and unnecessary components are removed, and the simplicity cycle from Dan Ward helps navigate that happy medium. Leaving only those that contribute positively to the object's objective. As innovators, we need to focus on the problem we are trying to solve, be willing to let go of our preconceptions and test our solutions rigorously in a Fast, Inexpensive, Restrained, and Elegant approach to developing a solution when we are lost in the complexity
Innovation Expert @ Innovatrium | Human Capitalist????, Chief Courage Officer | Systematizing Quality and Innovation | PhD Aerospace
1 年Rumelt has some thoughts on the power of constraint over complexity. When you have available resources things can be made simply. When available resources are constrained, and tradeoffs force hard choices, then things get complex. The simplity can return when you systematically prioritize, add decutive, or inductive weight to your priorities... but 'analysis paralysis' is more likely in complex situations where people refuse to just 'guess and check.' (aka be willing to be wrong, and then course correct.) Most design and strategy work doesn't map to knowable future states or outcomes - so you need abduction, (or the closest thing to 'creative insight') that you can get. The ability to look at any situation and see not just 'what you want to see' but actually sense 'what is going on here.' is a powerful skill set. Simply having the guts to openly share what you see is 'really going on' can feel like an attack to people who aren't used to being spoken to plainly. It's deeply uncomfortable to be 'radically candid' for some people - but it's a habit you can build, and one of the best ones for wayfinding through complexity I've found. Here's an example: Instead of solving the problem, what if we just 'started?'
Spark Ambassador@ AFWERX | CAW Scrum Master/WCD Facilitator, Tesseract AF LNO
1 年I’m super excited as well!
I'm just punk enough. (and my book PUNK is at LULU.COM)
1 年Hey thanks - glad to see my stuff resonated, thanks for sharing!
Crafting Brands With Purpose | Motion Design at Diagonal Media | Occasional Bigfoot wrestler. ?? Let’s Make Some Cool Shit.
1 年Well said Philip. Design is in fact, a problem-solving process. As a designer, our first goal is often to identify what the problem is. If we can't identify the problem, the most likely "solution" won't fix anything. At this point, is it design or just art? On another note, Brad Frost's Atomic Design tackles the issue of simplifying complex design systems and outlines a framework many use in order to streamline their workflows and assets. I invite you to check it out if you are interested. https://atomicdesign.bradfrost.com/table-of-contents/