A designer’s dilemma: to design for vices or not?
Designers face a dilemma when asked to design products or services that may not align with their personal beliefs. In the case of vice products, Donn shares why STUCK tends not to pick up such projects, and how the team holds one another accountable to only designing for good.
Summary
- There have been very cool projects from startups and companies that deal with more traditionally vice products, like tobacco and alcohol
- However, at STUCK, the team is aligned, and hold one another accountable, to not take on projects that fundamentally promote an increased use of vice products
- This doesn’t mean that STUCK is completely shut off to such projects, especially in instances where vice-like technology has medical or therapeutic uses for good
- As a designer, if your personal beliefs don’t align with the use of vice products, you can definitely still create an excellent product for its intended purposes, but perhaps a part of you dies every time
- “It’s one of those things where I think if you keep doing it, you will progressively feel that is more and more okay.”
Full Transcript
Maybe it’s easier to think of this like that, you know, sometimes you’re holding yourself to that thing, and you may waver. But if you think of what your children might think of it, then you might be able to hold yourself better to these values that you profess.
DESIREE
We’ve spoken a little bit about things that people love, things that clients love, what about things that designers love? And in cases where, you know, you may have to design a vice product, so meaning things like, for example, tobacco, gambling, those kind of vices. And, you know, in those cases, as a designer, is there ever inner conflict or dissonance if those don’t align with your values as a person, maybe? Is this inner conflicts or dissonance important to resolve? And yeah, how would that impact the design that you are able to put out?
DONN
This is a huge question. Also a question I believe is on a lot of young designers’ minds, especially if you’re considering where to go to, to work. And then there are very interesting startups, sometimes very big and exciting, that deal with tobacco, and kind of being hailed as a great and innovative company. Now, I would believe some would be very conflicted with that choice. And I would say that it will be a lie to say that, like, you know, that when there are cool projects coming from companies like that, that we’re not tempted also. But I think over the years, in our team, the alignment and that ability to hold each other to what we believe, is quite helpful, that we encourage each other to say, you know, let’s drop it. There are questioning routes like this.
So for example, even we’ve had, many times, clients coming to us with like, tobacco projects, alcohol projects, and they try to tell us that like, oh, this one, when you do it, it’s meant to help people consume this appropriately. So instead of saying that, you’re trying to add to it, it’s like, we’re trying to help you consume it appropriately, it’s better than another alternative. I think most of the time, when we question it further, we couldn’t get past the fundamentals that like, a company like that, for it to survive and thrive, its underlying goal must promote this, even if it seems like it’s promoting an appropriate use of this.
So in all of these cases, we have turned down those projects, just because I think—maybe it’s easier to think of this like that. You know, sometimes you’re holding yourself to that thing, and you may waver. But if you think of what your children might think of it, then you might be able to hold yourself better to these values that you profess.
But we’re not super closed, meaning that we’re not like entirely prudish, about it. In the sense that, the conversations, we are still happy to have conversations because there are instances, for example, where like, a company with a bit of vice-like technology is for its own sake of survival, also, trying to see if there’s a medical use for it, or use in therapy. I think in these instances, we are open to study how it can be used—something bad can be used for good. So we’re not entirely like, you know, just shut the door. That’s not how we operate. But most of the time, it doesn’t get through, because, you know, you see after the smokescreen, you see that at the end of the day, this business is still trying to promote this, as much as how you make it sound nice.
DESIREE
So do you think that in terms of—say if a designer really does design for these vice products, right, do you think it’s possible to still produce these good designs if you have this inner dissonance?
DONN
Certainly if you lie to yourself and suppress the nagging thoughts, you can still apply your skills to make something excellent for its intended purposes. Yeah, but maybe a part of you dies, I don’t know.
Yeah, it’s one of those things where I think if you keep doing it, you will progressively feel that is more and more okay. So we rather steer clear from that path as much as possible.
And I’m quite glad that our team, in the founding team, we quite hold each other to this. Sometimes we waver, and it’s like the other person will say, “Eh, no la,” you know? Yeah. And so it keeps it.
THE STUCK IN DESIGN TEAM
Desiree Lim, Kevin Yeo, Matthew Wong