graphic assets _project 3.

2/438/fa21

+ This week, continue to graphically experiment and test the boundaries of process

For design students, to be, think like and become a designer, you must be very capable with your design process, confident to
explore ideas, to think abstractly, to engage non-linear, non-analytical researches – and you must learn when you are clinging
to a concept that could be better, and how to detach from the work, move on from weaker ideas, move on faster, and have the
confidence and the collaboration skills to do so. But this all begins from allowing ourselves as designers, to think and create
freely and widely, from pushing away from the linear. Let us remind ourselves where we started, two weeks ago: with
becoming familiar with “graphic experimentation”:

In Coates and Ellison’s book, “An Introduction to Information Design”, about two thirds of the way through the book, they
insert back in an important discussion about the design process. The chapter begins with a question, “Why is Experimentation

and Inspiration Important?” In graphic design it is well-practiced, even by students, that “taking inspiration from
a variety of sources, including those outside the subject, and (graphic )design itself,
is valuable and valid. It is through this experimentation that designers produce unforeseen results”. This is your
goal, always as a designer. And this is why learn to do this. To WORK in this way.

Coates and Ellison ask:

“What is the point of experimentation within the design process? Experimentation sits at the heart of
the creative process. As designers we look for new ways of doing, making and ultimately
communicating. The desire to experiment is fuelled by curiosity: we look, we see, we respond to the
world around us; our situation and circumstance, our likes and dislikes, our interests, and our
experiences shape our work. When we are experimenting, we are asking questions and seeking
answers. We can’t instinctively “know” the best way to resolve a problem, so we ask questions of the

brief and we explore and experiment to find the most appropriate

answers. This is an essential part of the design process; it can lead to exciting and unexpected
solutions, taking the designer into new territories that challenge the established or expected.”

I cannot say it better than this. This is what this course is about – to strive for THAT. And again, this is why we go to graphic
designers to teach us this: because it is so central to how they are trained, whereas for UX Design(ers), for some reason, it is
not. Let’s stay focussed then on “the creative process”, and to learn to trust our instincts, and to find our voice through our
work. And, let us strive to, through our work, to “communicate”, with others, with our communities, and the world around us.
+
This week, continue to work in the mindset of the “outside designer” for your client

It is CRITICALLY important to enable this learning to occur, to really understand why the “outside designer” mindset is
important, and why working from OUTSIDE of your client, even “outside of design” as above, is the mark of true designer. We
know why our students (almost every team falls into it and has to be reminded), try to let the client drive their decisions, even
though we introduced the “outside designer” paradigm - and YOU understanding that it is most likely a PARADIGM for you
– something that you don’t even see until your see it, something so ingrained in you that you struggle to let go – and if the
mid-week desk crit with the TA doesn’t set you straight, you likely STILL are trying to drive the project that way.

This is important, so I want to keep unpacking it.

In a recent terms, very deep with talent, despite that we told them, we are always surprised when ALL the teams do it
anyways, until they’re told “no” again – but why should it take the TA to set you straight? Maybe this is more deeply
ingrained than you think !? Step back as a team and discuss this as a (soft skill) collaboration issue – did anyone see this,
before the meeting, and if so, WHY did it not get settled before the meeting? If not, why did you not get it? Unless WE call this
out and remind you, what our experience has been is that almost ALL teams will TRY to have their art direction
concepts/strategies stem from the client ! And, to be clear, it’s not that we are saying that driving from a client is WRONG – of
course not. Could there be value to the project is the cultural contact for example (as to client/user)? Of course, that may be
part of what you look at this week. But don’t DRIVE the project with client/user. We are driving the project with OTHER
things and showing you that it’s possible and important. But, for us, it appears, at least partly as a form of “rote learning” or
“easiest path forward” or “not getting rid of the weak idea fast enough”. And, these are PROCESS (and collaboration) issues.

In this course, I want us to be intensely interested in and have deep conversations about how the dictum that, “the quality of
your process, will always determine the quality of your results”. We really want and encourage in your teams that you openly
and regularly talk about, even seminar on these topics. And, we believe that if you do, your personal and collaborative process,
and as a result your DESIGN DECISIONS will improve rapidly over the course of the term. So, let’s start this conversation
for you (and then YOU keep it going this week in your team meetings): why do teams try (despite being told to try a new
approach) go back to concepts/approaches/strategies that stem from CLIENT research? Because you have been taught (by
myself included) to develop not just a “what”/ a form, but a sense of “why” in your projects.

And because you sense that you need a “why” to drive the project, most if not all teams will revert to CLIENT, OR THE
USER. On THIS project, we are asking you resist this impulse! Any why? (this is important) – because part of what always
needs to happen in this course is to having the students who take this course go deeper into learning the design process, and
learning how it impacts our design decisions. If it always comes back to client or user, you as the designer/design team are
introducing some pretty heavy CONSTRAINTS and FRAMING for the project – you have “framed out” other ways to begin,
you have framed OUT influences and inspirations “outside of the obvious choices”; as designers we must learn to think and
work in order to “explore and experiment in order to find the most appropriate answers”; and “taking inspiration from a
variety of sources, including outside of the subject, and design itself”.

Otherwise design work can too easily become an “echo chamber”, reifying results we already have, and not really producing
any “unexpected solutions, (or) taking the designer into new territories that challenge the established or expected”. This is
NOT a course in “UX Design” – this is a course in DESIGNING and knowing HOW to design. That we happen to, in the end
design “UX Design” is not the point. Again, back to Vignelli: “It is with this set of values that we approach Design everyday,
regardless of what it may be: two or three dimensional, large or small, rich or poor. Design is One. ”
This week, I want you, through all the work of all the learners and teams to (in some ways)create the design school or art
school program of design we wish SIAT could be at times, or that you wished you could have done. Yes, eventually we will
connect all of this back to a capability with projects that DO involve technology, and “users” (and clients) – but for this final
week, let’s revel in the creative freedom, without those constraints, or “driving the project” with that one approach.

Let us create. Let us imagine. Let us be curious. Let us feel inspired. Let us free.

Before we do “what is expected of us” (as UX Designers), let’s NOT.

It is hoped that this project will make you and your team better at prototyping for UX, because you will ask better questions,
take more risks, be less afraid to fail, trust your creativity, and not be afraid to throw things out. Prototyping causes us to test
our assumptions, and to listen to the feedback. In this week, listen to the “feedback” of your work, and pay attention to your
process. To talk to each about what is exciting in the work, and, encourage and support each other to explore. Surface the best
work: don’t make US keep having to dig around in your Figma board, asking, “what’s this? Why didn’t you pursue this?”.
Make good decisions, and a team learn to make the best decisions, choose the best direction, “explore and experiment” WHY?
– “to find the most appropriate answer” ! And then, to develop the skill to see and know what that is, and CONFIDENTLY put
forward what you think is the best work, your best work, and begin to “take a stand” with your work.

We can learn so much from studying how OTHER designers work – this is what I was writing about in the reading, “The
Outside Designer Paradigm”, and why I have professionally dedicated my life’s work to interviewing designers to show back to
you, in my class, to my students, to help INSPIRE and guide you. We can learn – in thus project where we are trying to learn
and deepen our understanding of the grammar of Graphic Design. We can learn so much from how OTHER design fields work,
those that existed BEFORE UX Design have much to teach us. Let’s get OUT of the “echo chamber” of “UX Design” and
“Design Thinking”.

But more specifically, when designers engage in their lateral process, their diverges, the ability to VISUALIZE this process is
most what we can learn from Graphic Design. In graphic design we call that “visual exploration”. Coates and Ellison again,

“The willingness to explore and experiment also helps you establish and define your own style and
beliefs, and to find out who you are as a designer. In this phase, designers experiment with different
media, materials and ways of presenting the raw information. During this process creatives move

beyond initial concepts and explore avenues outside of the obvious choices. This can
result in more innovative solutions. As a form of ‘sketching’ or ‘prototyping’, the designer can
investigate various methods to present the message, using diagrams, models, grids, typography, and
most importantly words and imagery. This allows the designer to compare in order to select directions,
and where possible the most appropriate technique. It is during this phase that many designers ‘play’
with visualizations. By ‘play’ we mean what psychologist Bruno Bettelheim defined it as, ‘freedom from
all but personally imposed rules (which can be changed at will) by freewheeling involvement and by the
absence of any goals, outside of the activity itself”.

This is what I am asking you, and you as team to ALLOW yourselves to do. The end goal for this week then is to potentially
hit that point of “the most appropriate technique” described above. In my experience speaking with and studying the world’s
great designers, two things are the result of all this process: first; the notion that there is the “right” form, or, second; a sense
of “the project” which does not end with this deadline, but, lives on in our ongoing discourse as designers and creatives. The
Modernists generally believed in the first: that your project can only end in one form that is “right” for the project. And
sometimes, perhaps this is true – it is a worthy goal as a designer – to seek that solution that truly feels “right”. Another way
to put this is that the solution is rather like a “point in time” – that you have deeply understood the project and located in its
moment in time, that it is like a deep, deep well of “rightness” for its time, but, not, as the Modernists would have it, seeking
“timelessness”. But, the other also is compelling as designers to consider : that the “project” is within us, it is ongoing, it is our
“work” – it is our constant exploring and exploration, an evolving identity that has no end. Maybe one is deep, and, one is
wide. But, in either case: for the true designer, the work is serious, it is our work. We are the outside designer.

the activity
This week, you will seek “the right solution” and to seek doggedly and with passionate purpose for our work, “the most
appropriate technique”. Your lateral processing and diverge/converge process will continue in this effort and explicitly seeking
this outcome – not simply to process, but to “land” the project – and hopefully, to produce the best work that you have ever
produced in this medium, that which you personally are most proud of. Without pressure (we are playing), I want you all to
seek, to shoot for – even if we don’t hit it – “perfection” in our work.

You will start this week still doing aspects of “diverge”, but then you must shift CONVERGE mode, and after iterating, and
working at all the details, you are meant to bring FINISH to this work. Not because perfection is the goal, but because seeking
it now and again can push our sense of what we think we can accomplish – and it is important for a designer to know and
FEEL what “finish” looks like – and how very, very hard it is to actually achieve. Your design process, once developed will
never, ever go away. But, until you can experience a truly great project, you will never know what it takes to produce one. We
must respect this week. It is serious work. But, this not AT ALL about “pressure” - this is about your confidence as a designer,
and knowing what kind of a designer you are, and what kind of designer you wish to be.

+
You will have left the crit this week with (it was hoped) at least one “direction” or “opening” or “line” that included
three graphic assets that showed the most promise. This, at the most basic level, is why we do “lateral process”, why I teach it
and why I ask you to learn it and fold it into your practice. (You will need this skill later in the course, when we will be
helping you more definitively selectively a single client and business problem for your UX project). There are four ways your
efforts could have landed this week: all would be just where your team’s process is at, with another opportunity to “resolve”
this week. The teaching team will try to assist you in the crit to help make those determinations.

1. How wonderful and better yet, if you have more than one “line” worth pursuing ! But you will need to thoughtfully as a
team decide what is moving forward this week and what will for now be left behind in your process (despite its promise).
Sometimes the form is just not right for a given, or current project – a good designer willingly puts great form up on a shelf.

2. Or, perhaps your process this week had promise in different parts and aspects of the three lateral process “lines” you
developed, that can merge together, without becoming “Frankenstein’s Monster” – in other words, the parts can naturally fit
together, without feeling “attached on” and not part of a “language” that is being developed. This is now for your team to make
good decisions about, to decide. SO, this is part one: decide what is moving forward to next week. But remember: the “lines”
we created were self-imposed constraints ! They are not hard lines, or rules, and they CAN be crossed, because ALL process in
a given week is part of ONE process. If PARTS of one can merge with another, that is OK, and part of good design process.

3. Of course there is the possibility that none of the three “lines” really landed, but that there may be possibility to continue to
explore in parts, or moments of the work, or even in experimentations that were not developed into a more finished form. This
again, is the work of the team to work through, if that is where you landed – and there is no shame at all there – you are
working through your process, that’s all. It’s like running, golf, tennis or cycling: play YOUR game, run/ride YOUR race.

4. It is unlikely but possible, that nothing really is “firing” yet and you need to go back and redevelop the approach, and how
you are working with the “design qualities”, and try this week to really get it “right”, rather than pursuing something that will
only achieve mediocre goals. This would be a rare exception in this fourth-year course – but possible.

But, let’s assume for now that all teams hit either #1 or #2 above. Once you determine which starting place your team thinks
you are at now (one line clearly standing out, or parts from more than one that need to be considered), you need to get that to
ONE LINE of inquiry as quickly as possible this week. Make good decisions, stick with them.

And, the reason why is that:

5. you will THEN do three lateral processes of that one line from this week, further exploring the “rightness” of the more
specific and detailed criteria, again, attempting to really get the project from “experiment” to “right” (or feels right), to land
the project graphically. The two weeks after, when we are focussed on Visual Design for this project, the team can refine that
further.

6. But, it is now important that have been developing strong team collaboration skills that lead to surfacing the BEST or
strongest, or more importantly MOST PROMISING and intriguing work – don’t get lost in the details or your process, just
GET THERE, that’s the outcome and goal for all. And, regardless of whom or where it came from (as long as it is not copying,
etc.) At this point we should no longer be needing to weed around in your Figma board after seeing what you presented
asking, ‘why didn’t you pursue this?” If that is still happening, the team needs to address clear collaboration and
COMMUNICATION and even trust issues within the team. Allow the right voices to come forward to facilitate this.

So, what we expect to see next week is: in 7 minutes no more:

+ Your final three lateral “lines” (developed likely from ONE from this week), each of which includes the three graphic
assets (and those assets can change, but must include a poster in each “line”), reading as a single identity within the “line”.

+ All copy writing, from “design qualities” to headers and body copy explaining the project and the design decisions fully
resolved, and hopefully moving from “clear” to “compelling”. Use great annotations to “show don’t tell”.

+ Your deck design approach to surface the content of this project, while also exhibiting excellence in design quality
standards, resolved in form (and if done right, it should serve as a template for the subsequent weeks of this project).
+ ART DIRECTION STRATEGY:
Image grouping.
A final clear, effective, evocative IMAGE GROUPING exercise, which shows us that you are not “designing in your head”, but
looking for your “design qualities” and “principles” that should be DRIVING this project in the professional and outstanding
work of others. From this searching you are meant to be LEARNING, and developing YOUR deep and specific “how to’s”. In a
good image grouping exercise, we should be seeing DOZENS of images grouped around your qualities, principles and themes,
from which you are pulling INSPIRATION AND CITING AS SUCH, and not copying the work of others. If we see final form
that seems to magically appear from nowhere, we WILL question this in your work.

As you turn “ideas”, words and concepts into FORM, it is extremely valuable to “cast a wide net” and to see what is out there
and has been done well by others, and to truly begin to see and “develop the eye” by seeing exceptional quality in the work of
others. Once you have assembled what will likely start as a “messy” process, for the presentation purposes, make sure that
you THINK about how to show us this and for us to understand what you are doing and why. Don’t “box check” this (it will
waste your precious presentation time). And, perhaps think of by way of scale and hierarchy how you can allow us to see
which works of others more specifically influenced YOUR work and project.

We don’t need to see a separate “image grouping ” and as below “mood board” for each separate line, as this represents your
overall qualities, principles etc. But, if for you as a team it makes sense to do it that why, fine: just make sure that in the
presentation you can move through this work QUICKLY (or doing it all three times can really take up valuable time).

+ Pull those final truly important visual inspirations into a grid composed “mood-board” which clearly communicates
for yourselves as a team and THEN to us (and those reviewing your work), your ART DIRECTION INTENT. A “mood board”
has one simple task to perform, so don’t just give us “eye candy” with this – what is your INTENT with your visual direction?
What do did you INTEND to do? What did you intend to be IN THE FORM? Then we can fairy evaluate whether you
EXECUTED on this intent (or whether you are still “box-checking”, and still misunderstand the importance of having
strategy. The “mood board” should clearly communicate, “here is what we intended to do with the work you will see”.

+ Keep working at and going DEEPER with a greater, deeper level of study and application of the essential Visual
Design areas of “typography”, “color theory” (new this week) and “grid systems”. If you begin to master this now with graphic
work, your visual design work with designing for screens will be much better for it. You must clearly and substantially
explain, specifically, what you are doing in ALL THREE AREA and “show don’t tell” by way of your “design decisions” using
appropriate and consistent information graphics/ annotations. We must see for examples slides of how you are employing your
grids in both the deck design and any graphic work of your final assets. We should see and hear the same for colour, showing
us and telling why, where and how specific aspects of colour theory (what SPECIFIC color palettes were applied and WHY).

+ How Tos, Techniques, Elements and Principles of Design. And, along the same lines as to design decisions and
application within techniques and form, your specific directions in the “elements and principles of design”, as discovered and
deeply studied and applied from Ellen Lupton – your “techniques” and “how to’s” clearly developing toward mastery.

+ How you organize and present most effectively your design decisions is up to you, but, we must substantially hear
about them, using a strongly graphic “show don’t tell” approach using effective information graphics, consistent with your
deck design approach. You MUST think on how much, what emphasis, and where you position this important discussion.
+ A final set of context images. This final set MUST be shown in images, where possible in “context” images (for
example, bus shelter ads for your poster, or street banners in context of the city). Finished, polished, believable.

+ Try to work through your lateral process work QUICKLY this week, to give you time to EXECUTE on your final
direction. Make sure that you start “editing”, clearing the table a bit of the clutter of all the process as you go along – and
turning a huge “buffet” into one carefully planned, and expertly cooked “meal”, served well. Don’t “firehose us” in the end.

cautions
Let’s start there: one thing to really work on this week is the skill of thoughtful editing, and simplification of the message.
Remember, in communicating design projects, we hope to have in the end a “clear and compelling message”. The compelling
part is hard to achieve up front, but usually begins to come into focus as a project matures – we will be essentially three weeks
in, this coming crit, so by now that ought to be at least partially achievable by all. Then the more important, critical aspect is
the “being clear” - because when these projects keep adding “principles” and “qualities”, and loads of terminology, starts
getting thrown at an audience the “clarity” can easily go out the window. In several projects last week: this was the case.

1.
So, this is the FIRST issue, we need you to improve this your communication, and editing this week. And, why this ought to
matter to you, is, if I’m the one who wrote this project, and I’m familiar with all the content you are throwing around, how do
you think an audience of industry professionals, who lack this understanding or the specifics will feel about this project, when
you try and present it in your portfolio? Frankly, their eyes will glaze over. This is something industry professionals have long
complained about, when they interview our students at, for example Touchpoint. There is a tendency to take the “prompts” we
provide in the project brief to ASSIST you in developing a good project, and in this case good form, and turn that into a
complicated mass of “word salad”. Often, when we compliment a student project and say, “that was really clear, I was able to
follow that”, it is because that project stands OUT, because the ones that proceeded it, were not. As an educator, to me, there
is almost nothing more irritating that teams “making me play find the pony” in your work. Your job is to clearly surface the
“pony” and get all the other distractions OUT of the way. And, as this course goes on, unless you learn to do this, or do it
better, we will have this as an ongoing issue in YOUR crits. It is critically important that you understand: the soft skills that
we are calling out now (to fix), we likely will be calling out in the final weeks of the term in your work (if we don’t - if you are
doing it now, and make little effort within YOUR team to address them. These are LEARNED skills.

2.
But, beyond this messaging issue, there is a greater problem, a SECOND, RELATED issue, that this sort of student project
often hides, or intentionally or not, begins to obscure – a sort of parlour trick of students presenting their work, that we want
you recognize and learn not to do in your work – which is – is all of this terminology, and qualities and principles, is that even
really ending up substantially IN the work, IN the form? And this is where, if your team is struggling, this is likely where and
how. This project has consistently for some time, now been asking you all to perform and SHOW “graphic experimentation” So
beyond “finished” posters, we need to see EVIDENCE that you are doing “spade work” So, there are two sides to the same coin
lacking here, and not doing one IS likely the reason the other is falling down for your team (if it is).
“Mastery” goals are not “presentation” goals.

Here is what I mean:

Your team may be TELLING US that you looked into Lupton and will investigate “x” design element or principle in the work.
But, when we get TO the work, the poster, if it is there, it is in most cases MARGINALLY there, or there, but in a sort of
“surface” or “pastiche”, or more accurately, “UNSTUDIED” way. And, I think, in most cases, the answer is quite simple as to
why: because you simply did not do small, independent “sketches” with the element or principles itself to LEARN how to
manipulate it, before attempting to apply it into the form of the poster. So, OF COURSE it looks rough and your graphic
design skills appear weak in that case. Yes, your graphic skills, coming in, and whether you bothered to advance them over
the past three weeks matters. But, if you think this is the SOURCE of why your form is coming across as “naïve” you are
mistaken – it is EASY for your team to resign and say, “shucks, we’re just not as good at GD as some others”. But, this is not
the issue – the issue is that, in this course thus far, we set up a way for you to CHANGE that, and maybe you’re just not doing
it – or at least, you know whether you are or not, but WE see no EVIDENCE of that – even though we have repeatedly
emphasized “graphic experimentation” and encouraged you to SHOW IT.

And, what, at heart, does this tell us? It tells us that your Design PROCESS is weak, because to skip over this important
sketching work and go right to the poster and design within it, is LINEAR. So, the only “lateral” process we are ever seeing is
the three “lines” of investigation we imposed on you, but, it could be argued that within each “lateral” line is in fact, or
possibly, an actually LINEAR process !!! Think about this. Consider this. Only you, and your team know whether this is true
or accurate or not. And, if you are then, not willing to put in the time (where it should go) into actually doing lateral
processing all along, and by doing small studies/sketches to LEARN this new “principle” through “graphic experimentation”,
then you are being PASSIVE in your learning. And, in which case, you KNOW this, and then you come to class, present this
work to us, hoping that we don’t notice, or just waiting for US to tell you what you already know – it’s not good enough.
Which, I hope you’ll understand and appreciate can be irritating week after week on OUR end. To be fair: we’re teaching you
IN GOOD FAITH, should we not expect the same of you?

I believe that if you truly want to learn this, and improve in this area, and take advantage of the considerable time that is
being allotted to give you the OPPORTUNITY to learn and improve this area, that these small, fast, INDEPENDENT studies
and sketches to try out ways of EXPLORING the “design quality” or “design principle”, are the ONLY way you will actually
learn them and make them part of your toolkit, your arsenal, in this area. If you keep resisting doing this, you can anticipate
the results will stay, about the same – save for the last resort tricks in the student bag – copying. And, pray we don’t get
there. Or, you will, as I’ve always said, make “baby steps” of improvement, while others are leaping forward week after week.

So, here we are, at fourth year, still having conversations about “linear process”, “copying” and “baby steps”.
It’s up to you people.

If you are TELLING US that you are investigating forms of “rhythm-meow-meow-meow”, then SHOW US evidence that you
TRIED that in various small studies, and found PROMISE in one approach over others, that you will then DEVELOP in your
final posters etc., in the “lateral process” lines and the final direction that you choose, then show is that you DID !!

So, to end:

1. What you SAY at the start of the deck (as to “qualities” has to LAND in the final form), otherwise, why are spending ANY
time just talking about it? You have go through the whole process, work on the final work, and then look BACK and decide,
consider whether EVERYTHING you said or intended to say at start of the deck LANDED in the final form – and if doesn’t,
then strip that out, or simplify it. In other words, we taught you the “rocket-ship analogy” in second year – we expect you to
USE IT. Conversely, if you actually stop and consider this before presenting, and you decide the “quality” is not that strong in
the final form, but you really DO want to pursue it? Fine. Then make sure the quality is REALLY THERE. And, we could go
further with that and refer you to Matthew Frederick, on “Authenticity” – “if you wish to imbue an (architectural/structural)
space or element with a particular QUALITY, make sure it is really there”.
2. Whatever you DO say in your set up to the final work that sets up your theoretical framework – make it REALLY clear to
your audience. Resist the temptation to pile one “ten dollar” term on top of another, making a giant “word salad” (which
students often then want to hide behind). Strip it down, edit, get rid of what is not essential. Use the “rocket-ship” analogy –
“you are not compelled to go to the moon and back with what got you off the ground in the first place”. Don’t in your weeding
hack out what IS essential for you to communicate, of course. But, through what you say, what we can read (give your
audience enough time and space to do so !), and most importantly SEE in your deck, make your message CLEAR first and
foremost. Don’t “bamboozle” you audience – immature design students pull that move. Let’s agree we’re not doing that in this
course and find better ways to communicate without pulling this tiresome trick out of the student bag, and, asking the
teaching staff to be responsible for calling it out – that’s your TEAM’S job, not ours.

3. Put in the work on small studies and “sketches” INDEPENDENT of the final work (don’t work in a linear fashion) if you
want to improve your graphic “chops”, and ultimately have a better result. Look: your team should be getting aligned on your
goals for every project of this term. IS THIS a potential “portfolio-quality project” for your team? And, if not, why? The
OPPORTUNITY is there for it to be. What is stopping YOU from making it one? There are still three weeks to ensure that
result. But, is that what the team TRULY seeks, wants? Or is it a passive hope? Have that discussion in your team, without
fail. If it isn’t: fine. But, if it is, then get aligned on this goal, and get serious about what it will take to get that result.

4. Don’t work “linearly” in your “lateral” processes. That should be self-evident. But, step back and consider whether your
team’s problems on this project, might actually be WEAK PROCESS, that you are putting off improving. Any design student
can learn design process, but because it is a “soft skill” it is also easy to avoid. Have you been avoiding this too long? I’ll tell
you right now: if you are in a team struggling in the final weeks of this course, on the final project, it is almost certain that at
the root of that outcome will be two things: poor process and poor collaboration skills. How to begin changing that? Agree as a
team that you will not work in a linear way, and, stick to it. LEARN to work “laterally” and think laterally – it’s the only way.

5. Team collaboration then comes to the surface as the next barrier to success. Teams work when ALL individuals feel they
have a say, and they are VALUED. Unless teams are willing to make personal compromises on preferences or working styles
or leadership styles, you will have friction, and the results will simply be the evidence of that. You need to, to have a
productive team, all be on the same page about commitment level, and time commitment and, work style. How you work
together, the working processes, scheduling and time management matter, and often are as responsible as any other factor for
successful work, or not. Things like taking the effort to get to know each other that makes the work feel less like “work” are
also important. Individuals ALL have different methods for being and feeling productive – team “leads” who want everyone to
work in their “style” will inevitably, then, create tension. The semester ALWAYS gets HARDER as the semester goes on and
the projects get harder and more complex, more time-consuming, and other pressures creep in. If you don’t handle this now,
you will likely crumble under that pressure later in the course. Again: these are the SOFT SKILLS of being and becoming a
good designer. The world is full of bad design, because the world is full of bad designers, or people who call themselves
“designers”, yet have never struggled through the hard part of learning HOW to design, and finding YOUR VOICE.

6. If you did the work to “explore” and “experiment” on your “design qualities” and “elements and principles” – know this, “the
quality of your process, will ALWAYS determine the quality of your results” – the graphic designer Clement Mok said that.
When it comes time to start working on the “graphic assets” that are more finished, you can’t work directly IN that final set of
boards, until EVERY element, and PART of the WHOLE composition, and the whole has been considered as an inter-
dependant SPACE that is only a pallet for your “qualities” and “principles” to intermingle. But in the end, never forget that all
graphic design has as its outcome “harmony” to some degree, and “unity” without question. “Readability” and “semantic”
(which btw NONE of you are even talking about referencing) , are not excuses for, or the same as “ILLEGIBILITY”. We have a
word for “illegible” in graphic design: a mess. You are COMMUNICATING !! So, WHAT are you communicating, or trying to,
and where and how specifically can see, and sense that? In design, communication in the end is NOT an option.

The final work here is not some form of “sketch”. That comes before, in your process. The final form is “worked out”,
thoughtful, FEELS “right”. But, we don’t START from the final form, we get there. Everything we’ve gone through over the
past three weeks was purposefully put in front of you as RESOURCES for YOU as a TEAM to develop further and select, and
develop again. Simply making “reference” to all of that, was never the point. We have provided you a series of “prompts” – it is
up to YOU now to develop those starting points INTO something. Don’t just parrot back, what we provided in the first place