Design Elements that Stand the Test of Time
The Value of Timeless Design and its Key Aspects
Society does not prioritize the longevity of products. Why should they, businesses aren’t incentivized by a product they only sell once; however, good design is timeless. The proof is simple morality. Creating a quality product that lasts is selfless, the users needs are truly catered to. On the other hand, selfish design creates a product that is poorly built causing it to break down early in the life of the product, forcing the user to buy another. This is not a good user experience and should not be the aim of designers. The following will cover some key elements of timeless industrial design that can be implemented into designers work.
Timeless industrial design is defined by its ability to remain relevant and useful over time, but what are the aspects of timeless design that industrial designers can implement into their work. The key elements of this type of design include simple aesthetics, design for repair, and meticulous functionality. By incorporating these elements into designer’s work, they can create designs that stand the test of time.
Visual Appeal is Maintained over Time through Simplicity of Aesthetics
Before diving into the value of simplicity in creating long lasting design it is important to justify the importance of aesthetics impact on product longevity. Although the aesthetics itself does not take away from the product’s ability to function, user preference to aesthetics does change over time. Creating a product that surpasses these changes in aesthetic value is a big challenge. The following study by Buechel, E. C., & Townsend, C. is an example of contrasting products, both with the same functionality but differing aesthetics. This study compares plates and bedding aesthetic, with no change to the functionality of the products. In the study there would be plates with different aesthetics, a more plane coloured plate vs a more intense colour plate with stripes or a pattern on it. These plates were compared by participants, they looked at the plates and asked how much they predicted they would like the plates over time. The study concluded that participants would like extremely stimulating designs less over time, increasingly becoming irritated with the extreme design. It is important to note that this study ensured that multiple tests were done with different colours and patterns to eliminate the possibility for a specific colour or pattern to create any bias in the data (Buechel, E. C., & Townsend, C., 2018, p.285). This study emphasises the value of aesthetics in creating lasting design. This is done through the prediction of liking different designs and colours over time compared, to a product with the same function and a more simple design. The results of this study prove that a more minimal or simple aesthetic, although not as arousing to the consumer initially, is more likely to be liked in terms of aesthetic for a longer time.
Timeless designs’ goal is not to sell more products, it is to create one product to be sold and enjoyed for as long as possible. Trends come and go, a lasting product comes and stays. Avoiding trends is difficult when designing, but to create a product of long term value it is important to stray away from this ideology. This concept is explained well by Zamani, B., Sandin, G., & Peters, G. M. journal article on the life cycle assessment of clothing libraries. This study covers the topic of fast fashion, the article states that fast fashion is a supply chain model used to quickly react to increasingly frequent trends in fashion. It states that companies like H&M and Zara use this model of fast fashion to have new clothing products extremely regularly throughout the year, recurring every 3 to 5 weeks. The article claims that fast fashion may lead to clothes not being taken care of and an increase in people throwing away or getting rid of their clothing before it wears out (Zamani, B., Sandin, G., & Peters, G. M., 2017, p.1). This article reveals as fast fashion has become prominent the product lifespan of garments has decreased. This proves that trendy design in products, specifically in this case fashion, cannot be used to create designs that are meant to last. This all goes to show that trends significantly reduce product lifespan and it is necessary to not follow design trends to make a product that people will enjoy the aesthetics of and not want to get rid of.
Aesthetics is important to creating timeless products and so is avoiding trends. This begs the question, “What aesthetic should be used to create timeless design?”, and the answer is simple, simplicity. Simple aesthetic does not follow trends.. Simplicity implies the product is familiar, understandable, easy to use, functional, and beautiful, here is how. The research done by Wallner, T. S., Magnier, L., & Mugge, R. is used to create more literature on how open consumers are to buying refurbished products. This is done through the exploration of refurbished product aesthetics and how it impacts the consumers’ likelihood to purchase the refurbished product. The goal is to determine how product aesthetics can be enhanced to increase product longevity, not only for one consumer but for resale of refurbished products as well. This study was composed as follows. Participants were shown pictures of coffee machines, headphones and radios with different design aesthetics, and were told they were refurbished. The participants were asked numerous questions. Here is what they found, participants liked neo-retro and simplistic design styles and were most likely to want to purchase them as refurbished products. Concerning the neo-retro design styles, products that incorporate this aesthetic are perceived as more timeless because participants believe that products of that time period were built to last and have better quality. Simplistic design styles were also considered more timeless as participants considered them disconnected from any particular time period or trend. Also, participants found that simplicity implied durability due to being associated with high-quality brands that often use a simple aesthetic (Wallner, T. S., Magnier, L., & Mugge, R., 2020, p.5-13). Not concerning the study but brought up in the report is the timelessness of Bruan products designed by Dieter Rams. These products follow his rules of good design. One of these rules being, good design is long lasting, another being good design is as little design as possible. In other words he is suggesting that timeless design is created in part by making it as simple as possible. This is emphasised through a photo of a radio designed by Rams in the 50s that is still considered beautiful today (Wallner, T. S., Magnier, L., & Mugge, R., 2020, p.4). This research is very powerful because it doesn’t only consider how long people are willing to hold onto a product based on its aesthetic, but if it is timeless enough for people to buy even after being refurbished. The research concludes that neo-retro design style and simplistic design style were considered more timeless. However, in argument of simplicity being the best for timeless design here is why neo-retro is not as timeless. Neo-retro design shouldn’t be considered timeless. Past trends may have a sense of familiarity and nostalgia when incorporated into modern design, however it comes down to more of a consumer style preference. Arguably in a short time the quality associated with neo-retro products will fail as consumers realise that these brands don’t maintain the quality of their past replicates. As reflected in the journal, Rams design philosophy of simplicity being a factor of timelessness prevails, it is not distinguished by any particular time period the same way that neo-retro products are. His designs are made up of simple shapes, with little change in colour or excess accenting. It is because of this simplicity that these products are able to fit in almost any home and not feel out of place. As stated before, simplicity is familiar, and these products are familiar, they are made up of shapes that are easy to understand and people recognise. The lack of excess on the simple products leaves room for the contrasting features to be easy to see, making its simplicity benefit the user experience as the product is more understandable. All this goes to show that making a product with a simple design aesthetic increases the chances of product longevity significantly.
Design for Repair is a Crucial Factor in Making Products that Last
Design for repair is another critical element of timeless industrial design. A specific way repairable products last longer is because of the quality, durable materials they are made of. Without quality materials the whole product would fall apart, decreasing its ability to be repaired. Some proof of association of durable products with quality materials is seen in an article by Wallner, T. S., Magnier, L., & Mugge, R.. Conclusions based on the participants’ comments on the products are as follows. Durable products use metal instead of plastic and feature other high quality materials such as leather and wood. In this study on the perception of products’ ability to be refurbished, conclusions were made that durability was a major factor in the ability to repair and in turn increase the lifespan of the product (Wallner, T. S., Magnier, L., & Mugge, R., 2020, p.4). In another article by Guiltinan, J. on planned obsolescence one technique considered is design for limited repair. A case study that was used to reflect this ideology is disposable cameras. They are cheaply made, not reusable or repariable and definitely not durable (Guiltinan, J., 2009, p.20). If you were to consider any other camera that is meant to last and be repaired it would be made out of quality hard plastic and metal assembled with screws so that it could be taken apart and fixed if needed. As seen in the comparison study, products that feature durable materials are expected to have a longer lifespan due to there perceived ability to be repaired. These thoughts are likely concluded from participants past experience with similar produts. This is why it is important to incorporate durable materials into products to create timeless design.
Upgradability, reparable products are meant to be taken apart, this feature allows consumers to modify and upgrade the product over time, in turn increasing the product lifespan. The following information was found in an article by Linton, J. D., & Jayaraman, V. that identifies different ways to increase product lifespan. One method covered in this article is the ability to upgrade. The article states that making a product upgradable increased the value, quality, functionality and performance of the product. It takes a look at the military and current technology. How often companies come out with new products rendering the old ones less functional. The article claims that by incorporating upgradability as a part of the product it becomes more functional and competitive in the market leading to increased profits for companies. Lastly products that are upgradable are able to replace products that wear faster. They are able to stay relevant longer through repair and upgrading with minimal labour and expense (Linton, J. D., & Jayaraman, V., 2005, p.1814). This article demonstrates that it is very valuable for a product to be upgradable to increase the lifespan of the product. Technology moves fast but creating a repairable product that can be upgraded for the future and continue to serve a purpose is super valuable. It further increases the lifespan of the product, making upgradability valuable for timeless design.
Lastly, repairability still gives the product value after its product life is done, this value is derived by its ability to be easily recycled. Repairable products can more easily be recycled, reused or remanufactured, serving a purpose again. The ability to repair makes it timeless as its function does not come to an end when it’s done being used by the consumer, its function only shifts. The following article by by Pialot, O., Millet, D., & Tchertchian, N. takes a deep dive into the process of remanufacturing. In other words how the the article covers how the product will carry on at the end of its use phase. It focuses on reusing parts of products in different ways, such as recycling, reuse and remanufacturing. Remanufacturing is stated to be used as a guideline for creating products that are more easy to take apart so they can be used again or in other ways. Further stating that making products modular is an important factor towards remanufacturing. A product that is made to be remaufactured can be taken back by a manufacturer and used again after testing and maybe fixing up the product a bit. Similarly reuse involves selling the product or part to be used again in another way and recycling involves breaking down a product into its materials to be used agaian. These are seen as the 3 main end of product life strategies (Pialot, O., Millet, D., & Tchertchian, N., 2012, p.1). As stated in the article, remanufacturing requires products to be repairable. When a product is repairable it is able to be used again, perhaps a different way at the end of its use phase. These end of life strategies that show how a product can be used even after its use phase is done show the value of making a product repairable, as it can more easily be recycled, reused or remanufactured. This doesn’t just prolong the life of the product but makes a way for the product carry on and serve more purposes. This makes design for repair extremely valuable in creating timeless design.
Detail to Functionality Ensures Products that Continue to Create Value
Meticulous functionality means that every aspect of the design is well considered and has a purpose. A clear example of products that do not abide by this is gimmicks, they are fun for a while but realistically they don’t serve much purpose and quickly become irrelevant. This is very different from the objective of timeless design. An article by Del Vecchio, G. discusses how brands can create fads that don’t fade through maintaining constant trends. An example brought up is the McDonalds happy meal, a little toy in the box gets kids excited, but McDonalds knows that without a constant refresh of new toys kids will lose interest. Another example of a gimmick would be PEZ. It is a little toy that dispenses candy. PEZ also does the refresh model that McDonalds does where they are constantly adding a new trendy character to their dispensers. This model is what the author calls an Ever-Cool product or trend. These Ever-Cool products create constant trends which are required to maintain attention on the product or else it people will lose interest. This happened to He-Man toy, they embodied strength to boys but didn’t continue to refresh the product in any substantial way. Nowadays you don’t see He-Man action figures much, not nearly as much as Barbie for example (Del Vecchio, G., 1998). These examples of gimmicks demonstrate that although they create attention, they do not last. People lose interest in them and they become irrelevant. If you want to create a lasting product don’t create a gimmick, make something functional that serves a real purpose, something people need.
Products that are made with extreme attention to detail that have all functionality considered and implemented will last a long time as it remains useful. This is quite the opposit to incompatibility obsolescence, which means to not make a product future proof. Or even intentionally designed such that it is incompatible with future products it would work alongside. An article by Sierra-Fontalvo, L., Gonzalez-Quiroga, A., & Mesa, J. A. covers this point well. The artilce is a review of product design and its relation to planned obsolescence. It describes incompatibility obsolescence as product requirements changing such that the product becomes outdated due to new addons that don’t work with it anymore. An example of this would be phone hardware no longer being compatible with the new software that comes out (Sierra-Fontalvo, L., Gonzalez-Quiroga, A., & Mesa, J. A., 2023, p.1). By not creating phone operating systems or software compatible with older phones, people feel cut off and like there phone is worth less. In turn decreasing the lifespan of the product as people get rid of it sooner. As designers it is important consider what the future functionality of that product may be. Also important, is to design for older generations such that they don’t lose value. This will greatly contribute to timeless design.
Lastly a well functioning product is worth holding onto and will truly stand the test of time as it leaves little reason to replace. Planned obsolescence is planning for the product to fail or become outdated faster than it needs to. To intentionally make a product that breaks so the user must buy a new one sooner is quite the opposite of timeless design. An article by Guiltinan, J. encapsules different types of planned obsolescence; one of the examples is design for limited functional life. Another phrase used to describe this is death dating, which means that the people designing the product would intentionally decide how long they want the product to functionally last based on trying to increase sales. An example given in the article is that in the 50s and 60s appliance companies would often death date their products to about 3 years. Another way a product could be made less appealing is through planned aesthetic failure. A case brought up in the article is appliances intentionally being designed with surfaces that would wear poorly. People would like the aesthetic originally but eventually not want the product anymore because it looks bad and old leading to people throwing away before it function life is over (Guiltinan, J., 2009, p.20). This is the opposite of detail to functionality as it ensures that the functionality of the product intentionally fades within a certain time period. If functionality for the consumer was considered more deeply the designers would choose a paint that doesn’t chip or discolour. These examples of careless attention to detail or intentional product destruction leads towards short product life cycles and drives out timeless design. In order to make a design timeless, ensure planned obsolescence is not considered and attention to detail for the consumer is a priority.
A Summary of the Key Aspects of Timeless Industrial Design
Designers should try to create products that don’t need to be thrown out so often. They should make products that last. As a result of the product lasting, a sustainable business will need to increase the price of their products. This is not a bad thing though, it is simply the real cost of the product. Before industrialization the variety of products the world currently has for the price they are at would be unthinkable (De Vries, J., 1994, p.255-256). Society has conditioned themselves to not realise the true cost of products, in an article by Ettehadieh, D. he reflects on the cost of recycled goods. Compared to putting recycling in a landfill, New York spends $200 more per ton of recycling (Ettehadieh, D., n.d.). These are things consumers end up having to pay for that they don’t think of when they are making a purchase. Designers should strive to create products that don’t need to be thrown nearly as often..
In summary, good design is timeless and that creating a quality product that lasts is selfless. In short the key elements of timeless industrial design in include the following. Aesthetics, they are an extremely important aspect of design that directly correlates to how long people will keep a product for. Simplicity, it is an essential element of timeless industrial design aesthetic. It doesn’t follow trends but instead focuses on creating designs that are familiar, understandable, easy to use, functional, and beautiful. This means that the product should be easy to use and not require any special knowledge or training. As a result simplicity is the best aesthetic for lasting industrial design. Design for repair is another critical element of timeless industrial design. Repairable products are made of durable materials, making them last a longer. Since repairable products are easy to take apart, they can also be upgraded, further increasing the lifespan of the product. Even when the lifecycle of the product does come to an end, perhaps due to irrelevance, a repairable product still serves a function. Repairable products can more easily be recycled, serving a purpose after it’s use phase. Timeless design is also meticulously functional, which means that every aspect of the design is well considered and has a purpose. A clear example of products that do not abide by this is gimmicks, they are fun for a while but realistically they don’t serve much purpose and quickly become irrelevant. On the other hand a product that is made with extreme attention to detail has had all its functionality considered and implemented and will last a long time as it remains useful. This method of design leaves no room for planned obsolescence. Lastly a well functioning product is worth holding onto and will truly stand the test of time as it leaves little reason to replace. By incorporating these elements into designers’ work, they can create designs that stand the test of time and remain relevant and useful for years to come creating a better overall customer experience.
Bibliography
Buechel, E. C., & Townsend, C. (2018). Buying beauty for the long run: (Mis)predicting liking of product aesthetics. The Journal of Consumer Research, 45(2), 275–297. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucy002
(Buechel, E. C., & Townsend, C., 2018, 275–297)
Del Vecchio, G. (1998). Keeping it timeless, trendy. Advertising Age, 69(12), 24. https://search-ebscohost-com.proxy.library.carleton.ca/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ufh&AN=399918&site=ehost-live
(Del Vecchio, G., 1998)
De Vries, J. (1994). The Industrial Revolution and the Industrious Revolution. The Journal of Economic History, 54(2), 249–270. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2123912
(De Vries, J., 1994, p.255-256)
Ettehadieh, D. (n.d.). Cost-Benefit Analysis of Recycling in the United States: Is Recycling Worth It? | Department of English. Interpolations. Retrieved November 14, 2023, from https://english.umd.edu/research-innovation/journals/interpolations/interpolations-spring-2011/cost-benefit-analysis
(Ettehadieh, D., n.d.)
Guiltinan, J. (2009). Creative Destruction and Destructive Creations: Environmental Ethics and Planned Obsolescence. Journal of Business Ethics, 89(Suppl 1), 19–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-008-9907-9
(Guiltinan, J., 2009, p.20)
Linton, J. D., & Jayaraman, V. (2005). A framework for identifying differences and similarities in the managerial competencies associated with different modes of product life extension. International Journal of Production Research, 43(9), 1807–1829. https://doi.org/10.1080/13528160512331326440
(Linton, J. D., & Jayaraman, V., 2005, p.1814)
Pialot, O., Millet, D., & Tchertchian, N. (2012). How to explore scenarios of multiple upgrade cycles for sustainable product innovation: the “Upgrade Cycle Explorer” tool. Journal of Cleaner Production, 22(1), 19–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.10.001
(Pialot, O., Millet, D., & Tchertchian, N., 2012, p.1)
Sierra-Fontalvo, L., Gonzalez-Quiroga, A., & Mesa, J. A. (2023). A deep dive into addressing obsolescence in product design: A review. Heliyon, 9(11), e21856-. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e21856
(Sierra-Fontalvo, L., Gonzalez-Quiroga, A., & Mesa, J. A., 2023, p.1)
Wallner, T. S., Magnier, L., & Mugge, R. (2020). An Exploration of the Value of Timeless Design Styles for the Consumer Acceptance of Refurbished Products. Sustainability, 12(3), 1213-. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12031213
(Wallner, T. S., Magnier, L., & Mugge, R., 2020, pg)
Zamani, B., Sandin, G., & Peters, G. M. (2017). Life cycle assessment of clothing libraries: can collaborative consumption reduce the environmental impact of fast fashion? Journal of Cleaner Production, 162, 1368–1375. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.06.128
(Zamani, B., Sandin, G., & Peters, G. M., 2017)
