Design Is Not A Democracy
(and Isn't A Dictatorship either…)
Design Is Not A Democracy
Design Is Not A Democracy
(and Isn't A Dictatorship either…)
(and Isn't A Dictatorship either…)
Because when everyone gets a say,
the work often stops saying anything.
Committees mean safety:
“balanced,”
“aligned,”
“inclusive.”
Design by committee doesn’t fail dramatically,
it just fades into everything else.
If that’s the goal, sure.
But for everyone else:
Every bold brand you remember
happened because someone said no.
No to endless feedback.
No to “what if we added…”
No to softening the ideas that made it distinctive.
The best design isn’t democratic, it’s directed.
Your audience, not your internal team,
is the only group that gets a real vote.
If they engage, it works.
If they don’t, you change.
That’s the democracy.
So is design a dictatorship or democracy?
It's dictatorship when compromise becomes the rule.
And a democracy, when the audience decides the outcome.
Made me think of that KFC ad: “Succumb to the bread crumb.”
“Succumb to the crumb.” clearly makes more sense.
The “bread” was the compromise, almost taunting the audience even more to wonder what they were even
supposed to be suspicious of if bread was not written.
What on earth could they possibly have used to fry chicken?
Because when everyone gets a say,
the work often stops saying anything.
Committees mean safety:
“balanced,”
“aligned,”
“inclusive.”
Design by committee
doesn’t fail dramatically,
it just fades into everything else.
If that’s the goal, sure.
But for everyone else:
Every bold brand you remember
happened because someone said no.
No to endless feedback.
No to “what if we added…”
No to softening the ideas
that made it distinctive.
The best design isn’t
democratic, it’s directed.
Your audience, not your internal team,
is the only group that gets a real vote.
If they engage, it works.
If they don’t, you change.
That’s the democracy.
So is design a dictatorship or democracy?
It's dictatorship when
compromise becomes the rule.
And a democracy, when the
audience decides the outcome.
Made me think of that KFC ad:
“Succumb to the bread crumb.”
“Succumb to the crumb.”
clearly makes more sense.
The “bread” was the compromise, almost taunting the audience even more to wonder what they were even
supposed to be suspicious of if bread was not written.
What on earth could they possibly have used to fry chicken?
Design has never been more collaborative —
and that’s both a blessing and a curse.
Because when everyone gets a say,
the work stops saying anything.
Committees mean safety: “balanced,” “aligned,” “inclusive.”
But safe design doesn’t stand out — it blends in.
If that’s the goal, fine.
But for everyone else:
Every bold brand you remember
happened because someone said no.
No to endless feedback.
No to “what if we added…”
No to softening the ideas that made it distinctive.
The best design isn’t democratic, it’s directed.
Your audience, not your internal team,
is the only group that gets a real vote.
If they engage, it works.
If they don’t, you change.
That’s the democracy.
Design by committee doesn’t fail dramatically — it just fades into everything else.
So is design a dictatorship or democracy?
It's dictatorship when compromise becomes the rule.
And sometimes a democracy,
when the audience decides the outcome.
Made me think of that KFC ad: “Succumb to the crumb.”
The “bread” was the compromise — almost taunting the audience into wondering what they were even supposed to be suspicious of.
What on could they possibly use to fry chicken?