Are Google's nerds destroying design?
 |
| A departing designer claims data too often trumps art. Image: Google Sketchup logo |
On his way out of Google, Douglas Bowman has posted a blog missive that might haunt the company one day. Bowman, the (now former) visual design lead, accuses the company's culture of relying too much on numbers, to the point where creativity suffers.
"Yes, it’s true that a team at Google couldn’t decide between two blues, so they’re testing 41 shades between each blue to see which one performs better," he writes. "I had a recent debate over whether a border should be 3, 4 or 5 pixels wide, and was asked to prove my case. I can’t operate in an environment like that."
It's hard to get on Google's (GOOG) case for loving data; after all, expertise in number-crunching algorithms and attention to user behavior are a big part of what's grown it into a company with a $104 billion market cap and nearly $16 billion in the bank. Google's data wizards have humbled Yahoo (YHOO), and set Microsoft (MSFT) on its heels in the online game. If that's where data gets you, well, then, more data for everyone. Right?
Maybe not. When I read Bowman's post, I immediately thought of Apple (AAPL) – a Silicon Valley company that has a very different relationship with numbers. Unlike Google, which is (if Bowman is to be believed) running online focus groups to choose among 41 shades of blue, Apple hates focus groups. Focus groups trigger Apple's cultural gag reflex. Where Google leads with the left brain, Apple leads with the right. Sometimes Apple's attitude yields products like the Flower Power iMac and the G4 Cube. But sometimes you get the iPod or the iPhone. Apple's attitude is that sometimes, to truly innovate, you've got to go beyond giving people what they say they want.
Who knows if Bowman has an ax to grind with Google – but I still hope Bowman's criticism at least gets some attention at the Googleplex. As Google has grown, so have its ambitions – it wants to expand beyond the number-centric search ads game into brand advertising, operating systems and phone design. And those are areas that favor Apple types – the right-brained. (Don't believe me? Think about how well Apple does in all those areas.) Perhaps search optimization can be boiled down to finding the answer to very complicated math problems, but these are design problems that are more subjective in nature. It's a different thing than online apps. You can't soft-launch a phone to the public, get feedback, and tweak it endlessly in public beta. You have to design a phone based on a bold vision, and try to release a product that wows people. Try to imagine a focus-grouped iPhone; it would have been a clunky thing with a slide out keyboard and pretty-good software. (Kind of like the first Google phone, which is due for a software update any day now.)
This is not to suggest that Google is lacking in right-brain skills. Fantastic designs like its search pages and maps prove it can do art, not just numbers. But if Google wants to be as successful in other areas as it has been in search, it may do well to heed Bowman's words. It may well have to develop more of an artist's arrogance – that quality of being able, in the right situations, to put aside its beloved data points and do what's best, even if it's not what users say they want.
Hey Hey Don't blame google. They are trying to survive just like every other company. I am sure there is dead wood in the company and they need to get rid of them. I work for the govt and I know how that feels. We clean house too. Many of us including myself make money with google especially with their adsence. I have also been in the internet business since 1996 and I can say I dealt with many companies out there that wanted to advertise on your web sites but basically never gave any money for valid results. I think google is a company that is honest and very reliable without cheating the innocent customer. Give them a break and u all know who u are! They are helping all of us in one way or another.
@ Ralphie. Sour Grapes? Google is likely near 95% engineers. Does that ratio represent society? No. The problem that engineers tend to have is that they lack empathy…empathy for anyone who is not overly analytical, which is like 90% of the rest of society. Designers are the bridge between engineering genius and 'regular' folks who don't speak code and who appreciate form, ease of use for the neophyte, pleasure, etc. When designers are too few, have too little visibility and power to improve that bridge…products become misunderstood, not optimally utilized and even irrelevent elements of technology.
BTW: saying 'artistic designer' doesn't make sense. Art and design are two seperate, yet overlapping things. Design is a science…we don't just 'come up with' concepts, like pulling it out of our keister's. They're developed/formulated from years of experience, research, education and perhaps a lil inspiration.
This is pretty much the problem that brings down all wildly successful companies. They try to "bottle the formula." I've always maintained that true greatness comes from extreme creativity. Extreme creativity is a culture that can not be created through process, planning or numbers. It is a synergy of personality. I've had a lot of successes in my career and invariably upper management has always tried to come in and "bottle the formula". That is when I walk, because this approach attempts to reduce success to a simple recipe and when you do that it is just last years leftovers staffed and maintained by a bunch of mediocre engineers with no imagination who have not had an original thought in their life. Companies (like Apple) who have had a string of successes are lucky, because as soon as they become introspective about success it will vanish.
Google's so-called left-brain approach is not based on focus groups. When an artistic designer comes up with a concept, the nerds can try out many variations using a few minutes of data to judge the response. Sounds like this ex-employee thinks he can judge the response to the best color or border better than millions of people in a blind test. Sounds like sour grapes to me.
Um, if you read his actual post he doesn't really sound "disgruntled" he sounds pretty calm about it to me… Just stated an opinion that he doesn't feel he can be creative there anymore due to the process they have in place.
Do you know any google employees? I do. And many of them will agree that the level of their anality can, and often does, stifle creativity. Hey.. if it works for them, great. But there are many that would agree that it is stifling to work there. Its not just one employee saying this type of thing.
iPhone – iTouch "Platform"
1) A camera shell where the iPhone docks to form the viewfinder/storage/gpstag/flikr uploader
2) Pocket sized radio controlled cars and helicopters, Bluetooth, iPhone is the remote
3) Fat iPhone case with 4400mAh Li battery, Dpad, buttons, 2x analog sticks, finger buttons behind (like a ps2 dual shock controller that the iPhone sits in the middle of) supported by most appstore games. This device will also have better built in speakers, and a headset passthrough for using the iPhone headsets mic for in game speech.
4) Occiliscope / multimeter docking unit. It’s a fat case with big battery that you slip the iPhone into, it has probe connections, properly fused, and excellent test / measurement software with graphing and history.
5) GPSbox: ruggardised feild gps case with clear weatherproof lid, long battery life and Bluetooth GPS compass.
In the movie "Pirates of Silicon Valley," it is established that Apple's enemy is IBM. However, as the movie unfolds, Microsoft emerges as the true enemy and stifler of all that is good in the world.
That's how Google is. They're the 800 lb gorilla of search and text-based advertising. Google stifles innovation because they won't be changing their search engine or the little text ads anytime soon. Does advertising need changing on the internet? Yes. Yes, it does. Text ads are archaic and could be much improved upon with graphical touches, color, and dynamic functionality. However, as long as Google dominates the online advertising market with Adsense, there won't be any innovation anytime soon. As it is, ads are still a one-way street that's served from a farm. A Google server farm.
Another interesting article, though nothing to do with Google really. One disgruntled former employee claims Google is stifling creativity, you say, but then you say "this is not to suggest that Google is lacking right-brain skills." So then, what are you suggesting? Are you saying that innovative companies may lose their entrepreneurial spark when they become giants and must take care — like Apple does — to stay limber? How banal! Perhaps you're the one that needs to get back to the right side of your brain.
I, for one, would be wary of one "ex" employee's point of view on decision making policies within a company.
You don't need me to tell you how successful Google is. And one reason for that is it's uniformity and simplicity in design. After spending some time with their interfaces, any new Google tools and toys are that much easier to learn. Apple may hate focus groups, but isn't Apple's success from the same uniform, easy, fun to use experience?
I'd say whatever makes that process work so well…keep it in place.
In my years as a web developer, I have noticed that when one of the individuals on the team's ideas don't 'mesh' with the company's goals or the rest of the team, that person can feel stifled.
Google's making big money and will be around for a very long time. If it's because of numbers and a 'science' to the design, then so be it.
This site has a lot on topics just like this. Intimately discussed.
So Bowman left because Google wouldn't let him change the fonts all by himself. Who cares if they want to pick 41 shades of tint. He had a team of color experts at his disposal. They were gonna worry about color for him.