A PROPOSAL FOR A White House Council ON DESIGN A Strategy to Harness the Power of Design DESIGN Program National Endowment for the arts June 1 994 White House Council ON DESIGN A Strategy to Harness the power of design Introduction D E S I G N - of products, services, communications, and environments - is a strategic national resource whose full potential has yet to be realized. Economically, design can enhance prosperity and the opportunities for employment by improving the global competitiveness of U.S. products, streamlining the manufacturing process, and creatively refining the interface between human beings and technology. Environmentally, design is an essential element in providing a clean, safe, and sustainable environment, making contributions in such areas as recycling and pollution control as well as offering strategies for the wise long- term use of natural resources, land, and infrastructure. Educationally, design is a tool for identifying problems, analyzing information, developing critical thinking, envisioning options, and commu- nicating solutions. Socially, design can break down the physical and psychological barriers to full participation in society and open the way for a democratic and economic system that is truly inclusive. It does this by making products, communications, and environments universally accessible. Certainly, there is a breadth of talent and energy being devoted to enhancing American design excellence, but because efforts are diffused, the message about the value and power of design never reaches certain important audiences, coordination of programs and strategies is difficult, and overall, opportunities to take advantage of design resources simply go unexercised. WHAT IS LACKING is focus and leverage to maximize design as a national resource. Responding to this situation, in June 1993, the National Endowment for the Arts' Design Program invited a group of business, government, media, and academic leaders to a three-day conference/workshop to explore and develop options on the formation of a U.S. Design Council and Office of Federal Design Quality. (See Appeiidix A fen the ageiicLi aiid the list of conference/workshop attendees . ) On the first day of the meeting, participants heard presentations from the directors of the British Design Council, Danish Design Center, International Design Center NAGOYA, Barcelona Design Center, and Taiwan Design Promotion Center on the mission, activities, and funding of these design promotion organizations. (See Appendix B for a summary of these five presentations.) On the second day, participants were divided into four working groups. Each group was asked to develop an American version of a design council and office of federal design quality and to outline the organization's mission, structure, activities, and funding, and to discuss a strategy/implementation plan. Later in the day and on the morning of the third day, the chair of each working group presented their scenario. This was followed by a general group discussion in an attempt to reach a coiisensus as to the best and most feasible options to pursue. (See Appendix C for the four scenarios . ) The conference/workshop was followed by a presentation about the meeting and its outcomes at the June International Design Conference in Aspen. The Design Program staff and participants then held discussions with other government representatives, business leaders, educators, and designers thrt)ughout the reminder of the year. In March 1994, the chairs of the four working groups met in Washington to report on these informal discussions and to make final recommen- dations. After carefully evaluating many options, they proposed a White House Council on Design as the best strategy for leveraging the power of design at a national level and recommended that the National Endowment for the Arts give this proposal the widest possible circulation. 2 White House Council ON DESIGN Mission THE WHITE HOUSE COUNCIL ON DESIGN will utilize U.S. design resources to achieve strategic national goals in the areas of economic competitiveness, environmental quality, education, and social inclusiveness. This mission is expansive to mirror the spectrum of arenas in which design can have a positive impact, k embraces the notion that design can enhance quality of life and economic productivity through an emphasis on identifying and fostering better product/service development and production processes, better visual com- munications and interactive information technologies, and better working and living environments. It recognizes that if we are to conserve natural resources, as well as reduce and, where possible, eliminate pollution, we must do so through design. It contributes to achieving Goals 2000: The Educate America Act, demonstrating the universal application of the design process in developing effec- tive critical thinking, communication, and problem-solving skills. And finally, it introduces yet another valuable tool in the national effort to make certain that all people — irrespective of race, creed, gender, sexual orientation or disability — can participate in the abundant opportunities our country offers those who live here. It is understood that the effectiveness of the White House Council on Design will depend on its ability to target and highlight specific elements within these priorities and articulate specific objectives. The scope of Council activities, as outlined in the next section, should help it achieve this focus. 3 Activities THREE INITIAL AREAS OF RESPONSIBILITY of the White House Council on Design: 1. Develop and advocate a U.S. Design Agenda. 2. Organize and administer the Presidential Design Leadership Awards program. 3. Prepare and disseminate an annual State of Design report. The U.S. Design Agenda is envisioned as a list of action items identifying specific opportunities for using design to improve economic performance and quality of life. It would relate discrete changes in design processes and criteria to well defined objectives, and become a tool for defining and advocating precisely how design is a strategic resource. Issues on the design agenda could be recommendations for government agencies, private organizations, educational institutions, and pri- vate industry. An example of such an action item is a national design extension service for small business. The Presidential Design Leadership Awards are an appropriate and highly visible way to profile the strategic value of design as an economic, environ- mental, educational, and social resource. These dimensions of design are not well understood, and this program would provide a compelling forum tor highlighting outstanding examples of American design. Similar to the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Awards, the goal would be to emphasize process rather than product. Submissions could be subdivided into separate categories relating design excellence to various economic, environmental, educational, and socially inclusive outcomes, and entries would be accepted from both the government and private sectors. This program expands the federally focused Presidential Design Awards currently administered by the National Endowment for the Arts' Design Program. The annual State of Design report is a document to assess current practice, evaluate progress, and make recommendations for both strategic and tactical improvements. Ideally, its scope would be broad, the notion being to present as complete a picture of design in the United States as possible. In this context, the White House Council on Design's State of Design recommendations might extend well beyond the more immediate concerns articulated in its Design Agenda. For example, it might discuss design as a means for articulating and fostering an understanding of America's cultural diversity. 4 Structure THE WHITE HOUSE COUNCIL ON DESIGN will be established within the Office of the President. The Vice President will be the ex'officio chair of the Council. Other members will be representatives from American corporations, govern- ment agencies, professional design and engineering organizations, educational institutions, private foundations, and state and regional design and business orga- nizations. The Council will be supported by a small staff and select an Executive Board to advise members on policy and program issues. The Office OF THE President is the location of the White House Council on Design, not only because its mission is broad and strategic, but also to facilitate communications and initiatives across a diverse constituency. This structure should leverage the ability to reach the private sector, facilitate federal interagency coordination and cooperation, nuture state and local government initiatives, and establish public/private partnerships and interdisciplinary programs involving busi- ness persons, educators, and professional designers. Although membership clearly needs to be limited, voices on the Council should include innovative business leaders, policy makers from such executive departments and agencies as Commerce, Housing and Urban Develop- ment, Transportation, Defense, Agriculture, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the National Endowment for the Arts, and influential spokespersons from the professions of industrial design, engineering, architecture, urban planning, land- scape architecture, graphic design, marketing, and design management. Other members might come from the ranks of interested business and design educators, as well as the heads of state and local organizations that may already be promoting the importance of design as a strategic resource. Chosen from this larger group, the Council's Executive Board would take an active role in helping to shape policy, programs, and research. Substantive issues would, of course, have to be debated by the entire Council, but the Executive Board's review could streamline that process. A small staff would complement this effort by overseeing and coordinating the Council's award pro- gram, the annual State of Design report, and the preparation and dissemination of the U.S. Design Agenda. Funding FUNDING for the White House Council on Design will be a 50/50 split between government and private sources. In one scenario, the staff and meeting budget would he underwritten by the Office of the President. Project and activity support would come from a variety of different organizations — gt)vernment agencies, corporations, professional organizations, and foundations. AT A TIME when funding at the federal level is being scrutinized, it would be important to articulate and highlight the many benefits that should accrue from the Council's efforts: • improving the efficiency oi government. • Enhancing innovation processes. • Ensuring the effective and timely transfer of technology to MARKETABLE ptoducts and setviccs. • Helping small business to understand the power of design as a competitive and STRATEGIC tool. • Increasing international sales of U.S. products and services and helping to alleviate the trade deficit. • Facilitating the conversion process ot defense companies from government dependence to the commercial marketplace. • Educating Americans for the MODERN workforce. • Creating new employment, training, and professional opportunities. • Developing better living, working, and recreation environments. • Stimulating the much needed sense oi com m u n ity. • Preparing citizens for civic participation and responsibility. • Providing an appropriate emphasis on sustai nability issues related to energy and other scarce or nonrenewable resources. • Advancing implementation of equal employment opportunity thrt)ugh UN iver sally accessible design. • Nurturing the diversity and effectiveness of public/private PARTNERSH I PS. • Building a cohesive NATIONAL DESIGN infrastructure. • Promoting design as a tocus ior national pride and identity. Supporters of this proposal to establish the White House Council on Design recognize the complementary discussion going 011 to create a U.S. Design Council within the Department of Cominerce. This is the central element of a bill introduced (H.R. 4673) by Congressman George Brown, chairman of the House Science, Space and Technology Committee. Quite appropriately, the legislation focuses on augmenting the competitiveness of American products and services through design. Should it pass and be signed into law, it is important to note that the White House Council on Design, with its broader strategic goals and inter- agency/private sector structure, would remain both viable and necessary. Care would be taken not to duplicate activities but to tightly link and coordinate the programs and talents of both organizations to strengthen and reinforce the presence and power of design as a vital U.S. strategic resource. To ensure coordination, the membership of the White House Council on Design would include a Department of Commerce/U.S. Design Council representative. Appendix a Harnessing the power of Design A Conference/Workshop on Explorinf^ the Formation of a U.S. Design Council and an Office of Federal Design Quality, June 9 - 11, 1993 Sponsored hy the National Endowment tor the Arts' Design Program American Institute of Architects, 1735 New York Avenue, NW, Washingttm, DC AGENDA Day One Wednesday, June 9 8:50 - 9:00 Welcome, H. Alan Brangman, Acting Director, NEA/Design Program 9:00 - 9:30 Desigii , Technuluf![^ and Competitiveness, Deborah Wince-Smith, Senior Fellow, Council on Competitiveness and former Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Technology Policy 9:30 - 10:00 Overview of Existing Design Councils, Robert Blaich, Industrial Design Consultant to the Government of Taiwan and former Senior Managing Director of Design tor Phillips Electronics N.V. 10:00 - 10:45 British De.sipi Council, Ivor Owen, Director General 1 1 :00 - 1 1 :45 Danish Desigri Center, Jens Bernsen, Director 1 1 :45 - 1 2:30 International Design Center NACjOYA Inc., Ka:uo Kiniura, Executi\e Director 1 ;30 - 2; 1 5 Barcelonu Dcsi,i:^i Center, Mai Felip, Director General 2: 1 5 - 3:00 Taiwan Desif^i Promotion Center, Paul Cheng, Executive Directiir 3: 1 5 - 5:00 Panel discussiim 5:00 - 5:1 5 Closing remarks, H. Alan Brangman 6:00 - 6:30 ComTntmieating with Industry, audio-visual lecture by Jens Bernsen Day Two Thursday, June 10 9:00 - 9;45 Competitii'eness; Department of Commerce View, Kent Hughes, Associate Deputy Secretary for Competitiveness Policy 9:45 - 10: 1 5 DesigTt in the Federal Govemmem, Robert Peck, Group Vice President for External Affairs, American Institute of Architects and former Chief of Staft to Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan 10: 1 5 - 11 :00 Open discussion, H. Alan Brangman, Moderatt)r 1 1 :00 - 1 2:30 WorkingGroup Sessions: four working groups of 7-8 people to develop specific recommendations and a plan/strategy for implementation. 1 :30 - 3:45 Workinji Croup .Sessions (continued) 4:00 - 4:45 Presentation: Working Group I , Arnold Wasserman, Chair 4:45 - 5:30 Presentation: Working Ciroup 2, Doiiald Rorke, Chair Day Three Friday, June 1 1 9:00 - 9:45 Presentation. Working Group 3, Katherine McCoy, Chair 9:45 - 10:30 Presentation: Workinfi Group 4, Tom Hardy, Chair 10:45 - 12:30 Group disciission, H. Alan Brangman, Moderator 1 :30 - 3:30 Finali-:e reccmunendiitums/ strategy 3:45 - 4:45 Summation/ closing remarks, H. Alan Brangman PARTICIPANTS Jack Beduhn, Assistant Vice President, Design Integrity, AT&T Global Information Solutions, Dayton OH Jens Bernsen, Director, Danish Design Center, Copehagen, Denmark Robert Blaich, Principal, Blaich Associates, Aspen CO H. Alan Brangman, Acting Director, Design Arts Program, National Endowment for the Arts, Washington DC Robert Brunner, Marmger of Industrial Design, Apple Computer, Cupertino CA Gary Cadenhead, Professor, Department of Management, University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX Paul Cheng, Executive Director, Taiwan Design Promotion Center, Taipei, Taiwan Shelia Levrant de Bretteville, Director, Studies in Graphic Design, Yale School of Design, New Haven CT Edward Feiner, Deputy Director, Public Buildings Service Office of Design & Construction, General Services Administration, Washington DC Mai Felip, Director General, Barcelona Design Center, Barcelona, Spain Vince Gleason, Chief of Publications Division, National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, Harpers Ferry WV Thomas Grooms, Program Manager, Design Arts' Federal Design Improvement Program, National Endowment for the Arts, Washington DC Tom Hardy, Strategic Design Planning Consultant, Stamford CT Paul Hawken, Entrepreneur and Environmental Writer, Sausalito CA Kent Hughes, Associate Deputy Secretary for Competitiveness Policy, U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington DC David Kelley, Principal, IDEO Product Development, Palo Alto CA Kazuo Kimura, Executive Director, International Design Center NAGOYA, Nagoya, japan M. David Lee, Principal, StuU and Lee, Inc., Boston MA Dorothy Leonard-Barton, Professor, School of Business, Harvard University, Cambridge MA Mary Madden, Assistant for Congressional Relations, Office of Legislation, U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development, Washington DC Katharine McCoy, Co-chair, Design Department, Cranbrook Academy of Art, Bloomfield Hills MI Deborah Mitchell, Principal/Director, Johnson Johnson & Roy/inc, Dallas TX Bruce Nussbaum, Editorial Page Editor, Business Week, New York NY Ivor Owen, Director General, British Design Council, London, Great Britain RobertPeck, Group Vice/or Externa! A^airs, American Institute of Architects, Washington DC Carol Pompliano, Staff, House Subcommittee on Technology, Environment &. Aviation, U.S. Congress, Washington DC Boone Powell, Principal, Ford Powell Carson Inc., San Antonio TX Deane Richardson, Chairman Ementm, Fitch Inc., Worthington OH Michael Rock, Professor, Yale School of Design, New Haven CT Donald Rorke, President, Steuben, New York NY Sally Schauman, Professor, Department of Landscape Architecture, University of Washington, Seattle WA Roger Schluntz, Dean, School of Architecture, University of Miami, Coral Gables FL RitaSue Siegel, Chairman, RitaSue Siegel Associates, New York NY Frederick Skaer, Chief of Environmental Programs Branch, Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department (.if Transportation, Washington DC Leila Vignelli, Principal, Vignelli A.ssociates, New York NY Browen Walters, Principal, Metaphase Design Group, St. Louis MO Thomas Walton, Professor, School of Architecture & Planning, The Catholic University of America, Washington DC Arnold Wasserman, Innoi'ation Strategy, IDEO Product Development, San Francisco CA Patrick Whitney, Director, Institute of Design, Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago IL Deborah Wince-Smith, Senior Fellow, Council on Competitiveness, Washington DC Noel Zeller, President, Zelco Industries, Mt. Vernon NY OBSERVERS Charles Atherton, Secretary, Commission of Fine Arts, Washington DC Moria Cullen, Writer, Communications Arts, New York NY Andree Dumermuth, Con/identiai A.ssistant to Kent Hughes, Associate Deputy Secretary for Competixeness Policy, U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington DC Yoshiko Ebihara, Director, Gallery 91, New York NY Andrew Euston, Senior Urban Desigtier and Energy Program i)fficer. Office of Enxironment &. Energy, U.S. Department of Housing &. Urban Development, Washington DC' Kristina Goodrich, Senior f)irect(ir/H.\tenuilA//air.s, Industrial Designers Society of America, Great Falls VA Chee Pearlman, Editor, i.D. magazine, New York NY Seppo Sillain, Chief of Geometric and Roadside Desigii Branch, Federal 1 lighway Administration, U.S. L\'partment of Transportation, Washington DC Thomas Vonier, Correspondent, Progressive Architecture, Paris, France Susan Wing, Executii'e Director, Association ot liulependent C'olleges of Art 6i Design, Washington DC 10 Appendix b DESIGN PROMOTION Organizations Abroad Should the U.S. estabUsh a design promotion organization? If the answer to the question was based simply on evaluating the example of other nations, there is little doubt that the response would be yes. No claim is being made that every country has some kind of design council, but it is a fact that a significant number of the nations with whom we compare ourselves economically and socially, and many countries that business and government leaders in U.S. perceive as industrial competitors have such institutions. Today, there are more than 100 design councils around the world. The list of "believers" includes Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, Canada, France, Britain, Italy, Germany, Spain, Denmark, Finland, and even Eastern European nations such as Poland, Slovakia and Bulgaria. A L O O K at Some Precedents Based on presentations given on the first day of the conference/workshop, the following illustrate several design promotion organization options. None is pre- sented as a specific model for the U.S., but they demonstrate possibilities with respect to structure and size, budget and programming. The British Design Council • Established in 1944 as an independent government agency under the auspices of the Select Committee on Trade and Industry. • No authority to mandate actions in either government or industry; it must influence policy through persuasion. • A budget of about $18 million - $1 1 million in grants from the Department of Trade and Industry and $7 million from other sources such as publishing and consultancy fees. • The Council's headquarters is located in London with offices in five regions; regional offices offer services and sponsor activities tailored to the design needs of that particular area. • In general, the program strategy over the past five years has shifted resources away from a high-profile consumer focus (exhibits and awards) in a centralized office in London to one that seeks to influence design in a small number of key manufacturing sectors - presently, clothing and textiles, furniture, and medical equipment - through a network of regional offices. I] • An effort has been made to identify intervention points where the Council can maximize the benefit of its efforts; the emphasis now is on desig;n for export, CAD, materials selectioii, and the development of international prt)duct standards. • The Council has a staff of about 215 people, about half of them working in the region offices. • Activities include a Design Advisory Service, a Design Consultancy Service, an Innovation NoticeBoard, a Materials Information Service, publishing, workshops, and the annual British Design Awards. The Danish Design Center • Founded in 1987, the Center is an independent foundation that serves as the activities arm of the Danish Design Council. • It has a staff of 1 2 with a board of 40 persons c]ualified in design. The board of the center and the council are the same. • The annual budget is about $2.5 million with $1.6 million coming from the Ministry of Industry and the remaining derived from fees for services and from publication sales. • Most of the Center's energies are devoted to promoting design in Danish industry; other priorities are design education and training, and promotion of Danish design outside Denmark. • Specific activities are diverse, entrepreneurial and responsive to opportunities as they arise. On-going projects include maintaining a database and library, offering a design management consultaiicy service, supporting a publicatitnis program, ht)sting and organizing exhibitions, running design competitions, giving three annual design awards, and working with the Ministry of Education and Research and the Ministry of Industry to develop design education policy guidelines. International Design Center nagoya Inc. • Builds t)n Japan's loiig standing commitment to design expressed in internation- ally recognized programs supported by the Ministry o{ International Trade and Industry (MITl). • A quasi-governmental corporation organized in 1992 with a capital of $100 million as a jttint venture of the Aichi Prefecture Go\'ernment, the City of Nagoya, Nagoya Chamber ot Commerce and Industry, Chubu Economic Federation, and corporate trustees from the business sector. • Serves as a bridge of global communication between community, industry, and the design profession to be an internatit)nally oriented cultural and eciinomic pivotal 12 point for design-related information gathering and dispersion. • Presently operating with a staff of 1 7. • This design center will be the largest of its kind in Japan and will be housed in a new building, currently under construction, with more than 160,000 square feet of space devoted to design center activities. • Major emphasis placed on the importance of design to the general public in addition to its importance to industry. • Elements of the project are an R&.D center focusing on high-tech design as it relates to product development, marketing and design management, design educa- tion and curriculum programs, corporate development services in the area of design, a design museum, a design resource center, and a shopping mart with retail outlets open to the profession, industry, and the public. Barcelona Design Center • A private not-for-profit organization founded in 1973 by a group of designers and various public and private entities to promote industrial and graphic excellence for both cultural and economic purposes. • Governed by a 45 -member Board of Patrons whose honorary president is King Juan Carlos and whose chair is the Minister of Industry and Energy of the Catalonian Government. • An annual budget of $ 1 .7 million excluding grants and special programs; although it is not government sponsored, one third of the funds come from government agencies and the rest from private sources. • Staff of 11. • Activities include a Business Advisory Service analyzing the most effective roles for design in the corporation under study, a design information resource center, a national design awards program, the organization of exhibitions and competitions, and the development of design education and design management programs. Taiwan Design Promotion Center • An arm of the public/private China External Trade Development Council, the center was formed in 1979 to help raise the level of industrial design in Taiwan and improve the quality, image, and competitiveness of Taiwanese products on world markets. • Staff of about 80. • Exact budget unclear but does receive major portion of $170 million industrial design initiative sponsored by the Ministry of Economic Affairs to improve design 13 and manufacturing quality, to enhance the perception of Taiwanese products, and to upgrade the industrial design resources and talent available within Taiwan itself. • Nine program areas: design management, design research and development, industrial design, commercial design (i.e., graphics and identity programs), pack- aging design. Euro-design coordination, and three Taipei design centers abroad - Duesseldorf, Milan and Tokyo. • Broad range of activities including design consulting referral service, industrial design education, packaging design research and testing, "good design mark" awards, publications, exhibitions, and international design interaction between domestic and fi,)reign designers. • Center is recognized as a highly effective vehicle for liaison and coordination among designers, manufacturers, educational institutions, and government agen- cies. THE MESSAGE Behind these Institutions This comparative exercise could continue, indeed for many more pages. But the point is ncn to develop an exhaustive list. It is rather to underline the fact that an impressive number of nations are committed to nurturing design - some, given the examples of Nagoya and Taiwan, quite aggressively - as a national resource. Several articulate or imply improvements in the quality of life as a valued result of this effort. All believe critical economic benefits emerge from pursuing this strategy. This last point is confirmed by Harvard Business School professor Robert Hayes when he discussed competitiveness in the Summer 1990 issue of the Design Management Jounxal: First price, then quality, then speed and responsiveness, then the innovation cycle; what is next? Even as companies struggle with product development, it is possible to discern the next competitive challenge. It is design! And it will not be an easy one for many companies to master. In a March 11, 1991 , Fortune article, "Design that Sells and Sells and...," reporter Brian Dumaine made the same poitit with these words: "After years of ferocious competition on price and quality, many companies believe that superior design will be the key to winning customers in the Nineties." Clearly, certain countries were aware of this message long before the nineties and made design a matter of national policy. It is notable that all five models reviewed 14 at this workshop/conference, whether private (Denmark and Barcelona), govern- ment (Britain), orquasi-government (Taiwan andNagoya) organizations, received government funding that ranged from ahout a third of their budget (Barcek:)na) to almost 100 percent (Taiwan). In the U.S., however, the focus on design is left to the discretion and wisdom o( individual companies. The laissezfaire ideals upon which we base our economy do not leave much room for intervention, however well-intentioned. More specifi- cally, design is commonly perceived as an "extra," the aesthetic veneer on an otherwise functional and already acceptable product, service or environment. In this sense, design adds value but is not regarded as essential. Abraham Maslow's well known "hierarchy of needs" perpetuates this thinking when it assigns design to the last category in which human beings seek satisfaction. Those committed to the principles behind the establishment of a design council or some other type of design promotion organization, of course, understand things differently. They believe that design is anything but an "extra," that in business decisions and as a matter of policy, it is pervasive, an element that should be considered in areas ranging from strategy and conceptual development to marketing and production, from identity and communications problems to product develop- ment and architecture. The problem in the U.S. is to document these outcomes and create a voice that conveys the power of design. The documentation has to demonstrate that design is a management tool, an organizational asset - not a aesthetic "extra." It also has to include ways of accurately measuring the benefits that accrue from an investment in design. The voice actually has to be a chorus combining support from business persons, design professionals, academicians, and strategic planning experts as well as government leaders. The challenge is anything but easy. It is one that has been attempted before. Fortunately, there are indications that renewing efforts in this area might have a better chance of success than in the past. 15 Appendix c FOUR SCENARIOS for a U.S. Design Promotion Organization Based on international precedent, a rationale that affirms the economic, educa- ticmal, and quality of life contributions of design, and what appears to be a growing momentum to take more dramatic steps in the arena of design promotion, we confront a special opportunity, a junctiiMi where the example of others, a body o( thinking and the particulars of history create the chance to act decisively. It is tc^ take advantage of this situation that this conference/workshop was convened by the National Endowment for the Arts' Design Program. But with our uniquely American set of economic, political, and geographic circumstances, how exactly should we proceed? Design as it relates to business strategy and quality lacks a coherent constituency and depth of expertise. And the size and diversity of our nation makes a single design management focus difficult to achieve and support. To respc^nd to these circumstances, after a day and a half of presentations, participaiits were divided into four working grt)ups. Each group was asked to develop an American version of a design council and office of federal design quality and to outline the organization's mission, structure, activities, and funding. Each team also had to discuss a strategy/implementation plan. These four scenarios are outlined in the following pages. SCENARIO ONE American Design Development Office Mission To create an environment for influencing design quality in a public/private partnership organized to improve Arnerican competitiveness and social inclusive- ness. Structure The American Design Development Office would be an indeperident public/ private agency with a broad community-based constituency within industry, various levels of government, academic institutions, and regional and local commu- nities, it would have a small headquarters staff lead by an entrepreneurial director. Oversight would be provided by an interdisciplinary advisory board. As an institution, the AL^D would, like the National Trust for Historic Preservation, be a hybrid public/private organizatit)n. Ideally, it would piggyback activities on 16 existing federal design programs such as those in Commerce, Transportation, the Post Office, and Veterans Affairs. It would build partnerships with other levels of government and the private sector including links to state and local organizations, corporations, business associations, and educational institutions. It also would network with similar design promotion entities abroad. Activities • Write and distribute design case studies. • Provide professional schools with information and curricula on managing design. • Prepare programs on design that reach all levels of education. • Establish a network to share design education resources and ideas. • Make the economic and social benefits of design explicit and visible. • Operate through existing organizations to improve the design competition process, create internships, and initiate/refine awards programs. • Foster design excellence at the federal level as a model for the private sector. • Create a system for design quality review within the federal government. • Profile examples of poor design as a method for raising design consciousness. • Stimulate design activities at the grassroots level - where the people are. • Inaugurate and publicize an annual State of Design report reviewing the status of design in both the public and private realms. • Share design information via an Internet DESIGNET. • Nurture regional design activities building on ADD's resources and expertise. • Address design responses to environmental and resource problems. Funding Initial financial support for the American Design Development Office might be made available by reallocating money designated for existing federal programs. Later, it should be a line item in the federal budget similar to Congressional appropriations for the National Trust for Historic Preservation. Perhaps a portion of export tax credits could be allocated to ADD. Other revenues could come from grant support and royalties. Implementation In the short-term, ADD might be created by an Executive Order. Over the long- term, ADD would be established legislatively by passing the appropriate authoriza- tion and appropriations bills. To realize both strategies, a lobbying effort - combining voices from the various design professions and business - would be initiated to garner the attention and commitment of the executive branch and to 17 build suppc^rt fcir ADD on the local and regional levels as well as among members of Congress. A bottoms-up, broad community-based implementaticm strategy would include sharing a better understanding of the value of design with business executives in small- and medium-sized firms as well as state and city political leaders. To get the ball rolling, desigri activities might be started within various federal agencies - e.g., exploring the importaiice c^f design as part of Commerce's Manufac- turing Extension Centers program, starting a design development program as a facet of the Small Business Administration, having the EPA initiate K-12 education packages on environmental issues. Perhaps some interest in ADD also could be created by linking it with Vice President Gore's initiative to "reinivent gcwern- ment." More directly, an Executive Order creating ADD could be drafted and circulated among the President's advisors. A multi-disciplinary Design Advisory Board might be organized with representatives from the design professions, industry, the arts, education, and government to highlight the breadth, significance, and legitimacy of establishing a national design agency. Any implementati(.)n program needs to take into account what is legislatively possible; what kind of testimony has to be prepared to make ADD happen; what can be done and what cannot be done through National Endowment for the Art's Design Program; what is necessary to get the attentit)n of the President and have him issue an Executive Order; and what aspects of design can be productively linked to other important issues such as protecting intellectual property and safety concerns. Working Group Members Arnold Wasserman, Chair; Sheila de Bretteville, Bruce Nussbaum, Michael Rock, Sally Schauman, Roger Schluntz, Noel Zeller 18 SCENARIO TWO The U.S. Design Council Mission To increase U.S. competitiveness through the promotion of design excellence. This mission is based on the assumption that design is a vital tool for imprtiving the competitiveness and quality of American products and companies. It is important to note that job growth is a likely benefit of a more competitive America. This group also believed that there would be a natural and positive impact on quality of life and social conditions as a result of the emphasis on competitiveness. Structure A U.S. Design Council would be established within the Department of Commerce and be guided in its programs by a Board of Advisors from the public and private sector. An executive director with a small staff would carry out and coordinate program activities at the national level with additional staff at the Department of Commerce's regional offices. In the near-term, the audiences for Council activities would be business executives, especially in the areas of marketing and product development, business schools, new companies, and firms undergoing a major transfc^rmation including those in the defense industry. Over the long-term, the public - notably school children and consumers - would become a target of Council initiatives. Activities The Council would not focus on federal design quality. It would stress programs to create partnerships and strategic alliances between the Council and its audiences. Building a base of knowledge and expertise • Developing design case studies. • Defining standards: what is excellence? Outreach: building networks and relationships • Creating an electronic database and resource center. • Mountirig exhibitic:)ns. • Developing career awareness materials. • Making presentations at business conferences. • Giving design support to businesses through extension programs, publications, seminars, and referrals. Incentive program • Giving awards for design excellence and excellent design processes. 19 • Being an advocate for strong intellectual property protection. • Promoting tax breaks for design investments. • Providing grants to support design excellence activities. Funding For a five-year seed period, the U.S. Design Council would be 100 percent funded by the federal government. Later, this would be reduced as other resources were developed including the procurement of matching monies for specific programs, charging fees for services, and seeking private foundation and corporate support. Perhaps states could be tapped to finance some of the costs associated with the regional offices. Implementation • Analyzing previous efforts to create a Design Council (e.g., H.R. 3514). • Preparing a detailed plan of action. • Broad-based lobbying effort: . Raising private funds and building a coalition of corporate and professional support (e.g., five corporations to contribute $250,000 each). . Writing the necessary authorization and appropriation legislation. . Finding advocates in Congress and the executive branch including the Vice President and the Secretary of Commerce. . Preparing supporting documentation and lobbying materials. • Creating a voluntary design council advocacy board headed by a persuasive director. • Developing a precise council structure, organization plan, and schedule of activities. Working Group Members Donald Rorke, Chair; Robert Brunner, Gary Cadenhead, Vince Gleason, Mary Madden, Carol Pompliano, Bronwen Walters 20 SCENARIO THREE National Design Partnership Mission To promote the recognition of design innovation as central to the continuous reinvigoration of the nation's global competitiveness, prosperity, and quality of life and work. The Partnership would seek to develop a collaborative infrastructure to insert design at the core of an integrated product development process in public and private organizations from local to national levels. Structure The National Design Partnership would be an independent public/private partner- ship. It would be co-chaired by the Vice President of the United States and a corporation or university president. Its advisory body, the Forum, would be composed of the following presidentially- appointed members: an under-secretary of Commerce, the director of the National Endowment for the Arts' Design Program, the head of the American Chamber of Commerce, the head of the American Design Council, one Congressperson, four design leaders, three univer- sity presidents, one K-12 representative, three corporate presidents, one labor representative. Operationally, the Partnership would be under the leadership of the Design Advocate General, a persuasive, energetic, visionary individual. The staff would be small and responsive. The central office would be located in Washington, DC. Activities The Partnership would focus on programs in three broad-based areas of recognized need and opportunity: To support competitiveness: • Network, support, and fund existing design advocacy programs from the local to the national level, affiliating with these organizations to enhance impact and credibility. • Provide a technical assistance program, in conjunction with professional design organizations, to start-up firms, small- and medium-sized manufacturers, and gov- ernment. • Participate in the Commerce Department's Manufacturing Extension Centers program. • Establish a library and electronic database on design as a management resource. • Fund design management research. 21 To stimulate and reward design excellence: • Establish a design process award with entry procedures similar to those used for the Malcohn Baldrige National Quality Awards, to honor and promote as a model the successful integration of the design process into product and project develop- ment. Applicants would he from the private sector or government. • Advocate adding design process as a criteria in the Malcolm Baldrige Awards program. To increase understanding about the importance of design: • Develop design curricula for grades K-12 and for business schools. • Write an annual report on the State of Design addressed to Congress, the executive branch, and professional organizations. • Advocate the addition of a design representative to the Council on Sustainable Development. Funding The National Design Partnership would be supported by funds from three sources. Government agencies, such as Commerce and the National Endowment for the Arts, would designate funds to the Partnership. Corporate giving and foundation grants would be used to generate an endowment. Finally, fees would be collected as a revenue stream. Start-up funding would be dependent on corporate grants. Implementation The Partnership would be implemented through an Executive Order. Initially it would focus on concrete, quantifiable economic goals, assessing existing viable resources and inventing as few new entities as possible. The emphasis would be on people/communication/networks rather than place/location. Working Group Members Katherine McCoy, Chair; Jack Beduhn, Paul Hawken, David Kelly, David Lee, Boone Powell, RitaSue Siegel, Frederick Skaer 22 SCENARIO FOUR U.S. Commission on Design and Technology Innovation Mission To integrate design processes in government and industry to stimulate economic growth and environmental quality. One goal of the U.S. Commission on Design and Technology Innovation is to reshape the economy from a post-cold war configuration to one equipped to meet the challenge of the global marketplace. A second goal is to foster communication among industries and between industry and the government. Structure DTI is seen as an independent federal agency with links and on-going working relationships with the private sector and state governments. The Commission itself would be composed of these constituencies: • Federal agency representatives - e.g. Commerce, Housing &. Urban Develop- ment, Transportation, State, Arts Endowment. • State and regional representatives. • Industry and business representatives. • Professional design organization leaders. • Academic leaders. Organizationally, at the federal level, DTI would operate out of the Office of the Vice President. With support from cabinet officers, however, there would be mechanisms for promoting DTI objectives and activities within a broad range of relevant agencies and programs. DTI also would develop an outreach strategy to create partnerships at the state, regional, and local levels. These would include cooperative ventures with depart- ments of economic development, urban planning agencies, and arts councils. Activities • Identify opportunities to take advantage of design resources. • Support design research. • Promote innovation. • Provide strategic direction on using design effectively. • Demonstrate the value of design in addressing environmental issues. • Develop and disseminate design education materials. • Foster global communication on design issues. • Advocate regulatory reform from a design perspective. • Create design recognition programs. • Act as a design promotion organization. Funding The U.S. Commission on Design and Technology Innovation would be funded with a federal appropriation with matching monies coming from state and private sources. Implementation To make DTI a reality, these steps are suggested: • Work with the House Subcommittee on Technology, Environment &LAviation to combine the recommendations of this workshop with a new version of H.R.3514. • Solicit the support and commitment of federal agencies with design ownership (i.e., responsibility) such as Commerce with responsibility for competitiveness and technology. Transportation and Housing & Urban Development with responsibil- ity for infrastructure and urban design, and the Arts Endowment, Interior and Education with responsibility for culture and education. • Initiate a Vice Presidential Task Force to: research and define the problem, analyze and identify options, build and ensure support, submit a report to the President and Cabinet. • Prepare an Executive Order to establish DTI. Overall, the goal is to foster the marriage of technology and design. This is the heart of the U.S. competitive edge. Working Group Members Tom Hardy, Chair; Robert Blaich, Alan Brangman, Edward Feiner, Deborah Mitchell, Deane Richardson, Leila Vignelli, Patrick Whitney Typography katherine McCoy 24 n ati on al endowment forW)^the ARTS