Form Doesn’t Follow Function
In The Way You've Been Told
We’ve all heard it.
In books, on social media, and at school. It is repeated and stated as a basic fact.
“Form follows function.”
But there is a problem with this statement.
It isn’t true!
At least not in most cases. The statement is presumptive and reductionistic. It ignores the reality of how design actually works, how things are made, and the process by which forms come into being.
It starts with a problem, a need, or a lack of something to function optimally. In the book The Evolution of Useful Things by Henry Petroski he states that, “...the form of made things is always subject to change in response to their real or perceived shortcomings, their failure to function properly.”
This perspective is correct. In design, it is exceedingly rare to think of a function you would like performed and then devise a perfect form capable of providing that function. As much as I wish it were the case, the truth is much more painful and repetitive.
First a problem, need, or improvement is identified. Almost always this is due to the failure of a form to function as you would like. And so, you imagine a concept of how to improve it, develop plans on how to bring that idea to life, and then create a new form to optimize the function of the previous form (or you could simply say the product).
Inevitably, this new design will have shortcomings of its own and so you find yourself back at the beginning of the design cycle. This is the process by which a form comes to be perfected into an optimally functional product. The form is not, in reality, following the function. No, it is instead following a previous design's failure to function optimally, perfectly, or simply as the user wanted it to function.
If you are a designer or an engineer, this is great news!
Developing a new “perfect” form to optimize a desired function is an impossible task. But, improving upon previous designs in iterative cycles? Now there is a process which is practical, informative, and quite fun.
To endure such a process, great engineers and designers must have a built in resilience. Of course they must also be critical and hold themselves to a high standard of design right from the start but iconic products are built from repetitive failures being continually improved, not from a single moment of inspiration. As Henry Petroski goes on to say in the same book, “...we must look to failure if we ever hope to declare success.”
I couldn’t agree more.
For more on this topic, check out Ep. 54 - Form Follows Failure from the Design30 Podcast. Available everywhere.