Design for the universe or the user?

I've had several good responses to my recent post on Universal Design. In particular Bill Shackleford made some good points about the derivative effects of design for accommodation.

I don't disagree that designs and technologies which start with the intent to accommodate limitations to abilities often spawn solutions providing much wider benefits. Nor am I saying that we should not try to design solutions for to help accommodate specific limitations. In fact, I have been working on a theoretical framework and typology for assistive technology that address just this dynamic. My goal is that if we better understand that at some level all technology is assistive and that its benefits can be leveraged to the greater good, we can make progress more quickly and efficiently.

But I was making a different point in my original blog. Foremost, I was saying that we do Universal Design a disservice when we only present it as a way of dealing with disabilities. When presented in the fashion, many in the mainstream will marginalize the message. And that works against creating a world with fewer barriers.

Second, Bill says:

There are many (MANY!) other examples of well designed products and systems in mainstream use that appear to have been 'universally designed', but in fact were initially targeted for persons with disabilities - to 'accommodate' them.

Certainly there are. But that is a statement of current reality, not necessarily the ideal process. If from the start we had addressed the needs that Bills examples address with an orientation toward how the solution could more widely benefit, we might have gotten to that end state sooner. And I would be willing to bet that there are many things designed to accommodate a disability that have fallen by the wayside because they were obviated by better designed, more universal solutions.

Scott Rains pointed out a term "inclusive design" and I like the phrase "user centered design" which is one that resonates with Bill's comment that he begins his design process thinking about his users, not design principles. But this points to an inherent tension--are we designing for a specific user, or users in general? If we are talking about a product where a person has a range of options or the ability to customize, I think that user centered design is the way to go. Or when it is a group of people for whom you have a clear insight about common usage patterns or abilities. However if we are talking about multi-use situations and public spaces or common areas, UD principles are undoubtedly something that should guide the process from the beginning.

All of this off course flows into what motivates people to actually innovate or design--maybe the best designs will always come from the individual desire to create something that solves a personal need or desire. But nothing in that is hurt by increasing an awareness that the best designs are at some level universally applicable.