In the summer 2013 we met to brainstorm about the foundational principles of the Design/Relief initiative, its short-term goals and long term objectives, we devised a structure, a process, wrote a manifesto with the input of our fellow board members, and launched the first community-centered design initiative of the chapter, excited to pilot a new model of engagement for graphic designers.

We met again in February 2015 over pizza, to reflect on the three Design/Relief projects completed after a year and a half of design work and deep community engagement, to discuss our accomplishments, missed opportunities and what we learned from it for the next time. Program director Laetitia Wolff took notes.

Revisiting our initiative a year and a half later, pregnant with ideas, aware of mistakes and epiphanies, we can definitely say that we have asked new questions of design and designers and that we have learned a few things about the business of design as a creative placemaking tool. Today again we ask ourselves: what were we trying to change or address, did we reach our goal, and how do we know we reached a concluding point?

About process: it does not always dictate success

First and foremost the projects show that things can be done by graphic designers. That was a critical realization, given that graphic design associations typically celebrate what has been done. We wanted to create a framework for designers to produce something new, test the boundaries of our profession and demonstrate our value, without a brief. It is important to know that fantastic things also fail spectacularly. In the end, success or failure do not matter that much, what matters most is that we did something new and different, connecting designers to the world beyond just their client relationships.

About our value proposition: connecting the dots

Designers are well equipped to borrow from different spheres and best practices, build connections from and to other communities. They master the art of inventive juxtaposition, they are able to connect the dots, and project the future. Design offers an intrinsic value in building something new and possible. While the artist starts from his own vision, the designer always needs input from others, in fact naturally seeks to encourage input and can be responsive to it. So community engagement is a form of response but carte blanche is no easy task for a designer accustomed to briefs.

About communication: both the subject and the mode of engagement

One could argue that graphic design is architecture without building. While architects think in terms of palette, structure, fabric, materials, graphic designers think in terms of flow of communications. And communications is typically associated with meaning. In the three Design/Relief projects, the design responses are all language-based. The sites we worked in have been voiceless for years, and although their desires and wishes were expressed here and there, they had not been successfully verbalized, visualized and disseminated. Graphic design succeeded here in providing a channel for people to express themselves, to empower them to have a voice. With their Modernist background, designers know how to give form to stories, information and content. Expressing, publishing, sharing ideas was truly empowering for those communities.

About community participation: listening does not mean you cannot talk

Designers are plagued with hyper-modesty, they are empathetic sponges of political correctness, trying to avoid the helicopter drop in mode. They want to gain input from the community through neutral listening and trust building tactics.

But crowd-making design is never successful, designers should not forget that there are things they know, that they can use their expertise to challenge community power dynamics to fulfill desires and dreams. Bowing yourself down to the community should only be a pose. Listening does not mean you obey, listening is not giving up your design power.

About expanding the repertoire of design: looking sideways

Although a designer mind can easily expand the scope of work, it’s another thing to think outside the traditional parameters of graphic design forms. One of the possible research tracks for a design studio is to create a lab, an experimental practice with open paths instead of client briefs. We thought we were empowering design teams to do just that but in the end designers stayed within the category of their familiar disciplines. They could have ventured in edge territories: whether design services to help amp up businesses, dealing with environmentalism, social justice, economic development or educational empowerment. In a learning environment in which you do not know what to expect, designers should look more sideways and not be afraid to question the limits of what design can do.

About the framework of engaged design: off hand or by the book?

While reflecting on the outcome of the Design/Relief initiative, and ready to embark on new civic projects in other neighborhoods of New York, we have to think of ways to readjust our model, correct some of its approaches. What could we have done better, or more of? For instance, we could have imposed more of a check-in structure with the teams, and provide a thematic framework to bring the concept of creative placemaking home. We could have placed more restrictions on scope of work. We could have said: this team is about economic development, this team is about pure artistic creation, this one is about communication channels. We also could have been more directive and confident to ask for specific deliverables. In the end, we did put a lot on designers’ shoulders, they were asked to design, devise, make, and implement and worked so hard and beautifully. In this learn-by-doing process, we managed to build familiarity in the designer’s headspace for complex partnerships, multi-directional dynamics, role playing and giving, and nurtured a collaborative definition of what a community-centered design looks like and how it functions in the real world.

Conclusion

Design/Relief has presented participants with a professional development opportunity, the ultimate benefit for designers. Would the designer consider taking a different kind of project than a year ago? Yes. Have they learned to work with city agencies and resource-poor but passionate community organizations? Yes. Did they grow their practice, their staff’s commitment, their outlook on what design can do? Yes. With that, we look forward to the next generation of designers who feel comfortable and able to navigate the complex waters of urban community engagement, creative placemaking and multi channel partnerships. Onward AIGA NY! to more meaningful civic initiatives. Design/Relief was just the beginning.