 In this episode, we'll be talking about how co-design has the power to transform our society and the need for more sustainable design and how we lost it along the way. And here is the guest of this episode. I'm Halpern Esslinger and this is the Service Design Show. Hi guys, my name is Marc Fontijn and welcome to a brand new episode of the Service Design Show. This show is all about helping you to learn from the future of service design. We talk about topics ranging from design thinking and customer experience, to organizational change and creative leadership. If these are the topics you're interested in, be sure to know that we bring you a new episode every two weeks on Thursday, so if you don't want to miss anything, click that subscribe button. And if you'd like to show your support, please leave a short comment or click that like button and let me know that the things we're doing here are appreciated by people like you. My guest in this episode is an absolute design legend. If you haven't heard of his name, open Google right now and go look for it. Hartmut Esslinger is the founder of Frog Design. He's worked with Apple since 1982 on the products they've been creating since then. Currently he's retired, but also a professor at the Detail Beijing Massage Academy, working a lot with design students in China. In the next 30 minutes or so, Hartmut will be talking about a lot of things, but especially these two. Why does co-design have the power to transform our society and why we need more sustainable design and how did we lose it along the way? If you're interested in one of these topics and you want to fast forward, check out the episode guide down below in the description, but I would strongly advise you to just keep watching throughout the whole interview. And if you're interested in listening to a podcast version of this episode, head over to servicesignshow.com slash podcast where you'll find this episode and all the previous ones. For now, let's just jump right in. Welcome to the show Hartmut. Yeah, nice to see you. Great to have you on the show and during our pre-chat for this episode, we talked a lot about a lot of things, but we didn't actually talk about the moment that you actually got in touch with service design or maybe even more interesting in your case, design in general. Do you remember the very first time that you got in touch with design? Yes, I think I was five years old, 1949. My dad got a Volkswagen Beetle. Yeah. And I always thought there were some bad parts on it. So I always designed another Volkswagen Beetle day and night. You were upgrading it? Yeah, and motorcycles. I mean, there were not many cars back then, I can imagine. We had the only kind of village and then over time. I think design by itself was also clear back then because in post-Nazi Germany, there was not much of a cultural recording of what the Bauhaus had done, what Raymond Lowey had done in America. And so what I always liked shapes, I always liked stuff. I always took everything apart to the chakra of my parents. My teacher at the village school let me do things I wanted to do. It was interesting. You don't have to get good grades. You could do what you wanted to do and then build a fire truck, a small one out of wood and bork because we had this fire pump. I mean, this is only six, seven houses, you know, crazy. And some of the kids came from another village. And so that just kept me going. And do you remember the moment that you actually start to realize that what you were doing had a name that you could name a design? Yeah, I went the normal way. I did my baccalaureate. I went to the army as a volunteer, become officer of the tactical support troops. Actually, I was in Aachen at the office at school. Then I started engineering because the service of the Sherman Army gave you a one year university for free. So it already counted. So I started with Zittka. Then my professor one day told me that aslinger, what you do is crazy. Everything is so complicated. You are never happy with the task. You always do something else. There is actually a job maybe for you to look at it. There is some design presentation. It's called industrial design. One of them comes by and I saw what he showed. And I thought, that's easy. That's easy. So that was a Saturday night. And then on Tuesday I switched schools. I went to Sherman. The guys at Ulm didn't take me because my sketches were too American. And then Cal did it. My professor really was a fantastic teacher. But I didn't really know that it was called design until that moment when I got into that evening presentation. That evening changed your life? Yeah, actually I discovered what I really wanted to do. And since that day I'm happy. Even if it's stress, I'm happy. This is the most wonderful professional else. At least for people like me. And it's great to see that design has gotten at least some appreciation throughout the years, right? Yeah, the point was back then it was really not widely recognized. Design was more beautification. I mean, I studied electronics so I looked at the inside of the manufacturing process and the form follows emotion but the function has to be perfect. So actually I can say by accident that I met Zeta-Moto at Vega. So we designed things from the inside out and for better assembly. For example, I found back then everything was in a wooden cabinet or in a sheet metal cabinet like the Braun. But it was not made for assembly. So the worker at the production unit could not handle it. And so what we did, I looked how the people worked on the assembly and then I made the pieces in a sequence and they would put them together in a logical way and also easy for service and replacement. So subconsciously when you talk to sustainable design these things were infinitely repairable, exchangeable and upgradeable. You were doing user research without actually knowing that you were doing user research, I guess. Yeah, there's a lot about etiquettes. Design is basically very simple. Whether it's communication or products or digital or online services you look at what is available in terms of technology and processes and you look at people. And then it must make functional, emotional and economic sense and also one of the resources you're using towards the result for people. And so I mean a famous example I was involved was German L.S. Lufthansa. That was a service design job in the first place but it also was a product which had to enhance the service. For example, they never thought that buying the ticket is the start of a process. They only looked at when the passenger is entering the airplane and leaving the tube and nothing between. So we had to redesign the Frankfurt Airport as a benchmark and also some details that people tried to steal stuff, you know, those trick criminals flying in. So we made the counter in a way that you cannot reach down. We got the customer closer but also more distance. So protect the thing. Also the people sitting on the counter. I mean for them it's a stressful job. They meet about 1,000 people during a shift. You mentioned everybody a ticket for one, a passport. They say, oh, I don't like it. I'm late. I don't have it. It's the MPE experience in that case. You also did some signage to educate passengers how to behave more efficient and still have more fun. And so that was basically a combination. But we still had to make it economically sound. It also could be implemented in Brazil or in Japan. We also looked at the physical presence and also then trained the people accordingly. Because in Japan people always in China people say, I don't know. But for those who had to know. This is for example, so we had to train them. We also had, for example, we gave passengers, back then it was still the Germans, I think, for God. Maybe it was Euro. We gave them 20 Euro, Bill. And the officials were supporting the plane but gave them money to the flight attendant. And the flight attendant said, what is that? They protested. This was degrading. And then we explained to them, just to make sure who is paying you. It's a passenger. It's creating awareness. And then they liked it. So this one action helped across the company to explain, yeah, passenger is paying us. Thanks very much. I know we can talk all day about these kind of examples. Your history is so rich that it's so inspiring for everyone. But I ask you to send me two topics that are dear to your heart at this moment. And let's use the time we have in this episode to talk about them. And time will fly by. So let's see how it goes. And I'm going to start. I don't know if you had a specific order, but we didn't discuss it. So I'll just pick this one as the first. The first topic you wanted to talk about was co-design. Do you have a question starter? One of the papers on your desk that goes along with this one. What if co-design? What if people would love in school to express themselves instead of just repeating dead metal? So instead of educating people to work in a factory, but actually educate them in a way that they are ready for society? No, no, for example, you do Mars. So why is 1 plus 1 true? And why is 1 to 1 plus 1 not 11? I mean, think a little bit more like Zen, deeper questions. And also accept that children very quick have a very good point about what is good, what is not good. And so enhance the courage to be more yourself instead of always adopting. There are famous examples that they bring people in and show them wrong things. It's very clear, two things are equal size. And then five people say they are uneven. I think most of the people say it's uneven. And you don't believe why they would do that. It's all even. You know, things like that, or is it blue or red? And they say it's blue, even if they see it's red. So people have to look what really it is. And I think that would help. Code design means to awaken a little bit this ability of people to know what is right, to express more what they would like to do if they would only dare to think about it. I mean, like products, for example, we had a Disney project on a boy said to Bill Gates, I want to switch, this thing is too complicated. I want to switch from music to movies to computer. And then Bill Gates said, no, that is not possible. Then looking back, then at least it was a little boy six years that I'll do the wishes made on Earth. And cannot give me a button. And it's so logical, so logical. Or, I mean, I think also it's about observing people, for example. I think this whole idea of customer feedback is completely misunderstood. What you have to do, and I wouldn't call it research. I would call it pre-design, whatever. This leads to code design. Exchange ideas with people in an active way. Like we do, you don't need to be a person. Just send me a video of what you do. What really bothers you? What would you think? And people have cool ideas. They don't know how to do it, but they have ideas. That would be a cool thing. And the reason why you're saying that customer feedback is being used wrong at this moment is that it's just a one-way street. There is no dialogue. There is no continuity in it. It is to confirm what you already want to know. I mean, the point is statistically, and my wife is in that role, she educated me a lot on that. We knew it somehow. Of new products launched to market only were they successful. And 95% of market research is for nothing. So it's a failure. Because you just confirm what people have known from the past, but you cannot project what they really would love. It would be possible. This is like when Steve finally did the iPhone. We had this idea already 30 years back in the 80s. So what is the Macintosh? What if the Macintosh would be just a tablet? And everything in it and display and nothing else. It would be cool. It took a while. And then what we got there, and then the next point was the other people like Nokia and Samsung and Motorola and all these guys, that doesn't make sense. Because people on the flip phone, they want buttons, Blackberry, you know, they want battery life forever. And Apple, nobody cared. They said we want to have a Macintosh in the pocket. So it was a change of paradigm. And for then when we talked to people, everybody agreed, a Macintosh in the pocket would be great. You know, how do you name it? There's a cell phone in the pocket. Yeah, I have one. It was the editability thing. What the Mac would do, bring it to the pocket. Is there is the key element in co-design that you need to bring your own perspective and you have to show leadership and those are qualities that are not being thought enough at this moment? I think most designers and most developers from Ford again love their own idea. They try forever to prove it. And co-design means whatever you think are very uneasy messages, but they're only uneasy because they're new. They're requesting something that you get a bit beyond what you have learned so far and have done. So ideally, when people have the most it's not about creativity. That's another thing. It's only one in eight. But everybody can say what they would like to have. The happiness, good life, these magical machines, a car which drives itself. I mean, it's logical. If you look at old literature, the Geiliger machine and so on, it's all there. Or this is self-driving toilet. So my students ask people and went around and they ask people about the toilet, public toilet, which is a problem in China everywhere and everywhere. So they just analyzed the people got there, stood in line, the male was okay, the female was almost too small and the ladies stood in line. And then one guy said, who's the lion, why doesn't the toilet come to me? That would be cool. You know, why doesn't the toilet come to me? And then sure, self-driving and Michael Hoffman's, Bill Gates' toilet and everything. So yeah, could be. You put an app, you designed it and everybody loves it. They say, Robo, it's so logical. But it was a male in the lion. So why not? What if it came to me? So is that the question, what if? Yeah, what if? Should we be asking more what if questions? Yeah, that's the key question. It's not the why. Why do we do this? This is all European. It's like stupid, you know? Why am I doing this? It's crazy. Why am I doing it? But what if? What if sparks imagination, I guess, right? It gets people excited. Yeah, I mean, that's the next step for designers that you can imagine what it could be. You're painting a future, right? You're painting a picture of a future that might be. Yeah, and also I think what we designers have, there's a lot of simulation. For example, it's actually more than 10 years ago, there was a computer which would be a tattoo on the head, kind of a put-on living of the glucose in the body, and have movies playing on the skin. It was completely crazy. But I said, what if it's technology already speaks to it? And they said, yeah, it would be really cool. I mean, you can wash it off at a shower. Different designs in a computer, printed out, get it? There's nothing impossible when you... You can imagine everything. Yeah. Let's move on to the second topic, Hard Moon, because I think that's the one you also like to talk about, and it's dear to your heart at this moment. And you're sort of already hinted upon this one. This one is about sustainable design. On modularity, do you have a question starter? Let's go design the question. Yeah, actually, how can we get there? How can we get to sustainable design or to modularity, or... Yeah, actually, it's two things. One is modular concept. Each product of some complexity has different components, and they have different life cycles. Take a refrigerator in my kitchen. It has a housing. The housing can live for a hundred years. It has a compressor head of the inside, so currently it's not separatable. And when we moved back to the house, we rebuilt it, and we had to... The other one didn't match, so we sold it, and somebody took it. It's always a fixed element, but the functionality of it is so different. So one project we do in Shire is a refrigerator, which is adaptive to local food culture. More vegetable, more beef, more fish. In the north, more beef. In the south, more veggies, and veggies everywhere, but also fish in the south, which is very perishable. Also, shopping patterns, because people have to walk. They don't have... It's China isn't working like here that you drive to the supermarket. You have to do... If you have to go public transport, so you have to public transport and walk. So we also designed a shopping cart, which can be taken home. And it has a cooling function in it, because if you go through Shanghai, or Beijing, or Xi'an, and a huge temperature, everything melts off. So you do a modular concept, which allows people to adjust to their liking. Vegetarians don't need beef components, you know? Stuff like that. So also, some intelligence in it that it gives you advice not to buy when. And normally... This is one example. Another one displays our computer here. So I have seven Macs, at least, in my closet. Each has a digital display. We can watch TV, whatever, videos, movies, but it's defective, throw it away. And so I think modularity would mean that on my iPhone here, so I just would put in a new chip, and it's upgraded. Memory. Why do I have to throw away the whole thing? But Apple could charge me free and affordable bugs for this thing. It would be even more profitable instead of this whole ecological nightmare of throwing hundreds of millions of phones away. You're an interesting article on your blog. I will link to it in the description. And I sort of got the idea through the blog that we used to design for modularity and more sustainability, your example of the beetle. And somehow we lost that along the way. What happened? Where did we lose it? I think both the beetle and actually also the old Ford T-model, the Lizzie, and especially the Dorsch war in France, were very modular. Everything could be replaced in a very short time. And so it was really smart concepts. But actually they were limited to design a little bit, but there's no reason with modern production methods to be more modular in the automotive thing. Then comes the idea of crash testing also acceptable. Even that could be modules, you know. The excuse people use, yes, you have to run the business, you have to sell new cars, you have to sell new refrigerators, new iPhones, new computers. So there's a lot of artificial intelligence in there. And naturally it's easier to sell a close concept to somebody. It's just the product, bank banks, so much money. And it's a really addiction to cheapness, getting cheaper, cheaper, cheaper, instead of the right thing. It's not about price, it's about the right thing, which has a long life cycle. And then the different life cycles of components that they display in a computer can live 10 years, theoretically, the process are 18 months. So why not the battery also gets kind of tired over time and then just change the components which have a shorter life cycle or a shorter innovation cycle. But the rest could stay. So your point is also that there is no other way we need more sustainable design, otherwise we'll sort of kill ourselves and kill the planet. You know, from your perspective, what will be the driving forces that actually move us more into sustainable design? Will it be the large corporations? Will the government, will it be education? What will lead this? I think one more, the economic thing is design a modular product which convinces by being more valuable and also providing more usage and a better fulfillment of the product promise. But I think then you hopefully win over those with the old fashioned concept. I think we also need a political help. For example, in Germany right now, they have finally decided to ban diesel engines from the downtown because of the PM 2.5. Same in China, they will ban gasoline-driven fossil fuel out of cities within the next couple of years. Downtown Shanghai already is redesigned for electric and fuel cell. And I think we also need the political will because people are dying from this craziness. Also, for example, in China when you fly to Mongolia, there are craters down there four or five miles wide and they dig for the teledyne which is actually used in our displays. So I mean, it's nearly a kilometer deep. One day it's gone. You see these holes, you have to recycle. So also designed for recycling. I think the better way instead of designed for recycling is to design for reuse. Like a usable again. Are you hopeful that we'll succeed? Do you have any clues that we're actually going to get there? I mean, one thing was, I think human people need a crisis only that they're willing to rethink in the big number. In the beginning, when I worked with Apple and Steve, I said no paint because I'd seen a story what the paint is doing. I mean, it's metallic stuff or whatever and the plastic cannot be recycled and it's even of that good looking. So I said, why don't we look at the best plastic which is actually four times the price of the carbon plastic but it's only from $1 to $4 in the computer and then you don't paint. And I said, one day we make a million computers and I showed them a picture of how much spray they would put on. I said, if it looks right, why not? I mean, we designers have to convince people with a positive argument that what we do will be much more, will be better, not only for the recycling element or whatever, but also for the daily use. It doesn't scratch off, you know, because there's no paint. And then the chemical industry, with Apple's pull, they gave us almost better, GE gave us better, better plastic. So again, my question, are you hopeful? Do you think? No, I'm a skeptic. I'm an optimistic skeptic, but I don't give in. I mean, the problem is, I'm over 70 and you think, okay, we changed a lot, we achieved a lot, but in the end there's also the counter movement of non-creative, senseless waste and actually I think also uneducated, naive and stupid consumption. That's our enemy. I think it's human behavior. If people would refuse to buy it because of certain things, that would be helpful. So I think if you speak of services and communication, you also have to look what are people doing with it, you know? And I think this is a very nice sort of bridge to the question I wanted to ask you and that is, there are millions of people watching this episode, probably hopefully. And this is your chance to ask them a question. What would you like to ask the viewers or the listeners of this episode? Yeah, my grandfather was from the North Sea and he said whenever you do something, first put your tongue up, count to five or to 10 and then be very careful of what you say. I think the same applies to buying. Before you get pulled away, I need this, I want it. Do you really need it? Do you really understand what it could be? Isn't there a better way? Think about it. So, yeah. Before you actually buy more stuff, buy more consciously? For example, even with Apple, a lot of it is called, so why do people in the eye watch? They have to shake it. And so this sometimes, it gets a little bit of drift, you know? If I could do anything in your car, but you have a Porsche, luckily, so they'll constantly bombard me, why don't you buy a new one? I drive my Porsche's 10 to 20 years. I'm now at your 10. That's fine. And it still drives. Yeah, sure it drives well. I don't need the new stuff, you know? But the point is, by servicing it and keeping it well maintained, of course, the Rutgers shop makes good money with me. I guess we also need companies that sort of take pride in making more sustainable stuff, right? And they use that argument and actually are pride of the fact that they are making stuff that doesn't need to be replaced in the next five months. Or one or two years, yes. Yeah. And also with mobility. I mean, you don't have the scandal in Germany right now, but it's everywhere. The government request it. Yeah, they have to reduce emission. Then they started to cheat instead of solving it or telling the government it doesn't work, you know? I don't know why there's a white thing here, but maybe it helps. There's this funny story, not funny, in Black Forest, where I'm from in Krua. And so the two neighbors, two farmers, each has a goat and the goat gives milk. And the one is kind of a stingy guy and then he stops to feed the goat. And the goat starts to scream and whine, still gives milk. So over the days, the other guy, the neighbor said, oh, your goat's still giving milk, but it's pretty nasty. I mean, she's screaming like crazy. Finally on Saturdays, the goat is quiet. And then the neighbor said, congrats. She finally, it works, right? He said, yes, just when she accepted to give milk without food, she died. Yeah, yeah. And that's the economic problem of so many companies that try to squeeze to the last thing and then they wonder why are people, why is it collapsing, you know? Well, do a different episode on that topic in general. Yeah. Hartmuth, thank you so much for your time. This was all the time we had for in this interview. It's time to wrap up. And again, thank you. Thank you for sharing your thoughts. And you mentioned, Mark, that millions would watch it. I think it's good enough in 100 to watch it change the attitude and become a little bit more aware of what the effects of the work actually were positive, okay? Absolutely. Thank you. So what is your biggest insight based on what we've just discussed with Hartmuth? Is sustainability an important argument in your design process? Let us know down below in the comments. And remember, more people like you are watching these episodes and your comment might just be the thing that helps them to get the next meaningful breakthrough. If you're interested in learning more, check out some of the past episodes and head over to Learn.ServiceDesignShow.com where you'll find courses that dig deeper into the topics we talk about on the show. I'll see you in two weeks' time with a brand new episode. Thanks for watching and I'll see you then.