구글에서 보낸 3년

Google's measured approach to design makes chief designer leave

구글에서 시각디자인 팀을 이끌었던 더글라스 바우먼(Douglas Bowman)이 지난 주 금요일 구글을 떠났다. 구글에서의 마지막 날, 그는 이러한 결정을 내리게 된 배경에 관한 글을 남겼다. 여기에서 그는 “엔지니어들의 회사에서 전통적인 디자이너가 부딪힌 한계”를 고백한다.

“엔지니어들이 가득한 회사에서는, 문제의 해결 방식 역시 공학적이다. 각각의 의사 결정은 단순한 논리 문제로 축소하고, 주관성을 일절 배제한 채 오로지 데이터만 들여다 보는 것이다. 데이터가 모든 의사 결정의 버팀목이 되면서, 대담한 디자인 의사결정을 가로막게 된다.”

그리고는 다음과 같은 일화들을 덧붙인다. “그렇다. 구글 팀은 두 개의 파랑색 가운데 쉽사리 한 쪽을 택하지 못한다. 그래서 이들은 두 개의 파랑색 가운데 어느 쪽이 더 나은가를 알아보기 위해, 이들 파랑색 사이 41개의 음영 단계를 테스트한다. 최근 나는 테두리 선의 너비가 몇 픽셀이어야 하는가, 3인가 4인가 아니면 5인가를 두고 논쟁을 벌이기도 했다. 그리고는 내 주장이 맞다는 사실을 증명해 보라는 요청을 받았다. 나는 이러한 환경에서는 더 이상 일할 수가 없다. 이렇게 작디 작은 결정들을 두고 논하는 일에 지쳐버렸다.”

하지만 “어느 색이 나은지 알아보기 위해 41개의 음영을 연구하는” 구글의 이러한 프로세스야말로, ‘구글다운’ 미덕이라 이야기되어 온 것도 사실이다. 하지만 바로 그 때문에 한 디자이너는 구글을 떠나기로 결심하게 된 것이다. 이 글은 현재 <코어77>을 비롯해, <CNet>, <기즈모도> 등 여러 매체에 소개되며 반향을 불러 일으키고 있다.

누군가는 디자이너 개인의 직관과 과감한 도전이 개입될 여지가 없는 디자인 프로세스란 무의미하다고 생각할 것이고, 반면 다른 누군가는 집요하리만치 사용자들의 행동 패턴과 데이터를 분석하는 디자인이야말로 좋은 디자인이라 생각할 것이다. 과연 좋은 디자인이란 데이터 속에 있을까, 아니면 디자이너의 머리 속에 있을까. 아니 이러한 양자택일의 질문은 과연 적절한가? 여러 가지 질문들이 꼬리를 잇는 가운데, 과연 3년 전 구글은 어떤 이유로 사상 처음으로 (전통적인 의미의) ‘디자이너’를 영입하려 했던 것인지도 다시 한 번 궁금해진다.

출처 : CNH corporation

아래는 원문 *****

Goodbye, Google

Part 1 of 2 (here’s Part 2)

Today is my last day at Google.

I started working in-house at Google almost three years ago. I built a team from scratch. I was fortunate to hire a team of a very talented designers. We introduced Visual Design as a discipline to Google. And we produced amazing work together. I’m very proud of my team, and I wish them well. They have a lot of challenging work ahead. But for me, it’s time to move on.

Do I have something else lined up? Yes. That will be covered in Part 2. So I’m not leaving just to leave. But I’m not going to sugarcoat the reasons for my departure either. The scale at which Google operates was an early attractor for me. Potential to impact millions of people? Where do I sign? Unfortunately for me, there was one small problem I didn’t see back then.

When I joined Google as its first visual designer, the company was already seven years old. Seven years is a long time to run a company without a classically trained designer. Google had plenty of designers on staff then, but most of them had backgrounds in CS or HCI. And none of them were in high-up, respected leadership positions. Without a person at (or near) the helm who thoroughly understands the principles and elements of Design, a company eventually runs out of reasons for design decisions. With every new design decision, critics cry foul. Without conviction, doubt creeps in. Instincts fail. “Is this the right move?” When a company is filled with engineers, it turns to engineering to solve problems. Reduce each decision to a simple logic problem. Remove all subjectivity and just look at the data. Data in your favor? Ok, launch it. Data shows negative effects? Back to the drawing board. And that data eventually becomes a crutch for every decision, paralyzing the company and preventing it from making any daring design decisions.

Yes, it’s true that a team at Google couldn’t decide between two blues, so they’re testing 41 shades between each blue to see which one performs better. I had a recent debate over whether a border should be 3, 4 or 5 pixels wide, and was asked to prove my case. I can’t operate in an environment like that. I’ve grown tired of debating such minuscule design decisions. There are more exciting design problems in this world to tackle.

I can’t fault Google for this reliance on data. And I can’t exactly point to financial failure or a shrinking number of users to prove it has done anything wrong. Billions of shareholder dollars are at stake. The company has millions of users around the world to please. That’s no easy task. Google has momentum, and its leadership found a path that works very well. When I joined, I thought there was potential to help the company change course in its design direction. But I learned that Google had set its course long before I arrived. Google was a massive aircraft carrier, and I was just a small dinghy trying to push it a few degrees North.

I’m thankful for the opportunity I had to work at Google. I learned more than I thought I would. I’ll miss the free food. I’ll miss the occasional massage. I’ll miss the authors, politicians, and celebrities that come to speak or perform. I’ll miss early chances to play with cool toys before they’re released to the public. Most of all, I’ll miss working with the incredibly smart and talented people I got to know there. But I won’t miss a design philosophy that lives or dies strictly by the sword of data.