Design thinking

Abstract 

Integration of Design and Marketing in Higher Education

A thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Colorado in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Master of Arts
School of Journalism and Mass Communication 1992

Evidence presented here strongly suggests that there is a need for a design management function in business. Design, in its various forms (product, environmental, information and corporate identity), is a powerful tool that should be used in every area of an organization's operations to provide a strategic competitive advantage and to achieve corporate objectives. Recognizing the need for more and better design work, a two-way education process must occur. Marketers must develop an understanding of the design process and designers must develop an understanding of the marketing process. Higher education, in both design and marketing, could play an important part in creating awareness and understanding of the potential of the integration of these two disciplines.

This study attempts to determine what progress, if any, higher education has made (in both design and marketing) in the emerging field of design management Integrated design and management education is defined as business school programs that include design-related courses and design school programs that include marketing courses. Included in this determination is the definition of a set of curriculum criteria (for both business and design) that should be used in the integrated education of designers and managers.

The course offerings catalogs of three top graduate business school programs and three top design school undergraduate programs were analyzed and compared in context of a design management curriculum. Findings show some evidence of integration of design and management in higher education; however it is minimal. Design schools appear to be taking the lead in developing this area.

Future research in this area should include identifying common management elements across design disciplines, defining subject areas and developing quantitative design decision-making models. 

Chapter I -- Introduction

The marketing concept became widely accepted as the right way to do business in the early 1960s when Harvard Business School professor Theodore ''Ted'' Levitt published an essay entitled "Marketing Myopia" in the Harvard Business Review. The marketing concept has been a hot topic ever since. Many executives consider the marketing concept gospel and Ted Levitt a prophet. The truth, however unfortunate for consumers, is that few companies practice marketing in the sense that Levitt championed. Many executives still confuse total marketing with basic selling. As Levitt (1975) pointed out, "Selling concerns itself with the tricks and techniques of getting people to exchange their cash for your product It is not concerned with the values that the exchange is all about Marketing ... views the entire business process as consisting of a tightly integrated effort to discover, create, arouse and satisfy customer needs." (p.194)

As competition gets tougher on the marketing battlegrounds of price and technology, design becomes a particularly important element in strategic marketing planning. Harvard Business School professor Robert Hayes said, "Fifteen years ago companies competed on price. Today it's quality. Tomorrow it's design" (Dumaine, 1991, p.86). ''Design reinforces the consensus that exchange forms the central phenomenon for marketing study by initiating a visual exchange system and by considering the aesthetics of a company or of an innovation as a set of controllable variables" (Borja de Mozota, 1990, p. 74).

Proponents of design as an integral part of marketing strategy say it helps to create "value-added" products for the consumer, increase the worth of a company and its products via corporate identity, reduce cost in production, and sell products more effectively through differentiation.

Design issues force a company to focus on the consumers' wants and needs and the product's ability to satisfy them, instead of on the processes within the organization.
The objective of using design as a strategic marketing tool is to create total satisfaction for the consumer, and in turn, profits for the company. Total satisfaction is accomplished by communicating information about products, services and organizations to consumers, suppliers, employees and shareholders through product design, information design, environment design and corporate identity design. As will be discussed later, information is the most important component of products and services, and communicating this information to consumers is vital to marketing success.

Design and marketing complement each other; however, antagonism exists between designers and marketers. Patrick Coyne, editor of Communication Arts magazine, says, "There has been an ongoing complaint by designers that they are not involved early enough in the decision making phase of most projects, or in the greater role of helping businesses to strategically position themselves for the future" (May I June, 1992, p. 18). Designers also complain that marketing executives are too concerned with numbers and forget that consumers react to products emotionally as well as logically. Brian Dumaine (1991) writes that "Managers typically fail to give designers enough authority to be effective, or, worse, they look upon design as pure aesthetics, a matter of simply dolling up a product long after it has been engineered .... Good design addresses the consumer's every concern - how a product works, how it feels in the hand, how easy it is to assemble and fix, and even, in this era of environmental concern, whether it can be recycled." (p. 86)

Management has a different view of things. Brian Dumaine (1991) writes in a Fortune magazine article on competition, "Engineers and manufacturers believe that designers don't have the technical knowledge to be of much use. Marketers see designers as blue-sky creative types, more concerned in winning awards than in making a product that sells" (p. 94).

These are stereotypes, although they may have some basis in reality. It remains that companies as diverse as Ford, IBM (Olins, 1985) and Sony (Lorenz, 1986) have achieved significant commercial success through their organization-wide use of design as a strategic marketing tool.

Design is critical to consumer satisfaction and corporate success. If marketing and design people understood and valued each others methods, intentions and processes more clearly, then corporations and consumers would both benefit. Marketers and designers must learn to appreciate and respect each other's skills and realize they can achieve greater success through cooperation than through opposition. Higher education is where this alliance could be forged. It remains to be seen whether it will be or not.

The essence of this research project is to investigate design as a critical component of marketing - a tightly integrated process involving discovery, creativity, arousal and satisfaction as prescribed by Levitt. Design, in and of itself, is not new. However, many marketing executives are not familiar with, or even aware of, the full potential of design. Designers are often not familiar with marketing strategy and the role that design plays in strategic planning and positioning.

Higher education, in both design and marketing, could be an important player in creating awareness and understanding of the powerful potential of the integration of these two disciplines. The primary question this thesis will examine is: what is higher education, in both design and marketing, currently doing in the emerging field of design management?

Chapter II -- Review of the literature

Meanings of Design
Design has many meanings and perspectives. Design is primarily a communication process; its purpose is to convey information about a product or an organization to consumers or clients. This section will investigate the "how" and "what" of design for marketing. Design is used to describe premium products, designer jeans and designer furni­ture. The products of some countries are characterized by their design, as in Swiss watches, Italian cars or German cameras.

David Brown, (1990) president of Art Center College of Design, describes designing,

"Everywhere we look we see the work of designers. Their hands shape the products we buy, use, and value. Their sensibilities guide the look and content of the visual communication that surrounds us. We live and work in spaces they create. Their ideas change our ideas about the world and our place in it. Design is the intersection between commerce and culture, between the individual and the environment. At its best, design embodies respect between maker and materials, between maker and eventual user. Designing is more than a job or even a career, although our rapidly changing, increasingly international economy offers plenty of opportunity. Rather, designing is a commitment and, ultimately, a way of life. (p. 5)

When marketers use the word "design," they usually refer to advertising, point-of-
purchase materials, packaging labels, and annual reports. This is a limited view of
design's scope. Design is a comprehensive term that covers the disciplines of designing products, packaging, interiors, graphics, publications and fashion, to name the most recognized fields (Wefler & Associates, 1980). The fields of architecture and industrial design should be included in this list. Industrial design historian Stephen Bayley (1985) says design encompasses "a wide range of activities, from materials technology at the hard end to styling and marketing at the soft one" (Bayley, 1985, p. 8). Philip Kotler and Alexander Rath (1984) describe the difference between functional and visual design as the difference between the design of a nuclear power plant and the design of wallpaper.

Peter Gorb (1978), director of the Institute of Small Business at the London Business School, defines design as "a plan to make something" (p. 7). He expands on this by saying, "The designer's concern with information is to present it efficiently; to simplify the complex, to suggest the subtleties behind the obvious, to enlarge the "micro" and reduce the "macro." Furthermore, the work stretches along a spectrum which at one end may be concerned with objective descriptions of the technology of products and environments and at the other with the highly emotive and persuasive, the advertising and sales promotion of these products and environments. (pp. 8 - 9)

Design describes the planning and decision-making process to determine the functions and characteristics of a product. Ralph Caplan, former editor of Industrial Design magazine and director of the International Design Conference in Aspen, says, "Design is at its best a process of making things right. That is, the designer at his best, or hers, makes things that work. But things often do not work. And making things right is not just a generative but a corrective process - a way of righting things, of straightening them out. (Caplan, 1982a, p. 11)

In the context of design as communication, it is important to understand how design conveys meaning to the consumer. Design aligns a product or organization with that of a consumer's self-image or expectations. The meaning of design is interpreted by the consumer according to his or her attitudes, personal experiences and preferences. That a single product is preferred by two or more diverse individuals or groups of people does not necessarily indicate that they like it for the same reasons. Mass media critic Tony Schwartz (1974), in talking about the effects of television and radio on consumers, wrote (note interesting choice of metaphors in first sentence),

"The critical task is to design our package of stimuli so that it resonates with information already stored within an individual and thereby induces the desired learning or behavioral effect. Resonance takes place when the stimuli put into our communication evoke meaning in a listener or viewer. That which we put into the communication has no meaning in itself. The meaning of our communication is what a listener or viewer [or in the case of design, the consumer] gets out of his experience with the communicator's stimuli. The listener's or viewer's brain is an indispensable component of the total communication system. His life experiences, as well as his expectations of the stimuli he is receiving, interact with the communicator's output in determining the meaning of the communication.... To achieve a behavioral effect, whether persuading someone to buy a product or teaching a person about history, one designs stimuli that will resonate with the elements in a communication environment to produce that effect." (pp. 24 - 26, parentheses added)

Positioning is the marketing adaptation of Schwartz's communications theory.
Positioning is a long-term strategic effort by a company to own a "place" in the prospect's mind "Share of mind" is more important to marketers in the long-run than "share of market." Most importantly, this information comes from the consumer, not the marketing manager (Trout & Ries, 1972).

Brigitte Borja de Mozota (1990), a professor at the Universite Rene Descartes in France, makes the distinction between design as a technique that can be used in a communications strategy (graphic and environmental design) and design used in a product development strategy (packaging and product design). "Whatever the final output," she says, "design as an innovation technique is always a problem solving activity" (Borja de Mozota, 1990, p. 73).

While her conclusion is generally agreeable, it could be argued that packaging and product design are communications devices as well as strategic new product development tools. In her explanation of the relationship between design and company profits, Borja de Mozota (1990) touches on the signification and semantic meaning of design in a typical French linguistic criticism fashion:

Innovations produced by designers are signs. A sign is the resultant of a three-dimensional system and of the complex set of relationships between the attributes of each dimension: structure, function, and symbol. All signs or innovations have a three-level communication system:
1 The innovation-itself system means our communication with the structure of the sign, its technological dimension and its syntax.
2 The innovation-user system means our communication with the structure of the sign, its pragmatic dimension and its utility.
3 The innovation-environment system means our communication with the symbolism of the sign, its semantic dimension and the connotative and denotative factors it conveys about our relationship with others.

Hence, if all innovations are signs in their visual, physical aspects, any other environment artifact is also a sign. And the environment is a system of signs with bilateral influence on any new sign or innovation produced.

Design, in order to be considered as an efficient management of innovation technique, has to create value. The signs (graphics or products) conceived by designers have to be profitable. Therefore, we can define the "sign value" concept as the equation of design technique efficiency. This concept explains how design efficiency can be measured. It also explains why design is part of marketing. Design and marketing are both concerned with the exchange relationships between a company and its environment. (pp. 73-74)

Much of the behavioral research done in advertising and visual communication
may be applicable to design studies and leaves much room for future work by design researchers. In the attitude literature, studies have shown attitudes may be influenced by message arguments - central route, or by contextual cues - peripheral route (Petty & Cacioppo, 1981); that attitudes toward the advertisement affect attitudes toward the brand (Gardner, 1985; Mitchell & Olson, 1981; Shimp, 1981); that both ad claims and pictorial elements of an ad influence attitudes toward both the ad and the brand (Miniard, Bhatla & Rose, 1990; Mitchell, 1986); that consumers' brand attitude formation for a novel or unconventional product may depend more on consumers' liking of the advertisement than on brand-related beliefs (Cox & Locander, 1987); that feelings affect attitude toward the ad and attitude toward the brand (Burke & Edell, 1989); that consumer processing of advertising is basically cognitive, rational processing of information (Shimp & Gresham, 1983); that non-cognitive (peripheral) processing of information is equally important to cognitive (central) processing (Thorson, 1983); and that hemispherical lateralization is a subconscious determinant of consumers' processing of information (Janiszewski, 1990). Visuals, because they rely on symbols rather than words for message effectiveness, have potential to communicate cross-culturally through shared meanings (Moriarty, in press) and visual elements of advertisements should be classified as rhetorical as well as verbal elements, and not as merely peripheral cues (Scott, 1990). If the preceding studies, of which only a few of the many in these areas are mentioned, included design (whether product, environmental or corporate identity - in addition to information - advertising), it may be deduced that attitudes toward products or product design would affect attitudes toward brands or companies, that liking of product design would affect attitudes toward the brand and company, et cetera. In other words, similar results might be found; however, this would need to be substantiated with empirical evidence.

Philip Kotler and Alexander Rath (1984) provide the best definition of design as a strategic marketing weapon. ''Design is the process of seeking to optimize consumer satisfaction and company profitability through the creative use of major design elements (performance, quality, durability, appearance, and cost) in connection with products, environments, information, and corporate identity" (Kotler & Rath, 1984, p. 17).

Design's value as a marketing tool is best understood by breaking it down into its major elements as described by Kotler and Rath (1984). The performance aspect is where designers gather information from market research to determine and understand the wants and needs of the target market. Designers are often credited with developing features that augment the product in ways that may never have occurred to the consumer. John Swans and Linda Jones Combs (1976) have identified two types of performance characteristics, instrumental performance and expressive performance. Instrumental performance is the utilitarian expectations consumers have for a product. Does the product serve its intended purpose well and satisfy consumer need? Expressive performance is the psychological level of performance. Does the product create and arouse consumer need? Design's performance role is not limited to products. Consumers can be satisfied or dissatisfied with the instructions for assembling or using a product (information design), a store layout (environment design), or with a company's ability to live up to or surpass expectations promised by its corporate identity. Swan and Combs (1976) found that, "In judging the performance of a product, the consumer compares a set of performance outcomes to the outcomes that were expected for the item. If the performance of the physical product was below expectations, then the product is likely to be categorized as dissatisfactory. If both instrumental and expressive outcomes were equal to or exceeded expectations, then the consumer will tend to judge the product as satisfactory." (p. 33)

The purpose of using design is to ascertain the desired level of performance in a
product and communicate appropriate levels of expectations to the consumer. Thus, high-­quality design is just as important in a generic item as in a premium positioned item because it communicates to the consumer exactly what it is that they are buying and what their expectations should be for the performance of the product.

Quality is the second component of design, and perhaps the most important in terms of providing benefits to consumers (For a more in-depth discussion of quality and marketing strategy, please see: Gitlow & Gitlow, 1987; Jacoby & Olson, 1985; Townsend & Gebhardt, 1990). The role of the designer is to determine the optimal level of quality in materials and workmanship that is appropriate for the target market's performance expectations and price range. John Czepiel distinguishes perceived quality from other definitions to mean that "the basic product design - the combination of technical features, aesthetics, and symbolic qualities - is a better fit to the customer's desires for benefits than others' products" (Czepiel, 1992, p. 1(0).

Products should be designed to reflect consumer's desires and tastes - so marketing people, designers and manufacturing must work closely through the whole marketing process; from developing the product idea through production and distribution and finally through research to determine consumers' satisfaction, which is input back into the product development process (Hauser & Gausing, 1988). Design plays a critical role in this cyclical process referred to as "continuous-improvement" (Gitlow & Gitlow, 1987). Urban and Star (1991) describe design as an integral part of "total quality":

Total quality includes the design of the product and customer service. The quality concept begins with design, carries through production, distribution, and service, and ends in total customer satisfaction. In product positioning for quality we must understand how engineering decisions are linked to feature creation; how features are related to the perceptions, preferences, and choices of customers; and how costs, prices and profits are affected by engineering (and design) decisions. The best quality level is the one that meets the needs of customers, can be produced defect free, and earns profits for the firm. Quality is an integral part of creating benefits and positioning a product in a target market segment (p. 141)

Jerry Bowles and Joshua Hammond (1991) credit the concept of quality for the
success of Japanese companies. They say that the Japanese developed a new marketing paradigm where winning organizations were defined by their practices of listening to the customer, designing products that met or exceeded their best expectations, and continuously improving all the organizational processes that lead to customer satisfaction. In reaction to losing markets to higher quality foreign products, many marketing managers in the U.S. are making adjustments in product designs, manufacturing techniques and marketing strategies (Jacobson & Aaker, 1987).

Durability is another component of product quality and is directly related to a product's performance and quality characteristics. Product appearance is a primary form of differentiating and segmenting by appealing to a specific group of consumers. Style is a form of visual durability related to appearance. But, "Design is much more than style. Some well-styled products fail to satisfy the owners because they are deficient in performance characteristics" (Kotler & Rath, 1984, p. 18). Finally, designers are responsible for ensuring that the product is produced and made available within the target market's cost range.

Design is a complex process with many perspectives and plays a major role in determining and providing consumer satisfaction. The most important perspective to a marketer is the advantage of using design to convey information about a company or product to a consumer and the marketing environment to facilitate exchange.

Design and the Marketing Concept
Design is the visual expression of the marketing concept. Designers determine, through research, what it is that the target market wants and translates that back into products, environments, information or corporate identity for the consumers' benefit, using the elements of performance, quality, durability, appearance and cost. This section will investigate the ''why'' of design for marketing.

Designers by nature are concerned with the basic properties of the raw materials in a product, not for what they are but rather for what they might become in terms of satisfying human needs. Design is the outward expression of the manufacturer's regard for both the products it makes as well as for the consumer. Good design is an expression of considerateness on behalf of the organization to the consumer (Dichter, 1975).

Levitt (1975), says "A company must learn to think of itself not as producing goods and services but as buying, creating, and satisfying customers. This approach should permeate every nook and cranny of the organization; if it doesn't, no amount of efficiency in operations can compensate for the lack. (pp. 176) One marketing text describes the marketing concept as the coordinated activities that allow a corporation to achieve its goals and objectives while at the same time satisfying consumers' wants and needs. "Customer satisfaction is the major aim of the marketing concept" (Pride & Ferrell, 1983, p.14). Philip Kotler (1991) describes the marketing concept as "the key to achieving organizational goals by determining the needs and wants of target markets and delivering the desired satisfactions more effectively and efficiently than others" (p. 16).

Consumers prefer to do business with a company that genuinely cares about them.
Tom Peters and Robert Waterman (1982), in their book In Search of Excellence, noted that many companies talk a lot about how important customers are, but actually think of them as a "bloody nuisance" (p. 156) and treat them accordingly. Design is the visual expression of the marketing concept, one that should be well managed and coordinated to allow a corporation to achieve its goals. Design is a subtle, genuine expression of caring for the consumer and is absolutely essential to their satisfaction because it customizes information to suit their needs. As we know, actions speak louder than words.

Design and the Marketing Mix
Design is a powerful tool that should be used in every area of an organization's operations to provide a strategic competitive advantage and achieve corporate objectives. Design can provide consumer satisfaction and enhance corporate performance in each component of the marketing mix and the marketing environment The primary advantage of high-quality design is providing information to, and communicating with, consumers, whether through the product, marketing communications, environments, or corporate identity. This section will examine the "when" and "where" of design and marketing.

Communication with the consumer is the essence of the marketing concept Information is the foundation of product utility. Economist, entrepreneur and writer Paul Hawken in his book The Next Economy (1983), describes the importance of the information-to-mass ratio of products. He says, "When we examine a product, it conveys to us something of the knowledge of the producer, through the cut of the garment, the design of the tool, the comfort and solidity of a chair.... The marketplace is where goods are exchanged, and the mechanism behind this transaction is the exchange of information, through both speech and observation. An item's price is an important part of the information in a product, and it is set between the buyer and seller. But most of the information is embodied in the product itself - in its quality, design, utility, and workmanship.... the application of the knowledge of how best to make or accomplish something." (pp. 74 - 76)

Coyne (1992) expands on Hawken's point by saying that, "Since information is replacing raw material as the most important element in the products and services we buy today.... Manufacturers are reevaluating policies ... that competitive advantage belongs to those who can make products at the lowest cost. Today, customers want quality and the designer is in the position of helping business by acting as the ultimate consumer advocate." (p. 18)

Marketing objectives are what a company wants to achieve, the goals of the
organization. Marketing strategy is a company's plan for how it will go about achieving its marketing objectives. The marketing mix represents the tools that a marketer works with, enabling an organization to strategically achieve its goals (Kotler, 1991, chap. 3, pp. 62- 80).

The marketing mix is made up of four "controllable" components that surround the consumer in a marketing-oriented firm: product, price, place and promotion. These components interact with the marketing environment: political, legal, regulatory, societal, economic and technological forces over which the marketer has little or no control (Pride & Ferrell, 1983).

The marketing mix and the marketing environment are affected positively by implementation of design as a positioning and differentiating strategy. Michael Lawless and Robert Fisher (1990) provide a framework that incorporates seven components affecting strategic decisions for competitive advantage: product form, product function, product intangibles, pricing, promotion, distribution, and firm characteristics. These components are design-driven or design related, and each has potential to influence consumer perceptions. This section will examine each of these decision components and how they are affected by design.

The product component is all of the physical characteristics of new product design. Lawless and Fisher divide the product component into function and form characteristics, indicating that, from a managerial perspective, they represent different investment approaches. Functional characteristics are physical attributes that influence a product's performance. Form characteristics relate to design aesthetics such as color, styling, size and shape. Essential product tangibles used for differentiation are features, quality (reliability and performance-related attributes), and styling (Lawless & Fisher, 1990). Joseph Alba and Wesley Hutchinson (1987) have shown that "inexperienced" consumers often use outward form to create opinions about a product's performance.

Citing the old industrial design adage from the Bauhaus school (which is still practiced and preached vigorously and successfully by designers such as Dieter Rams, chief product designer for Braun), "form follows function," Lawless and Fisher (1990) indicate the impact on the consumer is greatest when good form is accompanied by good function.

Product intangibles are the non-physical characteristics of a product and affect consumers' perception of the total offering (Lawless & Fisher, 1990). Product intangibles are also an important form of innovation (Levitt, 1981). Levitt (1980) describes the difference between product tangibles and intangibles. An automobile is not simply a machine for movement visibly or measurably differentiated by design, size, color, options, horsepower, or miles per gallon. It is also a complex symbol denoting status, taste, rank, achievement, aspiration, and being 'smart,' - that is, buying fuel economy rather than display. (p. 84)

Levitt (1980) adds, "Differentiation is not limited to giving the customer what he expects. What he expects may be augmented by things he has never thought about" (p. 87).

Brand image and packaging are considered product or promotion variables.
Graphic and industrial designers' job is to make sure that the product's promise of satisfaction is safely and effectively carried through shipping and handling, onto retailers' shelves and into consumers' homes, and into recycling bins instead of landfills. Graphic designers communicate information about a company or its products in the promotion variable of the marketing mix, which may include advertising, point-of-purchase displays, packaging labels, annual reports and corporate identity. A well communicated image should help establish a company's character and position, insulate the company from competition and enhance market performance. This potential impact of design on a company's performance underscores the importance of managing the image over time. A corporate identity or brand image should be viewed as a long-term investment (Park, Jaworski & McInnis, 1986). This is contrary to the market-share mentality that often dominates marketer's thinking.

Since design plays a major role in communicating brand image, it follows that design should be managed as a strategic competitive tool as well. Roger Blackwell (1987), a marketing professor at The Ohio State University, explains design's role in marketing communications: "All aspects of an organization's activities are focused upon satisfying the customer in a marketing-oriented firm. The same applies to the communications to those consumers. Thus, product design is seen as part of the communications program, as is package design, the decoration of the truck fleet, the uniforms worn by employees, the corporate logo, and the annual report." (p. 247)

Architects, retail planners and interior designers impact the place variable of the
marketing mix with attractive, productive, safe and comfortable office, warehouse and retail environments for employees and consumers. Finally, price is determined by the perceived value (innate qualities) of the product and its appropriateness for its intended purpose. A company may either be able to charge more for a product because of its appearance and functional qualities or it may be able to compete at a strategically low price because of enhancements or efficiencies gained in manufacturing through good industrial design.

Design gives companies a competitive advantage in the marketing environment It communicates a company's position regarding political, legal and regulatory forces and is dynamic in response to issues regarding economic, technological and societal forces that confront organizations. Although marketing environment variables may be uncontrollable, design is a tool with which to anticipate and respond to consumer's needs.

Design communicates information about a company or its products through all parts of the marketing mix and marketing environment to provide consumer satisfaction and enable corporations to achieve their objectives. As an essential part of the marketing mix, design should be managed in much the same way as other marketing mix elements.

Design and Marketing Strategy
Design can be a powerful tool for managers to use in making and selling products or to develop an effective working environment, or communicate with consumers, share­holders and employees (Gorb, 1990). Like advertising or public relations, design is a tool managers can choose to use, or not. All companies use design to some extent, but only some use designers appropriately. Effective, high-quality design is always done with consideration for the other elements of the marketing process, and not as an isolated, arbitrary process. In good design, each decision reinforces, and is reinforced by, other marketing decisions (Caplan, 1982b).

Design creates satisfaction for consumers and profits for the company and is essential to strategic marketing planning. ''The marketing process consists of analyzing marketing opportunities, researching and selecting target markets, designing marketing strategies, planning marketing programs, and organizing, implementing, and controlling the marketing effort" (Kotler, 1991, p.63, italics added). Marketing strategy is defining the target market in which the company will compete and the positioning of products and services to satisfy consumers' wants and needs (Urban & Star, 1991). Product differentiation is when the "product offering is perceived by the consumer to differ from its competition on any physical or nonphysical product characteristic, including price" (Dickson & Ginter, 1987, p. 4). A product differentiation strategy is the "alteration of perceptions so as to result in a state of product differentiation" (Dickson & Ginter, 1987, p. 4). The product difference must be perceptible and meaningful to the consumer for it to have a differentiating effect.

Companies seek differentiation through "product features - some visually or measurable identifiable, some cosmetically implied, and some rhetorically claimed by reference to real or suggested hidden attributes that promise results or values different from those of competitors' products" (Levitt, 1980, p. 83). Jack Trout and AI Ries, the instigators of the positioning era, comment on its importance to marketers, ''There are too many products, too many companies and too much 'noise' in the marketplace. To succeed in our over-communicated society, a company must create a 'position' in the prospect's mind" (Trout & Ries, 1972 p. 3). To cope with the proliferation of marketing communications, consumers "keep track of the information" by ranking products categorically in their minds. Design aids in this process by providing information to consumers, either in absolute terms or in relation to competitors' products, to help them perform categorization (Trout & Ries, 1972). This is why design is especially important, because its primary function is to understand problems from the consumers' point-of-view, then translate those needs into benefits designed into the product and communications, and relay that information back to the consumer.

Identifying and targeting consumers isn't getting any easier as they begin to express new attitudes of individualism (McKenna, 1988). To satisfy consumers, organizations must change the way they've traditionally designed, produced, marketed, and sold their products. Marketing consultant Regis McKenna (1988) states what this means for companies:

"More options for goods producers and more choices for consumers. Less perceived differentiation among similar products. Intensified competition, with promotional efforts sounding more and more alike, approaching "white noise" in the marketplace. Newly minted meanings for words and phrases as marketers try to "invent" differentiation.

Disposable information as consumers try to cope with information deluge from print, television, computer terminal, fax and satellite dish. Customization by users as flexible manufacturing makes niche production every bit as economic as mass production. Changing leverage criteria as economies of scale give way to economies of knowledge - knowledge of the customer's business, of current and likely future technology trends, and of the competitive environment that allows the rapid development of new products and services. (p. 89)

In his article "Marketing is Everything," McKenna (1991), says that "Marketing's
ultimate assignment is to serve customers' real needs and to communicate the substance of the company" (p. 70). Designers help business by "acting as the aesthetic and humane conscience of industry" (Graham, 1979). Amidst the deluge of advertising messages (McKenna counts 3,000 per person, per day) consumers are unable to remember which ad pitches which product, much less what differentiates one product from another. Marketers need to improve the quality of information contained within their products; make them more useful, more convenient or more entertaining. What customers want from products is "often qualitative and intangible; it is the service that is integral to the product. Service is not an event; it is the process of creating a customer environment of information, assurance, and comfort" (McKenna, 1991, p. 77).

Trout and Ries (1972) say that to cope with change, one should take a long-range view of the situation. Marketing people fall short here - they often think of their customers in terms of "percentage points" and concentrate on selling instead of satisfying the consumers' wants and needs for long-term success. McKenna calls this a "market-share mentality," and this translates into the marketplace as short-term tactics (coupons, gimmicks and promotions) instead of concentrating on long-term goals (growth, positioning, product leadership and corporate image development).

Many companies are experiencing the intense service and price competition mentioned by McKenna, and it is driving down profits. In this situation, one of the few hopes companies have to stand out from the crowd is to produce superiorly designed products for their target markets. Marketers pay considerable attention to product functioning, pricing, distribution, personal selling, and advertising, and much less attention to product, environment, information, and corporate identity design. (Kotler & Rath, 1984, p. 16)

Many marketers have yet to realize the value that design adds to their products
and companies and see it as a frill and not as a strategic tool. Kotler and Rath (1984) provide the following as typical of many managers' attitudes toward using design:

Steven Grant, an entrepreneur, visited one of the authors and described a device he was developing called the Fuel Brain, which monitors room temperature and controls the heating and air circulation functions of oil furnaces. When asked whether he would use professional design services to assist in this venture, he said there would be no need. His engineer was designing the product. His next door neighbor was designing the logo. His marketing officer was designing a four-page brochure. The Fuel Brain would not need any fancy packaging, advertising, or general design work, because he felt that the product would sell itself. Grant believed that anyone with an oil burning furnace and a desire to save money would buy one. A year later, upon being re-contacted, he sadly explained his disappointment in the sales of the Fuel Brain. (p. 16)

In addition, Kotler and Rath (1984) say, "Well-managed, high-quality design offers the company several benefits. It can create corporate distinctiveness in an otherwise product- and image-surfeited marketplace. It can create a personality for a newly launched product so that it stands out from its more prosaic competitors. It can be used to reinvigorate product interest for products in the mature stage of its life cycle. It communicates value to the consumer, makes selection easier, informs, and entertains. Design management can lead to heightened visual impact, greater information efficiency, and considerable consumer satisfaction. (p. 17)

Colin Clipson (1990a), a leading proponent of design management adds that,
"All outcomes of design are imbued with some symbolic or emotive content; this applies equally to a product, a building, a communication or a service.... In consumer personal products the emotive content is high, while in industrial goods it may be much lower; however it is always present" (p. 1(0).

An example of using design correctly as an integral part of the product to satisfy
consumers' wants and needs may be seen in the Ford Motor Company's recent history. Living with the heritage of Henry Ford, who made the infamous proclamation that buyers of the successful Model T could have "any color they wanted as long as it was black." Ford found itself losing desperately - $3.3 billion in losses between 1980 and 1982 - to General Motors and the Japanese imports in the battle for market share (Bowles & Hammond, 1991). Detroit never made the transition from "selling what we make" to "making something that people really want" (Lorenz, 1986).

Christopher Lorenz (1990), management editor of The Financial Times and author of The Design Dimension: the New Competitive Weapon for Business, recounts that Ford's cars used to look "characterless and utterly nondescript" (p. 136). Ford then made a bold move and literally "bet the house" on a new philosophy of integrated design and quality. Ford broke away from the conservative design which had characterized their cars for the last 20 years (since the introduction of the revolutionary and wildly successful Mustang) and introduced the Taurus, the most successful American auto since the fabled Mustang (Powell, 1987).

Lee Iacocca (one who should know better, since he was the ''father'' of the Mustang) dismissed Ford's new aerodynamic direction as "the jellybean look." General Motors executives felt the aerodynamic direction would fail because it was too extreme, and said so publicly. Ford leaped from the "brink of disaster" to the most profitable car company in the world based on this new philosophy (Powell, 1987). The success of the Taurus was much more than a styling job, however. Donald Petersen, Ford's president who deserves credit for the transformation, made several revolutionary changes in corporate structure and strategy to accomplish this huge feat. In corporate structure, Petersen brought together product planners, industrial designers and engineers for the first time into product teams, whose stated goals were:

• To create a world-class car, with quality second to none - either
  foreign or domestic.

• The customer would be the focal point in defining quality.

• Product integrity would never be compromised.

• To accommodate the first three objectives, the team at the very beginning had to involve people from both "upstream" and "downstream" in the car-making process: that is, from the CEOs office to the design studios to the end of the assembly line - and even beyond, to the supplier, the ad agency, the dealership, and ultimately the customer. (Doody & Bingaman, 1988,p.45)

The change that had the most impact was moving a large part of the corporate
design staff into line management roles under the Ford North American product develop­ment structure, where they had much greater influence and impact on design decisions. In marketing strategy, Ford moved away from its traditional production and sales-led think­ing toward ''true'' marketing, where consumers' wants and needs would determine the products the company would produce. Styling (adding strips of chrome and wood grain) had been replaced by an integration of form and function. Since then, the Ford Escort has become the number one best selling car in the world, and the Ford Taurus is about to take over the best selling car in America spot from the Japanese produced (but American made) Honda Accord (Kerwin & Treece, 1992). Lorenz (1986) comments, "Gone was the traditional policy, common to all American motor manufacturers, of cladding a lacklustre and unimaginative vehicle in an unwieldy, boxy, battering-ram shape, garnished with all sorts of ritzy, angular radiator grilles, tail fins and chromium strips. In its place was a policy of integral design, in which the car's uncluttered shape was heavily influenced by the need to reduce wind drag in order to improve its fuel consumption." (p. 2)

Petersen claims that Ford's new philosophy encompasses performance, handling and aesthetics, as well as quality, function, safety, comfort, reliability and cost of ownership - all of which are either direct or indirect results of well-managed, high-quality design.

Strategic marketing planning (positioning and differentiating) is critical to business success and design is a major strategic tool in this process. However, very few companies even consider design as a strategic weapon. Ford is an example of one company that has made design a focal point for strategic corporate decisions and experienced remarkable consumer satisfaction and corporate success as a result.

Design Management
This section examines what is known about how a company should manage the design process for the best returns on a company's investment, and reasons why more companies don't use design as suggested. Four contexts in which design management can be used (how to manage designers, designers in a management society, design function in an organization, and how managers use design), and a design user's model discussing four levels of a corporation's interaction with design (product, environment, information and corporate identity) will also be examined. Design management is the "who" of the design and management anomaly.

Design is a strategic marketing resource and should be managed as such. Bruce Archer (1976), head of the design research department at the Royal College of Art in London, put it succinctly, "Design, for management purposes, can be interpreted as meaning the main creative activity of the architects, engineering designers, graphic designers, industrial designers and others who, in a particular case, devise and elaborate the products, packaging, display, presentation and/or house style of a firm. Management, for design purposes, can be interpreted as ranging from the overall control of the firms' innovative activities - including corporate identity, product strategy, research, design and development, diversification and the like - to the detailed organizational and financial control of drawing office and/or project activity.... In some firms, where product design, in either the technological or the styling sense, dominates the company's fortunes, design management is identical with general management and the design manager will be the managing director. In other firms, where other consider­ations dominate, design management may be limited to (say) advertising. (p. 42)

Gorb (1982) defines what design is for managers and why it should be important to them. Design is the planning process for the things you make (which are your products). It can, but need not necessarily be, concerned with the aesthetics of your product. It also is in part and when necessary, a creative process, but it need not be exclusively, or even significantly concerned with creativity. Its importance to you as a manager is immense. In your manufacturing enterprise you have a number of responsibilities and concerns; to employees and to investors, to customers, to suppliers, to the community and so forth. But your prime responsibility, the main purpose of your enterprise and your main personal concern is with your product, and its present and future survival. On your product everything else depends. Furthermore as a manager one of your main tasks is planning in the widest context, and squarely in the forefront of that planning must be your plans for your product; and planning for your product is design. And design therefore almost certainly is (or should be) the most important thing you do. (p. 38)

Although Gorb neglects the importance of the consumer in this discussion, it is a
realistic view of the situation. Gorb (1982) also identifies four contexts of design management The first he calls ''How to manage designers," or the practice of running a design studio or department within an organization. It requires the same basic principles and practices as running almost any small business or consultancy except that it involves managing people and products that are inherently creative. The second area Gorb calls ''Designers in a management society," providing designers with knowledge of the worlds of marketing and industry in which they live and work. The third area (and, Gorb says, probably the most correct use of the term) Gorb calls, "Design function in organizations," and design management is placed at the same functional level as financial or production management. Although most designers feel that this is the level at which design decisions must be made and directed, it is rare to find the responsibility placed highly enough within the corporation.

Because "Design function in organizations" is concerned primarily with product design, a more comprehensive definition must be provided. The fourth area is "How managers use design." Gorb (1982) provides a model to describe the use of design in several types of business organizations because there are many companies whose product rarely changes, or organizations whose emphasis on design lies well outside of their main product, and also to address service and information industries whose product isn't tangible.

Gorb states that each of the four levels in the design user’s model represents a level at which most companies operate, and that each level is farther removed from the primary purpose of the organization than the previous one. Consequently, each level is correspondingly more complex. Kotler's (1984) observations on design management support this four-tier structure proposed by Gorb. Bill Hollins and Stuart Pugh (1990) refer to the integration of these four levels as "total design - the systematic activity necessary from the identification of a market of user need to the selling of the successful product to satisfy this need" (p. 3).

Design managers should be responsible for coordinating and directing all four levels of an organization's design efforts: products, environments, information and identity, in the same way that the personnel or accounting departments are managed. The first level is the product, the most important and most immediate concern for the manager. This level should include all activities from market research input through the start of detailed product specifications and designing, into and through manufacturing (Hollins & Pugh, 1990). Glen Urban and John Hauser (1980) take a similar view of the product design process, "Design is the designation of the key benefits the product is to provide, the psychological positioning of these benefits versus competitive products, and the fulfillment of the product promises by physical features" (p. 155).

The second level is the environment Gorb remarks that this is where the mission of the organization is most efficiently achieved. Environment design encompasses tools, buildings, equipment, location, vehicles, and selling points. Disciplines involved with environment include architects, retail planners, interior designers, site planners, landscape architects, signage designers and graphic designers. The designer's role at this point is more comprehensive and less immediate than product design. Environment design poses special problems for design managers because most of the applications require substantial capital investments (a new plant, for example), and most often a company will bring in an outside consultant, not having a need to keep an architect permanently on staff. If the organization's use of design is disjointed, then it is difficult to communicate a sense of the company's purpose, culture and needs to the supplier. Gorb (1982) points out the paradox that, ''The more important the commitment and the greater its strategic importance, the less knowledgeable the manager is likely to be; and thus, as a client, less able to brief his consultants" (p. 40).

The third level of the design model, information, is where design is typically thought of as communications. Information design may encompass everything from management information systems to advertising and public relations, to annual reports and signage. Gorb (1982) points out that because the costs of information design are slight, managers tend to trivialize the task. This is especially problematic when you consider that this is what most influences the public when they evaluate a company.

The fourth level of design input to an organization is corporate identity. Gorb (1982) says this level affects major management issues of strategy and policy. Corporate identity design involves auditing, improving, standardizing and controlling the product, environment and information systems which are used to communicate a company's personality, culture and mission.

Wally Olins (1989) says that, "In order to be effective every organization needs a clear sense of purpose that people within it understand. They also need a strong sense of belonging. Purpose and belonging are the two facets of identity" (Olins, 1989, p. 7). He explains the relationship between corporate identity and other design practices within an organization:

"Everything that the organization does must be an affirmation of its identity. The Products that the company makes or sells must project its standards and its values. The buildings in which it makes things and trades, its offices, factories and showpieces - their location, how they are furnished and maintained - are all manifestations of identity. The corporation’s communication material, from its advertising to its instruction manuals, must have a consistent quality and character that accurately and honestly reflect the whole organization and its aims. (p. 7)

The most important point is that design, at all four levels - product, environment,
information and corporate identity - must be integrated. Otherwise, it represents the shortsightedness of "selling" as opposed to true "marketing." Blackwell (1987) discusses that Integrated Marketing Communications (IMC) programs differ from traditional (fragmented) marketing communications in several ways. If the word "design" is substituted for "IMC," then these guidelines apply equally well.

1. IMC programs are comprehensive. Advertising, personal selling, retail atmospherics, behavioral modifications programs, public relations, investor relations programs, employee communications, and other forms are all considered in the planning of an IMC.

2. IMC programs are unified. The messages delivered by all media, including such diverse influences as employee recruiting and the atmospherics of retailers upon which the marketer relies, are the same or supportive of a unified theme.

3. IMC programs are targeted. The public relations programs, advertising programs and dealer / distributor programs all have the same or related target markets.

4. IMC programs have coordinated execution of all the communications components of the organization.

5. IMC programs emphasize productivity in reaching the designated targets when selecting communication channels and allocating resources to marketing media (pp. 237 - 8)

Design management requires a wide range of knowledge and skills to be used effectively and efficiently. However, this doesn't explain why so few companies utilize and manage design effectively. Why is there a high level of mistrust between managers and designers when it seems that there should be a high level of interdependence?

Peter Lawrence, founder of the Design Management Institute, feels that developing a design management discipline falls into two parts: developing the organization and operating structure within corporations to take better advantage of design's benefits; and promoting understanding by senior and middle management and integrating design at policy level (Design 1982). Gorb and Dumas (1987), observe that many line managers participate in significant design management decisions without even realizing it, in what they call "silent design."

Mark Oakley (1990), professor and writer on design management issues, observes that managers do one of two things when confronted with design: either they ignore the evidence and deny the importance of design, or they acknowledge that design is important but leave responsibility for it to others. "Managers, who would not dream of being left out of financial or personnel decision making, may quite readily distance themselves from anything to do with design" (p. 6). The explanations for this, Oakley says, are both practical and cultural. Managers feel uncomfortable making subjective decisions about design quality because their foundations are largely in analytical disciplines. They are not prepared to make determinations of visual (as opposed to written) information. Another explanation is that interest in color and style may be regarded as "a predominantly female concern," which many men are unable to appreciate, and since upper management continues to be dominated by men it follows that a lack of design understanding endures. Stereotypes dominate designers' and managers' assessments of each other. Regardless of the underlying reasons, too much unsuccessful design occurs because managers have no concept of appropriate design goals and expectations, or they fail to ensure that design projects meet the right expectations.

That designers and managers are different animals may come as no surprise to anyone who has worked with both groups (especially together), but it may provide explanation for their divergent approaches to solving problems. David Walker (1990) takes an anthropological approach to the fundamental differences between designers in his article appropriately titled, "Managers and Designers: Two Tribes at War?" In this examination Walker points to the different outlooks inherent to the two groups. His first observation supports those of Oakley (above) that design is largely uncharted territory for managers and they are uncomfortable with their lack of understanding. He also mentions miscommunication, different goals and different styles of thought as reasons for their different approaches. Managers have a critical, analytical frame of reference, whereas designers stick things together to see what results; they are better at synthesis than analysis. Managers are problem-oriented; designers are solution-oriented. Managers see difficulties; designers see opportunities. Designers are rash; managers are inert. The very differences in perception, aptitudes, processes and skills are what make managers and designers important to one another at both a personal and an organizational level. (Walker, 1990, p. 152)

Kotler (1984) cites design illiteracy, misconceptions regarding cost, tradition--
bound behavior, and organizational politics as the reasons that executives are not more effective design managers. He then suggests a two-way education process for both designers and managers as a way to improve this relationship. Marketers and designers can both be split into two groups regarding design practice; functionalists (the right way) and stylists (the wrong way). Stylist designers, says Kotler, concentrate on putting good outer form into design, resist market research, and pay little attention to cost; stylist marketers, most notably salespeople, use gimmicks and gadgets to catch the buyer's attention. Both press for cosmetic features, even if they don't add to a product's value and performance. Functionalist orientation is based on putting good functional performance, quality, and durability into the design, knowing that the key to customer satisfaction and repeat sales is not simply attracting initial purchase but providing long-term satisfaction.

Regardless of cultural, behavioral, or intellectual differences between designers and managers, the most fundamental reason for misunderstanding between them is a lack of exposure to the other's philosophical foundations in their education. Dumaine (1991) states that, "Many companies don't achieve maximum (design) leverage because a kind of Plexiglas wall separates designers and managers. An executive may feel vaguely uncomfortable with a designer - the guy's wearing a suit, sure, but underneath he's an artiste wearing a black silk T-shirt. Designers are just as much to blame for the breach. Many, trained at prestigious schools like Pratt (in New York City), or Cranbrook (in Michigan), never bothered to learn the language of business, looking upon the whole activity as beneath them -- mere commerce. (p. 88)

This observation is supported by many writers on the design-versus-marketing
subject Archer (1976) says, "The cross-disciplinary languages and the common sets of values are just not there. The educational, training, examination and qualification systems are so different that it is extremely difficult for the subject matter of one side to be effectively incorporated in the syllabuses of the other, except as optional 'familiarization' courses. A second important function of any professor of design management would therefore be to discover or develop the cross-disciplinary languages, the common sets of values and the means for transplanting relevant ideas into other educational and operational frame­works. That is why there is a need for an academic role in design management, regardless of whether or not there is room for a design management profession. (p. 43)

Walker (1990) discusses the gap between design and marketing education:
The education and training of managers tend to be based on analytical studies (such as accountancy and finance); therefore they are not very well equipped to deal with projects which involve unfamiliar concepts, predominantly visual (rather that written) information, fuzzy problems, high level of ambiguity, and assessments which are, variously, subjective, personal, emotional and outside quantification. Without making design sound mystical, as if it relied solely on intuition and higher non-rational insights, it does have the quality of many complex human skills in resisting analysis. (p. 148)

Walker (1990) indicates that the discomfort that management feels regarding
design seems to be based in the traditional cultural divide in education: "Numeracy and literacy are rated highly, while the abilities which revolve around materials -- manipulation, construction, tactile skills, and visual literacy -- do not even have a name" (p. 149).

All organizations can benefit from use of integrated design at all levels of operation: product, environment, information and corporate identity. Design should be managed much like any other strategic resource. The main reason more executives don't use design is that they don't understand its philosophy, processes, language, culture, practitioners or potential. The next, and final section, of this chapter will examine the prevailing criticisms of both the design and marketing education systems to determine the validity of the above hypothesis. 

Design and Marketing Education

A better understanding between designers and marketing managers could result in enhanced corporate performance and greater job satisfaction for those involved. Although design is a special kind of skill when compared to accounting and finance; it is an element of business, to be managed like any other element of business. Is it possible to persuade designers to become managers, or do you train managers to be sympathetic toward design, or do you create a new specialty of management specifically for design? Higher education could provide the means for resolving this difference in ideologies, but it doesn't appear to be doing the job now.

William Callaway (1990) provides the foundation for this line of reasoning. Higher education has perpetuated the lack of mutual understanding between those who emerge from the separate fields of design and management. The problem is twofold. First, there is a lack of information in each group about the technical knowledge and methods of the other; secondly, there is a gap between the collective culture of the two groups. At its baldest, the problem is that in management courses the product is taken for granted or ignored. In design courses, the physical object itself is central but the context of its production and marketing tends to be ignored.

The divide between management education and design education is both a result of different concerns - hence the absence of transfer of technical knowledge between the two fields - and more profoundly a manifestation of two very different cultures.

Management education is much concerned with those business functions associated with controlling -- especially accounting, descriptive statistics and cost analysis - and with analysis of the market and presentation of the product to the customer. The education of designers is essentially concerned with creating. The divisive effect of two parallel, non-convergent educational tracks, one about controlling and one about creating, cannot be ignored. (pp. 414 - 415)

Gorb (1990) outlines the requirements for teaching marketing management to
designers and design to managers. Designers and managers must first adopt a mutual lexicon. This is fundamental to fostering an understanding of the principles and processes of the complementary discipline, an enormously important task if design is to take its proper place in marketing.

Olins (1989) underlines the lack of a substantial body of support in the world's major business schools as a problem and acknowledges that part of the image problem suffered by designers is created by themselves. "Until recently," he says, "many designers seemed frightened to emerge from their own cozy little world, to learn new skills and broaden their horizons by developing non-design disciplines. They wanted to keep as near as possible to their drawing boards" (p. 148).

Design Firm Management reports that the design industry is being pressured to change from a craft-shop approach to that of a multi-disciplined service-oriented professional business. Many of today's design graduates are not prepared to participate, let alone compete, in this environment. Their education has been largely vocational, preparing students to get jobs and not teaching them how to be problem-solvers. Some in the industry complain that too many young designers lack basic business knowledge: budgets, overhead, billing, cash flow, and staffing (Design Firm Management No. 27).

Technical-oriented design programs like those at Stanford or the Institute of Design at the Illinois Institute of Technology (IIT) have become more research- and problem-solving oriented, emphasizing the process of design (de Forest, 1986). Some design schools have introduced critical-thinking curricula; information analysis and linguistic theory are offered in conjunction with practical exercises and abstract formal problems (de Forest, 1989).

The Institute of Design has introduced a doctoral program in an attempt to raise the status of design from vocation to profession. In this program students are encouraged to discover practical applications for theoretical studies in cognitive psychology or sociology. Other programs have begun to develop more broad-based curricula. Research has now become a significant part of the master's of science programs at The Ohio State University and the University of Cincinnati. Schools are now offering design history courses at the undergraduate level and graduate level in art history and American studies departments. In 1980, The University of Cincinnati began a master's program in design history but it failed to attract enough students. The Parsons School of Design in New York is the only school in the United States offering a master's of liberal arts in architecture and design criticism. The design field's search for credibility in the halls of academia has its critics as well. One design research professional stated, "The layperson's view of academia is largely correct. Academia is full of people doing trivial nonsense that is largely unimportant" (de Forest, 1990, p. 46).

Business schools have also been the target of harsh criticism for "turning out narrow technicians, conformists, and office politicians. Even the best business schools have grown smug, complacent, and rigid - and still worse, are failing to address the critical managerial needs of American business and society" (Silk, 1989, p. 9). In the late 1950s, the Gordon-Howell Report sponsored by the Ford Foundation and the Pierson Report sponsored by the Carnegie Foundation (Main, 1989) declared that business schools "were filled with second-rate students, taught by second-rate professors, who didn't understand their fields, did little research, and were out of touch with business" (Main, 1989, p. 78). These reports prompted business schools across the country to revise their curricula, raise admission standards and encourage professors to undertake more research. From fewer than 5,000 MBA graduates a year in the early 1960s, the popularity of the MBA degree has risen exponentially to more than 67,000·graduates per year today. Overwhelming success has caused business schools to become complacent, and most have not substantially changed their curricula since the early 19608 (Main, 1989).

In a Fortune magazine article on the future of business schools, Stanford professor Harold Leavitt says that a business leader today must have "three major talents: problem solving, implementing," and what he calls, "path-finding," meaning visionary and entrepreneurial talents (Main, 1989, p. 78). Business schools are now beginning to teach the human side of business, shifting their emphasis to include subjects like foreign languages and cultures, ethics and communications, along with the standards of accounting, finance and marketing.

Research supports new directions for business schools. Stephen McDaniel and Richard Rise (1984a) state, "In order to be truly responsive to the needs of the market­place, marketing educators involved in planning or restructuring marketing curricula must solicit and carefully evaluate feedback received from the business community" (p. 27). In their study of 236 CEOs of major industrial corporations, McDaniel and Rise found pricing and product components of the marketing mix were viewed as more important than the other two components - place and promotion. Specifically, they found that the surveyed CEOs placed greater value on customer relations, pricing strategies, new product planning and development, and product management, and less value on areas such as advertising, personal selling, public relations, and sales promotion.

Jack Behnnan and Richard Levin (1984) found that business schools are largely responsible for the failure of United States' companies against international competition:

"They (business schools) produce graduates who are too narrow, too shortsighted, and too risk averse. Rather than problem identification, goal determination, and high values, the schools stress data gathering, manipulation of information and personnel, and problem solving. They are oriented toward bureaucratic management rather than entrepreneurship and toward tools and models rather than rigorous, qualitative thinking. They pay too little attention to the development of the individual and of interpersonal relationships." (p. 140)

William Stanton (1988) found that business schools have gone too far in
emphasizing courses in the behavioral aspects and quantitative methods in marketing and need to move back toward courses in the mainstream. The areas most in need of attention are creative generation of concepts and emphasis on the implementation stage of the management process. Stanton says, "In the 1990s, the need for restructuring in manufacturing industries very probably will place more attention on making the product -- in doing, rather than only planning" (p. 5). Dillard Tinsley (1981) recommends that four basic courses be required for all undergraduate marketing majors: principles of marketing, buyer behavior, marketing research and marketing management (Tinsley, 1981).

McDaniel and Hise (1984b) studied 75 undergraduate catalogs of colleges and
universities offering a major or concentration in marketing for the 1982-1983 academic year. Each catalog was analyzed to determine what marketing courses were offered at that institution, as well as what marketing courses were required. The results from this analysis were then compared to a similar study (Hise 1975) which analyzed college and university catalogs from 1972-1973. Their findings show that of the top 26 marketing courses offered in one of these two years, there were no significant differences in the two time periods for 15 of the courses. Overall, their findings supported the recommendations of Blackwell (1981) regarding a shift in the curriculum to a conceptual orientation. However, no courses in design or design manage­ment were mentioned. The only courses listed that were even "in the ballpark," were advertising, promotion, advertising/mass communication management, marketing com­munication, and product planning/management.

John Deegan (1984) outlines a new method for teaching marketing principles to students called the Product Introduction Process (PIP), a "systematically organized listing of marketing fundamentals" (p. 25). Again, as in the McDaniel and Rise (1984b) study, no mention of design is made, although under the heading of company image he mentions innovation in product development, market positioning, product differentiation / obsolescence technology, and product identification (packaging / branding strategy). In the marketing mix place component he mentions image / convenience, and under promotion / packaging he mentions communication.

Taking Tinsley's (1981) recommendations of the four basic courses required for all undergraduate marketing majors (principles of marketing, buyer behavior, marketing research and marketing management), a quick survey of the subject index and text of books commonly used in these classes at both the undergraduate and graduate level revealed two mentions of design as discussed in this paper (Engel, Blackwell, & Miniard, 1986; Kotler, 1991; Pride & Ferrell, 1983; Zikmund, 1991). To be fair (although, hardly scientific) anything that even remotely sounded as if it might touch on design was investigated (management, for example). Kotler's Marketing Management: Analysis. Planning, Implementation and Control (1991, 7th ed.) calls design "the integrating force" of product differentiation qualities: features, performance, conformance, durability, reliability, reparability and style (p. 297). The following three paragraphs from Kotler's (1991, 7th ed.) book reveal all that a business student might learn about design during the course of his or her marketing education.

"All of the foregoing qualities are design parameters. They suggest how difficult the product-design task is, given all the trade-offs that are made. The designer has to figure out how much to invest in feature development, performance, conformance, reliability, reparability, style, and so forth. From the company's point of view, a well-designed product would be easy to manufacture and distribute. From the customer's point of view, a well-designed product would be pleasant to look at, and also easy to open, install, learn how to use, use, repair, and dispose of. The designer has to take all of this into account and follow the maxim "form follows function." The designer has to compromise some of the desirable characteristics. Much depends on knowing how the target market perceives and weighs the different benefits.

Unfortunately, too many companies fail to invest in good design. Some companies confuse design with styling and think that design is a matter of making a product and then putting some fancy casing around it Or they think that reliability is something to catch during inspections rather than designing it into the manufacturing process. They may think of designers as people who pay insufficient attention to cost or who produce designs that are too novel for the market to accept A design audit instrument to measure a company's design sensitivity and effectiveness would help management gauge whether it is adding sufficient value through design.

Several companies are now waking up to design's importance. Ford is an excellent example of a company that improved its process and product design and quality. In Britain, the British Design Council reports that some of its design projects not only have helped British companies increase their sales by more than 100 percent and cut manufacturing costs by 50 percent but have also helped nearly bankrupt companies turn around and vigorously compete with Japanese and West German firms. All said, good design can attract attention, improve performance, cut costs, and communicate value to the intended market." (p. 297)

Kotler (1991) also briefly mentions design in his discussion on image differentia-
tion, regarding symbols, written and audio / visual media, atmosphere, (environments) and events (pp. 300 - 301). Engel, Blackwell, and Miniard's Consumer Behavior (1986, 5th ed.) mention design only in reference to behavior modification in retail (environment) and point-of-purchase design, under the subheading of ecological design (p. 192).

Business schools are starting to realize that design and its management are important to marketing. Last year, Harvard Business School introduced an industrial design case studies class for the first time in its history (Dumaine, 1991). In October, 1989, the Design Management Institute held an exhibition on ''Designing for Product Success" at the Carpenter Center at Harvard University. The project produced thirteen case studies which provided the foundation for teaching design management in business schools. In the exhibition catalog, John R McArthur, dean of the Harvard Business School, says,

"As global competition becomes more intense, new dimensions of competitive strategy have received increasing attention. One of the most important is design and the management of design. Even as recently as five years ago, most managers considered good design almost frivolous. They viewed designers as the people who simply determine the color and overall appearance of a product.

When the success of companies like Braun in Germany or Sony in Japan is analyzed, however, the significance of design to their company's reputation and profitability become clear. Design - from reliable performance to quality appearance - is indeed a crucial competitive weapon. Institutions like the Harvard Business School need to develop the capability to teach future managers and business leaders how to manage design more effectively (Fulton, 1990, p. 5).

Yet, Kotler (1991) gives design and its management approximately one page out
of 756 in a marketing management text. Engel, Blackwell, and Miniard (1986) allot one ­half-page out of 633 in a consumer behavior text. The marketing principles text and the marketing research text reviewed make no mention at all. Little is being done by either the design schools or the business schools in this country to satisfy the needs of business by filling the gap in both design and marketing management education.

Gorb (1976) discusses the need for filling this gap,

"I define design as 'a plan to make something;' which in a management context is the co-operative achievement of product purpose; and also perhaps information about that purpose. Design management, therefore, is an aspect of the planning process, through which organizations are run. It is my proposition that it should be (but is not now) the central and vital aspect of that process. (p. 40)

Management consultant John Graham (1980) writes, "Once a function gains acceptance in industry, the emphasis shifts from the heroes who gained that acceptance to managers who can effectively integrate the function into the business enterprise. Today, design doesn't need heroes; it needs managers. (p. 39)

Olins (1985) says, "Design is normally regarded as a jobbing task to be commissioned and executed - or not as the case may be - for specific products or showrooms or brochures on a job-by-job basis, as though each is a completely separate task, having no relationship with anything else that emanates from the company.

The idea that design has any kind of overall coherence in a company's life is not just rejected or ignored - it simply doesn't enter anybody's consciousness.... Product design is run by engineers. Communications are run by public relations and marketing people. And in many companies, environments are looked after by the janitor.... There has to be a design manager, who is there to manage design - not to do the designing. He does need to know some knowledge of design, plus tact, sympathy, considerable political aware­ness and a determination to win. Some designers make good design managers because they understand what design can do. Most, however, don't. The disciplines in which they have been educated rarely bring out management skills. Marketing men, communications men, lawyers, even accountants, can make good design managers. They need to be trained to understand what the objectives are and then encouraged to get on with the job. (pp. 64-69)

Despite the sexist language and a strong disagreement with the notion that even
accountants can make good design managers (anyone but accountants), Olins' point is representative of the design industry. John O'Toole (1980) feels, however, that designers (and other "creatives'') can be effective managers: "It is the harvest of their bizarre minds which is our only real product. And no one is more concerned than they are about the efficient production and marketing of that product" (p. 2).

Gorb (1982) and Olins (1985) agree on the areas from which design managers must be culled. 'The overriding priority in the effective use of design lies in management education, first with existing managers, then in the education of young people preparing for careers in management" (Gorb, 1982, p. 41). Gorb (1986) has also instituted a long-­term study investigating the training of design managers already in industry in the U.K

There is very little evidence of design management education taking place currently in the U.S. The Parsons School of Design in New York has begun a program which offers a bachelor's of business administration (B.BA.) in marketing and fashion merchandising (White, 1989). The industrial design case studies course at Harvard Business School was mentioned earlier. These examples are encouraging but are not comprehensive enough to be considered true design management. Peter Gorb might be teaching the only design management class in the world at the London Business School.

The only example of academic initiatives to produce a fully integrated marketing and design management curriculum in the U.S. comes from Colin Clipson, director of the Architecture and Planning Research Laboratory at the University of Michigan. Clipson directed a project called "The Competitive Edge: The Role of Design in American Corporations," a study to research and document the role of various forms of designing in more than 400 businesses in the U.S. and abroad and to identify the strategies by which design can become a central force for improving performance (Clipson, 1990a). The main finding from this project was that there is a lack of inter-professional education and experience at the training level (Clipson, 1990b). Findings from this project were used to develop an experimental course at the University of Michigan that brought together students from the College of Architecture and Urban Planning, the graphic design and industrial design programs in the School of Art, the School of Business Administration, and the College of Engineering in a "real-world" problem-solving situation. Clipson surveyed more than 200 business and design schools in North America and found that not one brought together the education of business, design and engineering students, and none shared a common focus on problem solving and innovation.

In Clipson's (1990b) ''First Things First" experiment, interdisciplinary teams of students were formed as new product groups. The first task assigned was to develop a business plan. A problem that arose almost immediately was difficulty communicating between disciplines. Team members were not accustomed to working outside of their specializations and found it difficult to understand other professional viewpoints. Designers were slow to see the benefits of organizing the project along business lines, and business students were impatient with the need to explore several ideas before testing and eliminating possible directions. Other problems were lack of understanding of total business operations, limited practical management experience and lack of creative problem solving abilities.

The findings from the ''First Things First" experiment were interesting but not altogether surprising. The teams were shocked at the difficulties encountered in "real" project management and the wide gap between theory and practice in this area. Design students had little concept of real world constraints, only a primitive view of how small business works and few management skills. Many design students harbored an anti-business attitude that has long been fostered in design schools. Each professional group had little knowledge of the potential for contributions from other disciplines, and each profession had developed its own language and procedures for dealing with problems, which they found difficult to overcome.

Clipson (l990b) notes in his findings that ''Higher education itself is a major contributor to the problem, not just at the professional level, but much earlier when the arts, sciences and technologies branch in different ways and never meet again except when bridged by creative individuals" (p. 140). Students stressed their lack of contact with other disciplines and the lack of appreciation for the big picture. Generally, the students found the experiment valuable, but felt it contributed too little too late (Walker 1990).

Although it has been demonstrated that designers and managers need to develop better communications and understanding between each other, very little is being done by either design or business education to foster this cooperation. Apart from Peter Gorb at the London Business School in the U.K. and Colin Clipson at the University of Michigan in the U.S., there is little evidence that business schools and design schools are taking notice of the demonstrated need for design management education.

A "Catch-22" situation exists. Business and design schools have shown that they are willing to change to meet the needs of industry. But until marketing managers and designers understand each other's roles, skills and value, they won't see the need for their contributions, and thus, won't require it from higher education. 

Chapter III -- Methodology

Evidence strongly suggests that there is a need for a design management function in business. Recognizing the need for more and better design work, a two-way education process must occur. Marketers must develop an understanding of the design process and designers must develop an understanding of the marketing process. It follows that higher education has an obligation to its "clients" (both students and business) to develop curricula that fill this need - an integrated curriculum of design and marketing in higher education.

Both business and design schools have been criticized for producing graduates who are too narrowly focused and technically oriented. Development of a design management curriculum would broaden students' problem-solving skills and enhance their understanding of the role they play in the overall process of marketing. Larry Keeley (1992), president of a large Chicago design planning firm, says that American business schools have focused on traditional subjects such as general management and finance and allowed other countries to lead the way in focusing on products and consumers. Keeley accuses American business school of being "out of step" with current needs. "The best business schools, like Harvard and Northwestern, have even admitted that they erred by not addressing design in their programs" (Keeley, 1992, p. 134). However, it might also be revealed that design schools are decidedly "out of step" as well.

Research Design
The purpose of this study is to determine what progress, if any, higher education has made (in both design and marketing) in the emerging field of design management.

Included in this determination is the definition of a set of curriculum criteria (for both business and design) that should be used in the integrated education of designers and managers. Integrated design and management, for the purposes of this study, can be defined as whether business schools include design-related courses in their offerings, and whether design schools include marketing management courses in their offerings. It must be noted that this study compared curricula of undergraduate design programs with master's business programs. This reflects the level of specificity in the respective programs and is, generally speaking, the highest level of educational training that most of these students will undertake. Graduate design schools' curricula lack any standardization or accrediting body, tend to be an "extension of the undergraduate curricula, rather than distinct entities for inquiry and theoretical investigation" (de Forest, 1989, p. 44), are not considered particularly demanding, and are not considered a "good buy" by design students (Wefler & Associates, No. 27). In addition, the overwhelming majority of criticism regarding business and design curricula found in the review of the literature was leveled at the undergraduate design and the master's business programs, indicating that this is the appropriate level of focus for this study.

This research project does not intend to provide a broad-based empirical survey of the scope of design management in higher education. That would prove to be an exercise in futility. Clipson (1990b) surveyed more than 200 business and design schools in North America and found that not one brought together the education of business, design and engineering students, and none shared a common focus on problem solving and innovation. The main finding from Clipson's project was a lack of inter-professional education and experience at the training level. Clipson's project was used as the basis to develop an experimental course at the University of Michigan that brought together students from the College of Architecture and Urban Planning, the graphic design and industrial design programs in the School of Art, the School of Business Administration, and the College of Engineering in a ''real-world'' problem-solving situation. Clipson's survey looked specifically for classes with engineering, design and business students all in one room at one time, which is different from the integrated design management curriculum as described above. In addition, Clipson's data were three to four years old at the time of this study and much has been written and said since his project to point out the design management educational deficiency. Have business and design schools taken notice of the emerging design management trend and responded since Clipson's study?

Working under the presumption that part of what makes a school "the best" in a given area is leadership, flexibility and responsiveness to the current needs of students and business, and also under the presumption that these "best" schools are early-adopters of significant new curriculum trends, this study will look for an indication of the progress of the design management field. The aforementioned integrated design management curriculum criteria are the yardstick against which these "best" schools are measured to determine if they are effectively developing a design management curriculum.

Data were gathered from the most recent available course-offerings catalogs from six top-rated universities; three from business, and three from design. The criteria for selecting schools were determined by independent sources, which are generally used by students to "guide" their choice of college, as well as by industry to "guide" recruiters to the best students. While there is always a difference of opinion in what constitutes "the best," generally the same schools are continually listed at the top, although their rank order may vary somewhat from year to year. In business school rankings, favor was given to those schools listed as the best in marketing (as opposed to finance or accounting). As for design schools, while certain schools are known for their particular brand of design philosophy, the same selectivity as used for business schools is not necessary (or possible), because the design curriculum tends to be narrowly focused and there are far fewer schools from which to choose. Consideration is also given to location of schools (one business and one design school from the East, one each from the Midwest, and one each from the West Coast) to provide balanced geographic representation in the study. This may identify "trend setting" tendencies of schools in a particular region of the country.

Business schools were selected from Barron's Guide to Graduate Business Schools (Miller, 1988). Barron's cited rankings based on several published studies. Generally the top schools are listed as Harvard, Stanford, Pennsylvania (Wharton), and Northwestern (Kellogg).

While no such guide currently exists for design schools, they were selected from a survey conducted by Design Firm Management (1980), a series of advisory reports published by Wefler & Associates, among owners and key executives of independent design firms throughout the United States. Design Firm Management notes that school reputations appear to be largely regional and that even the top-named schools had a modest percentage of recognition. However, Pratt Institute and Art Center College were recognized as clearly superior. Other top rated schools were Cooper Union, Parsons School of Design and Cranbrook Academy of Art.

Based on these surveys, and on geographic criteria, the following six schools were selected for examination: in business -- Harvard Business School, Northwestern (J.L. Kellogg Graduate School of Management) and the Graduate School of Business at Stan­ford University; and design - Art Center College, the Institute of Design at the Illinois Institute of Technology (IIT), and Pratt Institute. Pratt Institute, Cooper Union, and Parsons School of Design are all located in New York City, and Pratt, being the most highly rated, was chosen to represent the East for design schools. Cranbrook Academy of Art, located in Bloomfield Hills, Michigan, was considered as the design school to represent the Midwest but was rejected because it is a studio-based program and does not offer classes in the traditional sense (Cranbrook Academy of Art, 1992). The Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania was also considered to represent the East for business schools, but Harvard was given preference for its generally higher rating in marketing.

The Harvard Business School was founded in 1908 and is located in Boston. Harvard is renown not only for the quality of its program but also for innovating the case study method of teaching business, now widely accepted and in use at business schools across the country (Harvard Business School, 1992). Northwestern's J.L. Kellogg Graduate School of Management, located in Evanston, Illinois (a suburb of Chicago) also was founded in 1908, and is considered one of the world's leading centers of management, education and research (Kellogg Graduate School of Management, 1991). The Stanford Graduate School of Business, located between San Francisco and the Silicon Valley area of northern California, was founded in 1925 and is recognized for its outstanding faculty and programs (Stanford Graduate School of Business, 1992).

Art Center College of Design features two campuses: one located in Pasadena, California; and the other in La Tour-de-Peliz, Switzerland. Art Center was founded in 1930 by Edward A. ''Tink'' Adams, a "young advertising man who saw opportunities for designers in publishing, advertising, and industrial design but found that no existing school was preparing designers for the business world" (Art Center College of Design, 1990. p. 10). The Institute of Design at the Illinois Institute of Technology was founded as the New Bauhaus in 1937 by Laszlo Moholy-Nagy, who left the original Bauhaus after it was closed by the Nazi government in Germany because it was considered subversive (Kent, 1992). Pratt Institute School of Art and Design is located in New York City, and is highlighted by a faculty that features 18 Tiffany, Fulbright and Guggenheim award winners.

The course offerings catalogs from the above mentioned schools were analyzed and compared for content in relation to the integrated design management curriculum criteria described below.

Curriculum Criteria
Two studies provide the foundations of the integrated design management curriculum criteria. The first is Tinsley's (1981) "Marketing Courses Required for Marketing Majors," which discusses trends in both undergraduate and graduate business programs and makes recommendations for core curriculum requirements. While several other articles reviewed made general recommendations regarding business school curricula, Tinsley made specific recommendations regarding core courses. Tinsley recommends four basic subjects to be required for all undergraduate marketing majors: principles of marketing, buyer (consumer) behavior, marketing research and marketing management Since design is primarily about communicating, a marketing communications category ­ encompassing advertising and public relations - should be added to Tinsley's recommendations for the purpose of this study. These subjects are the curriculum criteria by which design schools will be measured. If these five subjects are the building blocks of marketing education, they should also be the building blocks of marketing education for design students.

The second article is Callaway's (1990) "New Directions in Design and Management Education," which explores the means by which greater understanding between designers and managers might be developed, and specifically, higher education's role in this relationship. Callaway seconds Tinsley's (1981) recommendations for basic marketing courses for designers, observing that employers generally found design school graduates' technical skills adequate but found graduates lacking in business skills: people management, understanding of marketing and consumer behavior, and general ability to adapt to a corporate environment Callaway (1990) says, "The business oriented designer must be equipped with better business skills, better communication skills and the ability to operate in a corporate environment" (p. 419).

Callaway (1990) recommends the following nine subjects as necessary for design management students: the economic and business context of design, the nature of designer's work, design and product strategies, design policy making, researching design and product requirements, managing design projects, elements of design work, evaluating design results, and legal and quasi-legal aspects of design. Callaway's recommendations are somewhat industrial (product) design specific. To provide a broader perspective that accounts for all design disciplines, similar categories were combined, reducing Callaway's nine subjects to five: "legal and quasi-legal aspects of design" will be combined with "economic and business context of design;" "elements of design work" will be combined with "nature of designers' work;" and "evaluating design results," "design policy making," and "product requirements" will be combined with "design and product strategies." "Researching design" and "managing design projects" will remain as separate subjects.

Procedure
A matrix has been designed that places subjects (integrated design management criteria) on the vertical axis, divided into design and marketing sections. Schools are arranged along the horizontal axis of the matrix, again divided into design and marketing sections (Seebelow). This creates four quadrants in the matrix (clockwise, starting from upper-left): quadrant 1, design schools and design subjects; quadrant 2, marketing schools and design subjects; quadrant 3, marketing schools and marketing subjects; and quadrant 4, design schools and marketing subjects.

Descriptions of courses from the catalogs of each of the six schools were analyzed. For each school, an "x" has been entered on the matrix for courses that are required, and a "0" has been entered for elective courses, according to descriptions that fit the subject categories on the vertical axis.

Limitations
While everything possible has been done to ensure objectivity in the methodology and results of this study, several factors must be considered before drawing a conclusion. The first factor to be considered is a sampling bias. It was stated previously that this would not be a broad-based empirical study because evidence from Clipson's (1990b) study indicated that gathering enough data to produce a random sampling would be fruitless. Nonetheless, examining six schools' catalogs to represent two entire educational systems is limiting and could be potentially misleading.

Second, a coder bias may exist. Very few courses described in the catalogs ''fit'' the precise categories used in the matrix per se. If a strict content analysis method were used, where the categories had to be matched exactly in the titles of the courses or their descriptions, then very few matches would have been found in any quadrant. This difficulty was resolved by requiring that course descriptions include the words used in the category descriptions. In cases where descriptions were ambiguous, or where only course titles were offered, course content was confirmed by a telephone interview with a representative from the school. In the future, this problem could be reduced by utilizing additional coders. A minimum of one course description "match" was required for inclusion in the findings matrix; however, in some instances more than one course would qualify for a category.

Third, a bias based on the descriptions in the course offerings catalogs may exist. While it is likely that the course content is similar to the descriptions provided, variations in actual content probably exist from instructor to instructor and class to class. It must also be recognized that these catalogs are sent to prospective students as a type of ''promotional" brochure, and may reflect creative course descriptions provided by the schools.

Last, the distinction should be made regarding the variety of programs offered within each school. In the case of design schools, Ann de Forest (1986) notes that "Not only do schools differ widely in philosophy and emphasis, even the degrees granted vary from institution to institution" (p. 15). For the purposes of this study, the subjects required for all similar and relevant majors were combined, but separate degree programs were not. An exception was made for Art Center College, which awards a Bachelor of Fine Arts to students in advertising, graphic and packaging design, and a Bachelor of Science to students in environmental, product and transportation design. The exception was made to establish parity between Art Center and the other two design schools, which offer only one undergraduate design degree encompassing all majors.

Despite these limitations, this study fulfills its purpose of identifying trends of integrating design and marketing in higher education.

Hypotheses
The first hypothesis to be examined is whether expert thought and evidence suggest that design and marketing should be integrated to create a design management curriculum. A review of the literature will offer evidence to support or reject the opinion that design management courses should be offered to business students as part of their curriculum and that marketing courses should be offered to design students.

H1: Design and marketing courses should be integrated into one program to create a design management curriculum in higher education.
The second hypothesis for this study is that higher education is not currently
integrating design and management education. This will be indicated if all of the entries on the "Comparison matrix: design and marketing classes offered in 1992 at leading business and design schools" (Figure 2) are found in quadrants 1 and 3.

H2:Design schools will be found to be teaching only design, and business schools will be found to be teaching only business in context of a design management curriculum. These results will be evident if all entries are found in quadrants 1 and 3 of the matrix, indicating that higher education is not currently integrating design and management curricula. Evidence of integration of design and management education will appear as entries in quadrants 2 and 4.

THESIS FIGURE 1 GOES HERE

Chapter IV -- Results

General Findings
The results of the literature review present clear evidence that experts strongly urge the integration of business and design to form a design management curriculum in higher education. Thus hypothesis 1 is therefore supported.

Hypothesis 2 (H2) stated that higher education is not currently integrating design and management education. The evidence for supporting H2 would be provided if all (100%) the entries on the findings matrix (see , below) were found in quadrants 1 and 3 (design schools/design subjects; business schools/business subjects). Hypothesis 2 is generally supported by the appearance of 24 of 34 entries (70%) appearing in quadrants 1 and 3 (12 entries in each quadrant). However, ten entries (30%) in quadrants 2 and 4 indicate that some integration of design and management in higher education is taking place. Two entries appeared in quadrant 2 (business schools/design subjects) and eight entries in quadrant 4 (design schools/business subjects), indicating that design schools are addressing business issues much more aggressively than business schools approach design issues. The "marketing and technical sales" specialized minor at the Institute of Design accounts for half of the entries in quadrant 4 (design schools / business subjects). The apparent inequity between business schools and design schools regarding an integrated design management curriculum might be explained by the fact that design would not exist as an industry without business, but business has operated effectively in the past without relying heavily upon design.

Only Northwestern and Stanford demonstrated awareness of the value of design as a strategic marketing tool, although the level of their awareness appears to be marginal. Although it was reported in Chapter II that Harvard had implemented an industrial design case studies class in 1991, it was not substantiated by either the course offerings catalog or contact with the school (E. Twomey, personal communication, July 22, 1992). The Institute of Design appears to be leading design schools in developing awareness of marketing among its students by offering a "specialized minor" in marketing and technical sales that encompasses four out of the five areas of marketing studied. Art Center offered the only course in "design management," although it is a half-term class (R. Hill, personal communication, July 22, 1992) and no description of the course is provided in the catalog, indicating a lack of emphasis in this area.

Business Schools
In the business school category of the matrix Stanford and Northwestern demon­strate the only courses addressing design issues among the top business schools, with one entry each in quadrant 2 (design courses) under the subject category "design and product strategies." As anticipated, the business schools surveyed offer most of the core marketing courses listed in the bottom half of the matrix.

Harvard
Harvard's (Harvard Business School, 1992) course descriptions implied coverage of several design topics. However, when contacted by telephone to verify the substance of the courses, it was found that design was not included in the subject matter (E. Twomey, personal communication, July 22, 1992).

Northwestern
Northwestern's (Kellogg Graduate School of Management, 1991) course descrip-
tions implied coverage of the topics:

• Design and product strategies

• Design policy making

• Product requirements

• and Elements of design work.

These topics were found primarily in two courses titled "Total quality management," and "Simultaneous engineering" (Kellogg Graduate School of Management, 1991, P. 42).

When contacted regarding the content of these courses, it was discovered that only ''Total quality management" addresses design issues. "Total quality management" is an elective for master's of management (MM) students and required for master's of manage­ment in manufacturing (MMM) students. Although it was found that this class considers design only in terms of its impact on quality improvement, and not for its strategic or esthetic value (S. D. Deshmukh, personal communication, July 22, 1992), design com­prises about ten percent of the class discussion, and therefore qualified for an entry on the matrix under the subject category "design and product strategy."

Stanford
Of the business schools examined, Stanford appears to be making the greatest effort to develop students' awareness of the value of design in marketing. Two pieces of evidence lead to this conclusion: a class titled "Integrated design, manufacturing and marketability" and the existence of the Process of Change Laboratory, directed by Sara Little Turnbull. "Integrated design, manufacturing and marketability" is listed jointly in the catalogs of both the School of Business and the School of Engineering, and teams students from each school to develop, design, manufacture and market a product in a designated product category. The Process of Change Laboratory is concerned with explor­ing the "endemic influence of design in management education," and Sara Little Turnbull, a well-known design expert, participates in instructing "Integrated design, manufacturing and marketability." Currently, she is working to introduce design students to the class (S.L. Turnbull, personal communication, July 22, 1992). This class seems similar to Clipson's (1990b) "First Things First" experiment at the University of Michigan, and qualifies for the "design and product strategy" category of the findings matrix.

Design Schools
As hypothesized, the design schools fared well in quadrant 1 (design schools / design subjects) of the findings matrix and better than expected in quadrant 4 (design schools/marketing subjects). Of the design schools studied, Art Center College appears to be doing the best overall job of providing design students with marketing education.

Art Center
Art Center (1990) requires "Marketing" and "Introduction to advertising" for graphic and packaging design and advertising majors. Both courses are also available to students in industrial design (which at Art Center encompasses the areas of transportation design, environmental design and product design) as electives. "Marketing" is a two unit class at Art Center and qualifies for an entry under the "principles of marketing" subject category in quadrant 4. The course is described: Gives students a better understanding of the marketing process. Exposure to target marketing, product positioning, development of creative strategy, sales promotion, and market research. In-depth exploration of advertising agency and design studio operations. Comparison of various media and their effectiveness. Introduction to market research as a creative tool. A variety of audiovisual material is used. (p. 142)

Art Center (1990) requires eighth-term transportation and product design students to take ''Design management;" however, it is a half-term class (R Hill, personal communication, July 22, 1992) and no description of the course is provided in the catalog (while a description of nearly every other class offered is included). When contacted regarding course content of "Design management," Ron Hill, chairman of the transportation design department at Art Center, stated that the course generally addresses the issues of design management as described in Chapter II of this study. Hill also said that while he is pleased that Art Center is doing more than some other schools in design management, he also noted that 'we could be doing a lot more' (R. Hill, personal communication, July 22, 1992).

Institute of Design
The Institute of Design at IIT (Illinois Institute of Technology, 1990) utilizes a core curriculum of design courses with professional specialization (majors) in communi­cations design, photography and product design. These professional specializations are supplemented by a specialized minor program, which includes, among approximately 60 other options, a specialization in "marketing and technical sales." The marketing and technical sales minor specialization includes courses in:

• marketing;

• buyer behavior;

• marketing and selling for business markets, and two of the following;

• market research;

• product management and pricing policies;

• and marketing channels and communication. (p. 276)

These courses give the Institute of Design four entries in quadrant 4 of the find-
ings matrix (design schools and business courses). Also of interest are specialized minors offered in "computer supported design," "design process," "environmental and human factors design," and "product design" that are available to students in majors other than design - business or engineering for example - to add to their curriculum. These specialized minors include various combinations of courses from the Institute of Design's course offerings. It is interesting to note that if IIT's business school were included in this study, it would have scored well in quadrant 2 of the findings matrix (business schools and design courses) for the availability of these minors.

Pratt Institute
At the undergraduate level Pratt (1991) offers, among many others, electives in "Introduction to advertising," "Introduction to marketing," qualifying for two entries in quadrant 4 of the findings matrix. Additionally, courses are offered in "Business law," "Fundamentals of accounting," "Introduction to management," "Financial management," "Labor relations," "Personnel administration," and "Introductory economics," in the social sciences and management department (p. 223). Students are typically required to take two of the electives offered in this area during their four-year program.

Graduate Design Programs
Although graduate design programs were not included in this study for reasons detailed in Chapter Ill, two schools - the Institute of Design and Pratt Institute - offer graduate programs that closely resemble the needs of the emerging design management field as outlined in Chapter II of this study. Pratt Institute (1991) offers a graduate course in "Design management" Design management is listed as a three-credit graduate course in "Communications I Packaging Design" and the description reads:

Course deals with management methods within large corporations, design consulting firms, advertising agencies, multi-media production companies, etc. Student receives a broad perspective of her/himself as a manager and employee within the context of the professional world. Guest lecturers include management experts from the world of business and design. (p. 132)

Within the same program Pratt (1991) offers courses in "Corporate image planning," "Marketing" and ''Ethics and business practice." Of particular interest is the course description for the three-credit "Corporate image planning":

"Corporate identity functions as a problem-solving model combining phases of information gathering, organization and analysis, strategy development, creative design, graphics systems development, and establishing applications standards into a coordinated program. Each student performs on a professionally realistic level selecting or given a client; fulfilling every role of a typical corporate identification "team" account manager, design director and marketing manager. Each corporate identification program includes every stage from initial client interviews through the last stages of a design control manual." (p. 132)

When queried as to whether undergraduates at Pratt have access to these graduate classes, a representative of the school stated that not only do undergraduates not have access to these classes (because the graduate school is separate from the undergraduate school), but that even if they did have access, they would have little time because of the demands of the undergraduate program (p. Lee, personal communication, July 22, 1992).

The Institute of Design (Illinois Institute of Technology, 1991) offers graduate courses leading to master of science in design (M.S.), master of design (M.Des.) and doctor of philosophy (PhD.) degrees. Without listing the course offerings of the entire department, a few of the courses most pertinent to this study are:

• Principles and methods of design research;

• Philosophical context of design research;

• Design planning;

• Design policy;

• Communications planning;

• Product planning; and

• Strategic design planning. (pp.159-160)

Most importantly, the course descriptions for these and other courses offered in
this department stress the "relationship between an organization's design policy and its overall objectives and strategy" (Illinois Institute of Technology, 1991, p. 159). The Institute of Design does not offer summer classes, and representatives from the school were unavailable for comment at the time of this study (S. Smith, personal communication, July 22, 1992). 

INSERT DESIGNMARKETING FIGURE #2 HERE

Chapter V -- Conclusion

It has been established that design, in its many forms, is central to business and is a necessary tool for achieving business goals. Clipson (1990b) states "Designing is seen to be the key agent by which ideas and invention are translated into effective products and communications. In reality, this is hardly appreciated in many businesses today" (p. 141). Thus, if managers were more design-oriented, or designers were more marketing-oriented, design would be used more effectively, for the benefit of business, business people and designers, and ultimately and most importantly, for the consumer. Communication is about an exchange of ideas. If the design management curriculum is limited to one or the other (business or design) disciplines, then there will never be the basic understanding necessary for business to reap the full benefits of design.

Higher education is in a position to address this situation by exposing students to various complementary professions with which they will interact later in their careers. At the present time, as demonstrated in this study, it appears that neither business education nor design education is aggressively pursuing this goal, although there is some evidence that schools in this study may be headed in that direction - most notably Stanford and the Institute of Design at IIT.

The design schools in this study are starting to take the initiative in design management education. Perhaps it is because design, as a profession, has the most to gain by raising the status of the design management field. As was mentioned earlier, this may be attributed to the fact that design would not exist as an industry without business, but business has operated effectively in the past without relying heavily upon design.

However, business, as indicated in this study, also has much to gain by effectively utilizing "total" design, but it is just beginning to pay attention, as evidenced by the recent successes of the Ford Motor Company described in Chapter II.

This study demonstrates a need to develop a design management curriculum in both design schools and in business schools. The limited amount of activity in this educational area is evident from the results of this study. There is little mention of design in business course descriptions. Some business courses briefly introduce students to specific areas of design, but there is little evidence of teaching the comprehensive uses of total design.

On the other side of the coin, design schools need to do more to familiarize design students with business and marketing. Offering marketing or marketing-related courses as electives pays only lip service to the idea of design management, especially in light of the general anti-business attitude that pervades design schools. Not every design student will want to be a manager, nor will every business student want to work with design, but it is important that every student in each of these areas have a sense of the character and the importance of the other discipline. This is especially important for the design field.

The word "design" connotes commercial activity. Without the commerce, design is simply art. Not that art is without value, but the fundamental difference between art and design lies in facilitating a mutually beneficial exchange between parties.

David Ogilvy (1992), a prominent figure in the advertising industry and founder of the international Ogilvy & Mather Advertising agency, comments on a relationship similar to that of art and commerce, namely the relationship between creativity and sales
in advertising:

"My slogan is we sell. Or Else. If I could persuade the creative lunatics to give up their pursuit of awards, I would die happy. In a survey Ogilvy & Mather recently conducted in several countries, we asked manufacturers what function they want their advertising to perform. The large majority told us that they want us to increase their sales.

"If you spend your advertising budget entertaining the consumer, you are a bloody fool. Housewives don't buy a new detergent because the manufacturer told a joke on television last night They buy it because it promised a benefit.

When I write an ad, I don't want you to tell me you find it "creative." I want you to find it so persuasive that you likely buy the product -- or likely buy it more often." (p. 2)

Business will continue to slight the capabilities of design as a marketing tool until designers can demonstrate the power of design. This requires knowledge of the language, methods and processes of marketing, and the ideal place to acquire the foundations of this knowledge is in school. As for designers, if they wish to be involved in the "role of helping businesses to strategically position themselves for the future" (Coyne, 1992, p. 18), then it is absolutely necessary that they make the effort to gain understanding and appreciation for the role that business plays in design.

Two articles provide insight to the direction design management must take to establish its professional value, and they appear to be especially pertinent in light of the results of this study. The first article is Peter Gorb's (1976) "Opening shots in the Design Management Campaign." Sixteen years ago Gorb listed requirements for design management to be accepted as an academic discipline:

1. Using quantitative skills, work is needed in the development of new planning-models involving the quantification of the spheres of influence on the product of appropriate and predefined management functions.

2. Using mainly design skills, work is needed to develop matrices of the same management functions as a skeleton of the product plan.

3. Work is needed, in the behavioral sciences, to assess the cultural time lag in influencing product development and the conflicting cultural resources which modify that development

4. An assessment is needed of the weight given to creativity and related values in management decision-making about products. (Gorb, 1976, p. 41)

Finally, Gorb (1976) concludes, "the proof of the research pudding will be in publication" (p. 41). Design management, if it is to succeed as an accepted area of management, must produce research that validates its existence to those outside of design. To this point, design has largely been "preaching to the choir." As with the marketing concept, which was introduced about 30 years ago in Levitt's "Marketing Myopia," and which many companies have yet to adopt, neither has design education listened to its innovators and developed a design management curriculum.

The second article is Leonard Silk's ''What America Needs is a New, Improved MBA." (1989). In this article, Silk recounts that he was hired at one time by the Committee for Economic Development to synthesize and review the findings of the Ford and Carnegie reports (the two reports that were the catalysts for the dramatic overhaul of the business curriculum in the U.S. in the late 1950s), and at the time he noted four generally accepted criteria for defining a profession:

1. That it rest upon a systematic body of knowledge and on the develop­ment of personal skills in the application of that knowledge to specific cases.
2. That it set up standards of professional conduct that take precedence over the goal of personal gain.
3. That it have an association of members whose functions include the enforcement of professional standards and the advancement and dissemination of knowledge.
4. And that it prescribe ways, controlled in some degree by the members of the professional association, of entering the profession by meeting certain minimum standards of training and competence. (p. 10)

Some feel that business schools have proceeded too far in pursuit of these goals.

Stanford business school professor Harold L. Leavitt says, "We have built a weird, almost unimaginable design for MBA-level education. We then lay it upon well-proportioned young men and women, distorting them (when we are unlucky enough to succeed) into critters with lopsided brains, icy hearts, and shrunken souls. (Silk, 1989, p. 9)

Although business schools are being harshly criticized today by even their own leaders for adhering too closely to the above guidelines, the state of business education at the time these reports were issued was characterized by low academic standards, low admission requirements, and low-caliber students (Silk, 1989, p. 9). Adherence to the above four criteria has helped to transform business into a respectable, and respected, discipline. And although business may have gone too far in pursuing these criteria (as judged by its critics), the design field could use a push in this direction. In this same article, Silk quotes Professor Abraham Zaleznik of the Harvard Business School as saying, "Business is an art, and it is based on a person's gifts and talents. Fortunately, people have different qualities, and once they discover these talents, they should do their best to bring them to bear at work. This has been the problem with business schools - including my own. They don't understand that business is a talent." (Silk, 1989, p. 9)

Design as a discipline has the advantage of already realizing that it is a talent-
based field - an art. It shouldn't have to worry about going overboard in pursuit of "professional" status to the extent that has caused problems for business schools.
For the future, by developing the "academic" side of the design discipline, it then becomes possible for designers and marketers to share a common culture as an alternative to the traditional divide (Callaway, 1990). Design schools that are part of larger liberal-­arts institutions may have an advantage in this area in the future because of their long­standing academic and research traditions.

A call has been made for design schools to standardize their curricula and establish standards for accreditation (de Forest, 1989; Wefler & Associates, No. 27). This would need to be accompanied by identifying common management elements within the various design disciplines and defining course areas and requirements. Leaders of design as an academic discipline, as well as practitioners, need to work to develop quantitative design decision models. Some evidence that the field is beginning to pursue these goals is provided by Patrick Whitney, director of the Institute of Design (Kent, 1992) and Larry Keeley (1992), who are both working on developing formal theories, methods, processes and models to solve design problems.

As business education prepares to swing back from its extreme position, design must be prepared to meet it halfway, enabling management students to understand the critical role of design and enabling design students to see the potential role of the designer in corporate strategy. A partnership can be forged for the benefit of everyone. 

References

Alba, J. W., & Hutchinson, W. J. (1987, March). Dimensions of consumer expertise. Journal of Consumer Research. 13, 411-454.
Archer, B. (1976, November). In search of an academic identity. Design (335), 42-43.
Art Center College of Design (1990) Art Center College of Design Bulletin. Pasadena, CA: Art Center College of Design.
Bayley, S. (1985). Introduction. In T. Conran, The Conran Directory of Design (p. 8), S. Bayley (Ed). New York: Villard Books.
Behrman, J. N., & Levin, R. I. (1984). Are business schools doing their jobs? Harvard Business Review, pp. 140-145.
Blackwell, R. D. (1981, Spring). The preparation of future marketing managers. Journal of Marketing Education, pp. 4-9.
Blackwell, R. D. (1987). Integrated marketing communications. In G. L Frazier and J. N. Sheth (Eds.), Contemporary views on marketing practice (22), 237-250. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
Borja de Mozota, B. (1990). Design as a strategic management tool In M Oakley, B. Borja de Mozota, & C. Clipson (Eds.), Design management (pp. 73-84). Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell, Inc.
Bowles, J., & Hammond, J. (1991). Beyond quality: How 50 winning companies use continuous improvement New York: GP. Putnam's Sons.
Brown, D. R. (1990) President's Letter. Art Center College of Design Bulletin. Pasadena, CA: Art Center College of Design.
Burke, M. C., & Edell, J. A. (1989, February). The impact of feelings on ad-based affect and cognition. Journal of Marketing Research. 26, 69-83.

Callaway, W. (1990). New directions in design management education. In M. Oakley, B. Borja de Mozota & Colin Clipson (Eds.). Design Management (pp. 414-422). Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell, Inc.
Caplan, R (1982a). By design. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.
Caplan, R (1982b, March/April). Design as strategy: As assessment for business. Industrial Design, pp. 31-35.
Clipson, C. (1990a). Design as a business strategy. In M. Oakley, B. Borja de Mozota, & C. Clipson (Eds.), Design management (pp. 96-105). Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell, Inc.
Clipson, C. (l990b). First things first: a business and design educational experiment at the University of Michigan. Journal of Product Innovation Management. 7, 135-141.
Cox, D. S., & Locander, W. B. (1987). Product novelty: Does it moderate the relationship between ad attitudes and brand attitudes? Journal of Advertising. 16(3), 39-44.
Coyne, P. (1992, May/June). Editor's column. Communication Arts, p. 18.
Cranbrook Academy of Art (1992). Cranbrook Academy of Art Graduate Studies Bulletin. Bloomfield Hills, MI: Cranbrook Academy of Art.
Czepiel, J. A. (1992). Competitive marketing strategy. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice­Hall, Inc.
Deegan, J. R (1984, Fall). Product introduction process: A uniquely different method of teaching marketing principles. Journal of Marketing Education. pp. 25-28.
de Forest, A. (1986, Sept/Oct.). Design schools. Industrial Design. pp. 14-19.
de Forest, A. (1989, Sept/Oct). The educated eye. Industrial Design. pp. 42-52.
de Forest, A. (1990, Sept/Oct.). Drs. of design. Industrial Design. pp. 45-47.

Design management: In search of an agenda. (1982, September). Design (405), 39-41.
Dichter, E. (1975). Packaging: the sixth sense? Boston, MA: Cahners Books.
Dickson, P. R, & Ginter, J. L. (1987, April). Market segmentation, product differentiation, and marketing strategy. Journal of Marketing, 51, 1-10.
Doody, A. E, & Bingaman, R (1988). Reinventing: the wheels: Ford's spectacular comeback. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger Publishing Company.
Dumaine, B. (1991, March 11.) Design that sells and sells and.... Fortune. pp. 86-94.
Engel, J. E, Blackwell, RD., & Miniard, P. W. (1986). Consumer behavior (5th ed.). Chicago, IL: The Dryden Press.
Fulton, J.F. (1990, Jan./Feb.). Publisher's note. Industrial Design, p. 5.
Gardner, M. P. (1985, May). Does attitude toward the ad affect brand attitude under a brand evaluation set? Journal of Marketing: Research, 22, 192-198.
Gitlow, R S., & Gitlow, S. J. (1987). The Deming guide to quality and competitive position. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Gorb, P. (1976, November). Opening shots in the design management campaign. Design, (335), 40-41.
Gorb, P. (1978). Introduction: Using design. In Pentagram design partnership, Living by design. London: Lund Humphries Publishers.
Gorb, P. (1982, May/June). Design is one of the most important resources at a manager's disposal. Industrial Design, pp. 38-41.
Gorb, P. (1986, April). The business of design management Design Studies, 7(2), 106­110.

Gorb, P. (1990). The future of design and its management. In M. Oakley, B. Borja de Mozota, & C. Clipson (Eds.), Design management (pp. 15-25). Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell, Inc.
Gorb, P., & Dumas, A. (1987, July). Silent design. Design Studies, 8(3), 150-156.
Graham, J. W. (1979, May/June). Business must use design to satisfy changing consumer values. Industrial Design pp. 52-54.
Graham, J. W. (1980, March/April). The design manager is ascendant; design heroes need not apply. Industrial Design. pp. 39-41.
Harvard Business School (1992). MBA Program. Boston, MA: Harvard University Graduate School of Business Administration.
Hauser, J.R, & Clausing, D. (1988, May/June). The house of quality. Harvard Business Review, 66(3), 63-73.
Hawken, P. (1983). The next economy. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Hollins, B., & Pugh, S. (1990). Successful product design London: Butterworth & Co.
Illinois Institute of Technology (1990). Undergraduate Programs. Chicago, IL: Illinois Institute of Technology.
Illinois Institute of Technology (1991). Graduate Programs. Chicago, IL: Illinois Institute of Technology.
Jacobson, R, & Aaker, D. A. (1987, October). The strategic role of product quality. Journal of Marketing, 51, 31-44.
Jacoby, J., & Olson, J. C. (Eds.). (1985). Perceived quality. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

Janiszewski, C. (1990, August). The influence of nonattended material on the processing of advertising claims. Journal of Marketing Research, 27, 263-278.
Keeley, L. (1992, May/June). The strategic palette. Communication Arts, pp. 134-139.
Kellogg Graduate School of Management (1991). Full-time programs: Master of Management, Master of Management in Manufacturing. Evanston, IL: 1.L. Kellogg Graduate School of Management, Northwestern University.
Kent, C. (1992). Designing the Future. Institute of Design. Chicago, IL: Institute of Design, Illinois Institute of Technology.
Kotler, P. (1991). Marketing management: Analysis, planning, implementation and control (7th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Kotler, P., & Rath, G. A. (1984, Fall). Design: A powerful but neglected strategic tool. Journal of Business Strategy. 5(2), 16-21.
Lawless, M W., & Fisher, R. J. (1990). Sources of durable competitive advantage in new products. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 7, 35-44.
Levitt, T. (1975). Marketing myopia. Harvard business review on Management. New York: Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc.
Levitt, T. (1980, Jan./Feb.). Marketing success through differentiation -- of anything. Harvard Business Review, 58(1), 83-91.
Levitt, T. (1981, May/June). Marketing intangible products and product intangibles. Harvard Business Review, 59(3), 94-102.
Lorenz, C. (1986). The design dimension: The new competitive weapon for business. New York: Basil Blackwell Inc.
Lorenz, C. (1990). How Ford broke the Detroit Mould. In M. Oakley, B. Borja de Mozota, & C. Clipson (Eds.), Design management (pp. 136-144). Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell, Inc.

McDaniel, S. W., & Rise, R. T. (1984a, Summer). Shaping the marketing curriculum: The CEO perspective. Journal of Marketing Education, pp. 27-32.
McDaniel, S. W., & Hise, R. T. (1984b, Fall). The marketing curriculum: A decade of change. Journal of Marketing Education, pp. 2-8.
McKenna, R. (1988, Sept/Oct). Marketing in an age of diversity. Harvard Business Review, 66(5), 88-95.
McKenna, R. (1991, Jan./Feb.). Marketing is everything. Harvard Business Review, 69(1), 65-79.
Main, J. (1989, July 17). B-schools get a global vision. Fortune. pp. 78-86.
Miller, E. (1988). Barron's guide to graduate business schools (6th ed.). New York: Barron's Educational Series, Inc.
Miniard, P. W., Bhatia, S., & Rose, R. L. (1990, August). On the formation and relationship of ad and brand attitudes: An experimental and causal analysis. Journal of Marketing Research, 27, 290-303.
Mitchell, A. A., & Olson, L. C. (1981, August). Are product attribute beliefs the only mediator of advertising effects on brand attitudes? Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 318-331.
Mitchell, A. A. (1986, June). The effect of verbal and visual components of advertisements on brand attitudes and attitude toward the advertisement Journal of Consumer Research, 13, 12-24.
Moriarty, S. E. (in press). Visual communication: The international bridge? Journal of Visual literacy.
Oakley, M. (1990). Design and design management In M. Oakley, B. Borja de Mozota, & C. Clipson (Eds.), Design management (pp. 3-14). Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell, Inc.

Ogilvy, D. (1992, Summer). We Sell Or Else. The Advertiser. (3), 2, 24-25.
Olins, W. (1985, February). Management by design. Management Today, pp. 62-69.
Olins, W. (1989). Corporate identity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
O'Toole, J. (1980, May). What we know about creative management -- and why it's not so. Design Firm Management. (2), 1-6.
Park, C. W., Jaworski, B. J., & MacInnis, D. J. (1986, October). Strategic brand concept-­image management Journal of Marketing, 50, 135-145.
Peters, T. J., & Waterman, R. H., Jr. (1982). In search of excellence. New York: Harper & Row Publishers, Inc.
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1981). Attitudes and persuasion: Classic and contemporary approaches. Dubuque, IA: William C. Brown.
Powell, E. (1987, Nov./Dec.). On the road again. Industrial Design, pp. 66-69.
Pratt Institute (1991). The Pratt Institute Bulletin: Undergraduate and graduate Programs. New York: The Pratt Institute.
Pride, W.M., & Ferrell, O. C. (1983). Marketing: Basic concepts and decisions (3rd ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Schwartz, T. (1973). The responsive chord. Garden City, NY: Anchor Books.
Scott, L. M. (1990). Toward visual rhetoric. Paper presented at the 1990 American Academy of Advertising Conference, Orlando, Florida.
Shimp, T. A. (1981. Attitude toward the ad as a mediator of consumer brand choice. Journal of Advertising, 10(2), 9-15.

Shimp, T. A., & Gresham, L. G. (1983). A perspective on advertising literature. In J. H. Leigh & C.R. Martin (Eds.), Current issues and research in advertising (pp. 39­76). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Graduate School of Business Administration.
Silk, L. (1989, September). What America needs is a new, improved MBA. Business Month, pp. 9-11.
Stanford Graduate School of Business (1992). The MBA Program. Fall 1993. Stanford, CA: The Graduate School of Business at Stanford University.
Stanton, W. J. (1988, Summer). It's time to restructure marketing in academia. Journal of Marketing Education. pp. 2-7.
Swan, 1. E., & Combs, L. J. (1976, April). Product performance and consumer satisfaction: A new concept Journal of Marketing, pp. 25-33.
Tinsley, D. B. (1981, Spring). Marketing courses required for marketing majors. Journal of Marketing Education, pp. 10-14.
Thorson, E. (1983). Consumer processing of advertising. In J. H. Leigh & C. R. Martin, Jr. (Eds.), Current issues and research in advertising (pp. 197-230). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Graduate School of Business Administration.
Trout, J., & Ries, A. (1972). The Positioning Era. New York: Ries Cappiello Colwell (reprint from Advertising Age, 1972, April 24, May 1, May 8).
Townsend, P. L., with Gebhardt, J. E. (1990). Commit to Quality. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Urban, G. L., & Hauser, J. R. (1980). Design and marketing of new products. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Urban, G. L., & Star, S. H. (1991). Advanced marketing strategy: Phenomena, analysis and decisions. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Walker, D. (1990). Managers and designers: Two tribes at war? In M. Oakley, B. Borja de Mozota, & C. Clipson (Eds.), Design management (pp. 145-154). Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell, Inc.
Wefler & Associates, Inc. (1980a, April). A credo for the future. Design Firm Manage­ment (1), 1-4.
Wefler & Associates, Inc. (1980b, September). Rating the top design schools. Design Firm Management (5), 2-4.
Wefler & Associates, Inc. What's wrong with design education? Design Firm Management (27), 1-10.
Wharton School (1992). MBA Program Philadelphia, PA: The Wharton School, Univer­sity of Pennsylvania
White, C. C. R. (1989, April 21). Parsons' new program: Numbers with creativity.
Women's Wear Daily, 157(78), 16.
Zikmund, W. G. (1991). Exploring marketing research (4th ed.). Chicago, IL: The Dryden Press.