I was reading an interesting article about design (here, through DesignDroplets). Should we be more critical about what we make? Where we set the bar, scutinize our level of competence? Interesting stuff. Mostly it's about the usefulness of Design and its merit in the world. Hm. I can see where the writer John Barratt is getting at. We can certainly muddle along and 'just do our thing' but to compare and understand our evolutionary growth you need a benchmarker to set it off to. The hilarious thing to me is that the purpose of Design is questioned and whether innovation is usefull? Oh oh. It's like saying to an overexcited toddler: no you can't run before you learn you can't run everywhere. See what I mean?
So too is the life of the wee lambs. They just get up and rush around. They might lose their mum in the process. Ofcourse monitoring and understanding is valuable. When do we know if design actually progresses in a span of a few years? Still, let the benchmark not become a governmental guideline to stop designers going forward as innovation depends hugely on the opinion and results of the one carying out the study. Design becomes excellent by thinking outside the box. It may be far harder to determine what the rules will be to judge design, then to just observe it's evolution.