What Designers Want from AI

Designers are moving past initial fears of AI, now envisioning it as a trusted “thought partner” that handles mundane tasks. They emphasize that AI must enhance human creativity and preserve the essential elements of the design process, not replace them.

The initial shockwaves from generative artificial intelligence have, for many, begun to recede, giving way to a more pragmatic, albeit still cautious, assessment of its role in the creative industries.

What began as a widespread fear of job displacement and a looming content apocalypse is evolving into a complex dialogue about partnership, augmentation, and the very definition of human creativity.

The question is no longer if AI will be integrated, but how – and crucially, what tasks it should truly be entrusted with.

As tech companies relentlessly push AI as the panacea for every productivity ill, a chasm often persists between ambitious implementation, tangible return on investment, and, most importantly, genuine human buy-in.

It is in this fertile ground of uncertainty and potential that Fast Company recently posed a vital question to nine prominent designers: In a perfect world, what capabilities would you truly desire from AI?

Their collective responses offer a compelling roadmap, not just for the future of design, but for any creative field grappling with this transformative technology.

A recurring theme among these seasoned professionals is the longing for AI to transcend its current role as a mere task-runner and evolve into a genuine “thought partner.”
AI in the creative industries

Sara Vienna, chief design officer at MetaLab, articulated this aspiration, stating, “Everyone says they want AI to take away the busywork, and of course I agree.

But I want to push it further. I wish AI could act less like a task runner and more like a thought partner – a thought partner that I actually trust with context and nuance.”

This vision speaks to a desire for an AI that can not only execute instructions but also engage in a sophisticated dialogue, understanding the subtle intricacies of a creative brief, offering alternative perspectives, and even challenging assumptions – much like a human collaborator.

It’s a far cry from the current iteration of tools often perceived as blunt instruments, capable of rapid generation but lacking the intuitive grasp of human intent.

The allure of eliminating mundanity, however, remains potent.

Brian Collins, cofounder of Collins, vividly captured the sentiment of generations of designers, declaring, “The dream, the way I saw it, was never to sit in front of a drafting table for three days adjusting kerning by hand.

That wasn’t noble. That was carpal tunnel.”

This resonates deeply. The promise of AI alleviating the repetitive, soul-crushing tasks that often accompany creative work – the endless iterations, the meticulous adjustments, the sheer administrative burden – is undeniably attractive.

Imagine a world where the drudgery of pixel-pushing or font-spacing is outsourced to an unerring algorithm, freeing human minds for the conceptual leaps and emotional resonance that truly define art.

Yet, this utopian vision comes with a crucial caveat, eloquently voiced by Giorgia Lupi, a partner at Pentagram.

While embracing the potential for AI to reduce tedious labor and accelerate idea testing, Lupi warned of a “slippery slope.”

The risk, she contended, is that by relinquishing too much control, creatives might inadvertently produce a “sludge of boring content.” AI can enhance creativity but has limits.

Her “blue-sky scenario” for AI is one that “does not erase the important moments of frustration, collaboration, redirection, and happy accidents in the design process, as that is ultimately what brings the language of design to life.”

This is the crux of the matter: the human experience of struggle, serendipity, and collaborative friction is not merely an inefficiency to be optimized away; it is often the crucible in which genuine innovation and unique perspectives are forged.

Across the board, the unifying thread in these designers’ responses is a clear mandate: AI must enhance and support human creativity, not replace it.

This isn’t surprising – no one willingly cedes their livelihood to a machine.

What is noteworthy, however, is the almost complete absence of open hostility or outright resistance to AI’s growing influence.

The era of denial, it seems, has passed.

In its stead, a new chapter has begun, characterized by active engagement, experimentation, and a collective determination to steer the technology towards human-centric outcomes.

The diversity of these visions also underscores a critical insight: there is no one-size-fits-all solution for AI integration.

Imposing a top-down, standardized approach is proving to be a significant impediment to achieving meaningful ROI in many businesses.

Instead, the most harmonious and productive human-AI relationships are being built on foundations of experimentation, open-mindedness, and a deep respect for individual working styles.

This decentralised, adaptive approach acknowledges that creativity, by its very nature, resists rigid systematization.

And occasionally, the ideal AI might even offer a touch of unexpected, humanistic support.

One designer mused, “I’d appreciate it more if [AI] served me a sandwich every so often when I forget to eat, or if perhaps it could remove me from my chair when I’ve sat for too long to encourage me to go enjoy the weather instead.”

While whimsical, this sentiment speaks to a desire for AI that truly understands and cares for its human counterparts, extending beyond mere task completion to foster well-being.

The path forward for AI in creative fields remains largely uncharted, a process of trial and error reminiscent of any truly disruptive invention.

Just as the personal radio democratized information but also enabled new forms of propaganda, AI presents both boundless possibilities and profound risks.

To build a world where AI genuinely serves, rather than silences, humanity, it is imperative that the public conversation is not solely dictated by the tech companies, beholden primarily to shareholders, but is actively guided by the voices and experiences of the people whose lives and livelihoods are most profoundly affected.

The designers’ insights offer a vital starting point for this essential dialogue, reminding us that the future of creativity, augmented by AI, must ultimately remain deeply, irreducibly human.