Quality vs. Quantity

There is a major loss of quality in design and execution when mass-producing products. It is accepted that image and affordability is more an important than quality. We as designers and consumers need to support skilled crafts persons and local producers over cheep labor and outsourced production. During this time of increased environmental concern, we need to make environmentally sound decisions and have conscious design principles. Using the cheapest materials and conforming to purely low-end market driven design cannot accomplish this. We need to educate consumers about the benefits of long-term investment instead of couture content with disposable furniture.
As RISD students go through classes in wood, metal and other materials, learning the best way to produce our designs, we are encouraged to design in ways that best suit the material. It is of great importance that we support the art of craftsmanship and skilled work. The current era of economies supports more mass-produced items made by unskilled laborers and outsourced origins. RISD requires that students design work through maximizing the skill acquired at school. When building a chair, is it better to design it in a manner that utilizes techniques and practices (like mortis and tenon joints, or welding vs. nuts and bolts) that produce a stronger more durable product at a higher cost? I would say yes, I also think that one could make conscious design solutions that produce simple yet elegant products that meet the quality of much costlier existing designs.
Right now in 2008 we in the midst of rising oil costs and a global environment in decline. The next generation of designers must take steps to reduce the waste we produce. By moving production back to our country we will decrease use of oil by not having to ship raw materials to china and then the finished product back to us. Also, designing our projects using materials that are local to the builder will decrease the costs of transportation. Most inexpensive furniture utilizes particleboard, which is made with formaldehyde and other caustic adhesives. These bonding agents emit VOCs during application and cannot be recycled after the products life span is over. I believe that it is possible to build inexpensive and environmentally responsible furniture with solid wood or plywood. By buying domestic materials like lumber, environmental impact via use of fuel can be reduced. America uses some of the best practices of obtaining and harvesting lumber in the world. For example, Red Oak or Ash is a local hard wood that is very strong and durable. If one of these woods were used to build a chair instead of say Mahogany, which does not grow in America and is not as strong, the production cost could be lower. Less material is used to produce a chair of equal strength and the consumer is not supporting poor harvesting practices used in other countries.
Another consideration for reducing impact on the environment includes the life of the product. Furniture made from particleboard and/or from a bad design will have a much shorter lifespan compared to solid wood. Even taking into account the greater upfront cost of a well-designed product, over the course of a lifetime it will be less expensive and less wasteful to buy one superior chair instead of 5 inferior ones.
Designers are the ones generating the market trends. They need to direct the market towards products that are better designed. We should introduce designs that maximize the use of material. There is an idea of quality that came from the past that is connected to wood. Old furniture has quality built into it because of the fact that it is solid wood and the existing technologies would not allow for shortcuts. That is the reason that there is furniture lasts for over a 100 years. This is true of both the expensive furniture and the lower quality furniture from the same time. Using materials that are wood composites, (particleboard) to act like wood is a poor design choice to just save a few bucks. Currently lots of modern furniture is made from particleboard with wood veneers or even faux wood veneers. By using a look that is ingrained in our history there is a perceived quality that is not there. This is an entirely irresponsible practice. Designers need to be true to the product and process and create honest designs. Use solid wood when applicable
The reason that the price of a well-designed chair costs more than inexpensive chairs is that there is a lot of time spent designing it for proper fit and function. Look at the Aeron office chair for example it costs about one thousand dollars, but is designed to support the body in a way to limit fatigue at an office desk. The ergonomic chair position minimizes discomfort for the person sitting in it, compared to a Staples office chair for $150. As a business owner it could be more economical to spent $20,000 to outfit and medium sized office with Aeron chairs then $2000 for cheep office furniture. Yes there is a large up front cost, but because it was so well designed, the employer will save money over the long run. Spending the money for better office furniture is a good investment in an office environment. The chairs will hold up better through the daily abuse for years to come, and could increase productivity because the employee is more comfortable in their work environment. Also Spending 40 hours a week 50 weeks of the year in a poorly designed chair could promote back and body pain ultimately costing the employer money for medical treatment and time lost from work.
What it all comes down to is that designers need to produce designs that are honest and pure. Augmenting weak manufactured materials for strong materials that will last a lifetime. This will inherently begin for a better design. Consumers need to see the difference between products that are quickly produced to fill shelves and one where time was spent to develop and deliver the best product. Picking the right materials can offset the higher cost of quality design, the real offset is that better designed product will provide a lifetime of enjoyment.