A corollary to this is that the longer you work on something the more emotionally attached you become to it.

Ryan – great thought. I think the answer is not to detach your emotions from your designs but to make sure you’re emotions are invested in solving the problem, rather than just making something look really good. Flexibility and openness flow naturally out of that.

So true. Been there so many times before, and not only about design, but about brands, about hierarchy, about any change.

Becoming flexible is one of the hardest and, at the same time, most important things to do. And it’s so hard, probably, because changing yourself in order to start accepting change is kind of paradoxal.

I think it helps to work on one thing for a while, and then switch to another. Don’t multi-task. Focus on each exclusively. When you return to the first problem, perhaps you’ve lost some of that emotional investment and can evaluate your choices objectively.

@Ryan – hit a nerve here. I’ve been designing software in financial services for 20+ years, but I have a degree in fine art from Pratt Institute. In art school, you create new pieces every week, put them up for criticism, and the other students tear them to pieces (not physically!). It is brutal; fewer than half the students stay. By the time you graduate from a good art school you are basically cured from the “falling in love” problem. Why? Because you’ve fallen in love with so many works that you ultimately realized were not great. Your fellow students forced you to see the truth. As a result of this relentless assault you do two things: 1) you focus on doing great work, and 2), you evolve a separation mechanism, that is you come to realize, at a deep level, that “my art is NOT me,” no the quality of this particular piece is not an absolute reflection on my talent. Interestingly, high praise is often more deadly than negative criticism because the ingénue artist believes it must be true and for all time, when in fact the praise was for an object, not a self. Good art schools drive the student relentlessly to separate the object from the effort – it’s the only way you can survive! The critical reception you realize is about the work, not you the artist. You develop a kind of double-mind, where you are totally invested in the object, but criticism of that object is not hurtful because once the object exists, it is beyond you. Many business people get to experience the results of this training when they work with top flight advertising agencies. The business people often hesitate to express their feeling about the work – in fear of relationship repercussions – or they do the opposite, they take their negative reactions to a work personally – whereas the top-flight advertising and graphic professionals absolutely do not. The same effect can be observed in the industrial design profession: professional industrial designers have this same professionalism, yet detachment about the ‘object,’ as great graphic designers and artists. So yes, “You can’t improve a design when you’re emotionally attached to past decisions. Improvements come from flexibility and openness.” Your post made my day. Best, E

Really? Maybe you folks should revisit Basecamp.

Emotional aspect in designing process is too much complicated. I do suffer when creating new design project and this suffering usually reflects in 3-4 different concepts. So flexibility is guaranteed.

Also I am never satisfied with my old works, never. It is a natural boost, don’t you think?

I’d better say that designers are like children while growing, they always argue, search new ways, make their own mistakes.

You do know that teenagers’ emotional attachment is fast passing – new idols, new lovers, no connection to places or things. What can be better for max flexibility and openness .