Abstract
Design culture has proliferated aspirational value frameworks, from manifestos championing social justice to ethics toolkits, yet lacks meaningful accountability infrastructure when values are violated or conflict. This paper examines a transgressive design research intervention: a mobile confessional booth at a city Design Week in 2025 that invited designers to anonymously confess professional compromises and ethical failures. The 125 confessions revealed patterns of deflection (blaming systems over individual agency), superficiality (focusing on technical mistakes rather than methodological rigour leading to ethical violations), and conspicuous absence of admissions regarding exploitation, greenwashing, or designing harm. Unlike medicine, law, or journalism, design has implemented no meaningful ethical infrastructure, defaulting instead to personal intra-structuring of consequences for harmful or negligent practice. This structural gap means values remain aspirational rhetoric or private guilt, unable to be metabolised collectively. The paper argues value accountability requires bottom-up infrastructure to surface, negotiate, and reckon with complicity in design practice.
Keywords
Design accountability, Value reflexivity, Deontological design ethics, Complicity, Value logics
DOI
https://doi.org/10.21606/drs.2026.944
Citation
Dunbar, M., Fennessy, L., and Speed, C. (2026) What Can't Be Confessed: The Structural Absence of Value Accountability in Design Culture, in Simeone, L., Gray, C. M., Verhoeven, A., de Götzen, A., Bakırlıoğlu, Y., Zohar, H., Stead, M., and Buwert, P. (eds.), DRS2026: Edinburgh, 8–12 June, Edinburgh, United Kingdom. https://doi.org/10.21606/drs.2026.944
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
Included in
What Can't Be Confessed: The Structural Absence of Value Accountability in Design Culture
Design culture has proliferated aspirational value frameworks, from manifestos championing social justice to ethics toolkits, yet lacks meaningful accountability infrastructure when values are violated or conflict. This paper examines a transgressive design research intervention: a mobile confessional booth at a city Design Week in 2025 that invited designers to anonymously confess professional compromises and ethical failures. The 125 confessions revealed patterns of deflection (blaming systems over individual agency), superficiality (focusing on technical mistakes rather than methodological rigour leading to ethical violations), and conspicuous absence of admissions regarding exploitation, greenwashing, or designing harm. Unlike medicine, law, or journalism, design has implemented no meaningful ethical infrastructure, defaulting instead to personal intra-structuring of consequences for harmful or negligent practice. This structural gap means values remain aspirational rhetoric or private guilt, unable to be metabolised collectively. The paper argues value accountability requires bottom-up infrastructure to surface, negotiate, and reckon with complicity in design practice.