Can Design Solve Everything?

When I started this blog, I said its purpose was primarily to help me sort out my own thoughts and experiences with UX design.  This post is one where I'm truly torn between idealistic and a practical ways of thinking about the scope of design. Let me apologize in advance if this post seems a tad negative.   

One extreme says: everything is designed. Design, therefore, can solve most problems.  Certainly, people like Tim Brown espouse this broad and idealistic position. "Design thinking", they might say, broadens the breadth of design's scope will solve the big problems the world faces. I agree with this. I'm not sure how one could disagree. 

One the other hand, most UX designers today face hard deadlines; incomplete or nonexistent requirements and user input; restricted budgets; political infighting between various disciplines on development teams; responsibility for design without ownership of design; or a development environment where application of lipstick to a fete de complete bulldog is all that can be realistically accomplished. Is it your job as a UX designer to redesign the business, requirements, and development processes?

I don't mean to set up a false dichotomy here. Broader design thinking is the obvious evolution of the design discipline. But what does the lowly UX designer do while we await the required epiphanies in our organizations? A few thoughts:

• Document design and process trade offs you're making and ensure the stakeholder understand the trade offs being made and why.
• Document design assumptions when there's no user data to back up your hunches. State the potential consequences to the user and the bottom line.
• Educate the stakeholders. Lobby for improving processes outside your realm of responsibility by sharing easily understood and implemented ideas.

I'm sure there's more we can do. I'd love to hear about your approaches.