There was a time when developing a product focused solely on solving problems.
Inventors, product developers, and designers always came together to ensure their creativity was all about addressing real human needs. And at this point, product development meant more filling a gap and a strategy for virality.
Along the way, and as priorities in the market shifted to visual appeal, companies, especially in the beauty market, have been in an endless competition about “who will have the better presentation,” completely abandoning purpose and market gaps in the process.
And we can officially say that now, aesthetics is most markets’ top priority, and a good product can be measured by social shares rather than sustained value
The Rise of the Visual Economy
The standard product development cycle, which we were all familiar with, always begins with two main pillars: developing the idea and validating the idea. And this was until the visual economy came into the picture.
Visual economy is the idea of focusing on visual imagery and identity to highlight a product, rather than focusing on functionality. In simpler terms, it is the way of “show first, then tell.” Although this term has been around for much longer than we can think of, it recently rose to fame.
Combined with the over-consuming nature and state of the market, it’s hard to ignore the visual dominance. Although aesthetic-driven demand isn’t entirely negative, as it captures attention, builds, and fuels brand loyalty. But when the aesthetic becomes the product itself, we lose the foundation of meaningful creation.
The Illusion of The Mirror Self World
The “mirror-self” product concept originated from the psychological idea of the mirror-self world, which suggests there is a reality where perception often matters more than core. Everything reflects a specifically curated image rather than an authentic one.
Based on this, the concepts of the mirror-self products appeared, where products and brands are constantly reshaping themselves to satisfy the reflection, not building a connection.
Rhode
Rhode, the brand setting benchmarks in the beauty market, has applied this constantly to their products, leaving people to suggest that it is the only reason why they are successful.
Take the Rhode lip case as an example. A complementary product that has only one function: to hold a lip gloss so that it can look better in a picture. Although this could only be a good idea if purses and bags were not a thing, it took the world by storm, selling millions and becoming the brand’s top-selling.
Labubu
Let us not forget about labubus, small dolls that people couldn’t get enough of. Do they matter? No. Do they address a certain problem? Also, no, but they are good in pictures. However, they were able to generate $1.81 billion in revenue in only one year.
Stanley
A while ago, feeds were flooded with pictures of people holding their Stanley, which is a cup. Although the product is well-designed, it has no purpose other than getting filled with whatever drink, which is not a gap to fill by any means. But, again, it looks good in pictures.
The Call to Meaningful Products
Design was once a tool to enhance the usability of a product, not the other way around. And while stunning visuals can create emotional connection, they can also create an illusion where a product’s worth is tied to how it looks rather than what it does.
To develop and create a product should mean more than to “produce.” It should mean to solve, to connect.
As marketers, the call is clear: shift the question. Don’t start with, “What will this look like on a shelf or a screen?” Instead, ask, “What problem will this solve? How will it make life better?”
The next move for marketing and product development needn’t be about making things prettier but about making them matter again. Consumers shouldn’t buy just to belong but to use.
