During several years working in the advertising market, I had contact with different types of companies, clients, and creative professionals. In this creative environment, it is common to resort to external references to the work to justify its delivery and even the company’s mission and values. The most common when we talk about design is the famous German school that defined new architectural parameters and influenced design in many ways: Bauhaus. As a valid reference for everything related to aesthetics and design, Bauhaus should be utilized more as a fundamental reference for working methods, company missions, and the individual development of each professional. It remains current and has much more to offer than just aesthetic refinement.

In its conception by Walter Gropius, Bauhaus advocated that the new school and the new teaching method should focus on developing students’ skills in Form, Construction/Execution, economic effects (costs), and the social purpose (the environment in which it would be inserted). As early as 1919, Gropius advocated for an end to the isolation of the creative process, which generated arrogance and distance from society. This isolation that Gropius mentions is not very different from what we see behind notebook screens and leads us to a lack of connection with our surrounding community, losing the sense and meaning of economic and business aspects. Inevitably leading us to an essentially sterile design.

As Gropius reminds us, all design must be part of our world-environment, our society. Moving out of isolation, from behind the notebook screen, and seeking teamwork (and with teams of different specialties than yours) is the only way to achieve this purpose. Only teamwork allows for mutual criticism, prevents sensationalist outbursts, and, ultimately, also teaches us to live in society.

The changes proposed by Walter Gropius were intended to begin in education, breaking paradigms of the schools of the time (and still used by many). This change would start with the union of theory and collaborative practical experience. Theoretical teaching would cease to be isolated and overvalued, as this method only allows people to reinterpret historical references. The union of arts (theory) and crafts (collaborative practical experience) allows for the active involvement of a solid theoretical basis with the day-to-day life of the society we are part of. Observing human interactions with one’s work daily makes it possible to seek new solutions and discoveries. Making new discoveries is the genuine path to innovation, abandoning once and for all the reinterpretation of historical visions.

Still, in the fight against isolation, there was a proposal for concentric (with the human being at the central point) and continuous teaching. This model is a counterpoint to the teaching of isolated subjects/skills separated in time, which we still have today in many schools and companies. With the concentric model, skills are developed globally, and the depth and intensity gradually increase over time. The main objective of this method is to offer a general overview of the entire process to complete a project (insert any field of activity here) before delving into the specific skills of each stage. Another critical point is that this way you also leave room for the professional to be creative and inventive in the process itself, as they can also interfere in the place and time of each stage that will lead them to a successful delivery.

More than an aesthetic reference in the current advertising market, the fundamental aspects of Bauhaus need to be an inspiration again for its essences of teamwork, the union of art and craft in the elaboration of creative work, and the development of the individual as a professional. The objective of Bauhaus has always been to lead the person who works with creativity from observation to discovery, from discovery to invention, and finally to the configuration and influence on the behavior of our society as a whole.

Nothing could be more up-to-date than that, right?