No it's not their job, and I'll try to explain why I think that.
Apart from the remit being just too broad, designers in any case are
part of a complex team that deal with a multitude of functional,
non-functional, regulatory and financial requirements.
Now, we have many different definitions of "designer", which I am very
aware of, but I believe that, in some circles "designer" has become
romanticised and extended to include a set of perceived "magical"
powers to "deliver what a boss wants". That is a distortion of the
role to something grotesque.
Speaking from a domain in which I have expertise; in sound design a
great battle ensued between designers, users (audiences) and the
'bosses' (studios and publishers) as to how music and films should
sound. You probably know this as the "Loudness Wars". I think it
remains a textbook example of misalignment between technical, artistic
and financial factors. It also remains an example of why I think
"Markets are a myth" [2].
Despite listeners saying over and over that they "Don't want it", the
producers, through a mess of internal motives (mainly financial),
repeatedly foisted their values onto them, being obsessed with what
they think users want in preference to flat-out contradiction that
would be evident in even the most cursory market research.
The job of a designer is to balance factors, and in a sense act as an
advocate (stand-in) for the user by mentalising their actual
needs. It's a very demanding and complex skill. Doing "what your boss
says" is absolutely not it and reduces a designer to a tool.
On the other hand, a job of the designer is also to listen to expert
technical advice outside of their skill-set, and so must not get
carried away with any grand "aesthetic vision", wanting to be Steve
Jobs.
A hard line to tread, and one requiring strong will and ethics as well
as judgement.
Related, the challenges sound designers face in making dialogue audible. What seem like simple problems (make car climate control buttons easy to use, make the speech in a movie easy to understand) turn out to be incredibly complex.
Apart from the remit being just too broad, designers in any case are part of a complex team that deal with a multitude of functional, non-functional, regulatory and financial requirements.
Now, we have many different definitions of "designer", which I am very aware of, but I believe that, in some circles "designer" has become romanticised and extended to include a set of perceived "magical" powers to "deliver what a boss wants". That is a distortion of the role to something grotesque.
Speaking from a domain in which I have expertise; in sound design a great battle ensued between designers, users (audiences) and the 'bosses' (studios and publishers) as to how music and films should sound. You probably know this as the "Loudness Wars". I think it remains a textbook example of misalignment between technical, artistic and financial factors. It also remains an example of why I think "Markets are a myth" [2].
Despite listeners saying over and over that they "Don't want it", the producers, through a mess of internal motives (mainly financial), repeatedly foisted their values onto them, being obsessed with what they think users want in preference to flat-out contradiction that would be evident in even the most cursory market research.
The job of a designer is to balance factors, and in a sense act as an advocate (stand-in) for the user by mentalising their actual needs. It's a very demanding and complex skill. Doing "what your boss says" is absolutely not it and reduces a designer to a tool.
On the other hand, a job of the designer is also to listen to expert technical advice outside of their skill-set, and so must not get carried away with any grand "aesthetic vision", wanting to be Steve Jobs.
A hard line to tread, and one requiring strong will and ethics as well as judgement.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loudness_war
[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/context?id=32463541