Editing Design by committee (section)

==Usage of the term==
[[File:Google TV Remotes at YouTube Headquarters.jpg|thumb|Remote controls with as many as 78 buttons have been cited as an example of a product designed by committee.]]
The term is used to refer to suboptimal traits that such a process may produce as a result of having to compromise between the requirements and viewpoints of the participants, particularly in the presence of poor leadership or poor technical knowledge, such as needless complexity, internal inconsistency, logical flaws, banality, and the lack of a unifying vision.  This design process by [[Consensus decision-making|consensus]] is in contrast to autocratic design, or [[design by dictator]], where the project leader decides on the design. The difference is that in an [[Autocracy|autocratic]] style, members of the organizations are not included and the final outcome is the responsibility of the leader. The phrase, "a camel is a horse designed by committee" is often used to describe design by committee.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Kolbert |first=Elizabeth |date=1998-01-26 |title=Metro Matters; The State Of the State Of (Whatever) |language=en-US |work=The New York Times |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1998/01/26/nyregion/metro-matters-the-state-of-the-state-of-whatever.html |access-date=2023-04-22 |issn=0362-4331}}</ref>

The term is especially common in technical parlance; and stresses the need for technical quality over political feasibility. The proverb "[[wikt:too many cooks spoil the broth|too many cooks spoil the broth]]" expresses the same idea. The term is also common in other fields of design such as graphic design, architecture or industrial design. In automotive design, this process is often blamed for unpopular or poorly designed cars.<ref>[https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/10/AR2005061002188.html Biggest Automaker Needs Big Changes<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref>