It was really an intellectual, ethical, and commercial decision. Intellectually, it was a way to open up to new avenues of conversation that aren’t tied to just an individual’s — my — point of view. Ethically, it was a way to reflect that design is collaborative, and to better represent the team behind the work. And commercially, it spoke to a way to grow the business.

That said, I’ve kept the studio the same size for the past few years — about 30 people. It’s a mid-sized team — large enough to take on the biggest challenges, but small enough that you still know everybody. I’m not interested in growth just for growth’s sake. There could be more folks there, and we could say yes to more work, but I like being attached to all the work we’re doing. The bigger you get, the more structure and distance you find yourself having. I think that the people that come to us want the team to be just as invested from the top to the bottom. So that’s the way that Layer is set up.

Design is complex, and it’s based on who you’re designing for, what they want, how they live their lives, the frustrations and desires that they have, what makes their business tick, and what creates impact on the world around us. All of those are layers in the decision making about what features you may or may not include in a product. And that process itself is also multi-layered: research, ideas, development, prototypes, production. It felt like a nice name — open to interpretation, but relevant in terms of how you structure a design process.

The easiest answer is that we were mostly doing physical things — furniture and products — and now, we are much more holistic. We grew a digital team, a brand team, a spatial activation team, and a research team to back up the design process. We spread our wings a bit, in terms of looking at experiences that aren’t just driven by physical interaction with an object.

We’re interested in impact, and using design as a tool to make a difference — both in terms of making people happier and healthier, and in terms of making a business impact. With that type of focus, you can be limited if you’re not looking at all the areas where a brand can deliver. Brand conversations evolved into digital conversations, because those two are so intrinsically linked, and many of our products are technology things that involve some degree of digital interaction. We don’t always do everything, but where we can add more value, we will look to do so.

When you see all those parts come together, it’s incredibly satisfying. If somebody is being introduced to a new product, they might hear about it first through word of mouth, then go online to see it, then see some campaign material, then pick it up and purchase it, and then maybe there’s some sort of subscription service associated with it. There are so many different elements along that journey that somebody is invested in, and you need to keep the quality consistent throughout. You see companies that compartmentalize things, but the most compelling experiences come from brands that take a holistic approach.

Design is a people business, and the best partnerships that we’ve built are the ones where we get to know each other over a long time. You get really good at understanding how somebody thinks — the things that they love to do and the things that are putting them under pressure, and all of that helps to build a relationship.

We look for people that want to go for it — that have an ambition to do something that will move the needle, and that are prepared to go on that journey. Those types of projects do not happen super quickly, so it requires an understanding from people that great things take time — and a desire to be involved in the process. But ultimately, the process that we build with them becomes a kind of toolkit — so that they don’t need to rely on us forever to deliver all the things that they need.

The development of our team is something that I’m personally the most proud of. Seeing how people have grown and flourished, even after working here — that’s something that really stands the test of time.

In terms of physical commodities, our work with Bang & Olufsen has become a type of calling card. The way that Layer is positioned is sort of between two types of businesses. On the one hand, you have a white label consultancy, doing all this business strategy behind closed doors. And on the other, you’ve got a boutique atelier creating beautiful, long-lasting, well-crafted lifestyle products. Layer sits right in the middle of those two — bringing the warmth and heart and softness from the craft end of things, and the insight from the consultancy end.

A lot of our research is about finding opportunities in the market — thinking about how people use products, what they don’t already have in their lives, and how to carve out a niche that we can own. Looking at Bang & Olufsen, technology is a great enabler of things,  but we don’t really believe it’s an expression in its own right — it can feel cold and inanimate and scary sometimes. Knowing that, we chose to make the expression about communicating an investment in warmth and craftsmanship. The design of the product is the manifestation of that, but all the thinking behind it is the strategic end.

When you do something with a brush, and particularly with watercolours, the marks end up being quite reductive — just the lines or silhouette. It expresses a very simple essence — the feeling of something — without getting too fussy. So we use them very gesturally, trying not to overwork things. It brings a flair to the process. Industrial design can be pretty technical and dry sometimes and occasionally you need to step back and do things that have an artistic quality to them. For the exhibition, we’re super-sizing the water colours to create these huge translucent banners that will be displayed throughout the space.

You only turn 10 once. We’ve done a lot of things in Milan over the years, but they’ve been with brands — an installation for a brand, or a furniture collection launch with a brand. All that’s been great, but you do end up wrapping the work in the brand’s world. So we thought that 10 years was a great opportunity for us to pull together everything that we’ve done in the past, as well as a new collection, and put it in one place so that people can see the common thread of our perspective on design.

“10” also being the address of 10 Corso Como is a happy accident, really. Our new collection looks 10 years ahead, and it all just fell into place in a succinct way with this simple, singular message: 10. Plus, the spaces there are beautiful. Last year, they renovated the whole thing, and it’s got a raw but clean gallery feeling to it. It’s a perfect backdrop to showing work that is both sharp and industrial, but also zany and expressive.

This is a gallery show, but it’s much less of a “limited design pieces that are being sold” set up. It’s more a platform to express creativity. The new pieces we’re developing are prototypes. They are, at the moment, neither for mass production or batch production — they are conversation pieces, with each one tackling an important theme that we face as humanity. That’s grandiose, but at their core they do answer a very basic need: keeping warm, keeping cool, water, food, light.

Rather than looking at technological solutions, which would have maybe been the industrial design world’s answer to that, we looked back at craft processes that have been used for thousands of years. That means no electrification, and no over-leveraging of technology. Let’s not draw more from the world while trying to solve things. It means supporting craftsmanship and committing to handmade processes. Each one has got a slightly different personality, but they all express it in a visceral, craft-oriented way. We wanted to keep the semiotics of the function clear without overadorning it, while still paying enough attention to the details and quality that these didn’t just feel like utility items.

We learned so, so much. We learned that ceramics can evaporate water to cool the air around them, which went on to inform Cool. We learned about Swedish military garments, which influenced Shield. The research was super diverse, and that was actually really refreshing, because normally you don’t get to tackle so many types of challenges.

Keeping the solutions ultra-analog was also a refreshing way to frame it — more mindful. There are less materials, less parts to build and recycle, so it’s more responsible, too. It taught us a lot of discipline, because at first we’d think “We can solve that by adding this bit in a different material,” but we really wanted to focus on a smaller palette, which meant maximizing each material. There was a sensitivity and capacity for patience that became a big factor of that — especially given all the different production processes involved in the collection.

Despite the fact that we’ve been talking about sustainability as an urgent and pressing need for much longer than that, we’ve seen a change in terms of businesses changing their agenda and committing to something that is lighter on the planet around us — whether it’s repairable, has more longevity, or is made from materials that have less impact on the earth. But, we also need all this to be cost comparative — or to cost less. People are making hard choices. The past four of five years have been difficult in terms of interest rates and pressure points — people in the Western world have had to make tough decisions about the things they consume. And I think as designers, we need to address this.

All seven brands are a callback to someone we’ve worked with over the years. Once we broadly had established what we wanted to do, we started thinking about who would be the best connection to execute that. The right fit was very obvious — we knew who to work with for ceramics, and glass, and slim, lightweight furniture — we just had to convince them to invest their time, finances and brand equity in the project.

In some ways, the whole project would have been simpler if we did it independently. But it was important to invite more people into this discussion, because now there are more channels and it perhaps gains more clout through the brand recognition of our partners. The package we’re presenting was designed for impact, and our brand partners were critical in achieving that.

Each conversation was different. Working with Christopher Raeburn was a true collaboration, where we were in his studio pinning things on mannequins. I’m not a fashion designer, so that was very much industrial design meeting fashion design, and there are tensions and sparks there.

During Milan Design Week, there’s so much stuff, so we didn’t want this to be a demanding space that takes over from the products. At the same time, you want to know why there are beehives and fermentation jars in a gallery. So the environment is going to be very clean, but there are going to be video projections that bring in a bit more context.

We have had those discussions with some of the brands that the pieces are affiliated with. The proof in the pudding will come when people see the final pieces. This world is very commercially minded, so they’re interested in how things can translate.

I just hope that it does stimulate conversation. We’ve gone out on a limb here with designs that are intentionally provocative and unconventional, so the worst thing for me would be if people just pass it by. I would rather they tell me they don’t agree with something, or ask me if I’ve thought about approaching the idea differently.

Part of the reason we’re showing this at 10 Corso Como is because we think that interesting people go there. It’s a crossover environment — it’s fashion, it’s food, it’s lifestyle, and those are all people who bring antidotes to the usual industry crowd. Of course, we do work in the furniture world, but we’re a creative hub, and our work is quite eclectic, so we want to have more eclectic chats.