There is a syndrome I try to discourage among the designers I work with: the artist-designer. It's the condition in which a designer loses sight of the context they operate in — the technological constraints, the business priorities, the users' needs — in favour of pure aesthetic exploration. When I look for a visual designer, I look for a designer, not an artist: someone who understands that their work must be a synthesis of form and function, and that the function must be practically achievable to meet people's needs. And then yes: they must be obsessed with details, and a nerd in typography, color theory and composition.
The watchmaker
The classic objection is that constraints kill creativity. The best answer I've heard came from a watch-dial designer working for a very well-known luxury brand. On the surface, the constraints governing the design of a watch dial are so numerous and strict that they leave no room for creativity at all. He told me the opposite:
It is precisely those constraints that force me to be creative — and to push their limit a little further every time.
Design is defined by its constraints. Without constraints there is no design: there is decoration.
Against trends, for instant classics
I'm not a fan of trends, especially when working with large entities or institutional organizations. I prefer building visual identities and design systems designed to last, perceived as instant classics. A major pension system or the interface of an operating system cannot follow a trend, for a banal reason: realistically, it has a longer life cycle than the trend itself.
For the same reasons, visual design should never be judged in the absolute, but in its context of use and against the purpose of the interface. I appreciate Gov.uk for an aesthetic radically oriented towards usability, pure function and minimalism; and for similar reasons I like Cloudscape, Amazon's design system. With these premises — I admit it — I am a fan of pixels and functionalism.
Innovation is not a metric
The same principle applies to innovation: it is not an objective in itself, and I don't consider "innovativeness" a relevant metric for a design team. There are new problems that require innovative solutions, and innovative solutions to existing problems. In a context driven by clear objectives, innovation is pursued when necessary — and if the innovative solution proves successful, it becomes standard practice. That's why it's important to disseminate innovations, large and small, within teams: to promote them into a new standard.
In one line
Form serves function, function serves people, and constraints are not the enemy of creativity: they are its engine.