The aim of this thesis is to explain designer responsibility by illuminating the key role of adaptivity. In my opinion it is of great importance to draw attention to how our artefacts shape and evoke our everyday culture. However, I find that the approach to design from a cultural point of view is no longer explored in style, but increasingly in the design attitude. The primary source of my study was the national classification of our subject culture. Can an object be identified as the product of one single nation? Many components play a role in the formation of a ’national character’, in the coding of its direct and underlying meaning. I sought to find answers to the formation of this complex network by observing the domains of design culture as defined by Guy Julier. In the course of my research I discovered the designer and the design methodology to be the main determinants of character formation. The birth of the character roots from reflecting on the context by which the product or work can become a culturally representative phenomenon. I refer to all this as a ’perceptual-processing mechanism’, or simply adaptation. As a design solution, I use Victor Papanek’s function complex to parallel the lack of adaptability with the resulting functional deficiencies. As to conclude my study, I draw attention to a pradigm shift in design. I believe that the acquisition of the ability to adapt, leads to the flourishing of design and the birth of innovation. Furthermore, I think that design attitude is responsible for one’s particular character.