User-Value-Based Product Adaptation
Suzan Boztepe
Abstract
This paper reports an ethnographic study on the use of kitchen appliances
illustrating how various factors of physical and socio-cultural context influence
users’ interaction with product and its value. Based on the relationship between
these cultural influences and the value users derive from products, the paper
proposes a user-centered framework for product adaptation. The primary drives
for product adaptation decisions in the proposed framework include the
consideration of convenience, compatibility, accessibility, social significance, and
pleasure in user-product interaction.
Keywords: Product Adaptation, User Value, User-Centered Design,
Globalization
Introduction
As one of the most fashionable buzzwords in political, cultural, and economic
spheres of life, the term globalization has been both embraced (e.g., Levitt,
1983; Ohmae, 1990) and resisted (e.g., Mander and Goldsmith, 1996; Rodrik,
1997). A major source of tension that is directly related to design is the
disagreement as to the nature of influence globalization has specifically on
cultural and economic spheres of life. This is especially true when it comes to
the question of whether flows of people, images, and money homogenizes
cultures or further increases diversity, and whether globalization brings
prosperity or is a new form of imperialism (Guillén, 2001).
For businesses, globalization is often synonymous with benefits such as scale
economies or larger markets which are seen realizable through push of
identical products, and an assumption of move towards cultural convergence
and homogenization. In the words of Levitt (1983), “[e]veryone in the
increasingly homogenized world market wants products and features that
everybody else wants. If the price is low enough, they will take highly
standardized world products, even if these aren’t exactly what mother said was
suitable” (96). Many companies have been successful in global markets
precisely because their products are undifferentiated and strongly associated
with their Western origins. Others, however, learned that cultural differences
are still a significant factor in product design through faux pass. For instance,
in the early 1980s, Electrolux figured that Europe would become like the US
where a few powerful companies compete across an entire continent.
Marketing studies showed that due to converging lifestyles European
consumers would be eager to buy the same refrigerators, ovens, and
dishwashers. However, in spite of the marketing indicators, differences in
shopping and eating habits across Europe were prevalent, and the attempt to
introduce a single refrigerator model across Europe failed (Echikson, 1993).
The notion of cultural convergence is theoretically challenged today by
positioning cultural convergence and multiplicity not as opposing concepts,
but as coexisting entities ( e.g. Appadurai, 1996; Featherstone, 1996;
Robertson, 1995). In this view, “global resources are often indigenized and
syncretized to produce particular blends and identifications which sustain the
sense of the local” (Featherstone, 1996: 64). In other words, products are
always contextualized, and there is no guarantee that the intention of the
designer will be recognized, much less respected, by the users from another
part of the world. Washing machine can be used to clean potatoes by Chinese
peasants (Brookes, 1998), cell phones could become means to learn prayer
times for Malaysian Muslims (Hermida, 2003), and even Coca Cola’s use and
meaning changes when it crosses borders (e.g., Howes, 1996). Thus, designers
need to be aware of both differences and commonalities among different local
contexts, understand how products are reshaped when brought into new
cultures, and respond accordingly by proper product adaptation.
However, although the concepts of adaptation and standardization have been
heavily contested for several decades, the knowledge of how design should
approach the issue is still limited. The conceptual development of the topic has
taken place predominantly in the marketing literature where advertising has
been a leading concern. Product planning and design, on the other hand, have
not received the attention they deserve, but rather they were treated as a subset
of marketing. In practice, decisions of product adaptation and standardization
have traditionally been made based on designers’ intuitive knowledge, or a
reactive marketing approach, where adapting to local needs is not anticipated
in advance, but occurs as problems affecting sales figures emerge (Calantone
et al., 2004; Douglas and Craig, 1989), and if the effort in adaptation is worth
the cost involved (Ono, 2002). The factors considered in these decisions have
mostly involved organization and industry related conditions (Bartlett and
Ghoshal, 1998; Porter, 1986), government regulations and standards (Hill and
Still, 1984), and the nature of product (Kim and Maugborne,1987). Little
attention has been paid to user-related adaptation requirements.
The tools and methods in designer’s disposition that enable them to effectively
deal with the complex issue of designing for global markets, specifically to
account for a range of user needs, are still limited. In current practice, one way
to deal with this issue as an increasing trend is to collaborate with
anthropologists and other social scientists (e.g., Squires and Byrne, 2002).
Many have emphasized the relevance of social science methods, such as
ethnography, to design (e.g., Whitney and Kumar, 2003; Salvador, Bell, and
Ken, 1999). However, there are some inherent problems in the application of
these methods with no modifications to design practice. Originally being
developed in the context of social sciences, they aim to develop an
understanding and credible explanation of human behavior. The end result of
the work is often a theory. Utilization of these methods in design, on the other
hand, aims for an intervention, a change in the context of research. Simon
(1996), for example, defines design as the process by which we devise
“courses of action aimed at changing existing situations into preferred one”
(111). This paradox causes what some in the design community name an
applicability gap (e.g., Mitchell, 1993). For designers, collaboration with a
social scientist often means a translation of the very broad, general, and rich
information about people to an actionable form that can lead to new, tangible
concepts or modifications of certain aspects of existing products. Designers
alone may not be able to relate the very broad and rich information about
culture to specific product aspects. Needless to say, designers in some large
companies do not even have the opportunity to get involved in the research
process. In a similar vein, an ethnography conducted by an untrained designer
is considered to have a tendency to overlook important cultural information
(Forsythe, 1999). Therefore, those advocating the adoption of ethnography in
design for global markets also point to the need for efficient tools for
conducting, analyzing, and presenting user research (e.g., Kumar, 2004). Also,
researchers in social sciences often demand a long-term commitment to
fieldwork. They attempt to live within the community that is being studied. On
the other hand, in the business world, the product development time gets
shorter. Therefore, culture-oriented research and product development work at
cross purposes for design practitioners.
This paper presents a framework for product adaptation which offers a usercentered perspective by asking the following question: “How can a product
create value for users in this new location?” It aims to assist designers in the
user research phase when designing for global markets and the decisionmaking regarding product adaptation and standardization. The framework is
based on a study on the use of and the value assignment to kitchen appliances
(Boztepe, 2004). The data were collected through observations and interviews
with 28 urban families in Turkey and the United States. The study produced a
qualitative description of users’ situated experiences with products and the
cultural patterns that implicate how these experiences are shaped. The aim was
to understand some of the complexities of the local context of product use and
its interplay with value users assign to products.
2. User-Value-Based Product Adaptation Approach
2.1 Definitions and Key Elements
The term value is a highly polysemous word. It oscillates between concepts of
economic return or moral standards (Boztepe, 2002). The definition of value
adopted here refers to the practical or symbolic result created through userproduct interaction. The emphasis is on users’ experiences with the product,
observed consequences provided by the interaction with the product, and
users’ subjective interpretations of what constitutes value. In fact, the findings
of the study are consistent with such definition that value resides not in the
tangible product properties alone, or in the social system only, but in the
interaction between the two (Graeber, 2002; Holbrook, 1999). It is created as a
result of the harmonious combination between product properties and what the
users and their local contexts bring to such interaction.
In responding to the question of what constituted the source of value for them,
participants often indicated specific product properties. In other words, on the
face of it, they defined the source of value as the product properties
themselves. In responding to the question of how a specific product property
constituted the source of value, however, they often assumed the context of
product use, and exemplified how that property fits into their behaviors, daily
habits, etc. For instance, many American participants explained the value of
the second refrigerator or freezer within the context of their shopping patterns
and the types of food consumed. In other words, in assigning value, users take
for granted how product properties respond to elements of local context.
Product properties are treated as cues, or, indicators, of value. Through their
visible and intrinsic characteristics, they convey certain uses and meanings,
which are constantly matched and compared against the requirements of the
local context. Elements of the local context influence how users assign value
and what product properties become salient in the user-product interaction. On
a broader level, the elements of local context that influence user value include:
(1) Local Behaviors: daily routines, specific ways of doing things, etc., (2)
Meanings: symbols, rituals, beliefs, etc., and (3) Systems: physical
environment, technical systems interfacing products, etc. At a given point in
time each product exists within multiple local contexts.
Findings of the enthnographic study on kitchen appliances suggest existence of
four major value categories of (1) Utility Value, referring to the utilitarian
consequences of the product such as enabling the accomplishment of a
physical or cognitive task, (2) Social Significance Value, referring to the social
ends provided through interaction with the product such as building one’s
reputation with others, and (3) Emotional Value, referring to the affective
benefits of the product for people who interact with it such as pleasure and fun,
and (4) Spiritual Value, referring to the spiritual benefits such as good luck and
sacredness enabled by the product. These value categories are not mutually
exclusive, and the same experience with a product can impart different
categories of value simultaneously and with varying degrees. For example, a
well performing appliance can provide not only a utility value, but at the same
time can be a great source of pleasure when used, due to the consistent results
obtained. On the other hand, there also seems to be an aspect of trade-off
between different value categories, one value can be favoured at the expense
of another. So, in practice, value categories can be closely interwoven and
interdependent. Thus, product properties, elements of local context, and user
value are the three core elements of the proposed adaptation framework
(Figure 1).
The framework offers a way of examining any product as part of multiple
local contexts, which may lead to multiple value categories. Because the
interrelationship between the notions of user value, local elements, and
product properties is a dynamic one; that is, no a priori or linear
correspondence exists among them, I adopted a wheel-like model which
allows for variation for any given product property depending on the features
of its context of use. For example, we cannot say that interfacing systems will
always have an influence on technical specifications of a product, and lead to
efficiency, or convenience value. In many cases, the social rituals and roles
can affect the technical specifications of a product too, and thus, involve
identity or impression management value. In the study, the Turkish
participants moved large appliances such as ovens or dishwashers almost
weekly to clean the rear side and the underneath. This behavior was motivated
by the local perceptions of what constitutes cleanliness, the importance
attributed to cleanliness in proper womanhood, and the fear of losing face. In
such context, if technical specifications of these products, such as weight,
mobility, size, parts, and configurations had been considered in terms of how
social roles are locally defined, attitudes toward hygiene, and the local
perceptions of identity, perhaps a series of modifications might have been
made such as the addition of castors, easily removable hook-up to water or
gas infrastructure, and handles to aid in moving the appliance. This, in turn,
could have improved the product’s social significance as well as convenience
value.
Figure 1. User-Value-Based Adaptation Framework
2.2 Types of Adaptation
Any adaptations made based on this framework could be classified in terms of
their purposes as (1) Convenience Adaptation, (2) Performance Adaptation,
(3) Economy Adaptation, (4) Social Significance and Identity Adaptation, and
(5) Pleasure Adaptation.
Convenience Adaptation involves product modifications with the objective of
increasing its accessibility, appropriateness, avoidance of unpleasantness, or
compatibility to the local context. It is primarily concerned with how the way
things work serve the practical purposes. Therefore, some local elements that
might be influential include activities users engage in, and systems that
surround the product. For instance, it was observed that many Turkish
households had two or three different ovens in order to ensure appropriateness
to certain cooking techniques. A typical combination includes a conventional
oven and an additional drum oven, or midi oven, or a wood stove. This is due
to the fact that there is no one single type of oven that accommodates the
whole range of typically cooked dishes. For example, both conventional oven
and midi oven are efficient in baking of dishes such as cakes and cookies but
fail to accommodate certain traditional dishes such as börek or baklava. These
are usually baked in large round pans which often do not fit inside these
ovens because of their size. Drum oven, on the other hand, is highly robust in
baking of these traditional dishes. Its cylindrical form is compatible with the
size of pans and desired heat distribution and temperature.
Interfacing objects might also influence how convenience is defined in terms
of compatibility with surrounding objects or systems. For instance, American
participants reported that they buy groceries on a monthly basis in bulk from
club stores. So, their expectation was that their refrigerators would
accommodate numerous frozen packages, and items as large as a gallon of
milk, or 18-inch pizza, as well as various condiment bottles. For Turkish
participants, who were mostly engaged in weekly shopping from local openair markets, the expectation was that they would fit large quantities of fresh
produce in their refrigerators.
Perceptions of social roles and social rituals may redefine what users in a
particular local context perceive as being convenient, when the convenience is
desirable, and how they define what constitutes saving time and effort. For
American participants, refrigerator is a time saver because it eliminates the
need to include shopping into the daily routine. The widespread availability of
refrigerators with large freezer space or second freezer in the observed
American households enables provisioning of quantities of food at home and
reduces the need for frequent visits to the grocery store. Rather than
economizing from time, the refrigerator has been described and observed
being used as a tool for reordering and managing time in Turkish kitchens.
Note that the notion of managing time is different than that of saving time. It
involves relocating time as desired instead of reducing the time an activity
takes to accomplish. Many of the Turkish participants related the
refrigerator’s convenience to the practice of storing elaborate homemade
dishes in semi-prepared form or plenty of homemade pastries. Especially for
working women, this was perceived as a means to be a good mother and
provide proper meals to their children even when they have no time.
Similarly, the storage of pastry was done with a purpose of conforming to the
social ritual of treating even unexpected guests with tea and pastry.
Convenience adaptation may lead to modifications to any aspects of product,
such as technical properties, general specifications of size, weight, materials,
layout and organization of parts, or graphic interface.
Performance Adaptation involves product modifications made with the
purpose of improving its performance and efficiency in the new local context.
The most typical local elements that need consideration are geographical
factors and infrastructure. For example, many Turkish participants reported
that they were hesitant to operate their dishwashers when they are not at
home, fearing that there might be a water cut. In such case, the machine
would continue to work as if there is an incoming water and burn its motor.
Thus, there is a need for accounting for the unstable infrastructure. Culturally
situated attitudes toward health, cleaning, or environment may affect how
users assign the performance value as well. Traditions can influence the
performance and efficiency of products too. For example, some Turkish users
utilize food processors in the traditional winter preparations of tarhana, a dry
soup mix, and pepper paste. Food processors are taken outside the house, and
with the help of extension cables, they are used to crush more than 100 lbs of
boiled peppers or several kilograms of dried dough. However, being typically
designed for indoor use, and intended to be used for only a few minutes at
each session, when used outdoors, and exposed to work over a long period of
time these often get broken.
Economy Adaptation involves product modifications made with the purpose
of improving the economic value of product both at the point of purchase and
in use. Income, price levels, distribution channels and after sales services are
the factors that are immediately associated with the economy value. Issues of
social networking might influence how economy value is locally defined too.
Product alteration might include price and payment adjustments, changes to
distribution and service systems as well as changes to product’s energy
sources, materials, packaging sizes etc.
Social Significance and Identity Adaptation relates to the social outcomes
resulting form interaction with product. This kind of adaptation is about how
products assume meanings when in use. Some questions asked might include:
What are the local social rituals of which that product is a part? What does
one’s repertoire of social roles and identities involve? What are the symbols
of impression management and face saving? How do meanings evolve?
People use goods as markers of their relative position in the social nexus
(Bourdieu, 1984; Veblen, 1899). Even ordinary goods like appliances may
develop as symbols and that people interact with them in several ways to
obtain social prestige and to maintain their face (Goffman, 1967; 1974).
Goffman views the self as a social construction, and the notion of face, “the
positive social value a person effectively claims for himself by the line others
assume he has taken during a particular contact” (5), is one way of viewing it
as such. Mere possession of a trendy object is often seen as sufficient to
communicate a certain image.
The value of appliances as a means of achieving distinction from others
through projection of an image one wishes to create, or through what
Goffman (1959) calls impression management, however, is not related only to
the static ownership of products and their use as labels, but also to how they
are being utilized and what ends are achieved through their use. As Goffman
notes, members, to use his term, employ a series of well-choreographed
techniques in an attempt to control the impressions they form on others, just
as an actor presents a character to an audience. Note that earlier the value of
refrigerator in the Turkish context was seen specifically in terms of its ability
to enable time shifting through advance preparation and storage of homemade food. From the perspective of social significance value, the same
phenomenon here generates a reality of a kind in the eyes of the participants’
visitors such that the hosts are always well prepared for unexpected guests.
So, by preparing pastries in advance not only does the hostess avoid the rush
when she has guests, but also gains their recognition and admiration. The
image she projects is of a handy housewife, who can whip up a rich treat in a
short notice, and also spend time with her guests showing attention and
respect.
Adaptation for social significance could lead to alternation to any aspects of
product including, but not limited to, its technical properties, layout, form,
materials, and brand.
Pleasure Adaptation relates to product modifications aiming at providing a
pleasant experience with product. Local elements that should be considered
typically include the local perceptions of aesthetic which might vary. For
example, in order to make their refrigerators more aesthetically appealing
Turkish participants utilized handmade covers, while American participants
preferred magnets, family photos, children's art work, etc. Trends and
fashions may also differ from location to location. Toy-like looking small
appliances in pastel colors prevailed Turkish households, while American
countertop appliances communicated image of power, industrial capacity and
look. For instance, many American participants mentioned the pleasure
derived from using Kitchenaid Classic Stand Mixer because of its powerful
motor and quality of materials. Thus, pleasure adaptation could not be limited
to the modifications in the formal characteristics of the product, but could also
include any other alterations that may increase product’s performance.
2.3 Application of the Framework
I propose three initial areas of application for this framework. First, it could
offer a general analytic frame for the evaluation of existing products in new
local contexts. Thus, it can be used in the assessment of potential product
pitfalls in a new locale. Second, during design planning and research, it could
suggest an approach for collection and structuring of user research
information. As Mitchell (1993) points out, there is an applicability gap when
it comes to the use of user research data in design practice. That is, designers
tend to perceive user data as being too abstract and too distant for a given
design problem. It is hoped that by examining user research data from the
perspective of their influence on user value, designers will easily be able to
relate the data to product success as defined by users themselves. A final area
of application would be the design and implementation stage, where the
suggested framework could help in the identification of product adaptation
requirements, and the definition of product specifications in terms of how
particular design decisions might deliver value for users. In fact, when all
these areas of application take place consecutively in a single project, it
constitutes a specific guideline for the use of the proposed framework. The
assumption here is that there is already an existing product design that needs
to be transferred to a new location. However, these guidelines could also be
applied to new product development cases by starting from the second step.
Note that in both cases the process requires back and forth movements
between the core and the periphery, as well as around each circle of the model
presented above. Four basic steps can be extracted to present the logic of this
movement, and to encapsulate the possible application areas outlined above
(Figure 2).
The first step, value assessment, involves evaluation of user-product
interaction to identify what categories of user value are derived from
experiences with the product. Also, it aims to identify the areas where the
value obtained is relatively low. This sort of analysis sets up a purpose for
design teams and helps define the scope of the cultural user research needed.
In addition, it creates a potential for quickly pinpointing the areas for
innovative adaptation opportunities. Some of the questions to ask here are: Is
the product convenient (accessible, appropriate, compatible, etc.)? Does the
interaction with it produce socially significant outcomes for the users? Is the
interaction with the product pleasant? What are the users’ priorities in the
assignment of value?
The second step involves focusing on why certain gaps, if any, in value
assignment occurred in the new location and analyzing what are the local
elements that play a critical role in the situated definition of a given value
category. At this stage, it is also important to pinpoint any potential conflicts
between the utility and social significance values, because the expected social
significance value could sometimes render the utility value as undesirable.
The third step involves defining how the properties of a product will be
affected by the influence of local elements, and establishing the criteria of
how modifications of certain product properties can enable users to obtain
value from their experience with the product.
Finally, the fourth step involves the actual development of products in
accordance with the criteria established before. The design decisions in this
stage, such as those regarding product architecture, form, functions, materials,
etc., should be made considering how they would lead to user value in local
markets. It should be noted, however, that the process presented here is
simplified, and it may involve several back and forth movements between
various steps. Also, this final step should be followed by repeating the whole
loop to put the decisions made into test.
NEW PRODUCT
EXISTING PRODUCT
1
VALUE ASSESSMENT
User Value
Evaluate Product’s Value in
the Local Context
Is there a gap in User Value?
Is the product convenient?
Is user-product interaction socially significant?
Is the experience with product pleasing?
2
RESEARCH
Local Elements (LEs)
Define LEs Critical for
Assignment of User Value
What are users’ priorities in value assignment?
What local elements influence low value?
Is the product consistent with local behaviors?
Is the product consistent with local systems?
Is the product consistent with local meanings?
What local elements may create value conflicts?
3
ADAPTATION CRITERIA
Product Properties (PPs)
Identify What PPs Need
Modification
What PPs are critical in value assignment?
How do PPs fail to meet local elements?
What product modifications are needed to meet LEs?
How could modifications improve/create user value?
4
IMPLEMENTATION
Product Properties
Apply Adaptation Criteria to
Product Design
What forms meet criteria?
What functions meet criteria?
What features meet criteria?
What colors, surfaces, materials
images, etc. meet criteria?
ADAPTED PRODUCT
Figure 2. User-Value-Based Adaptation Guidelines
3. Conclusion
This user value based model of adaptation focuses on the outcome of the
adaptation in terms of the benefits it brings to the users. As such, it is hoped
that, it could provide design practitioners with a means for a sound decisionmaking. Additionally, by enabling the identification of local elements as they
relate to users’ value assignment, the framework brings a more practical and
action-oriented approach to user research with a design focus in mind.
References
Appadurai, A. Modernity at Large: Cultural Dimensions of Globalization.
Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, 1996.
Bartlett, C., and Ghoshal, S. Managing across Borders: The Transnational
Solution. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press, 1998.
Bourdieu, P. Distinction: A Social Critique of Judgment of Taste. Translated
by R. Nice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1984.
Boztepe, S. “The Notion of Value and Design.” Proceedings of the 6th Asian
Design International Conference, Tskuba, Japan, October 14-17, 2003.
Boztepe, S. Product Adaptation: A User-Value-Based Approach. PhD
Dissertation. Chicago, IL: Illinois Institute of Technology, 2004.
Brookes, A. “Rural Markets, Machines with Muscles.” Far Eastern Economic
Review (November 1998): 46.
Calantone, R. J., Cavusgil, T., Schmidt, J. B., and Shin, G. C.
“Internationalization and the Dynamics of Product Adaptation – An
Empirical Investigation.” Journal of Product Innovation Management
21, no. 3 (2004): 185-198.
Douglas, P. S., and Craig, C. S. "Evolution of Global Marketing Strategy:
Scale, Scope and Synergy." Columbia Journal of World Business 24,
no. 3 (1989): 47-59.
Echikson, W. “The Trick to Selling in Europe.” Fortune 128, 6(1993): 82.
Featherstone, M. "Localism, Globalism, and Cultural Identity." In
Global/Local:Cultural Production and Transnational Imagery, edited
by R. Wilson and W. Dissanayake, 46-78. Durham: Duke University
Press, 1996.
Graeber, D. Toward an Anthropological Theory of Value: The False Coin of
Our Own Dreams. New York, NY: Palgrave, 2001.
Goffman, E. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York, NY:
Anchor Books, 1959.
Goffman, E. Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Behavior. New
York: Pantheon Books, 1967.
Goffman, E. Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience.
New York: Harper and Row, 1974.
Guillén, M. F. “Is Globalization Civilizing, Destructive or Feeble? A Critique
of Five Key Debates in the Social Science Literature.” Annual Review
of Sociology 27, (2001): 235-260
Hermida, A. “Asia Plays with High-Tech Visions” BBC News UK Edition
(October 2003): http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3177348.stm
(last retrieved on June 10, 2004).
Hill, J. C., and Still, R. R. "Adapting Products to Lcd Tastes." Harvard
Business Review 62, no. 2 (March-April 1984): 92-101.
Holbrook, M., ed. Consumer Value: A Framework for Analysis and Research.
New York, NY: Routledge, 1999.
Howes, D., ed. Cross Cultural Consumption: Global Markets Local Realities.
NY: Routledge, 1996.
Kim, W. C., and Mauborgne, R. A. "Cross-Cultural Strategies." The Journal
of Business Strategy 7, no. 4 (Spring 1987): 28-36.
Levitt, T. "The Globalization of Markets." Harvard Business Review 61, no. 3
(May-June 1983): 92-102.
Mander, J. and Goldsmith, E. (eds.), The Case Against the Global Economy
and for Turn Toward the Local. San Francisco, CA: Sierra Club Books,
1996.
Mitchell, C. T. Redefining Designing: From Form to Experience. New York:
Van Nostrand Reinhold,1993.
Ohmae, K. The Borderless World: Power and Strategy in the Interlinked
Economy. Harper Business, 1990.
Ono, M. M. "Emergent Strategies for Designing New Products, Facing
Cultural Diversity, within the Globalization Context." Paper presented
at the European Academy of Management, 2nd Conference on
Innovative Research in Management, Stockholm 2002.
Porter, M. E., ed. Competition in Global Industries. Boston, MA: Harvard
Business School Press, 1986.
Robertson, R. "Glocalization: Time-Space and Homogeneity-Heterogeneity."
In Global Modernities, edited by M. Featherstone, S. Lash and M
Roberts, 25-44. London: Sage, 1995.
Rodrik, D. “Has Globalization Gone Too Far?” California Management
Review 39, no. 3 (1997): 29-53.
Salvador, T., Bell, G. and Ken, A. “Design Ethnography” Design
Management Institute Journal 10, no. 4 (1999): 35-41.
Simon, H. A. The Science of the Artificial. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press,
1996.
Squires, S. and Byrne, B. Creating Breakthrough Ideas: The Collaboration of
Anthropologists and Designers in the Product development. Bergin and
Garvey, 2002.
Veblen, T. The Theory of the Leisure Class. New York: The Modern Library,
2001 (1899).
Whitney, P. and Kumar, V. “Faster, Cheaper, Deeper User Research.” Design
Management Institute Journal 14, no. 2 (2003): 50-57.
Suzan Boztepe, Ph.D.
Suzan Boztepe serves as a faculty member in the Department of Industrial
Design at Middle East Technical University. She has recently completed her
Ph.D. in Design from Illinois Institute of Technology, where she also received
her Master of Design in Strategic Design Planning. She taught human-centered
design research methods at Pratt Institute and Carleton University. Her
research interests include strategic applications of design, and social and
cultural human factors.
Contact Information
Middle East Technical University
Faculty of Architecture
Department of Industrial Design
06531 Ankara Turkey
boztepe@id.iit.edu