Cultural values in the design process and product
+30 20 4447788
Mari Carmen Puerta Melguizo
+30 20 4447788
cristina@cs.vu.nl
mcarmen@cs.vu.nl
Cristina Chisalita
Department of Software Engineering, Vrije University
De Boelelaan, 1081a
1081 HV Amsterdam (The Netherlands)
We are interested in researching the impact of group/organizational culture on design
process and product. Organizational culture can be conceptualized in many ways (e.g.
Schein, 1990; Trice & Beyers, 1993) and consecutively there are several approaches to it:
sense making approach (root metaphor approach), managerial approach, cross-cultural
approach,m etc.
We consider the relationship between culture and design process and product as dynamic
(Chisalita, Puerta Melguizo and van der Veer, 2002).
The new system and
its design process
influence
Either:
fit to/change/initiate
End-users culture(s)
Figure 1. The relationship between culture of the end-users and the new system and its design process.
The existing culture(s) of the end-users should be analyzed because it influences the
design process and, hence, the resulting system. If the system does not fit the culture then
there is a high probability that the system will fail in supporting the tasks and the users.
Consequently, if the culture is changing, for example in the case of a business that is
developing and changing its goals or processes, the technology needs to change in order
to fit the new culture(s).
On the other hand, because culture is socially constructed (Hong & Chiu, 2001) the new
system will induce changes in the culture(s) of the users. Thus, in designing information
technology it is necessary to take into account the way this new technology can influence
and change the culture. The influences of the new system in the end-user’s culture can
balance between fit, change and initiation of a new culture:
1. In designing for an organization that does not want to change too many things, the new
system should be designed to fit with the current culture.
2. In other cases the new technology can change the culture, organization, procedures
and workflow of the user groups. And sometimes this change can be quite radical; think
for example on the way mobile telephones changed our work relations, and even our
personal relationships.
3. There are cases in which the product of the design is developed for the future. In these
cases, with the design of the new system the designers are (either unconsciously or on
purpose) initiating a new user’s culture.
Concluding, during the design process it is necessary to analyze the current culture in
order to fit the new system into it. But it is necessary to envision how the organization
changes because of the new system as well. An extra difficulty in this case has been
pointed out by Pliskin, Romm, Lee & Weber (1993) who suggest it is important to know
the difference between actual culture (the existing culture of the organization) and the
presumed culture (in our case the culture that the designers think exists). In other words,
designers should not work with the preconceptions they have about the end-users’
cultures because they can be wrong.
We propose to discuss several issues:
Issue 1
There are several ways in which organizational/group culture can impact the design
process and product in different phases on the design cycle (analysis, design,
implementation). The problem that arises here is how to conceptualize organizational
culture for the different design situations.
Values as a possibility to represent culture
One possible way to look at the culture is to study the work related values. By values we
understand what is important for the group or the organization we design for. We are
trying to focus not on “general” values (like humanistic values) but on values that are
very specific to a certain group.
The sources of values
We investigated such concrete work related values in a case study of a design team
working practices (Chisalita, van der Veer, Hoorn & Puerta-Melguizo, 2002).
In the study we investigated team values using as research methods ethnography,
interview analysis and document analysis. We found out that part of the values are shared
values of the organization (e.g. “contact an expert when needed”) and part are
characteristic for the team (“the organizations’ design process should be user-oriented).
The last one can even be in opposition with organizational values (“the organization is
technologically driven”).
Furthermore, the case study showed that between the team and organizational culture (in
terms of values) exists a bi-directional dynamic relationship. Organizational culture
influence in a top-down manner the culture of the team, but the team culture as well, can
influence the culture of the organization in a bottom-up manner (see figure 2). This
process can lead to a cultural change in the whole organization.
ORGANIZATION

e
ang
l ch 
tura on
cul asi
-up ersu
tom h p
bot hroug
t
top
thro down
ugh cu
dire ltura
ctiv l cha
es ng
e
leader
Organizational culture
set of rules, for example:
 consult outside experts
 focus on the system
 support company’s success
Team subculture
external event 2
outside help

shared workspace
 external event 1
dissatisfied market
 consult
outside
experts
Teamwork practice
 focus
agent
agent
agent
on
actions
actions
user
 apply
shared objects
DUTCH
DUTCH design (= new business process)
computer system (= business goal)
satisfy customer
(= business goal)
Figure 2. Model of cultural influences on teamwork practice in system design as found in the case study
Issue 2
To study the culture of an organization/group in order to design, means to study the
context in which the work takes place. In this point one question is how (and if) this
approach is different from other approaches to study the context:
- Contextual Design (Holtzblatt & Beyer, 1998)
- Ethnography and communities of practice, etc.
Related to this there is another question: how efficient is to use such an approach to
context?
Issue 3
When designing systems for different groups (subcultures) that are part of the same
culture which would be the best way to approach this issue?
Issue 4
How we can represent envisioned (the new) cultures, using scenarios (Carroll, 2000;
Cooper, 1999).
REFERENCES:
Carroll, J.M. (2000). Making Use. Scenario-based design of human-computer interactions. The MIT Press
Cooper, A. (1999). The Inmates Are Running the Asylum: Why High-tech Products Drive Us Crazy
and How to Restore the Sanity. Sams. ISBN: 0-672-31649-8.
Chisalita, C., Puerta Melguizo, M.C, van der Veer, C., G. (2002).Designing for new cultures of use –
scenarios as a method to bridge the gap. In: S.Bagnara, S. Pozzi, A. Rizzo, & P. Wright, (Eds.).
ECCE11: Proceedings of the 11th European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics. ISBN: 88-850
59-13-9. pp. 179-186.
Chisalita, C., van der Veer, C.G., Hoorn, J.F. & Puerta Melguizo, M.C. (2002). A model of cultural
influences on teamwork practices – a design case study. In: S.Bagnara, S. Pozzi, A. Rizzo, & P.
Wright, (Eds.). ECCE11: Proceedings of the 11th European Conference on Cognitive
Ergonomics. ISBN: 88-850 59-13-9. pp. 151-156.
Holtzblatt, K. & Beyer, H. (1998). Contextual design: defining customer-centered systems. Morgan
Kaufmann Publishers, Inc.
Hong, Y. & Chiu, C. (2001). Toward a paradigm shift: from cross-cultural differences in social cognition to
social-cognitive mediation of cultural differences. Social Cognition, vol. 19, 181-196.
Pliskin, N., Romm T., Lee A., S., & Weber, S. (1993). Presumed versus actual organizational culture:
managerial implication of information system. The Computer Journal, vol.36, No.2.
Schein, E.H. (1992). Organizational Culture & Leadership. Jossey-Bass.
Trice, H., M. & Beyer, J., M. (1993). The Cultures of Work Organization. Prentice-Hall. Inc.