Design Patterns for Cross-Cultural Computer

Design Patterns for Cross-Cultural Computer-Supported Collaborative Design Learning Nicole Schadewitz and Timothy Jachna School of Design, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom, Kowloon, Hong Kong sdnic, [email protected]

Abstract This paper introduces design patterns for cross-cultural computer-supported collaborative design learning. It presents four patterns derived from an in-depth analysis of interactions between Hong Kong and Korean distributed teams and a cross-cultural comparison of interactions within these teams to interactions in Hong Kong/Austrian, Hong Kong/USAmerican and Hong Kong/Taiwanese teams. The patterns concentrate on design solutions that resolve breakdowns in the collaborative interaction between those cultures.

Introduction To the author’s knowledge, there has been no research conducted that proposes design patterns for addressing cross-cultural differences in collaboration. However, studies in internationalization and localization of products and systems show the need to address such difference in the design of computational systems, products and services (Marcus, 2005). The patterns reported in this paper address a very specific area of cross-cultural collaboration supported through computer technology. Incorporating international collaboration in learning, and especially in design education contexts, has been gaining more attention in research and praxis in recent years (Cheng, 2003). Setting up global virtual teams with students distributed over time and space, diverse in nationality and sometimes profession often serves as a cross-cultural collaborative learning module in design education. This educational environment usually consists of local design teams who are connected to geographically and culturally distant teams. Together global virtual teams are formed. Students work over the time of the course collaboratively on a common project. Although such international design collaboration was found to inform creative processes in teams, misunderstanding and breakdowns in communication were also reported to be more frequent and severe than in homogeneous and collocated teams (Adler, 2002). Such problems in international design collaboration need to be addressed in order to support creative design learning processes. However, knowledge about breakdowns in cross-cultural communication and how to overcome them is scattered across various research domains. Hence, design patterns were thought to be an appropriate medium to communicate knowledge about cross-cultural differences in collaboration and how to overcome breakdowns in communication caused by those differences. Educators and systems developers can use the proposed patterns in this paper to support the development of international distributed design courses. Research into design patterns in collaboration often employs situated and ethnographically informed methods to identify patterns in the context of collaborative work or learning. Martin et al (2001) consider patterns of collaborative work as a

- B4-1 -

crossover between activity and design patterns. Similarly to these scholars’ approach to identifying patterns, the design patterns presented in this paper derived from a three-year ethnographic study of communications among culturally diverse and geographically dispersed design learning teams. The identification of the design patterns resulted from a cyclic observation and analysis of the data in which observations from one year could guide the following year’s analysis of collaboration. Figure 1 illustrates this process.

Figure 1. Cycles of identification of design patterns in computer-supported collaboration. An in-depth discussion of the design pattern identification and articulation methodology is given elsewhere (Schadewitz and Jachna, 2007). In particular, the final cycle of deductive analysis of the qualitative data from Hong Kong/Korean collaboration supported the articulation of design patterns that communicate reasons for misunderstandings caused by cultural differences in collaboration and suggested design solutions that bridge those differences in culturally diverse teams. For this analysis, crosscultural dimensions identified in research over the last 50 years guided the identification and articulation of the design patterns (Kluckhohn, 1950), (Condon and Yousef, 1985), (Hall 1990), (Victor 1992), (Trompenaars and Turner, 1998), (Hofstede, 2001), (Adler 2002). This research utilized nine cultural dimensions to analyse and articulate design patterns, which are summarized below: 1. Activity Orientation: Achievement Activity cultures are action oriented. Doing something is preferred over doing nothing. Effectiveness can be measured by action. However, Ascription cultures value waiting for the right situation to do something. They value understanding the complexity of a situation and do not act in a hurry. 2. Authority Conception: This dimension refers to the degree of equality or inequality among people accepted into a society or group. This also relates to leadership styles, roles and the degree of authority in an organization. 3. Community Aspect: Communities and societies may differ in Collective or Individual Community values orientations. While Individual Community cultures act based on their

- B4-2 -

individual needs, Collective Community cultures consider the needs of others as much or more than personal needs. Collectivism also employs a “face” mechanism to defend oneself or others against losing face by means of saving or giving self-esteem and respect. Individualist cultures usually employ low face mechanism. 4. Contextual Communication: This dimension describes a culturally varying phenomenon of how much contextual information is given through verbal or nonverbal language. In High Context Communication, most of the meaning transmitted in the communication process is in the context, i.e. the immediate surroundings or cultural implicit knowledge, while very little is actually in the verbally transmitted message. In contrast, a culture in which most things are explicitly stated is a Low Context Communication culture. 5. Communication and Relation Style: Cultures with Neutral Relations tend to hide their feelings in communication and interaction with others. Those cultures tend to appear “cold”. Expressive Relation cultures do not hesitate to show emotions and affectivity. Specific cultures maintain more neutral relationships than diffuse. 6. Standards and Principles: Standards either build on particular relationships or on universal rules. In Universal Principle cultures rules are the same for everyone in every situation. In Particular Standard cultures, truth and principles are not absolute but dependent on the situation. 7. Technology Orientation: Cultures either tend to accept and favour technology as a positive tool to dominate, structure and master nature, or cultures may see technology as something rather negative that controls a community, which is not desirable in such a culture because humans should be in harmony with nature. 8. Time Orientation: Monochronic Time societies tend to carry out tasks sequentially without interruptions, whereas in Polychronic Time nations, people are comfortable doing several tasks at once. This dimension is reflected in the rate and flow of information exchange, and in human discourse structures like turn taking, breaks and intervals. Long Time cultures respect traditions and long-term commitments. In Short Time cultures change happens more easily. 9. Uncertainty Avoidance: The level of tolerance for ambiguity and uncertainty may vary in cultures. Low Uncertainty cultures tolerate various opinions and inconclusive or unsettled discussions. Change is accepted more easily. However, High Uncertainty cultures like to employ rules to control ambiguity and uncertainty. If uncertainty emerges it must be resolved. The proposed design patterns will refer to above-mentioned dimensions especially in the sections describing the “Forces” behind the pattern and “Why” they work. Interactions observed and analyzed in Hong Kong/Korean teams show similarities in several dimensions. This constituted a certain team culture that was characterized by a Collective Community orientation and Hierarchical Authority orientation. Teams were similar in

- B4-3 -

Long Time orientation, although Hong Kong was strongly influenced by a Short Time orientation of a Canadian tutor. Hong Kong and Korean students communicated High Contextually, while Korean students tended to Lower Contextual Communication styles. Teams differed largely in Polychronic (Hong Kong) and Monochronic Time orientation (Korea). Hong Kong followed Particular Standards whereas Korea tended to employ Universal Standards. While Korean teams Ascribed to the design project, Hong Kong students did anything to Achieve goals set by the tutors. Korean teams perceived Technology as Controlling but Hong Kong had the perception that they were Controlling Communication Technologies. Finally, Korean students had Higher Uncertainty Avoidance than Hong Kong students. Based on this theory-driven analysis of observations, eleven design patterns that were recurrently employed to facilitate interactions among members of above-mentioned cross-cultural collaborative design learning teams were articulated. In addition, five design suggestions were recognized, which were not yet implemented. Finally all patterns were compared to interactions observed Hong Kong/Austrian, Hong Kong/Taiwanese and Hong Kong/US-American collaboration. Figure 2 shows the network of related patterns. This paper will present the patterns (1) GRAND OPENING, (3) INTERNATIONAL HOME, (6) LOCAL VARIATIONS and (10) GLOBAL RESOLUTION in detail, while other patterns and hypotheses are described in pattern thumbnails.

Figure 2. Cross-cultural collaborative design learning design pattern map

- B4-4 -

Thumbnails DP2: COMMUNITY WATCH: Watching activities in an international community online portal supports the awareness and coordination of community relevant information and actions in geographically and culturally dispersed teams. DP4: STRUCTURED CHAT: A synchronous computer-mediated chat, which is based on local and shared design ideas and representations, keeps the discussion among culturally diverse collaborators focused. DP5: SUMMING UP: Frequent summaries of discussions online or among local team members and with local tutors allow the global virtual team to gain a common understanding of the local and global design project process, tasks, ideas and open problems to solve in following conversations. DP7: MOOD OF THE MOMENT: Emotional values in textual communication are implicitly conveyed using visual communication means. DP8: ANNOTATED DESIGN GALLERY: An annotated design gallery supports sharing and interpreting of locally implemented design variations. DP 9: WHO WHEN WHAT: Allowing structuring online information by User ID, Date and Time and Content Summary bridges cultural differences in managing online contents. DP11: GRAND FINALE: Celebrate the final, virtually mediated project presentation like an important ceremony. DH1: READY STEADY GO: Having all possible computer-supported collaboration tools ready to use at the beginning of the design project (in the collocated workshop) allows for a smooth collaboration start. DH2: AUTHORITY SAYS …: Students as well as tutors communicate advice from local tutorials to the remote team asynchronously. DH3: LOCAL CO-ACTIVITY: Make a ware of co-presence and local activities of remote team members who are not signed in with a separate chat account but co-present at the account holders location.

- B4-5 -

DP1: “GRAND OPENING” **

Thumbnail A grand project opening makes participants aware of the importance of the project, connects them emotionally with the learning community and provides opportunity for first coordination among the distributed local teams.

Cultural Context Supports Collective Community and Hierarchical Authority orientation cultures. Bridges High and Low Contextual Communication cultures. This pattern was observed to work well in Hong Kong/Korean and Hong Kong/Taiwanese collaborations.

Context A computer-supported collaborative design subject is offered at Universities in different countries. For the majority of students who signed into the course it is the first experience to collaborate with students from other nations and over a distance.

Breakdown The international distributed design project is about to start. Local teams were formed and remote teams were assigned to each local team. Now students from local and remote teams need to start working collaboratively on the project. Although all participants know the project brief, it is difficult for the distributed groups to approach the design problem because they are unaware of each other's personal and professional backgrounds, culture, expectations and goals.

Problem How can one initiate contact between students from universities around the world, who will work on a common design project?

- B4-6 -

Forces Collective Community-oriented collaborators need to develop a sense of belonging to the learning community and remote team members in order to trust each other and take responsibility for the project outcome. It is difficult to establish such conditions in a short-term design project over a distance, because teams do not share a common history. If participants miss out the chance to get to know each other at the beginning of the project, breakdowns in communication are more likely to occur later on in the project. In order to facilitate the emergence of common ground, Collective Community-oriented cultures need to have close contact over a period of time. However, holding the international project for the entire time collocatedly is not viable.

Solution Organize a short, intensive, collocated workshop to which all participants are invited. Help students to gain common ground by introducing the design topic in lectures, by scheduling collaborative activities to let the team establish a common goal, and by organizing social events for the participants to get to know each other. A memorable beginning of the design project helps students to connect emotionally to the community and team. For this purpose, interweave off and on task activities in the collocated short workshop. Give an opening lecture to establish a shared understanding of the project goals and communicate all necessary project information. Set up a collaboration goal or several milestones that should be reached during the collocated workshop. Thereafter let the local and remote team members introduce each other informally and allow time for social events. At the same time, encourage the participants to explore the design topic to discover similarities and differences among the team members' expectations and visions. Especially in design projects, stimulate multi-modal discussions using mind mapping, sketching, playing games or telling stories to convey design ideas among culturally diverse members. Encourage the emergence of team roles, which each member takes up according to skills and interests. A plan for accomplishing project milestones is aligned to the curriculum given by the course leaders.

Why A grand opening conveys a feeling of importance for Collective Community and Hierarchical Authority cultures, due to which students will feel obliged to take the project seriously and take responsibility. In an intensive and inclusive workshop where formal and informal meetings are intertwined, Collective Community cultures establish a friendly relationship, which is important to fuel a successful collaboration beyond this workshop. In collaboration where students discuss using a second language, reaching shared understanding is facilitated through High and Low Contextual Communication. When misunderstandings occur in verbal communication ideas are written down, drawn or acted out, which balances Low and High Contextual Communication. Due to the interrelation of tasks and off-task activities in this workshop, students negotiate a shared understanding by exploring and explaining their design ideas within multiple contexts from which meaning can be inferred. - B4-7 -

Resulting Context Due to restrictions in time and funds not all students might be able to join the collocated workshop, therefore use READY STEADY GO and make sure that all collaborative technologies are set up and ready to use before the participants converge in the local workshop. In case the grand opening cannot be hold collocatedly, start the design project with a distributed collaborative task that connects sharing and comparing information about the participants’ backgrounds and visions about the joined design project. Use the pattern KNOW ME BETTER for this activity.

Related Work Researchers who look into intercultural computer-supported collaboration mentioned the effectiveness of collocated workshops as openers for distributed collaboration among heterogeneous groups (Vogel et al., 2001).

- B4-8 -

DP3: “INTERNATIONAL HOME” **

Thumbnail A virtual group home supports storing, sharing, creating and modifying of design ideas and representations among distributed learning teams.

Cultural Context Supports Collective Community and Hierarchical Authority cultures. Bridges High and Low Contextual Communication, High and Low Uncertainty Avoidance, Particular and Universal Standard, Monochrome and Polychrome Time oriented cultures. This pattern was successfully used to support Hong Kong/Korean, Hong Kong/Austrian and Hong Kong/Taiwanese design learning teams.

Context You established a design learning community using GRAND OPENING. In this intensive workshop atmosphere, teams gained an awareness of the community in general and their international team members in particular. Using READY STEADY GO you might have enabled remote students to monitor community activities using the patterns COMMUNITY WATCH that incorporates remote students who could not attend the GRAND OPENING into the community.

Breakdown The global team negotiated general goals and strategies to collaborate in this project in the collocated workshop. However, since not all members were present at the GRAND OPENING, more specific arrangements were left to be negotiated in synchronous communication with the entire team. In this initial conversation team members became suddenly aware of their difficulties in explaining local developments in textual communication only.

Problem How can one facilitate the continuous production and exchange of design ideas in distributed design learning teams?

- B4-9 -

Forces While Polychrome Time and Particular Standard oriented team members already looked into multiple possible design directions locally and came up with new ideas, Monochrome Time and Universal Standard orientated members approached the problem more structured and linearly. They started to develop the original concept theoretically. Although this difference in approaching design learning doesn’t have necessarily a negative effect, team members still need to be aware of this variation. However, due to face-saving techniques in Collective Community cultures, it is considered rude to ask directly what the other side was doing and has accomplished yet. Furthermore, High Contextually Communicating cultures rather infer such information from clues that the environment offers and engage eventually in conversations to gain a common understanding of the next steps. Team members who work on many particular ideas at once can accept a certain degree of uncertainty concerning the process and results. This is not the case for High Uncertainty Avoidance team members, who want to know about all options in order to gain a universal understanding of the design space and problem. If those cultures design together, there is a need to be aware of local processes and coordinate collaborate efforts in a central location that can be accessed at any time.

Solution Provide an online space as central resource to manage all design project related contents. This group environment facilitates the storage, asynchronous creation and communication of design ideas and representations. Moreover, the local team can monitor parallel remote design processes of the remote team. Essential elements in this environment include but are not limited to storage, sharing and creation of design artefacts and documents. Asynchronous conversation and access to stored synchronous conversation histories are also important facilities in the group home. Ideally the group home integrates all those aspects within one online environment. Alternatively external online applications can be linked from the groups’ home.

Why Such a group coordination and content management environment can give Collective Community and High Contextual Communication cultures the opportunity to interpret implicit information first before more explicit questions are asked. While Particular Standard cultures store many diverse design examples, Universal Standard cultures gain a more complete picture from those examples in the early stages of the design process. Universal Standard cultures prefer to gain a holistic view before they engage in a discussion. In case meaning cannot be distilled from the multiplicity of design representations, the exchange of asynchronous Low Contextual messages can clarify the understanding of the shared representations and local design processes displayed online. Alternatively, a shared document that addresses all open questions can be created. A document or message thread can SUM UP the main issues identified in a STRUCTURED CHAT. In particular, Polychrome Time cultures benefit from refraining from a specific order of design events (i.e. someone creates a document, an another person edits it

- B4-10 -

thereafter) Moreover asynchronous messages enable Monochrome Time oriented cultures to engage in SLOW THINKING.

Resulting Context Design representations are shared using the ANNOTATED DESIGN GALLERY. SUMMING UP contents of STRUCTURED CHAT conversations can be kept in a shared document or shared as asynchronous threaded messages, which support SLOW THINKING. To structure the shared contents in the group home use the pattern WHO WHEN WHAT.

Related Work Schuemmer at al proposed additional design pattern such as THREADED DISCUSSION, SHARED FILE REPOSITORY or SHARED EDITING that confirm above-mentioned solution (Schümmer, 2003), (Schümmer, 2004). A few researchers discussed benefits of threaded, asynchronous discussions for multicultural groups such as integration of less English proficient speakers into the discussion (Kim and Bonk, 2002), (Agerup and Buesser, 2004).

- B4-11 -

DP6: “LOCAL VARIATIONS” ***

Thumbnail Implementing local variations of a globally shared design concept or idea facilitates the development of a shared understanding in cross-cultural collaborative design learning.

Cultural Context Bridges Low and High Contextual Communication, Universal and Particular Standard, Ascription and Achievement, High and Low Uncertainty Avoidance oriented cultures. This pattern was observed in Hong Kong/Korean and Hong Kong/Taiwanese design collaboration.

Context You used the ANNOTATED DESIGN GALLERY to promote sharing ideas, references and design examples among the distributed local design learning teams.

Breakdown Distributed design students work parallel in local design teams. In online discussions they propose and discuss multiple ideas. However, they have difficulties to decide which ideas are feasible and should be further developed. Hence they argue for different ideas without finding a compromise.

Problem How can one promote the emergence and development of shared design ideas and solutions?

Forces Collective Cultures want to develop a collectively accepted design concept. However, local teams have to explore the feasibility of a globally discussed design concept. While High Contextually Communicating collaborators prefer to explore ideas through drawings and mock-ups, Low Contextually Communicating cultures prefer to express and test ideas in written concepts, especially early in the design process. Hence, this might lead to a conflict regarding when, why and in which fidelity implementations of design ideas should be made in the design process. Some members contribute design representations in different stages of fidelity and complexity continuously from the early stages onwards

- B4-12 -

in the process. While these Polychrome Time and Particular Standard cultures develop design ideas through frequent implementation, Monochrome Time and Universal Standard cultures need to develop a theoretical understanding and strong concept before they start executing the implementation of their ideas. High Uncertainty Avoidance cultures don’t want to do anything wrong and wait until they are certain about their ideas in order to implement them. This can lead to ill-defined conflicts because Particular Standard and Polychrome Time cultures assume laziness behind this approach.

Solution Support the implementation of local variations of globally shared design concepts and ideas at any level of fidelity and stage of the design process. Local variations expressed in scribbles, sketches, virtual or physical prototypes are based on a shared understanding of the design space. This is displayed in the ANNOTATED DESIGN GALLERY in which possible solutions are displayed. Students interpret local variations from global solutions displayed in this shared space. They test ideas locally and compare local variations in conversations online in order to reorganize the solution space.

Why Shared knowledge is gained through multi modal communication of design ideas in cross-cultural teams. Sharing and comparing variations of local implementations helps team members to co-construct knowledge. Although some cultures feel uncomfortable implementing early, they are inspired through evaluations of other members' variations and encouraged to also offer variations based on the newly gained shared understanding from their evaluation. A product implementation can dominate the discussion, so that other team members want to measure-up by implementing their design variations. Furthermore, frequent and early implementations allow for more certainty in the design process. This supports gaining common ground in design collaboration. Through the implementation and comparison of local variations, universal ideas that were negotiated in the team are tested and particular improvements are made. Hence, the strength of both cultural dimensions Particular and Universal Standards is exploited. This balances needs and goals of Achievement and Ascription cultures because hands-on achievements as well as idealistic ascription values are considered in this process.

Resulting Context LOCAL VARIATIONS can be displayed and shared in the ANNOTATED DESIGN GALLERY. Use STRUCTURED CHAT to negotiate and detect skills of each member and utilize SUMMING UP to distribute appropriate tasks related to the implementation of local variations among the members. In early stages the GRAFFITI WALL can be used to visually explore and collaboratively draw design ideas.

Related Work Although this solution seems very intuitive, the author was unable to identify related work.

- B4-13 -

DP10: “GLOBAL RESOLUTION” ***

Thumbnail Visually and verbally supported synchronous text chat tutorials help in gaining common ground among culturally diverse distributed learning teams and their local tutors.

Cultural Context Supports Collective Community and Hierarchical Authority oriented cultures. Bridges High and Low Contextual Communication, Achievement and Ascription oriented cultures. This design pattern was used in collaboration between Hong Kong and Korea, and Hong Kong and Taiwan.

Context In this learning community, local tutors predominantly instruct local teams. Local tutorial teams use the STRUCTURED CHAT to compare local activities and instructions and develop a shared understanding of changes suggested by the tutor.

Breakdown After a local, face-to-face tutorial students discuss remotely the options for the development of the designs but cannot gain common ground about the direction they want to follow. This might be due to differences in the local and remote tutors' advice or because some students do not want to adopt the tutor's opinion without discussing the feasibility of the suggestions among the entire team. However, since local teams are assessed locally, the local tutors' opinion has a high significance for them. A breakdown among the local and remote team occurs because possibly contradictory instructional advice of the tutors cannot be resolved in the global team. Hence, instructing distributed design-learning teams exclusively in local face-to-face tutorials causes breakdowns in the coordination and decision making process of the global virtual team.

Problem How can one support the global virtual team to coordinate and resolve potentially conflicting local instructions?

- B4-14 -

Forces Collective Community and Hierarchical Authority oriented cultures have a tendency to follow the tutor's advice without question. The result is that in a chat discussion about local instructions, students hold on to their local tutor's advice. Nevertheless, maintaining harmony in the global virtual team is also important to Collective Community oriented cultures. However, if tutors give different advice in separate local tutorials, harmony in the global virtual team is disturbed. Harmony can only be restored if both tutors' views are balanced and a decision is imposed from above.

Solution Let local instructors advice not only local teams but also global virtual teams. Establish several synchronous computer-supported peer tutorials over the project period involving local and remote instructors and students of the global team. Scheduling at least three sessions, one at the beginning of the project, one interim and a final presentation, is a minimum requirement for establishing common ground in this design learning community. Synchronous peer tutorials involving local and remote tutors and teams are major project milestones and offer ultimate awareness of the progress in the teams and the opinions and suggestions of both tutors. Design decisions can be made instantly. Possible conflicts in advice can be discussed on the spot. In textual synchronous communication tutors can refer to representations of the designs stored in the DESIGN GALLERY as reference for the discussion. However, video-supported presentations of the teams' designs are especially successful. In the discussion and comparison of local implementations, students and tutors can communicate in reference to shared physical design artefacts. Since sound quality is sometimes a problem, textual synchronous communication can be used to support the visual demonstration of the design artefacts.

Why In visual and textual supported synchronous discussion and tutorial sessions, students explain their design implementations in detail by means of sketches and prototypes. The discussants can immediately check and clarify misunderstandings in the design process. Both teams share and explain the design process from their local point of view, which fosters equality among the teams. All attending students and tutors gain awareness and common ground through High Contextual Communication. Having gained the entire picture of the global team's process and progress, tutors can discuss the proposal among themselves and communicate the decision and instructional advice immediately and in unity to the global team. High Contextual and multi-modal information about the designs enables tutors to give Low Contextual, clear and direct advice. Due to the strong Hierarchical Authority orientation of the students, the advice is taken without objection. This resolves possible uncertainties of the students and restores the harmony in Collective Community oriented cultures. While the conclusion of the discussion satisfies Achievement-oriented cultures, the involvement of the entire community reassured Ascription-oriented cultures that they are aligned with the projects values and goals, too. Therefore, global resolutions given by the tutors should address - B4-15 -

universal goals and directions but should refrain from giving concrete tasks for both teams. Even if the team's abilities and skills do not match the assignment or task, the students would not object to the tutors' instruction. Collective Community oriented students would not speak up in front of the community not wanting the tutor to lose face. Hence, while discussing the new design direction, teams can clarify new tasks and roles that evolved from the tutorial.

Resulting Context You can use the pattern STRUCTURED CHAT to achieve global resolutions.

Related Work Vogel et al. (2001) reported about the benefit of structured instructional feedback for collectivist cultures.

Conclusions The presented patterns in this paper represent a small section of my Ph.D. research into design patterns for cross-cultural collaboration. This research contributes mainly to three areas of knowledge. It advances knowledge in the underrepresented area of research into cross-cultural design and learning. It also contributed knowledge to the area of internationalization and localization of products and systems. This research showed that different cultures require different technological support and course design to facilitate intercultural collaboration between them. The internationalization of systems that enable collaboration and interaction among different cultures vary from one collaboration context to another. Hence, knowledge that enables technology and course developers to design interactive systems that support intercultural collaboration is context dependent and requires a format of communication that specifically addresses solutions within a certain cultural context. Design patterns were identified to be a well-balanced communication format for context dependent knowledge. They communicate practical advice, which, in the case of intercultural collaboration, is explained using theoretical knowledge of differences in cultural values that influence human interaction with technology and interaction with other humans mediated by technology. This research will be further developed in the context of the organization of design learning local workshops and an accompanying online community for Chinese design schools.

Acknowledgements I’d like to thank my shepherd, Tim Wellhausen, who spend considerable time and effort to understand my design patterns approach and helped me to improve the patterns presented in this paper.

References Adler, N. J. (2002). International Dimensions of Organizational Behavior. South Western, Thomson, Cincinnati, Ohio.

- B4-16 -

Agerup, K. and Buesser, M. (2004). A case study on collaborative learning in distributed, cross-cultural teams. In International Conference on Engineering Education, Gainesville, Florida. Alexander, C. (1979). The timeless way of building. New York : Oxford University Press. Cheng, N. (2003). Approaches to design collaboration. Automation in Construction Journal, 12:715–723. Condon, J. C. and Yousef, F. S. (1985). An introduction to intercultural communication. Macmillan, New York. Hall, E. T. (1990). Understanding cultural differences. Intercultural Press, Yarmouth, Me. Hofstede, G. (1997). Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind. McGraw-Hill, New York. Kim, K. and Bonk, C. (2002). Cross-cultural comparisons of online collaboration. Journal of ComputerMediated Communication JCMC, 8(1). Kluckhohn, F. R. (1950). Dominant and substitute profiles of cultural orientations: Their significance for the analysis of social stratification. Social Forces, 28(4):376–393. Marcus, A. (2005). User-interface design and culture. In N. Aykin. Usability and internationalization of information technology. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Martin, D., Rouncefield, M., Rodden, T., Sommerville, I., and Viller, S. (2001). Finding patterns in the fieldwork. In ECSCW’01, Bonn, Germany. Kluwer. Schadewitz, N., Jachna, T. (2007). Introducing New Methodologies for Identifying Design Patterns for Internationalization and Localization. In Proc. of International Conference on HumanComputer Interaction, HCII, Beijing, China, July, 22-27, 2007. Schümmer, T. (2003). Evolving a groupware pattern language. In ECSCW 2003, the 8th European Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, in Helsinki. Schümmer, T. (2004). Gama - a pattern language for computer supported dynamic collaboration. In EuroPLoP 2003 Proceedings of the 8th European Conference on Pattern Languages of Programs, Konstanz, Germany. UVK. Trompenaars, F. and Hampden-Turner, C. (1994). The seven cultures of capitalism : value systems for creating wealth in the United States, Britain, Japan, Germany, France, Sweden, and the Netherlands. Piatkus, London. Victor, D. A. (1992). International business communication. Harper-Collins, New York. Vogel, D., van Genuchten, M., Lou, D., Verveen, S., van Eekhout, M., and Adams, T. (2001). Exploratory research on the role of national and professional cultures in a distributed learning pro ject. In IEEE Transactions on Professional Communications, pages 114–125.

- B4-17 -