Working with users and stakeholders. Cross-cultural design, part 3/3
This is the last part of the series of articles about culture. I would now like to look at other dimensions that have an impact on the quality of your work in design and research.
Evaluating (Feedback):
From direct negative feedback (clear and specific) to indirect negative feedback (gentle, conveyed between the lines).
I remember my first user tests in Great Britain. The participant was polite, and when asked about a difficult application, he replied that it was "quite OK." It was only a conversation with our English client that made me realize this meant serious problems and discomfort. In Poland, I would have heard this much more directly.
Direct cultures (e.g., Netherlands, Russia, Israel) express criticism openly, factually, sometimes using "upgraders" (e.g., "absolutely inappropriate").
Indirect cultures (e.g., Japan, Thailand, Great Britain) use subtle forms, "softeners" (e.g., "a bit," "maybe"), and understatements to avoid causing offense.
Strategies:
Be careful with adaptation: Don't try to imitate the style of another culture if you don't know it well. It's easy to overdo it. A Pole imitating British subtlety might be incomprehensible, and a Brit imitating American directness might be perceived as rude.
If in doubt, ask clarifying questions: "Do I understand correctly that you are suggesting...?"
Alternative techniques: In cultures that prefer indirect feedback, I recommend using engaging techniques, such as role-playing, to gather opinions without the need for direct confrontation.
Persuading
From principles-first (starting with theory and general principles) to applications-first (based on examples, practice, and details).
I experienced a small cultural shock when I changed my working style from a more British to an American one. When presenting research results, I usually started with the methodological context: why such methods were used, why a certain number of people were studied, etc. In Great Britain, this approach worked. However, in an American team, which is strongly "application-first," my approach completely failed.
Principles-first cultures (e.g., France, Italy, Poland) value understanding the theory and context before moving on to practice and conclusions.
Applications-first cultures (e.g., USA, Canada, Australia) prefer to start with practical examples and conclusions, and only then, if necessary, delve into the theory.
Presenting research results to an American team ("application-first"), I started with methodology and was met with resistance and impatience – participants wanted to know the conclusions straight away. I changed my approach: I start with the results, and leave the methodology for the end - now it's definitely more effective.
Strategies:
If you are dealing with different cultures, use a hybrid style: Combine both approaches. Start with an example, then explain the principles (or vice versa).
Explain your approach: State at the beginning how you will present the information.
Of course, if you can, ask what style is preferred - and adapt accordingly.
Scheduling
From linear-time (strictly adhering to schedules and punctuality) to flexible-time (allowing for fluidity and spontaneity).
A long time ago, I was standing on a beach in Indonesia waiting for a boat. Despite a prior reservation, the boat didn't arrive. After a call to the local guide, I learned that the boat would only appear after the captain's lunch. For the guide, my dissatisfaction was incomprehensible, and my questions "when exactly will that be" were also completely incomprehensible, just as it was incomprehensible to me that a vaguely defined lunch time was delaying the cruise. A linear approach to scheduling assumes strict adherence to timetables and deadlines, whereas a flexible approach allows for plans to be adapted according to changing circumstances and priorities.
Linear-time cultures (e.g., Germany, Switzerland, Japan) treat time as a resource, strictly adhere to schedules, and punctuality is key. Flexible-time cultures (e.g., Middle East, Africa, India, South America) perceive time as fluid, plans can change, and relationships are often more important than the schedule.
Poland is closer to a linear approach, but with a certain degree of flexibility. For a German, "in five minutes" means exactly 300 seconds. For a Balinese, a meeting "after lunch" can mean a wide time frame.
Strategies:
Clear communication and education: Simply discuss the approach to time within the team at the beginning and establish rules.
Visual schedules: Use shared tools (Kanban, Trello, Gantt).
Time buffers: Build margins into the schedule.
Disagreeing
From confrontational (openly expressed) to avoids confrontation (avoiding open conflict).
In confrontational cultures (e.g., Israel, France, Germany), open expression of disagreement and debate are seen as constructive and leading to better solutions. In confrontation-avoiding cultures (e.g., Japan, Thailand, Indonesia), the priority is group harmony, and direct conflict is unwelcome. Emotional expressiveness is different! One can be expressive and avoid confrontation (e.g., Philippines) or be unexpressive and confrontational (e.g., Germany).
Strategies:
Plan workshops carefully: Create a space for expressing different opinions in a safe way (e.g., anonymous brainstorming where ideas are not attributed to authors). Consider two different meetings for different cultural groups.
Consider collaborating with a mediator: In difficult situations, consider involving a neutral third party who knows the culture well.
Individual conversations: Before workshops, talk to participants individually to understand their perspective and prepare them for discussion.
Summary
How to use the Culture Map in practice?
Understanding cultural differences is a powerful tool. What can you do to better navigate an international environment?
Analyze Yourself: Where do you fall on the individual scales? Use available tools (even simplified online ones) or simply reflect on your preferences. You can use the "Country Mapping Tool," GlobeSmart, or The Culture Factor's Country Comparison Tool.
Remember Individuality: Culture is only one factor. Don't assume everyone from a given country is the same. Always consider personality and individual experiences.
Flexibility: Your way of working isn't always the only right way. If possible, try to adapt to the culture of the team or client.
Focus on Transparency: If adaptation is difficult, open communication is key. Explain potential differences in work styles and expectations. This builds trust and prevents misunderstandings.
Build Bridges: Actively seek compromise solutions and strategies that work for everyone (e.g., hybrid presentations, clear decision-making rules).
Establish Rules at the Start: At the beginning of a collaboration, discuss preferences regarding communication, scheduling, and feedback. Create a team "contract."
Treating cultural diversity not as an obstacle, but as a source of learning and development, can make your work much more interesting and satisfying. Use your flexibility, gather experiences, and broaden your horizons.