Search for: All records

Just as engineering designs can be uniquely created for different cultures around the world, engineers come from all over and view design through their own cultural lenses. Culture can impact how designers perceive themselves, their self-efficacy, and the way they interpret the design task at hand. Studies have shown that cultural values and behavior (i.e., cultural context) impact communication patterns, as well as learning strategies (Newman et al., 2017, “Psychological Safety: A Systematic Review of the Literature,” Hum. Resour. Manage. Rev., 27(3), pp. 521–535. 10.1016/j.hrmr.2017.01.001; Hirsch et al., 2001, “Engineering Design and Communication: The Case for Interdisciplinary Collaboration,” Int. J. Eng. Educ., 17(4/5), pp. 343–348). Halls' information processing continuum illuminates how some cultures communicate explicitly through written and spoken words (low context), while others communicate with a common awareness of nonverbal cues (high context) (Handford et al., 2019, “Which ‘Culture’? A Critical Analysis of Intercultural Communication in Engineering Education,” J. Eng. Educ., 108(2), pp. 161–177. 10.1002/jee.20254). Designers from low-context cultures are more comfortable in a low-context learning environment (e.g., with explicitly written instructions), whereas those from high-context cultures benefit more from face-to-face interactions (Goel and Pirolli, 1992, “The Structure of Design Problem Spaces,” Cogn. Sci., 16(3), pp. 395–429. 10.1207/s15516709cog1603_3). These communication differences impact cross-cultural collaboration within global companies and virtual teams. This study examined whether communicating a design task in a more engaging manner would impact solution quality and self-efficacy, particularly in light of the designer's culture and/or familiarity with the design problem. Engineering undergraduate students and professionals were recruited from each of 10 countries, including the United States, to complete a design task and respond to self-perception questions. Participants were presented with the design problem in one of two modes: written (low context) or video (high context). Results showed that delivery modality and cultural context did impact design solution quality and self-efficacy; however, differences were found between professionals and students.