Research on Intercultural Teaching for RE - Proposal for a Multi Case Study

Intercultural aspects are important aspects in software engineering in teaching as well as in practice. In the requirements engineering context, these topics are not so well addressed by research, and if they are, then in the meaning of national cultures. We expect that, besides this, the diverse “professional cultures” of the participants in the requirements engineering process are an equally important aspect. This paper provides a first proposal for a research collaboration on intercultural aspects in requirements engineering teaching. We are searching partners for this study. Index Terms Intercultural, interdisciplinary, research outline—. A. Introduction and Motivation Software engineering (SE) is a multi-step transformation of ideas into artifacts. In this process, Requirements Engineering (RE) is the first step, in which the ideas of the future users or their representatives (managers etc.) will be transformed in a more or less formalized representation. Not all participants in this process are trained or experienced in methods of formalization (modeling, developing of algorithms etc.). The teaching of RE deals with methods of elicitation, documentation and validation (see for instance the syllabus of the IREB Foundation Level [20]). The important intercultural aspects, however, are regularly not treated. In the research on SE, we find studies about intercultural aspects in international cooperation (e.g. [22],[28]), enforced by the trend to international software development outsourcing, for example to India/Bangalore or Russia. These studies partly emphasize the aspects of different national cultures that influence the handling of requirements, for example in the aspect of the non-critical acceptance of the requirement documents, even if they contain unrealistic requirements. Cultural differences are listed as one of many sources of challenges in distributed development, e.g. in [5], [10], [11], [12], [23]. Cultural differences lead to misunderstandings that happen when the communicating parties make tacit assumptions that are not shared by the others because it is not part of their cultural background. This includes misunderstandings about the meaning of software requirements and about work processes, and finally leads to software that does not conform to what the stakeholders really wanted. This causes re-work, suboptimal project results and also negative emotions among the parties. Despite this importance of culture for RE, we find only little research on the intercultural differences in RE training. There are approaches to teach such socio-technical aspects within the RE education [8], [15], [29] , but research on the different training needs in different cultures is missing. A training concept which works well in one cultural context might work less well in another context. In our definition, “culture” is not limited to national cultures, but also refers to professional and organizational cultures. In addition, differences between different learning contexts like university teaching, a workshop at a conference, or an in-house training in a company are considered different cultures. To investigate such differences is important because the quality of RE is known to be critical for the success of software projects [25]. This emphasizes the importance of the education of software practitioners [21] – regardless of whether RE is conducted in a formal RE process in heavyweight software development processes or conducted in a less formal way in agile processes. We plan a study which will test the hypothesis that there are differences between learners from different cultures in terms of the learning succcess achieved or fun experienced. Depending on culture, some training concepts might work well in one culture and less in another. This paper presents an initial outline for setting up a research study that is open for interested colleagues – teachers, trainers and researchers. During the REET workshop, we want to receive feedback concerning the planned study and its internationalization. Moreover, REET gives us a unique opportunity to meet and discuss with potential cooperation partners especially outside Europe. B. Definition: Culture The term “culture” is understood differently. According to Hofstede [16], culture is characterized by six factors: Power distance, Individualism vs. collectivism, Uncertainty avoidance index, Masculinity, Long-term orientation vs. short term orientation, Indulgence versus restraint [16]. Hofstede defines culture as “the collective programming of the mind distinguishing the members of one group or category of people from another” [17]. However, we also (at least informally) talk about different cultures when talking about cultures of companies, cultures in different professional disciplines, types of teaching environments (e.g. university versus on-the job training), etc. In some disciplines, stereotyped archetypes of persons and their character behavior exist. This is for instance reflected in the assumption all information scientists being bad communicators and bad team workers, or in jokes that address the brevity of students in technical topics. A previous study on communication problems in distributed software development has found cultural differences not only between countries, but also between different organizational cultures, between younger and older people, and between different professional cultures (like software developers versus managers or customers) [26]. Another study within India showed that even within one country, one can find large cultural differences [3]. 1) Interculturality: International aspects Hofstede defines that “The category can refer to nations, regions within or across nations, ethnicities, religions, occupations, organizations, or the genders.” [17] This dimension of interculturality is widely accepted and discussed in science and in practical work and trainings. 2) Interculturality: Organizational Cultures Organizational culture is – according to [24] – “the pattern of basic assumptions, that a given group has invented, discovered, or developed in learning to cope with its problems of external adaption and internal integration”. The organizational culture focuses on the internal relationships in an organization. The learning experiences of a company, its strategy and its tradition are important aspects. Hofstede [19] lists the following dimensions of organizational culture: meansoriented vs. goal-oriented, internally driven vs. externally driven, Easygoing work discipline vs. Strict work discipline, Local vs. Professional, Open system vs. Closed system, Employee-oriented vs. Work-oriented, Degree of acceptance of leadership style, Degree of identification with your organization. These dimensions will affect the process of Requirements Engineering. 3) Interculturality: Professional Cultures There is not as much literature on professional cultures as on national or organizational cultures. Herkenhoff measures differences between professional cultures using the Hofstede dimensions [13]. She points out the relationship between the professional cultures and the national cultures: “Just as Hofstede notes that national culture is not genetically shared but is passed down between groups, the same holds true for professional culture.” [13] One aspect for example is the longterm vs. short-term orientation of professions [2]. In this dimension, computer programmers and other people engaged in project work may be short-term focused. Herkenhoff [13] developed a Professional Culture questionnaire (PC08) based on Hofstede/Bond as a tool for measuring along the dimensions of Power, Time, Risk, Service and Team. In her study, she compares professional culture rankings of people working in accounting, IT support, sales and science. Referring to the five dimensions of professional culture (Power, Time, Risk, Service, Team) IT staff shows high ranking values for team orientation and service, but only low values for long term orientation. PC08 can be used as questionnaire for our study. The remainder of this paper is structured as follows: Section II summarizes the current situation in research on intercultural aspects in RE. Section III sets up the research design for our multi case study research project. Section IV discusses the research design and Section V summarizes the paper and the possible next steps. II. LITERATURE ON INTERCULTURAL ASPECTS IN RE