The culture-centered design approach emerged as a response to concerns about the standardization of product design due to globalization. This approach prioritizes localization and cultural sensitivity, with designers seeking to uncover the symbolic underpinnings of historical works and adapt them to contemporary user sensibilities. To aid in this endeavor, researchers have proposed practical processes and models geared toward identifying and translating cultural nuances for designers. Consequently, a pertinent query emerges: what are the shared attributes and discrepancies among these models, and how do they contribute to the comprehension and translation of cultural symbols in design objects? To address the aforementioned inquiry, a descriptive-analytical study utilizing a comparative approach was undertaken. The study involved the collection of information through document analysis, focusing on the examination of three culture-centered design models. These particular models were selected based on their emphasis on practical application and output within the design process. Subsequently, the study delved into an exploration of the symbolic motifs inherent in a cultural artifact, specifically the Iranian carpet, within the framework provided by the selected models. Notably, the Iranian carpet serves as a significant source imbued with profound cultural and identity-related significance for designers, as its motifs are rooted in the artistic philosophies and thought processes of Iranian Muslim artisans. The findings from the analysis of the chosen sample within the context of product culture-oriented design models reveal that, despite variations in the underlying philosophical frameworks of these models, all three are rooted in the essential processes of identification, translation, and implementation. In the identification phase, the accurate recognition of cultural product symbols is paramount; failure in this aspect hinders the designer’s ability to effectively translate these symbols into the contemporary language of the audience, thereby impeding their comprehension of audience desires and needs, and hindering the establishment of effective product-audience communication.
