Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
CONTENTS
Culture……………………………………...1
Layers of culture…………………………1
Culture and society………………………2
Introduction to culture and negotiation….3
Cross-Cultural Negotiation…………………9
Basis of relationship……………………….10
Information of Negotiations……………….10
Negotiation Styles…………………………10
Negotiating Globally………………………..14
1)Location……………………………....15
2)Physical arrangements…...…………...16
3)Participants…………………………...16
4)Time Limits…………………………..17
5)Status differences…………………….17
Negotiation Process………………………….18
1
Synergistic Approach ………...18
Negotiation Tactics…………………………..19
1)Verbal Tactics…………………………20
2)Nonverbal Tactics……………………..20
Dirty Tricks……………………………………..21
Conclusion……………………………………….25
Build a model……………………………..25
Observe……………………………………25
Analyse…………………………………….25
Act accordingly……………………………26
Useful tips…………………………………26
References..............................................................28
2
CULTURE
What is Culture?
The word culture has many different meanings. For some it refers to an appreciation
of good literature, music, art, and food. For a biologist, it is likely to be a colony of bacteria
or other microorganisms growing in a nutrient medium in a laboratory Petri dish. However,
for anthropologists and other behavioral scientists, culture is the full range of learned
human behavior patterns. Edward B. Tylor said that culture is "that complex whole which
includes knowledge, belief, art, law, morals, custom, and any other capabilities and habits
acquired by man as a member of society." Of course, it is not limited to men. Women
possess and create it as well. Since Tylor's time, the concept of culture has become the
central focus of anthropology.
Layers of Culture
There are very likely three layers or levels of culture that are part of your learned
behavior patterns and perceptions. Most obviously is the body of cultural traditions that
distinguish your specific society. When people speak of Italian, Samoan, or Japanese culture,
they are referring to the shared language, traditions, and beliefs that set each of these peoples
apart from others. In most cases, those who share your culture do so because they acquired it
as they were raised by parents and other family members who have it.
3
of each of these subcultures share a common identity, food tradition, dialect or language, and
other cultural traits that come from their common ancestral background and experience. As
the cultural differences between members of a subculture and the dominant national culture
blur and eventually disappear, the subculture ceases to exist except as a group of people who
claim a common ancestry. That is generally the case with German Americans and Irish
Americans in the United States today. Most of them identify themselves as Americans first.
They also see themselves as being part of the cultural mainstream of the nation.
The third layer of culture consists of cultural universals. These are learned behavior
patterns that are shared by all of humanity collectively. No matter where people live in the
world, they share these universal traits. Examples of such "human cultural" traits include:
While all cultures have these and possibly many other universal traits, different cultures
have developed their own specific ways of carrying out or expressing them. For instance,
people in deaf subcultures frequently use their hands to communicate with sign language
instead of verbal language. However, sign languages have grammatical rules just as verbal
ones do.
Culture and society are not the same thing. While cultures are complexes of learned
behavior patterns and perceptions, societies are groups of interacting organisms. People
are not the only have societies. Schools of fish, flocks of birds, and hives of bees are
societies. In the case of humans, however, societies are groups of people who directly or
indirectly interact with each other. People in human societies also generally perceive that
their society is distinct from other societies in terms of shared traditions and expectations.
While human societies and cultures are not the same thing, they are inextricably
connected because culture is created and transmitted to others in a society. Cultures are not
the product of lone individuals. They are the continuously evolving products of people
interacting with each other. Cultural patterns such as language and politics make no sense
except in terms of the interaction of people. If you were the only human on earth, there would
be no need for language or government.
4
When we think of culture we often think of the national cultures reported in the
international media. However, culture is much broader and encompasses the beliefs, attitudes
and behaviors of diverse ethnic groups, clans, tribes, regional subcultures or even
neighborhoods. Culture also differentiates people by religious or ideological persuasions,
professions and educational backgrounds. Families also have cultures, as do the two largest
cultural groups in the world, men and women. Companies, organizations and educational
institutions also demonstrate unique cultures. With all of these cultural variables, and
significant variations within cultures, how can we develop any common understanding,
general hypotheses or conclusions about how a particular person or group from any one
culture might behave in negotiations or conflicts?
Fig 1 and 2
Yet specific cultures do contain clusters of people with fairly common attitudinal and
behavioral patterns. As indicated in Figure I above, these clusters occupy the middle portion
of a bell-shaped curve (Trompenaars, 1994).
However, every culture includes outliers - people who vary significantly from the
norm. While still contained within the range for their culture, their views and behaviors differ
significantly from that of their peers and may even look similar to other cultures. For instance,
a businessman or engineer from a developing country who was educated in England may have
more in common with his or her peers in Europe than with his fellow countrymen (see Figure
II).
For this reason, we must be wary of generalizations about how people from a specific
culture may think or act. Rigid notions about a group's cultural patterns can result in
inaccurate stereotypes, gross injustice to the group and inaccurate (and possibly disastrous)
assumptions or actions. Common cultural patterns found in a group's central cultural cluster
should be looked upon as possible, or even probable, clues as to the ways a cultural group
may think or respond. But the hypothesis should always be tested and modified after direct
interaction with the group in question. You may well encounter an outlier who seems more
similar to us than we ever expected.
Similarly, people interacting with people from other cultures often feel 'lost'. Lacking
familiar attitudes, beliefs, behaviors, procedures or structures that shape day-to-day
interactions, people in cross-cultural situations often get disoriented, make mistakes and spend
time and energy merely surviving rather than understanding and appreciating the differences
they encounter. They also often fail to negotiate the most favorable agreements possible or to
resolve serious conflicts due to cultural misunderstandings.
Negotiators need general principles to guide their negotiation strategies and a culture 'map'
that helps them to:
5
• Identify the general 'topography' of cultures - the beliefs, attitudes, behaviors,
procedures and social structures that shape human interactions;
• Identify potential hazards, obstacles and pleasant surprises that negotiators might miss
if they did not have a trusty guide;
• Select responses that will promote successful interactions and outcomes.
Unfortunately, few analytical frameworks identify, interpret and respond to cultural
differences. Few maps describe how different cultures solve problems, negotiate
agreements or resolve disputes.
Although the term culture has taken on many different meanings, we use it to refer to
the shared values and beliefs held by the members of a group. Cultures are considered to be
stable over time. Hofstede conducted the most comprehensive and extensive program of
research identifying and exploring different cultural dimensions in international business.
Hofstede examined data on values that had been gathered from over 100,000 IBM employees
from around the world; to date, over 53 cultures and countries have been included in this
study. Statistical analysis these data suggests that five dimensions could be used to describe
the important differences among the cultures in the study.
These dimensions are:
1)POWER DISTANCE
The power distance dimension describes “the extent to which the less powerful
members of organization and institutions (like the family) accept and expect that power is
distributed unequally. According to Hofstede, cultures with greater power distance will be
more likely to have decisions making concentrated at the top, and all of the important
decisions will have to be finalized by the leader. Cultures with low power distance are more
likely to spread the decision making throughout the organization and while leaders are
respected, it is also possible to question their decisions. The consequences for international
negotiations are that negotiators from comparatively high power distance cultures may need
to seek approval from their supervisors more frequently, and for more issues, leading to
slower negotiations process.
Countries that are high in power distance include Africa, Malaysia, Guatemala and
Panama. Negotiators from these countries tend to be comfortable with :
• Hierarchical structures,
• Clear authority figures,
• The right to use power with discretion.
Countries with a low power distance include Great Britain, Austria, Denmark, USA, New
Zealand, Ireland, Sweden, Switzerland, and Germany. Negotiators from these countries tend
to be comfortable with
6
2)INDIVIDUALISM/ COLLECTIVISM
3)MASCULINITY/ FEMININITY
Hofstede found that cultures differed in the extent to which they held values that were
traditionally perceived as masculine or feminine. Masculine cultures were characterized by
“assertiveness, the acquisition of money and things, and not caring for others, the quality of
life or people. Feminine cultures were characterized by concern for relationships, nurturing
and quality of life. Countries that are higher in masculinity include Japan, Austria, and
Venezuela and, USA while countries that are higher in femininity include Costa Rica, Chile,
And Finland. According to Hofstede, this dimension influences negotiation by increasing the
competitiveness when negotiators from masculine cultures meet; negotiators from feminine
cultures are more likely to have empathy for the other party and to seek compromise.
4)UNCERTAINTY AVOIDANCE
5) LONG-TERM ORIENTATION
7
Long-Term Orientation is the fifth dimension of Hofstede which was added after the
original four to try to distinguish the difference in thinking between the East and West. From
the original IBM studies, this difference was something that could not be deduced. Therefore,
Hofstede created a Chinese value survey which was distributed across 23 countries. From
these results, and with an understanding of the influence of the teaching of Confucius on the
East, long term vs. short term orientation became the fifth cultural dimension.
Below are some characteristics of the two opposing sides of this dimension:
8
HOFSTEDE'S DIMENSIONS
INDIVIDUALIS UNCERTAI
POWER MASCULINIT
REGION/ M- NTY OTHER
DISTANC Y-
COUNTRY COLLECTIVIS AVOIDANC DIMENSIONS
E FEMININITY
M E
North America
(USA) Individualism Low Medium Masculine
West Slavic
Medium Medium/ high
Low Medium/ high
West Urgic individualism masculine
Near Eastern
Balkanic Medium
Collectivism High High
masculine
Nordic Medium/ High
Low Low/ medium Feminine
individualism
Latin Europe Medium/ High Medium
High High
individualism masculine
East Slavic Collectivism Low Medium Masculine
China Emphasis on
tradition,
Masculine and Marxism,
Collectivism Low Low
Feminine Leninism, and
Mao Zedong
thought
Africa Colonial
Collectivism High High Feminine traditions; tribal
customs
Latin America Extroverted,
prefer orderly
Collectivism High High Masculine
customs and
procedures
9
GEERT HOFSTEDE ANALYSIS TO TURKEY
(IDV): Individualism
(MAS): Masculinity
Religion in Turkey:
10
There is a high correlation between the Muslim religion and the Hofstede Dimensions
of Power Distance (PDI) and Uncertainty Avoidance (UAI) scores.
The combination of these two high scores (UAI) and (PDI) create societies that are
highly rule-oriented with laws, rules, regulations, and controls in order to reduce the amount
of uncertainty, while inequalities of power and wealth have been allowed to grow within the
society. These cultures are more likely to follow a caste system that does not allow significant
upward mobility of its citizens.
When these two Dimensions are combined, it creates a situation where leaders have
virtually ultimate power and authority, and the rules, laws and regulations developed by those
in power, reinforce their own leadership and control. It is not unusual for new leadership to
arise from armed insurrection – the ultimate power, rather than from diplomatic or democratic
change.
Cross cultural negotiations is about more than just how foreigners close deals. It
involves looking at all factors that can influence the proceedings. By way of highlighting this,
a few brief examples of topics covered in cross cultural negotiation training shall be offered.
Eye Contact : In the US, UK and much of northern Europe, strong, direct eye contact
conveys confidence and sincerity. In South America it is a sign of trustworthiness. However,
in some cultures such as the Japanese, prolonged eye contact is considered rude and is
generally avoided.
Personal Space & Touch: In Europe and North America, business people will usually leave
a certain amount of distance between themselves when interacting. Touching only takes place
between friends. In South America or the Middle East, business people are tactile and like to
get up close. In Japan or China, it is not uncommon for people to leave a gap of four feet
when conversing. Touching only takes place between close friends and family members.
Time: Western societies are very ‘clock conscious’. Time is money and punctuality is crucial.
This is also the case in countries such as Japan or China where being late would be taken as
an insult. However, in South America, southern Europe and the Middle East, being on time
for a meeting does not carry the same sense of urgency.
Meeting & Greeting: most international business people meet with a handshake. In some
countries this is not appropriate between genders. Some may view a weak handshake as sign
11
of weakness whereas others would perceive a firm handshake as aggressive. How should
people be addressed? Is it by first name, surname or title? Is small talk part of the proceedings
or not?
Gift-Giving: In Japan and China gift-giving is an integral part of business protocol; however
in the US or UK, it has negative connotations. Where gifts are exchanged should one give
lavish gifts? Are they always reciprocated? Should they be wrapped? Are there numbers or
colours that should be avoided?
There are three interconnected aspects that need to be considered before entering into
cross cultural negotiation:
Information at Negotiations
Western business culture places emphasis on clearly presented and rationally argued
business proposals using statistics and facts. Other business cultures rely on similar
information but with differences. For example, visual and oral communicators such as the
South Americans may prefer information presented through speech or using maps, graphs and
charts.
Negotiation Styles
The way in which we approach negotiation differs across cultures. For example, in the
Middle East rather than approaching topics sequentially negotiators may discuss issues
simultaneously. South Americans can become quite vocal and animated. The Japanese will
negotiate in teams and decisions will be based upon consensual agreement. In Asia, decisions
are usually made by the most senior figure or head of a family. In China, negotiators are
highly trained in the art of gaining concessions. In Germany, decisions can take a long time
due to the need to analyse information and statistics in great depth. In the UK, pressure tactics
and imposing deadlines are ways of closing deals whilst in Greece this would backfire.
Clearly there are many factors that need to be considered when approaching cross
cultural negotiation. Through cross cultural negotiation training, business personnel are given
the appropriate knowledge that can help them prepare their presentations and sales pitches
effectively. By tailoring your behaviour and the way you approach the negotiation you will
succeed in maximising your potential (yorum olarak).
It is difficult to track the myriad starting points used by negotiators from different
national settings, especially as cultures are in constant flux, and context influences behavior in
multiple ways. Another complication is that much of the cross-cultural negotiation literature
comes from the organizational area. While it cannot be applied wholesale to the realm of
intractable conflicts, this literature may provide some hints about approaches to negotiation in
12
various national settings. Dr. Nancy Adler compares key indicators of success as reported by
negotiators from four national backgrounds.Her table is reproduced here, ranking
characteristics of negotiators in order of importance as reported by managers in each national
setting:
CHINESE
AMERICAN JAPANESE BRAZILIAN
(TAIWAN)
NEGOTIATORS NEGOTIATORS NEGOTIATORS
NEGOTIATORS
Preparation and Persistence and Preparation and
Dedication to job
planning skill determination planning skill
Thinking under Perceive and exploit Win respect and Thinking under
pressure power confidence pressure
Judgment and Win respect and Preparation and Judgment and
intelligence confidence planning skill intelligence
Verbal
Integrity Product knowledge Verbal expressiveness
expressiveness
Demonstrate
Product knowledge Interesting Product knowledge
listening skill
Perceive and exploit Judgment and Perceive and exploit
Broad perspective
power intelligence power
Verbal
Integrity Competitiveness
expressiveness
As Adler points out, for instance; Brazilians and Americans were almost identical in
the characteristics they identified, except for the final category. The Japanese tended to
emphasize an interpersonal negotiating style, stressing verbal expressiveness, and listening
ability, while their American and Brazilian counterparts focused more on verbal ability,
planning, and judgment. To the Chinese in Taiwan, it was important that the negotiator be an
interesting person who shows persistence and determination.
Negotiators also vary in the styles of persuasion they rely upon and their comfort with
emotionality. In American settings, appeals tend to be made to logic, relying on "objective"
facts. Emotional sensitivity is not highly valued, and dealings may seem straightforward and
impersonal. Japanese negotiators value emotional sensitivity highly, and tend to hide
emotions behind calm exteriors. Latin American negotiators tend to share the Japanese
appreciation of emotional sensitivity, and express themselves passionately about their points
of view. Arab negotiators may appeal to emotions and subjective feelings in an effort to
persuade others. Russians, in contrast, tend to appeal to ideals, drawing everyone's attention to
overarching principles.
U.S. negotiators tend to rely on individualist values, imagining self and other as
autonomous, independent, and self-reliant. This does not mean that they don't consult, but the
tendency to see self as separate rather than as a member of a web or network means that more
independent initiative may be taken. Looking through the eyes of the Japanese negotiator who
wrote "Negotiating With Americans", American negotiators tend to:
13
• Be competitive in their approach to negotiations, including coming to the table
with a fall-back position but beginning with an unrealistic offer;
• Be energetic, confident, and persistent; they enjoy arguing their positions, and see
things universally -- i.e., they like to talk about broad applications of ideas;
• Concentrate on one problem at a time;
• Focus on areas of disagreement, not areas of commonality or agreement;
• Like closure and certainty rather than open-endedness or fuzziness.
Do these generalizations ring true? Clearly, it depends which Americans you are
talking about, which sector they represent, and the context surrounding the negotiations. Is
this a family matter or a commercial one? Is it about community issues, national policy, or a
large public conflict? Strategies change according to context and many other factors.
Many African nations have indigenous systems of conflict resolution that have
endured into the present, sometimes quite intact and sometimes fragmented by rapid social
change. These systems rely on particular approaches to negotiation that respect kinship ties
and elder roles, and the structures of local society generally. In Nigeria, for example, people
are organized in extended families (nnu'), village (idu' or obio), lineage ('duk), and lineage
groups (iman). A belief in the continuing ability of ancestors to affect people's lives maintains
social control, and makes the need to have formal laws or regulations minimal. Negotiation
happens within social networks, following prescribed roles. Women in conflict with
husbands, for example, are to defer and apologize, preparing a ritual meal to symbolize the
restoration of harmony.
In the Nigerian Ibibio context, the goal of restoring social networks is paramount, and
individual differences are expected to be subsumed in the interest of the group. To ensure that
progress or an agreement in a negotiation is preserved, parties must promise not to invoke the
power of ancestors to bewitch or curse the other in the future. The aim of any process, formal
or informal, is to affect a positive outcome without a "residue of bitterness or resentment."
Elders have substantial power, and when they intervene in a conflict or a negotiation, their
words are respected. This is partly because certain elders are believed to have access to
supernatural powers that can remove protective shields at best and cause personal disaster at
worst.
There is a great deal written about Japanese approaches to negotiation, and collisions
between American and Japanese approaches are legendary. The following values tend to
influence Japanese communication: focus on group goals, interdependence, and a hierarchical
orientation. In negotiations, these values manifest themselves in awareness of group needs
and goals, and deference to those of higher status. Japanese negotiators are known for their
politeness, their emphasis on establishing relationships, and their indirect use of
14
power.Japanese concern with face and face-saving is one reason that politeness is so
important and confrontation is avoided. They tend to use power in muted, indirect ways
consistent with their preference for harmony and calm. In comparative studies, Japanese
negotiators were found to disclose considerably less about themselves and their goals than
French or American counterparts.
Japanese negotiators tend to put less emphasis on the literal meanings of words used in
negotiation and more emphasis on the relationships established before negotiating
begins.They are also less likely than their U.S. counterparts to make procedural suggestions.
In Central America, people think about and respond to conflict holistically. Lederach
contrasts his natural (American) inclination to "make a list, to break a story down into parts
such as issues and concerns" with his Central American experience, where people tended to
respond to requests for naming issues to be negotiated with "yet another story." They
preferred a storied, holistic approach to conflict and negotiation, rather than a linear,
analytical one. When Central Americans needed help with negotiations, they tended to look to
insider partials rather than outsider neutrals, preferring the trust and confidence of established
relationships and cultural insight to other credentials or expertise. They referred to the concept
of confianza to explain this preference. Confianza means "trustworthiness," that "they know
us" and "we know them" and they will "keep our confidences."
NEGOTIATING GLOBALLY
15
As shown in table below Russians typically use an axiomatic approach to negotiating-
they base their arguments on asserted ideals.
Americans differ from both Russians and Arabs. Americans typically use a factual
approach to negotiating; they attempt to counter the other sides’ arguments with logical
appeals base on objective facts.Americans make small concessions early in the negotiation in
an attempt to establish a relationship , and they generally expect their bargaining partners to
do likewise. Americans, far from casual about time and authority, genrally take deadlines very
seriously and have broad authority.
What happens when Russians begin negotiating with Arabs or Americans? Who
persuades whom when styles of negotiating differ? Who wins when bargainers from each
culture define the process negotiating, the rules of the game, differently? How can I get what
my company and I want from them while maintaning a good relationship? To succeed in
global business, negotiator must continually solve this dilemmas.
16
Styles of Persuasion Vary Across Cultures
NORTH
AMERICANS ARABS RUSSIANS
Axiomatic
Primary Negotiation Factual appeals made to Affective appeals made appeals made to
Styles Process logic to emotions ideals
Conflict:Counterparts
’ Arguments
Countered With… Objective fact Subjective feelings Asserted ideals
Small concessions made Concessions made Few, if
early to establish a throughout as a part of any,concessions
Making Concessions relationship bargaining process made
View
counterparts'
Almost always concesions as
Response to Usually reciprocate reciprocate weakness and
Counterparts’ counterparts’ counterparts’ almost never
Concessions concessions concessions reciprocate
No continuing
Relationship Short term Long term relationship
1)LOCATION
Should you meet at their office, your office or at a neutral location? Negotiation
wisdom generally advises teams to meet at their own or a neutral location. Meeting in another
country disadvantages negotiators because it reduces their access to information and increases
travel-related stres and costs. Meeting at home allows a team to control the situation more
easily.
Many negotiators select neutral locations. Business entertainment remains a common
type of neutral location used primarily to get to know and improve relations with members of
the opposing team. Heavy users of business entertainment Japanese spend almost 2% of their
17
GNP on entertaining clients-even more than they spend on national defense. Americans
generally consider such high business entertainment costs absurd, but perhaps Americans’
extraordinarily high legal expenses reflect the cost of insufficient relationship building.
2)PHYSICAL ARRANGEMENTS
In traditional American negotiatons, the two teams face each other, often sitting on
opposite sides of a boardroom table. Unfortunately, this arrangement maximizes competition.
By contrast, sitting at right angle facilitates cooperation. If negotiators view the process as a
collaborative search for mutually beneficial outcomes(win-win solutions), the physical
arrangements support cooperation, not competition. As an alternative to the boardroom table,
negotiators from both teams may choose to sit on the same side of the table, “facing the
problem”. In this way they compete with the problem not with the people. The Japanese, in
posting all information related to a negotiation on the walls, structure the environment so that
all parties involved “face the problem” holistically.
3)PARTICIPANTS
Who should attend the formal negotiationg sessions? Americans tend to want to “go it
alone”- they consider extra team members an unneccessary expense. This strategy is usually
ineffective in global negotiations, where more team members tends to be better. Why? Firstly,
the physical presence of more people communicates greater power and importance- an
essential nonverbal message. Second, as discussed earlier, communicating cross-culturally is
complex and difficult. Giving some team members primary responsibility for listening to the
discussion and observing nonverbal cues while other members focus primarily on conducting
substantive negotiations has repeatedly prove to be an extremely effective strategy.
Who should present at a negotiation? Should the press be present? Will public opinion
make it easier or more difficult to develop mutuallly beneficial soutions? Should the union
have direct representation? Should bargainers keep government agencies informed during the
negotiation or only present them with final agreement? The power that government, unions
and public opinion have over business negotiators varies considerably across cultures.
Negotiating with government officials from such open democracies as Australia, Canada and
New Zeland, for example, requires broader public debate than is generaly necessary in the
more tightly controlled governments of Iran and Kenya, or in communist and quasi-
communist countries such as Albania, Cuba, and North Korea. Effective global negotiators,
carefully manage access to the proceedings.
18
4)TIME LIMITS
The duration of a negotiation can vary markedly across cultures . Americans being
particularly impatient, often expect negotiations to take a minimum amount of time. During
the Paris Peace Talks, designed to negotiate an end to the Vietnam War, the U.S. team arrived
in Paris and made hotel reservations for a week. Their Vietnamese counterparts leased a
château for a year.As the negotiations proceed, timing forced the frustrated Americans to
continually renew their weekly reservations to accommodate the more measured pace of the
Vietnamese.
5)STATUS DIFFERENCES
The United States prides itself on its egalitarian, informal approach to life, in which
titles do not seem particularly important and ceremonies are often considered a waste of time.
Americans often attempt to minimize status differences during negotiations; for example, they
use first names to promote equality and informality. Unfortunately this approach, which
succeeds at putting Americans at ease, often makes people from other cultures uncomfortable.
Most countries respect hierarchy and formality more than does the United States; and most
negotiators from these countries feel more comfortable in formal situations with explicit
status differences. The Japanese, for example, must know the other person’s company and
position before being able to select the grammatically correct form of address. For this reason
Japanese always exchange business cards- meishi- before a business conversation begins.. For
similar reasons, German negotiators would almost never address colleagues on their own
team, let alone those from another team, by first name. Such informality would severely insult
their sense of propriety, hierarchy, and respect.
Age, like title, connotes seniority and demands respect in most countries of the world.
Sending a young, albeit brillant, North American expert to Indonesia to lead a negotiation
team is more likely to insult senior Indonesian officials than facilitate a successful exchange
of technical information. In almost all cases, North Americans need to increase formality in
dress, vocabulary, behavior and style when working outside of the United States.
19
NEGOTIATION PROCESS
Does this principle approach become easier or harder when negotiating globally? Let’s
analyze the principled approach from a cross cultural prospective. Cultural differences make
communicating more difficult. Steps 1, 2 and 3 therefore become more difficult.
Understanding opponents their interests and their assessments, ciriteria becomes more
complex and fraught with cross cultural communication pitfalls. By contrast step 4 can
become easier. Inventing options for mutual gain requires recognizing and using
indifferences. The fewer identical options sought by both negotiating teams, the greater
chance of simultaneously satisfying each teams needs. If teams recognize, clearly
communicate, and understand cross culture differences (i.e. Step 1, 2, 3 ), They can become
the basis for constracting win-win solutions. Western European countries that import
Indonesian batiks, for example exchange an economically develop market for a labor
intensive good.The Europans could not afford to hand make batiks in Europe, and the
Indonesians could not comment as high price in stable currencies within their own country.
This culture synergistic approach which uses cultural differences as a resource rather than a
hindrance to organizational functiating, allows global negotiators to maximize benefits to all
parties.
20
TABLE: 3 Approaches to Each of Negotiatiating Globally
NEGOTIATION TACTICS
As you know, there are verbal and nonverbal tactics in negotiation. These are
changing across cultures.
21
VERBAL TACTICS
Some of the more common tactics used in negotiating include promises, threat,
recommendatitons, warnings, rewards, punishments, normative appeals, commitmence, self-
disclosure, questions and commons. The use and meaning of these tactics change accrross
cultures as shown in table. Negotiators from Asia(Japanese), North America (Americans),
South America(Brazilians) use different verbal tactics in negotiating. Brazilians for instance,
say “no” nine times more frequently than do Americans and almost 15 times more frequently
than do Japanese. Similarly, Brazilians make more initial concessions than do Americans,
who in turn make more than Japanese.
Promise 7 8 3
Threat 4 4 2
REcommendatiton 7 4 5
Warning 2 1 1
Reward 1 2 2
Punishment 1 3 3
Normative Appeal 4 2 1
Commitment 15 13 8
Self-disclosure 34 36 39
Question 20 20 22
Command 8 6 14
No’s (per 30 5,7 9 83,4
minutes)
Profit Level of first 61,5 57,3 75,2
offers(80 max)
Initial Concessions 6,5 7,1 9,4
NONVERBAL TACTICS
22
Nonverbal behavior refers to what negotiators do rather than what they say. It involves
how they say their words, rather than the words themselves. Nonverbal behavior includes ton
of voice, facial expressions, body distance, dress, gestures, timing, silence and symbols.
Nonverbal behavior is complex, it sense multiple messages, many of which are responded to
subconsequencly. Negotiators frequently respond more emtionaly and powerfully to the
nonverbal than the verbal message, often leading to positive or negative spirals, which
directly affect the outcome of negotiation.
DIRTY TRICKS
Neither all domestic nor all global negotiators search for mutually beneficial
agreements. In attempting to gain the most for themselves, some negotiators resort to “dirty
tricks,” tactics designed to pressure opponents into undesirable concessions and agreements.
Negotiators can reduce the use of dirty tricks in the following ways:
23
Avoiding dirty tricks is more complex internationally than domestically. Effective
negotiators systematically question their own interpretations of their counterparts’ tactics
rather than naively assuming that others’ tactics have the same intended meanings as they
would within the negotiators’ home culture.
Reviewing the range of dirty tricks from a cross-cultural perspective reveals some of
the possible misinterpretations global negotiators face. Brazilians, for example, expect more
deception among negotiators who do not know each other than do Americans. Brazilians are
therefore more likely to use “ phony facts” during the initial a stages of a global negotiator
than are some of their counterparts. the recommendation therefore is: “unless you have good
reason to trust someone, don’t”.
A negotiating team’s discretion ( the extent of its authority) varies across cultures.
Under communist regimes, Russians and Easterm Europeans traditionally had very
limited authority; they had to check with their superiors if they wanted to deviate at all from
the planned agenda. American, by contrast, generally have extensive authority they expect to
make the most important decisions at the negotiating table. When the other team has limited
authority, experts recommend making all commitment tentative and conditional on the ability
of other party to accept and commit to their side of the deal. In cross cultural business
situations, negotiators must remember that the other party may not be using limited authority
as a form of deliberate deception; they may simply come from cultures where the authorities
delegate very little discretion to individual team members.
Psychological warfare (tactics design to maket he other person feel uncomfortable) has
different meanings in different cultures. a common psychological trick, for example, involves
too much touching or too little eye contact. As discussed earlier, both extremes make people
uncomfortable; both make them want to get out of the situations quickly (and therefore
conclude the negotiation as soon as possible). Problems arise in defining appropriate versus
extreme amounts of touching and eye contact across cultures. Latins touch much more than
Canadians, who in term touch more than Swedes, Arabs maintain much greater eye contact
than do Americans, who in turn use more than the Japanese. What appears to be a dirty trick
from a domestic perspective may simple express another cultures typical behavior. As with
other potantially inappropriate tactics, negotiators must differentiate intended psychological
warfare from unintended expressions of a cultures normal behavior patterns.
When should global negotiators continue to use their own cultural style of negotiating
and when should they adopt the style of their counterparts? Global negotiation experts suggest
that negotiators have five options, depending on the nature of the negotiation and level of
cross cultural knowledge of each negotiating team has. As outlined in table, if neither team is
familiar with the others culture, it would be best to consider employing agents to represent the
teams. If your team has a high knowledge of their culture, but their team has a limited
knowledge of your teams culture, you have the option of embracing their cultural approach if
the opposite is true, they have a high knowledge of your culture while you only have a limited
24
knowledge of their culture, you can attempt to induce your counterparts to follow your
cultures approach to negotiating. If both teams have a moderate knowledge of their
counterparts culture, both teams can adapt somewhat to each others style. In the ideal
situation, in which both teams have an in-depth knowledge of other’s culture, the two teams
can improvise an approach that works for them both, that is, they can create a culturally
synergistic approach to the negotiation. Although no option quarantees a positive outcome,
the higher the cross cultural knowledge on the part of both negotiatings, the more options
open to them and the greater their chance of reaching a satisfactory agreement.
TABLE: When to Use Their Style -- When to Use Your Style Culturally Responsive
Negotiating Strategies.
high
Low
Low High
Negotiator’s Familiarity with Counterpart’s Culture
25
What qualities does a good negotiator possess? According to negotitators’ extensive
research the answer depends on the cultures as shown on table, American managers believe
that effective negotiators at highly rationally. Brazilian managers to the surprise of many
Americans hold an almost identical view, differing only in replacing integrity with
competitiveness as one of the seven most important qualities of effective negotiators. By
contrast the opinions of Japanese negotiators differ quite makedly from those of both
Americans and Brazilians. Japanese see an interpersonal, rather than national, negotiating
style as leading to success. Japanese differ from Americans in stressing both verbal
expressiveness and listening ability, whereas Americans only emphasise verbal ability. In
contrast to Americans, Brazilians, Chinese and Japanese managers. In Taiwan emphasise
negotiators’ rational skills and, to a lesser extent, their interpersonal skills. To the Chinese, a
successful negotiator must be an interesting person and should show persistance and
determination, the ability to win respect and confidence, preperation, and planning skills,
product knowledge, good judgement and intelligence.
The role that individual qualities play varies accross cultures. Favorable outcomes are
most strongly influenced by negotiators’ own characteristics in Brazil, opponents’
characteristics in the USA, the negotiators role in Japan( the buyer always does better.) and
the mixture of negotiators’ and their counterparts’ characteristics in Taiwan. Spesifically,
Brazilian negotiators achieve higher profit when they act more deceptively and in their own
self-interst, when they Express higher self-esteem, when their bargaining partners act wtih
more honesty. American negotiators achieve greater success when theşr counterparts are
honest not self .nterested, introverted, not particularly interesting as people and made to feel
uncomfertable by the negotiators’ actions. By contrast Japanese buyers always do beter than
sellers. Both Japanese buyers and sellers can improve their positions by making their
bargaining partners feel moe comfortable. In Taiwan, negotiators do beter when they act
deceptively and when their counterpart are neither self-interested nor have particularly
attractive personalities.
26
Which Individual Characteristic Do Negotiators See as Most Important for
Negotiating Succesfully? The Answer Varies by Culture
CONCLUSION
Different nationalities have different values and ways of behaving. You need to
understand ritual and culture in order to make people of other nationalities more comfortable
when negotiating with you. You may not even have to deal abroad to need to understand the
ritual and culture of another society - many companies in the UK have settled here from
overseas and strive to maintain their native beliefs and traditions.
Build a model
Observe
Step one in observation might be to conduct some research into the country of origin
of the people with whom you will be dealing. Check out the basics, such as size, population,
religion, economic situation and so on. The fact that you can converse intelligently regarding
the homeland of your counterparts shows that you have done your homework and wish to
make the business relationship a success. You can also pick up ‘cross-culture’ books that will
warn you off making some of the more obvious errors, such as not putting money directly into
the hand of a Korean, for example (it’s considered to be rude).
27
It is also a good idea to learn a few words of the language. You may not be expected to
be fluent, but if you can greet people and say ‘please’ and ‘thank you’ in their language, then
your efforts will be noted and appreciated. The British are notoriously bad at learning other
languages in order to do business within other countries; with the advent and widespread use
of the Internet, this may be an issue that is largely resolved for us as other cultures learn
English in order that they may make the most of the unique advantages offered. However, you
would be wise to remember that the Germans have a saying: ‘We will sell to you in any
language, but we will only buy from you in German’.
The next stage of observation takes place when you meet and begin to develop a
relationship. Observe how people behave. Are they very formal, or very relaxed? Do they
touch or avoid touching? These are all valuable insights into how to fit in with the culture.
Remember that we like people who are like ourselves. Everyone has experience, either
personally or through observation, of the fact that opposites attract. Despite this, the norm is
for similarities to attract. People in long-term relationships often look quite alike, too - they
take the desire to see a mirror image a step further than would be the case in a friendship or
business relationship. Consequently your efforts to understand and emulate another culture
are likely to pay off handsomely in a business relationship.
Analyse
It is a good idea not only to know how people behave, but also why they behave in
certain ways. Understanding the underlying reason for something both helps you to get it right
and enhances your relationship with others. Think about someone observing our culture;
things they might notice include:
Knowing what to expect guides people’s behaviour. Remember also that people are often
very flattered to be asked about their country’s culture and traditions. Most people enjoy
talking about themselves and will appreciate your showing an interest.
Act accordingly
Once you have observed and understood something, amend your own behaviour to
suit and assimilate your new habits into your everyday ritual. Don’t become a mimic
overnight - little by little should encourage and impress. It is arguably better to show
improvement in your understanding over a period of time, so demonstrating that this is a long-
term commitment and something that you are prepared to work at. Once you have taken on
board everything you have learned, it is time once more to observe.
By following the cycle you become, by degrees, more comfortable with the culture in
which you are working. You do not need to lose your essential British ways or subsume your
28
own personality, just act in a way that makes people more comfortable when doing business
with you.
Useful tips
REFERENCES
29
ADLER, N.J. “International Dimensions of Organizational Behavior”, fourth edition, pp 208-
256.
http://www.kwintessential.co.uk/cultural-services/articles/cross-cultural-negotiation.html
http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/culture_negotiation/
http://www.amchamchile.cl/files/Cross-cultural%20Negotiation%20and%20Dispute
%20Resolution1.pdf
http://strategicdecisionsciences.com/documents/Cross_Cultural_Negotiations.pdf
http://www.krannert.purdue.edu/centers/ciber/publications/pdf/2003-007%20Drnevich.pdf
http://www.mediate.com/articles/cdr1.cfm
http://www.springerlink.com/content/j65k26524520412q/fulltext.pdf
http://www.arts.uwaterloo.ca/~wladair/papers/Neg%20J%202004Culture%20and
%20Negotiation%20Strategy.pdf
http://laxman.net.np/articles/Cultural%20perspective%20on%20negotation%20progress
%20pitfalls%20and%20pro.pdf
30