CROSS-CULTURAL NEGOTIATIONS (original) (raw)

| | **16IMC031** |
| | **Name: Sanaa Essam**

**ID:135292** |

| **[CROSS-CULTURAL NEGOTIATIONS]** |

Negotiation is an open communication skill that differentiates a lot than dialogue and that skill has become one of the success keys in business areas and professional life .negotiator who negotiate very well always achieve a good earnings and the bad negotiator always makes loses, according to (Ursula F. Ott,2016) "Negotiations belong to the basic social interaction processes and they have formed a cognitive scheme and differ between people and cultures “.Cross-cultural negotiations are about the difference between the behavior of each partner in negotiation, according to (Kathryn J. Ready,2009) “If negotiating parties are from different cultures, they may have varying beliefs and perceptions about what negotiation is and how it occurs.” Culture has a big influence on negotiation and how to make a decision and the aim of negotiation for each party differs from culture to another culture, according to( Moran 2000) " In Asian cultures, (e.g., Malaysia), the creation of long-term relationships between two parties is more important than the actual outcome”.

Cultures differ for different factors that has an effect in shaping negotiation styles ,firstly religious factor and different beliefs ,for example countries like Taiwan ,Iran and the USA ,according to (Adapa, 2008) “culture is a set of shared values and beliefs that characterize national, ethnic, moral and other group behavior.” So, many researches explore results of how different religions differ in making negotiation with different cultures (Iran, Taiwan and USA) ,according to ( Farideh,2011) “*Christian group had a higher significant value than Muslim and Buddhist groups for all four negotiation styles. In other words, the Christian group prefers to employ all four negotiation styles more than Muslim and Buddhist groups”* .The second factor that has an effect on negotiation style across cultures is gender differences because in some countries like Canada and china applying negotiation strategies not equally between gender ,according to (Zhenzhong Ma,2010) “*there are more gender differences in Canada, where men are more likely to consider it appropriate to use ethically questionable strategies in all five categories than women; while in China no gender differences are found in the perceived appropriateness of using these strategies in all but one category.”* As a result it seems that the negotiation strategies are stronger more in Canada than China. The third factor is the ethics of negotiation in different countries ,according to (lam,2008) “It is widely accepted that culture can influence ethical attitudes and behaviors” for example ,Chinese are more considerable to apply strategy ethics in negotiation more than Canadians ,according to (Zhenzhong Ma,2010) “Chinese negotiators are more likely to consider it appropriate to use ethically questionable strategies while Canadian negotiators are less likely to do so in the process of business negotiations.” So that means that Canada is highly individualistic; conflicts and disagreements are accepted, while china is highly collectivistic; avoiding disagreements and conflicts. Business ethics has an effect on cultural contextualism, according to (Hall, 1976 )" Contextualism reflects the degree of sensitivity to communication contexts." For example Canada; low context cultures, Canadians using direct and explicit language while china has a high context cultures; using indirect and implicit language , and that leads to the country that use low context will negotiate well than the country that use high context, according to (Zhenzhong Ma,2010) *"Negotiators from low context Canadian culture will be more likely to use negotiation strategies consistent with their social norms and*

*ethical standards while negotiators from high context Chinese culture will be less likely to do so".*

The other important factors that has an effect on cross-cultural negotiations including negotiation goal, protocol, communication, time sensitivity, risk propensity and decision-making ,firstly the goal of Chinese, Japanese and Thai always value long-term relationships but western negotiators always aim to sign a contract ,secondly protocol differ across cultures like German and English are very concerned with protocol but Thais just value respectful manners ,thirdly communication ;Thais use indirect language and speak softly but , Americans always use direct language and prefer presentations, fourthly time sensitivity ;Americans see that time must not be wasted , Japanese spending time to study counterparts and Thais have a relaxed behavior to scheduling and time , fifthly Risk propensity; Japanese prefer to be strict to the rules ,while Thais accept changes and more flexible to apply the rules of negotiation, according to (Weiss, 1994) "the cultural differences can consistently influence international business negotiations processes ". Managing a cross-cultural negotiation requires preparation because it is the key for achieving a successful negotiation, according to (A.N.Sarkar,2010)

"Negotiation performance is an evaluated and predictable outcome, usually based on a continuum of success to failure

or vice versa". Cross-cultural negotiation is not just about close deals it is more than that, each party must know his party’s emotions because non-verbal language differs across cultures ,for example, firstly strong eye contact in some countries like UK and US means sincerity and confidence and south America it conveys trustworthiness but in japan strong eye contact is a sign of being rude, secondly personal space in some countries like North America and Europe always leaving a particular distance when negotiating ,while china or japan ,it is not good if you leave a gap of four feet when negotiating. Understanding the other emotions of different parties across cultures ,leading you to be a successful negotiator ,according to (Kopelman,2008) " Displayed emotions significantly influence negotiation tactics, negotiation processes, and,perhaps most important, negotiated outcomes".

The impact of Culture on negotiation conclude that it is a set of values, behavior, norms, believes that affects and plays as an influencing parameter in cross-cultural negotiations ,culture has its factors that make a difference between each negotiation across world and these factors like ethical strategies including gender differences and contextualism and religious factor. Every culture has differences in strategies, communication ,emotions and time sensitivity like Canada, USA, Japan, Thailand and china.in order to be an effective in negotiation, you should understand each party, negotiation styles and having cross-cultural negotiation skills because each culture affecting on negotiations skills.

**References:-**

1-Sarkar, A. N. (2010). Navigating the Rough Seas of Global Business Negotiation: Reflection on Cross-Cultural Issues and Some Corporate Experiences. International Journal Of Business Insights & Transformation, 3(2), 47-61

2-Ott, U. F., Prowse, P., Fells, R., & Rogers, H. (2016). The DNA of negotiations as a set theoretic concept: A theoretical and empirical analysis. Journal Of Business Research, 693561-3571. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.01.007

3-Ready, Kathryn J., and Mussie T. Tessema. 2009. “Perceptions and Strategies in the Negotiation Process: A Cross Cultural Examination of U.S. and Malaysia.” International Negotiation 14, no. 3: 493-517. Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost

4-Farazmand, F. A., Tu, Y., & Daneefard, H. (2011). IS RELIGIOUS CULTURE A FACTOR IN NEGOTIATION: A CROSS-CULTURAL COMPARISON OF IRAN, TAIWAN AND THE UNITED STATES. Journal Of International Business Research, 10(1), 27-44

5-Kopelman, S., & Rosette, A. S. (2008). Cultural variation in response to strategic emotions in negotiations. Group Decision & Negotiation, 17(1), 65-77. doi:10.1007/s10726-007-9087-5

6-Ma, Z. (2010). The SINS in Business Negotiations: Explore the Cross-Cultural Differences in Business Ethics Between Canada and China. Journal of Business Ethics, 123