Robert J. Greenleaf

Training Management Corporation
Princeton Training Press • Princeton, New Jersey

com Editor-in-Chief: Series Manager: Writer: Cover Design: Interior Design: Monique Rinere-Güven. Greenleaf Donna Lukis Bonnie Jacobs © 2000 TRAINING MANAGEMENT info@tmcorp. Talia Bloch Robert J.tmcorp.D. COI® and TMC’s graphical depiction of our Cultural Orientations Model are registered trademarks of Training Management Corporation. No part of this publication may be reproduced. electronic.361. recording or otherwise. Registration: 2. mechanical. Ph. 4 Training Management Corporation . Printed in the United States of America ISBN: 1-882390-911 The Cultural Orientations Indicator®. or transmitted. New Jersey a division of TRAINING MANAGEMENT CORPORATION 600 Alexander Road Princeton.NEGOTIATING ACROSS CULTURES Published by: PRINCETON TRAINING PRESS Princeton. New Jersey 08540-6011 USA Tel: Fax: Web: Email: (609) 951-0525 (609) 951-0395 www.329.085 and 2. in any form or by any means. photocopying. Managing Across Cultures Series: Negotiating Across Cultures All rights reserved. stored in a retrieval system. without the prior written permission of the publisher.

TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE Preface iii OF CONTENTS Introduction 1 Negotiation Defined Negotiating Across Cultures Chapter One: The Impact of Culture on Negotiating Behavior Case Scenario The Ten Dimensions of Culture Cultural Analysis of the Case Scenario Generalizations and Stereotypes in Negotiations 5 Chapter Two: The Seven Phases of International Negotiation 29 An Overview of the Seven Phases Showing a Commitment to Negotiating Internationally Chapter Three: Negotiating Effectively Across Cultures 35 Phase 1: Strategic Planning and Analysis Phase 2: Network Approach and Entry Phase 3: Building Personal and Business Relationships Phase 4: Orientation and Presentation Phase 5: Bargaining and Persuading Others Phase 6: Reaching Agreement Phase 7: Follow-Up and Maintaining Relationships Conclusion Appendix A: Cultural Orientations Model™ Quick Reference Resources Index 77 75 73 Training Management Corporation: Information & Publications Training Management Corporation .

NEGOTIATING ACROSS CULTURES Training Management Corporation .

Working in the multicultural environment of the global marketplace. this is simply not true.PREFACE PREFACE It is no secret that we are in an era of global business. competencies and practices of the individuals who create. sometimes conflicting. The ways in which we manage and conduct business are extensions of our social and cultural environments. Between the increase in strategic business alliances and the proliferation of global organizations. Most organizations now understand that competitive advantage no longer rests on formal structures but on a dynamic organizational culture that effectively encompasses the mindsets. how we conduct business is deeply influenced by the cultural values and associated behavior patterns that operate in that environment. Thus. processes and operations is affecting virtually every industry. Organizations everywhere have been transforming themselves to adapt to these new requirements. This new type of organization also calls for a different type of manager––one who can create a dynamic. the share of the market run by companies that span two or more business cultures is growing constantly. one in which the world is moving toward a completely transnational market. The rapid growth of increasingly interconnected markets. practices. Speed. responsiveness. The main challenge for today’s global manager is to combine a repertoire of managerial and leadership skills with a thorough understanding of and sensitivity to culture. flexible environment and draw upon his employees’ varied mindsets and skills. It was once assumed that business and commerce were culturally neutral zones in which business professionals from various nations came together to participate in transactions according to universally recognized norms. Past successes in the old marketplace do not guarantee future success in the new. today’s managers are confronted with this every day. effectiveness and an ever-increasing rate of innovation have become the cornerstones of success in today’s market. These trends have changed the criteria for competitive advantage. The individuals with whom they conduct business and whom they manage often represent a collection of different cultures with different. Given the varied cultural backgrounds of the employees in global organizations and strategic business alliances. But. The “hard skills” Training Management Corporation iii . flexibility. support and sustain the organization––individuals who often do not share the same cultural background. company and worker today. culture has become one of the key areas of managerial competence and one of the most challenging aspects of working in the global marketplace.

Building on this knowledge. emotions and behaviors. The areas discussed are: Influencing and Persuading Across Cultures Management Across Cultures Managing Global Projects Marketing and Sales Across Cultures Negotiating Across Cultures Presenting Across Cultures Transcendent Teams™ Each title assumes that the reader is familiar with the fundamentals of the management function under consideration and has a working knowledge of Training Management Corporation’s Cultural Orientations Model™. The guides presented in the Managing Across Cultures series are designed to help you develop the cross-cultural competencies that have become essential to every manager’s basic skill set. complex phenomenon that we tend to minimize or even deny the existence of altogether. Yet. These roots remain below the level of our daily awareness. are most appropriate for each cultural orientation. The series explores the interplay between culture and particular aspects of managerial competence. within the particular area. the author also outlines the best strategies for each managerial function in today’s leading business centers. They then describe which types of practices. we quickly become aware that culture is a diffuse. the authors discuss how each cultural orientation shapes business practices and business interactions within these management functions differently. ignoring culture and the role it plays in shaping our business behaviors and preferences is dangerous. In some cases. Usually we do not spend much time considering the deep roots of our behavior or that of others. When they do surface or when we take the time to consider them.NEGOTIATING ACROSS CULTURES iv of business tasks and the “soft skills” of the ways we interact and communicate have thus become intertwined and can no longer be easily distinguished. we can easily overlook the profound influence of culture on our thoughts. Examples are drawn from specific cultural settings to demonstrate the direct applicability of this analysis to actual crosscultural interactions. however. Today’s manager must be able to successfully integrate cultural knowledge into her understanding of how to manage business and daily work. Many business arrangements have failed due to an unrecognized and/or unacknowledged clash of cultures. Culture and Cross-Cultural Competence Unless we have experienced an environment that has changed or is somehow different from those in which we have been socialized. Training Management Corporation .

This series will help keep you afloat. whereas the thick. Cross-cultural skills The first aspect of understanding people and organizations from other cultures is developing and maintaining an open attitude or mindset. Thus. It ensures that you interact with others from a broad perspective on the world around you and enables you to recognize the interrelated nature and Training Management Corporation v . Such a mindset is non-judgmental toward difference––toward different values. rituals. which can be cultivated simultaneously and continuously. and the invisible. assumptions and the emotions with which these are invested. beliefs and behaviors. This process has five different aspects to it. then. Cultural knowledge 5. Culture manifests itself in tangible ways. The visible portion of the iceberg consists of the tangible elements. and we have no insights into them. But culture also consists of intangible components. Self-awareness 3. customs. If these thoughts and feelings remain invisible to us. the tip of the iceberg can be said to consist of observable manifestations of culture. much more powerful block of ice below the surface of the water consists of the thoughts and feelings that are associated with and connected to these behaviors. which each manager must engage in to become effective in the global business arena. reinforced and rewarded by and within a particular group. attitudes. Awareness of others 4. 1. The Five Aspects of Cross-Cultural Competence Cultural competence rests on a process of global learning. Culture can be thought of as an iceberg. like any unsuspecting ship. we may run into the iceberg and founder. if we see only behaviors different from our own. The following offers a quick overview of the five aspects as we define them. larger part consists of the intangible components. food. dress. such as in language. art and music. beliefs.PREFACE What Is Culture? Culture is a complex pattern of ideas. such as values. Open attitude 2. emotions and observable manifestations (behaviors and symbols) that tend to be expected.

beliefs and attitudes. it can also be an enormous source of personal and professional enrichment and pride for those who engage in this process as a lifelong undertaking. Articulating these on an ever-deeper level enables you to understand how you must appear to others whose values. political. The third aspect of cross-cultural competence is forming an awareness of others. the ability to admit that you never know everything and that you are always open to learning something new. beliefs and behaviors differ from your own. and. historical and philosophical roots of the cultures that underpin them. attitudes. The fifth and final aspect of cross-cultural competence is developing cross-cultural skills. This entails recognizing the cultural values. To increase your effectiveness. Once you begin to take account of your counterpart’s behavioral preferences and approaches to business. This means learning about your counterpart’s cultural values. The Cultural Orientations Model™ (COM™) The Cultural Orientations Model™ is a comprehensive tool that provides both a framework for understanding culture and the ways in which it affects people’s attitudes and behaviors and a vocabulary for discussing these attitudes and behaviors. attitudes. None of these aspects of cross-cultural competence is ever complete. The process of global learning requires an ongoing commitment of time and energy. This involves identifying the values. as well as about the socioeconomic. perhaps more importantly.NEGOTIATING ACROSS CULTURES interdependence of all cultures. The second aspect is the development of self-awareness. it is crucial to recognize your own cultural preferences. You might ask yourself these questions: • What are the cultural preferences of my counterparts? • What cultural differences may be affecting our interactions? • What cultural common ground do we have? The fourth aspect is obtaining cultural knowledge. you can translate this understanding into effective business interactions. it has become the cornerstone of TMC’s cross-cultural consulting solutions and has achieved a worldwide reputation. you can base your awareness on a comprehensive understanding of your counterpart’s social and business culture. vi Training Management Corporation . attitudes and beliefs you hold and becoming aware of the behaviors you engage in as a member of your own culture. Each individual has a responsibility to continually maintain this open attitude. It was developed by Training Management Corporation and was first introduced in TMC’s publication Doing Business Internationally: The Guide to Cross Cultural Sucess in 1995. Once you begin to understand the culture in which you will be operating and/or of those with whom you shall be conducting business. While the development of these competencies may be a strategic imperative for today’s industries and organizations. beliefs and behaviors of those around you. Since then.

there are 17 continua. Structure and Thinking. Action. You are invited to use the Managing Across Cultures guides and the Doing Business in Regions and Countries Around the World guides together in whichever way best suits your needs and interests. Power. as well as brief historical. This placement defines their orientation within the dimension. for example. The guides in Managing Across Cultures are intended for use in conjunction with TMC’s series Doing Business in Regions and Countries Around the World. another may have a strong orientation toward the fluid orientation. The dimension of time. For a full overview and review of the COM™.PREFACE The COM™ describes culture as consisting of ten basic dimensions: Environment. the foundational publication for understanding the Cultural Orientations Model™. Each guide contains an in-depth cultural profile of a particular country or region followed by a discussion of its business communication style. Training Management Corporation vii . While one individual may have a very strong tendency toward the fixed orientation of the time dimension. A person or culture may be described as tending toward one or two of those continua. The Cultural Orientations Model™ For your convenience. Time. Each dimension breaks down into one to four continua along which a person and culture might find themselves. It is recommended that you start by reading the Cultural Orientations Guide and grounding yourself in a thorough knowledge of the COM™ and your own cultural orientations. management practices. One will offer you a comprehensive overview of the dominant business culture in the target country or region while the other will provide you with the necessary management skills across cultures in your area of business expertise. Individualism. A culture may emphasize the importance of managing time precisely. Doing Business in Regions and Countries Around the World explores a particular national or regional business culture through the lens of the COM™. refers to the ways in which an individual or culture perceives the nature of time and its use. Competitiveness. Communication. or it may reinforce the concept of time as loosely defined. please consult the Cultural Orientations Guide. Doing Business in Regions and Countries Around the World also explains the difference between stereotyping and generalizing and outlines the role of trust in cross-cultural business interactions. a brief reference guide to all the dimensions and orientations is included in the appendix to this publication. negotiating tactics and decision-making processes. Within this dimension is a continuum that goes from fluid to fixed. and yet a third may have a relatively mild inclination on the fixed-fluid time continuum. You may then select a title from either the Managing Across Cultures series or the Doing Business in Regions and Countries Around the World series. In all. Space. political and economic overviews.

NEGOTIATING ACROSS CULTURES Doing Business Globally Doing Business in Regions and Countries Around the World Doing Business in Asia Doing Business in the Middle East and North Africa Doing Business in Latin America Doing Business in North America Doing Business in Eastern Europe Doing Business in Western Europe Doing Business in Argentina Doing Business in Australia Doing Business in Belgium Doing Business in Brazil Doing Business in Canada Doing Business in Chile Doing Business in China Doing Business in Colombia Doing Business in France Doing Business in Germany Doing Business in Hong Kong Doing Business in India Doing Business in Ireland Doing Business in Italy Doing Business in Japan Doing Business in Malaysia Doing Business in Mexico Doing Business in the Netherlands Doing Business in Norway Doing Business in the Philippines Doing Business in Saudi Arabia Doing Business in Singapore Doing Business in South Africa Doing Business in South Korea Doing Business in Spain Doing Business in Sweden Doing Business in Switzerland Doing Business in Thailand Doing Business in the United Kingdom Doing Business in the United States Doing Business in Venezuela Managing Across Cultures Influencing and Persuading Across Cultures Management Across Cultures Managing Global Projects Marketing and Sales Across Cultures Negotiating Across Cultures Presenting Across Cultures Transcendent Teams™ viii Training Management Corporation .

You must be receptive to cross-cultural learning and maintain an open and productive attitude toward difference. But. rather. Those negotiators who are more experienced can correctly identify the cultural orientations of their counterparts and how they are expressed in the counterparts’ negotiating behavior. A successful negotiator is able to understand and articulate his own cultural values. This means that there is a need to recognize the cultural values. Successful negotiators must continuously challenge their assumptions about other cultures and avoid quick judgments. Negotiating across cultures will require that you continuously pursue learning about other cultures and their approach to negotiations. in turn. The more you understand about the history. an international negotiator needs to be a good observer. Being able to identify differences between one’s own culture and another’s—and to realize that these differences can lead to misunderstandings—is important when preparing to negotiate across cultures. Negotiating across cultures requires that you have an open attitude and flexibility in your approach. and their cultural orientations. we must first understand our own culture. will lead to less misunderstanding and stronger cross-cultural relationships. To understand another person’s culture. but. one who has developed a global feel for negotiating across cultures. attitudes. Patience is a virtue. A successful negotiator is not someone who has memorized a list of do’s and don’ts. Identifying ways to adapt your approach to support cross-cultural negotiations is critical for success. this remains true for cross-cultural negotiations as well. requires individuals and organizations to effectively work across cultures and languages. first and foremost. In cross-cultural situations. economy. Gauging the approach of one’s counterparts to negotiating. beliefs and behaviors of others in order to develop new cross-cultural negotiation skills. as well as how they are reflected in negotiating behavior. beliefs and attitudes. Selfawareness and knowledge about one’s own cultural preferences is crucial to negotiating across cultures.INTRODUCTION INTRODUCTION Globalization is exposing more people to cross-border negotiations and bargaining—which. A Training Management Corporation 1 . the more likely you will be able to succeed in negotiating across cultures. you will need to tolerate ambiguity and prepare for the complexity of cross-border negotiations. This book focuses on how to transcend cultural differences in global negotiations. politics and business practices of a specific culture. to be able to articulate areas of shared cultural perspectives in finding common ground.

thereby transcending cultural differences. and build the personal and business relationships required to do business across cultures is also crucial. for example. people are motivated. or can acquire as necessary. Experienced negotiators can translate cultural awareness and knowledge into negotiation skills. a comprehensive knowledge of other. Negotiation Defined What is negotiation? Is it the simple process of influencing others to achieve our own ends. people are led—all these are crucial to success. Negotiating Across Cultures Does the negotiation process really differ from one culture to another? The simple answer is “yes. “to confer with another or others in order to come to terms or reach an agreement. Acknowledging the other culture’s approach to negotiation and responding accordingly is the ultimate goal. there is a need to go beyond an intellectual understanding of how another culture negotiates. Being able to identify how conflict is resolved. decisions are made. Knowing that the Japanese place great emphasis on protocol and seniority in negotiations should influence your behavior the next time you are in Tokyo. Changing your behavior to adapt to the particular negotiation context and situation is the hallmark of a good international negotiator. how can we develop the cross-cultural skills needed to negotiate successfully across cultures? A successful negotiator has the necessary skills to work effectively across cultures in many different business contexts. is first to look at the web of Training Management Corporation .” The Japanese approach to negotiation. that the Japanese tend to be formal and indirect in their communication is important. In short. problems are solved. relationships are established and maintained.” and otium meaning “easy time or leisure”— implying that people who negotiate with each other are not going to have an easy time. Knowing. There is no easy. or is it a complex process in which teams meet to hammer out agreements that spell out the roles and responsibilities of both parties as they engage in a business transaction? One dictionary definition of negotiate reads. a good negotiator may require specific business or industry knowledge. performance is rewarded. The larger question is. we can respond more constructively. Only through experience and trial and error can you continue to refine and improve your negotiation skills in order to adapt them appropriately to particular cultures and situations. to arrange or settle by discussion and mutual agreement” (The American Heritage Dictionary 1209). knowing how to enter a network. meaning “business. for example. Understanding the cultural orientations of those with whom you negotiate across cultures is crucial. negotiations are conducted. By better understanding our own cultural preferences and those of our negotiating partners. Finally. The historical root of the word negotiation comes from the Latin word negotium.” neg meaning “not. specific social and business cultures. quick way to improve one’s own ability to negotiate in cross-cultural or cross-border situations. get the necessary information to negotiate. but knowing how this affects your ability to negotiate with the Japanese is even more important.NEGOTIATING ACROSS CULTURES 2 successful negotiator has acquired. Beyond correctly identifying the general knowledge needed about a culture.

or when socializing. There is a need to learn and understand the business practices and communication styles of the other party in a negotiation. This requires a more collaborative style of negotiating (called win-win) as opposed to the zero-sum (“winlose”) style of negotiating often found in Europe and Asia. which undermines trust and prevents us from moving the negotiation forward to a successful conclusion. It is important to understand how to establish relationships. how to reduce conflict and how to develop effective bargaining strategies. How we relate to each other. Another response to the other party’s unfamiliar behavior is to ignore it. based on consultation and discussion.” Understanding cultural differences is essential to understanding how other cultures define. The Russian approach to negotiation is to have an informal discussion with one or more people and.S. Emotional connectedness and social obligations play a role in the process. “Negotiation is the process by which at least two parties with different cultural values. The Russian negotiator employs persuasion. As Pierre Casse and Surinder Deal state. we may miss opportunities at the negotiation table. The U. in many ways. the process of negotiation. When we encounter behavior that is unfamiliar. The exchange of favors between parties away from the table is. • Understand how our own cultural biases limit our ability to negotiate across cultures. as the Japanese negotiatior strives to understand his counterpart’s position and come to an agreement without an excessive amount of bargaining. how we interact in the process. use influence strategies and attempt to reach an agreement are all “culturally bound. This often means that agreements are reached in informal situations away from the negotiating table––on a break. how to assess expectations. over a period of time. come to an agreement. Because we do not understand it. reasoning and rhetoric to convince the other party that his position is the correct one. This often leads us to negatively evaluate unfamiliar or different behavior. • Devote adequate time to planning and analysis of the other party. approach to negotiation is to have two or more people meet and discuss common and conflicting interests in order to reach a mutually satisfying agreement. needs and viewpoints try to reach agreement on a matter of mutual interest” (Casse and Deal 2).” To be successful in international negotiations. The key word here is “cultural. Training Management Corporation 3 . • Determine whether our approach to entering a new network or company is appropriate or not. • Create a plan with a strategy appropriate to the other party’s situation. we need to: • Understand the fundamental cultural preferences of the other party. beliefs. the ways in which we present information. we tend to view the other’s behavior through the prism of our own culture. the same as the Western concept of exchanging concessions at the table. People perceive the process of negotiation from their own cultural perspective or context. and go about.INTRODUCTION relationships and obligations owed and then to come to an agreement with the other party.

• Learn what type of information to present. Chapter 2 reviews the basic elements of the seven phases of international negotiation and Chapter 3 provides a thorough going examination of how different cultures approach each of the seven phases. • Be flexible in negotiating in new environments or cultures.NEGOTIATING ACROSS CULTURES • Develop both a personal and a business relationship with the other party. • Pay attention to protocol. and socialization with the other party. An appendix concludes the book with a quick review of the Cultural Orientations Model™. follow-up visits. how and when to present it. • Spend time maintaining the relationship and follow-up on commitments. and what kind of strategies of influence persuade others. This book explores the ramifications of culture for international negotiations by discussing how cultural orientations manifest themselves during the negotiating process and exploring in detail the seven phases of international negotiations. 4 Training Management Corporation . ceremonies. Chapter 1 analyzes a cultural case scenario and describes negotiating behavior across the ten dimensions of culture.

Inc. where he doubled CreditCorp’s base of business in less than three years. Banner thought back to the meeting he had had with Ken Mogi in New York one year ago. Mogi was looking for an ON NEGOTIATING BEHAVIOR 5 Training Management Corporation . The article went on to report that Nagano Securities had 127 domestic branches and 29 overseas offices with a total market capitalization of U. The president of Nagano Securities was Kenichi “Ken” Mogi. Inc. The new company would begin wholesale investment banking operations and sell financial products and services to both individual and institutional customers throughout Asia. $200 billion in assets as of 1998. CreditCorp. a major shareholder of Nagano Securities. age 47. $1. Banner had thought that there was a huge opportunity in Japan with its U. when Banner had proposed that the two companies enter into a joint venture in Japan. retail market services. $10 trillion in personal savings. securities and credit card services. Two years ago. CreditCorp. Most Japanese banks and securities companies had had problems after the financial bubble burst in Tokyo in 1997 and 1998. John Banner.S.S.S. in its pursuit of establishing a global network of customers. had appointed Mogi as the new president just before his meeting with Banner in New York.” or NCS. The new joint venture in Tokyo was named “Nagano CreditCorp Shoken-Gaisha. was a 15-year executive of CreditCorp and had been promoted to CEO upon his successful stint as executive vice president of sales in Europe. a 35-year veteran of Matsubashi Bank and Nagano Securities. age 58. Nagano Securities had been embroiled in a scandal in which they had tried to cover the losses of their preferred customers (from bad real estate loans and stock deals) at the expense of Nagano’s minor individual accounts. electronic products. management services and personal financial management services—which would sell CreditCorp’s products and services in Japan. $5 billion.” The article went on to say that the “hard-charging” John Banner had successfully negotiated a U. with its 500 domestic branches and operations in 27 countries.. The CEO. was capitalized at U.THE IMPACT 1 OF Chapter THE IMPACT OF CULTURE ON NEGOTIATING BEHAVIOR CULTURE Case Scenario John Banner smiled at the headline in the Wall Street Journal announcing “CreditCorp Negotiates New Joint Venture in Japan. There would be five new divisions—commercial market services. products and services. $100 billion and had U. Matsubashi Bank. As a result.2 billion investment for a 10 percent stake in Nagano Securities with an option for an additional 5 percent in the next two years.S. saw the joint venture as the entry point for increasing its share of Japanese corporate and individual accounts for banking.S..

Besides. in turn. 38. standards when they became embroiled in the securities scandal in Japan. with the technology CreditCorp was bringing to the joint venture. a graduate from Tokyo University and a former bureaucrat from the Ministry of Finance. create new business opportunities in Japan. and his interpreter. a Harvard MBA graduate and former Citibank vice president of acquisitions. 42. CreditCorp was extremely reluctant to allow these 500 managers to be transferred to the new joint venture. The joint venture seemed to be the answer to his capitalization problems and CreditCorp’s need to increase their penetration of Japan. First. $1. but insisted that the board majority of the staff and new president be Japanese. CreditCorp reasoned that wholesale banking was not Nagano’s strong suit. On his team were two other CreditCorp senior executives: Mary Ross. since they were the dominant leader in the banking industry. who was in charge of business development in the wholesale banking division. They reasoned that their large Japanese client base would be reluctant to deal with a foreign company in Japan’s very conservative banking environment.S.000 “relationship managers” or sales employees who were responsible for handling their major individual and corporate accounts. CreditCorp senior executives wanted a 51/49 split to retain control of the joint venture. to negotiate the joint venture with Nagano Securities. Nagano Securities assigned Junichiro Ando. Banner assigned Roger Greene. Nagano Securities was adamant that NCS absorb some 500 of the 2. a recent graduate of Waseda University. there was the problem of ownership. They were willing to allow CreditCorp to fill the operations and technology management positions. Third. Nagano Securities wanted a 51/49 split in its favor. Mogi invited Banner and his senior staff to Tokyo in January 1999 to discuss the joint venture idea. and that they had proven their inability to be financially sound by U. there were three main sticking points in reaching the final agreement between CreditCorp. Mitsuko Ueda. Because the joint venture would be in Japan. Second. a rising lawyer in CreditCorp’s trust department. During the negotiation. They reasoned that a U. such overstaffing would be unnecessary. Berkeley—who was the general manager of CreditCorp’s Tokyo office. Ando had recently retired from public service and had been accepted on the board of directors for Matsubashi Bank five years Training Management Corporation . They reasoned that for NCS to have credibility in the marketplace. as lead negotiator. CreditCorp managers felt that Nagano Securities was dumping their poor performers into the joint venture and saddling NCS with the high cost of Japanese salaries and benefits. it would need the continuity of the sales force which would.S. Nagano Securities wanted its own people to head the new joint venture. and Nagano Securities. CreditCorp insisted that it should run the new joint venture and appoint the top officers for NCS from its own management. however.NEGOTIATING ACROSS CULTURES 6 infusion of capital to keep the company afloat. 65. from Miami. In addition. With the low return on assets that Nagano Securities had experienced in the past three years. and Steve Martinez. Inc. 35.2 billion investment in the joint venture gave them the right to control the company and its assets. there was Wayne Tanaka—a second generation Japanese-American who had graduated from the University of California.

the next day and transported to Nagano Securities’ head office in the Marunouchi district. 53. Banner walked down to Roger Greene’s office and gave him a copy of the newspaper with the article. D.THE IMPACT OF ago. So. Ando informed Greene that they had arranged for a dinner party at a famous Ginza restaurant at 7:00 p. assistant director of personnel and a graduate of Keio University. Greene accepted the invitation on behalf of his team.” which would be aired in Tokyo that evening. Director of Corporate Securities.m. to welcome them to Japan. Once again. The Japanese team consisted of eight members. That is why we are investing in Japan.m. Americans were informed that they would be picked up at 9:00 a. Ando had spent five years in Washington. 42. including Toshio Saito. Although they were tired and suffering from jet lag.. he said. In the late 1980s.m. he congratulated Greene on his successful negotiation with Nagano Securities. Greene and the CreditCorp were greeted at the front door of the Nagano Securities’ headquarters building and ushered into a large boardroom.C. where the CreditCorp executives would be staying during the negotiations.” When he was asked about the negotiation with Nagano Securities in Tokyo. 32. After much toasting and nonbusiness conversation. The following morning. and was the lead person in discussions with the government body investigating the securities scandal. the CreditCorp team had already spoken with headquarters over the phone and learned that Banner had given an interview in New York to CNN’s “Financial News. and Tomoaki Itah.S. “In the banking industry. where the negotiation would take place. to be met not only by Wayne Tanaka of CreditCorp Japan.. working on behalf of his government. With our banking strengths in on-line products and services we should have no trouble leaping to the top of the wholesale banking business in Japan. Greene smiled as he thought back to his trip to Tokyo nine months earlier. a section manager in human resources. the party finished and the U. manager of business development and an MBA graduate from Stanford. Ari Matsuda. He also had been appointed as an advisor to Nagano Securities’ former president. They were soon picked up at their hotel and taken by taxi to a restaurant.C. “Competition in the wholesale banking business on a global basis is very keen. He and his team had arrived at Narita Airport after a 12-hour flight from New York. In the CNN interview he was quoted as saying. A number of limousines provided by Nagano Securities carried members of the two teams to the Imperial Hotel in downtown Tokyo. but also by Junichiro Ando. Toshio Saito and four other Nagano Securities staffers. Greene was surprised when Ando deferred talking about the negotiation and began a long conversation about his own experiences living and working in Washington. and whether Ando had received the latest proposal and related information sent by CreditCorp the week before.” He went CULTURE ON NEGOTIATING BEHAVIOR 7 Training Management Corporation . in a sense. we have to keep developing new services and products. Koji Kobayashi. We have to run fast to succeed. Tomihiro Izumi. a senior director for corporate securities and funds from Matsubashi Bank. Ltd. where a sumptuous feast and drinks were served. Having awoken in the early morning hours.. At around 11:00 p. 54. D. Masaki “Mike” Akahane. 38. Banner’s style of business was based on the “profit or perish” model. Greene found himself asking Ando about the next day’s negotiation. a female manager in charge of administrative affairs. Hiro Hirayama. We can never relax because the fellow next door can enter the business anytime. 28. a 20-year veteran of Matusbashi Bank and president of Nagano Research Center. Also assisting the Japanese side was Shuichi Ikegami. we need to diversify our business to sustain growth worldwide.

Ando nodded to Akahane. We will run the joint venture with trust and respect for each other. We network into different countries step by step. For this to happen. If it proves profitable. Ando sat quietly and after a long silence said. mahogany negotiation table. management control and staffing. We trade our technology and knowledge of banking to a new partner who has the local contacts and the financial clout to help us receive a good return on our investment. a bank-affiliated credit card company in Japan. to introduce the Japanese team in English. and that is why we are talking to Nagano Securities. which he continued doing for some time. “Yes. Then he said: In the past five years. then we pull out just as quickly as we went in. We continue as long as opportunities for profit continue. Then he asked Ando which of these three issues he would like to address first. that will be encountered in the marriage. then we move on to another country.S. Ando thanked Greene for the introductions. three regional banks and a mutual loan and savings company to provide our Japanese customers with quality products and services.” He then went on to ask Greene how they found their accommodations at the Imperial Hotel. we understand your proposal well. John Banner will understand our situation in Japan. and where the markets seem promising we establish a new business. this was the same 8 Training Management Corporation .NEGOTIATING ACROSS CULTURES on to conclude the interview with the following statement. Akahane translated Greene’s remarks to Ando. and whether this was their first trip to Japan. We also negotiated with JCB. big and small. Ando asked Greene to talk about CreditCorp. Akahane. we have established five joint ventures in cooperation with two life insurance companies. there was no visible reaction. team in Japanese. then asked the person sitting to his right. Japan is at the head of that priority list. wholly owned subsidiaries and minority investments leading to participation in 27 countries. with Akahane translating his remarks into English. We believe in an arranged marriage in which there is give-and-take on both sides. Greene formally introduced his team to the eight members of the Japanese team sitting across from them at the long. If not.” After an exchange of business cards. but to his surprise. This small talk continued for about 30 minutes. “We have consistently followed a path of international diversification through joint ventures. Ando welcomed the U. Greene thanked Ando for his welcoming remarks and proceeded to lay out the major differences between the proposals of the two sides. He went on to list the three biggest issues: ownership. to furnish credit card services to our consumers in Japan and abroad. For Greene and his team. just as occurs in a marriage between a Japanese man and woman. who went on to lay out the Japanese proposal. We hope that your Mr. Courtesy and a continued dialogue between the two partners will allow us to resolve all issues. He went on for some time discussing Nagano Securities’ past successes in joint ventures in Japan. we need to have good channels of communication and mutual respect between our two companies. We are proud of our 50 years of history and we have been successful with our joint venture partners because we enter into these agreements as if they were a corporate marriage. After the light discussions. At any one time we have a priority list of six or seven countries we are studying for opportunities in the banking sector. Upon completion of his remarks. After the introductions.

pressed the Japanese to address the three main issues as presented. He proposed that the new joint venture be named “Nagano CreditCorp Shoken-Gaisha. they were reluctant to address the ownership issue at that time.S. ultimately. since the Japanese had not responded to their proposal sent the week before. Kate Myers interrupted Akahane to say. At one point. he was told that they were merely reconfirming their understanding of what had been said and that he should not worry. either verbally or in writing. they had just sat quietly and nodded in unison whenever Ando spoke. The U. Ari Matsuda approached the interpreter. since instead of participating in the discussion. growing restless. additional data and details were provided. The negotiation resumed at mid-afternoon. side thought had already been successfully addressed in earlier correspondence.S. Americans answered the questions in a direct. Americans. The U. Twice. Greene knew. straightforward and concise manner. Ando was looking forward to treating them all as his guests at his favorite member’s club near the office. Greene fielded some of the questions. “Why are you asking the same questions all over again? Haven’t we answered them sufficiently? Can’t we move on to the real issues at hand?” The Japanese then became very quiet until Greene suggested that everyone take a break. Ando stood up and announced that he had arranged for a tour of their offices before adjourning for lunch.” Although the Japanese were agreeable to his offer. to ask her if Greene and his team would be interested in having dinner with Ando and Toshio Saito that evening. but his team answered most of the questions. team members were still jet-lagged and in need of rest. Americans even wondered about the role of the others on the Nagano side. Akahane went on to reintroduce issues that the U. but were unsuccessful in getting the Japanese to do so by the end of the first day of negotiations. Mitsuko Ueda.THE IMPACT OF information that had previously been presented to them in New York in writing. they felt that they were back at square one. At dinner. team. In fact. Greene thanked Ando but politely declined. He had even offered to meet Ando’s request that the Nagano name come first in the new joint venture if they could resolve the issue of ownership. This repeated questioning was annoying to the U. He stated that he and his team would like to return to the hotel where they could review the day’s proceedings and prepare for the next day. It seemed that their latest proposal was not being addressed at all. At the end of Akahane’s remarks. Their hope was to develop a product mix that would provide their CULTURE ON NEGOTIATING BEHAVIOR 9 Training Management Corporation . Greene had tried to redirect the negotiation back to the three main issues of disagreement.S. During the negotiation. In fact.S. the Nagano Securities team often broke into side discussions in Japanese that sometimes lasted 15 minutes or more. Greene and his team reviewed the day’s events and concluded that they were no closer to an agreement than they had been prior to their departure from New York. much to her surprise. Throughout the afternoon. After consulting with his team he stated that the U. that CreditCorp’s joint-venture strategy was to concentrate on the direct distribution of products and services to various market segments in Japan. The U.S. when the Japanese began asking questions previously asked by the Japanese in writing and which CreditCorp thought it had addressed in its most recent proposal. When Greene asked Akahane what the Japanese were discussing. During the break. Ueda passed on the invitation to Greene and. as they fell in a team member’s functional area.S.

He wondered whether the expense of higher salaries and benefits was justified. it would be difficult to fire poor performers. Banner was less concerned with the name of the company or management issues than he was with profits from the joint venture. once these workers were transferred. to Greene. Ando then outlined the structure of the Matsubashi kieretsu. the company union would support the move of the 500 managers and agree to a 15 percent reduction in salaries and benefits for those transferred managers. but he had assumed that the union would not be problematic. measure and reward performance under Nagano’s present relationship management system. He said that member companies of the Matsubashi Group. Ikegami explained that a few members of the bank’s board of directors were concerned about the joint venture. Greene and his team were concerned that Nagano Securities was using the joint venture to dump poorly performing managers at a substantial cost to CreditCorp. After a brief side discussion. This news alarmed Greene and his team. Greene knew that Nagano Securities had a company union. Although Greene felt that this was a good idea. saying that it would be awkward to manage. a horizontally integrated conglomerate of companies affiliated with Matsubashi Bank. Greene doubted that Banner and CreditCorp’s stockholders would wait patiently for profits. In addition. He knew from his research on Japanese business practices that shukko was a traditional way for Japanese companies to reduce head count and costs in times of recession or declining business. During an informal discussion. they asked Ando to explain Nagano Securities’ business relationship with the Matsubashi Group in greater detail. and told Ando this. from Matsubashi Bank. since his network at Matsubashi was extensive. Ando emphasized that relationships came first in Japan and that profits would be realized later. based on the performance of these managers over the past three years. the interconnected structure of the member companies. formerly with Matsubashi Bank. had expressed their reservations about the joint venture and had threatened to discontinue using Nagano Securities as their preferred underwriter in the future. What better way to do this than to make use of the sales force already in place? He went on to explain the concept of shukko. Ando assured Green that. Before the negotiation session began the next day. He stated that Mogi. Ando assured Greene that if he accepted the relationship managers. Greene and his team expressed their concerns about Matsubashi Group’s relationship with Nagano Securities. but didn’t understand what this ultimately had to do with their discussions today.NEGOTIATING ACROSS CULTURES 10 global clients with the best services in Japan. Mary Ross disagreed. or assigning staff to a subsidiary or joint venture as a way of gaining experienced staff and a fast start-up in the marketplace. The discussion went on for some time and was finally resolved when Wayne Tanaka took Koji Kobayashi aside during a break and proposed that Nagano Securities cover 25 percent of the cost of salaries and expenses over the first two years of the joint venture. The Nagano Securities team continued the negotiation with another round of questions and expression of concerns. he (Ando) Training Management Corporation . Ando introduced Shuichi Ikegami. if he agreed to accept the 500 relationship managers. Ando responded that if Greene had the time. would handle this small problem. perhaps he could visit some of Mogi’s contacts at Matsubashi and explain CreditCorp’s proposal to establish the joint venture. Greene agreed to do so. Ando proposed that the two sides address the issue of relationship managers and the need for Japanese clients to feel comfortable with the services and products of the new joint venture.

Any changes on this point would be challenging for Ando and his team. In his discussion with Banner. If Nagano Securities would agree to CreditCorp’s request to staff the top management positions of the joint venture. At the conclusion of the second day’s negotiation. He explained how difficult it had been to reach consensus on their position. On the third day of the negotiation. Greene told Ando that he would talk with Banner and give him an answer the next day. After translating the counterproposal. He stated that CreditCorp was willing to invest another 5 percent in the joint venture over the next two years. and listed on the Tokyo stock exchange as NCS. Greene took his team aside and conferred with them. CreditCorp. He asked that Greene talk directly with Banner to see if a compromise could be reached wherein the Japanese side could retain a 51 percent share of ownership. if Greene could staff key positions in the joint venture with CreditCorp executives. The joint venture and new company would be named Nagano CreditCorp Shoken-Gaisha. Greene. Ando thanked Greene for his new proposal and told him that he would get back to him after conveying the information to Mogi and his senior CULTURE ON NEGOTIATING BEHAVIOR 11 Training Management Corporation .S. wanting to move the negotiation ahead. Ando agreed and picked Greene up at his hotel for dinner at his private club. Reaching agreement had been extremely difficult and time consuming.THE IMPACT OF personally would work with Kobayashi to select only the best managers for the joint venture. but suggested that he meet with Ando separately from his team and allow his team to prepare for the following day. Ando once again offered his dinner invitation to Greene and his team. readily agreed despite protests from Ross. CreditCorp would be willing to agree to Nagano Securities’ need for ownership control. would invest additional money into the joint venture based only on future performance measurements to be agreed upon by both parties. hands. He reminded Nagano Securities of their current financial situation––that their stockholders would want CreditCorp to have control to ensure a healthy stream of profits back to the United States. and having just agreed to meet Nagano Securities’ request on the relationship managers. Greene decided to address the ownership issue. both internally and with the Matsubashi Group. The discussion went on all afternoon with only one decision being made. CreditCorp was confident that their technology leadership and expertise in wholesale banking would give them an edge in the key decisions of the joint venture. This time. he revealed that Mogi had used favors and obligations to align the senior managers of Nagano Securities and Matsubashi Bank and get them to agree on the joint venture with CreditCorp. he would be willing to give in to the Japanese request for a 51/49 split. Banner told Greene that. Greene learned that Banner was willing to sacrifice some control as long as profits were high. should Nagano Securities agree to a 51/49 split. Ando told Greene that the issue of ownership was important to the Japanese and could be a deal-breaker. which would leave control in U. Beyond the issue of consensus decision-making. both sides agreed to revisit the issue of ownership later in the negotiation. Toward the end of dinner. Tanaka told Greene that he was sure that they should trust Ando’s judgment on this point. Greene opened with a counterproposal. however. After lunch on the second day. However. Greene was happy to accept. Ando reasoned that Japanese stockholders such as Matsubashi Bank would want just the opposite to reassure Japanese customers that they could trust the new joint venture.

but that it sounded like a good idea worth considering. staffing the new joint venture was an issue of creation and control. On the train ride home. At the end of the morning session. with Greene and his team asking questions to clarify their understanding of the proposed structure. Akahane drew up an organizational structure that had parallel positions at all senior management levels (for example. two vice presidents of finance.NEGOTIATING ACROSS CULTURES 12 staff. Ando explained some of the difficulties of hiring. Akahane provided amusing anecdotes to entertain his guests. Masaki Akahane and Ari Matsuda accompanied the team on the train ride to Kamakura from Tokyo. Ando was concerned that CreditCorp would have difficulty motivating and retaining staff. With the acceptance of the relationship managers and other employees transferred from Nagano Securities. He was also aware that numerous Japanese and U. Greene and his team agreed to the trip to Kamakura. Ando led off the Thursday afternoon session with a review of the negotiation to date and Nagano Securities’ response to CreditCorp’s counterproposal on Wednesday. Akahane asked Greene about a recent article he had read in the Asian Wall Street Journal about a new joint venture between a U. where dinner and drinks were served. Greene understood that. he was interested in learning more about CreditCorp’s plans for staffing top management positions. and that they could resume the negotiation the next afternoon. Training Management Corporation . a local onsen––or hot springs bath––in Kamakura that afternoon.S. he stated that CreditCorp’s leadership development program and succession planning would be integral to staffing at NCS. and Chinese company. explaining that such a structure would integrate the two cultures and provide a consensus-based decision-making process for resolving conflict.-American). Greene was surprised at the unannounced break in their discussions and suggested that they continue their talks to ensure that they could come to an agreement before their scheduled departure on Friday evening. Akahane wondered if CreditCorp had any experience with this type of management structure. In addition. Greene said that he had not read the article. After dinner. Greene explained the organizational structure of CreditCorp and how NCS would be integrated into their global operations.S. He understood that conflicting cultural assumptions can have disastrous consequences for new organizations. Ando asked Greene and his team if they had planned any sightseeing in Tokyo. in which the top management positions were held jointly by both sides for a one-year period. After visiting the Great Buddha of Kamakura and bathing at the onsen. Knowledgeable about the Kamakura area. Reluctantly. ultimately.S.S. team was invited to go singing at a nearby karaoke bar. He suggested that Greene’s team stay as guests at the Nagano’s company resort house. Ando told Greene that Nagano Securities needed the additional time to present CreditCorps’s counterproposal to their management. The presentation went on for some time. the group retired to a large tatami room. Nagano Securities would be willing to give CreditCorp broad discretion on staffing the top management positions if they agreed to the 51/49 ownership issue in favor of Nagano. developing and firing Japanese employees in Japan. This allowed both sides to learn from each other and to manage the new company jointly. But before doing so. Ando then asked Akahane to present his own proposal for staffing key top-management positions at NCS. one Japanese and one U. the U.

Ando told Greene that he would call Banner personally to set up the meeting and hoped that Banner would be able to attend the meeting. Tanaka also suggested that CreditCorp seriously review key positions and determine which ones required the most interaction with the Japanese business environment and should be staffed by Nagano Securities and which should be staffed by CreditCorp. side and expressed his gratitude for their time and effort. Greene approached Ando and asked if it would be possible to meet privately after the session.” The following morning. Although these cultural orientations are unlikely to be addressed during the negotiation. they play a significant role in the proceedings and the final outcome. After some discussion. The meeting resumed after a two-hour break. the vice president of information technology and the vice president of banking operations should be selected by CreditCorp. He went on to inquire whether Greene and his team would be available for a meeting in two weeks in New York at CreditCorps’ headquarters. and Greene responded to Akahane’s proposal for staffing by countering with his own proposal. not knowing what to do next. side. Greene thanked Akahane for his presentation and told him that he would consider his proposal. a training and orientation program would be designed and implemented on both sides of the joint venture. exhaled slowly. He then suggested that they keep this issue on the table until the following morning.S. Ando then rose from the negotiation table and bowed to the U. Training Management Corporation 13 . It appeared that the negotiation had ended without an agreement. Greene suggested that the position of chairman and that of vice president of human resources and sales should be selected and staffed by Nagano Securities. In a private meeting room. and said: “I will do my best to support your proposal. CULTURE ON NEGOTIATING BEHAVIOR The Ten Dimensions of Culture Culture affects the negotiation process through the cultural orientations and behaviors that individuals and groups bring to the negotiating table. Greene and his team looked at one another in some confusion.THE IMPACT OF joint ventures had tried parallel organizational structures. including the suggestion that the chairman of the organization be Japanese. Ando nodded. and asked Ando for a short break so that he could discuss the proposal with his own team members. Greene’s team was anxious to wrap up the negotiation and fly back to New York. Greene felt that CreditCorp should stand firm on their need to staff the joint venture. He suggested that all selected managers have a thorough understanding of Japanese language. government officials or employees. and that he needed to show a positive result to Banner before he and his team returned to New York. He reminded him that CreditCorp had conceded on two of the three issues brought up at the beginning of the negotiation. culture and management practices. Ando again addressed the U. To ensure success. Ando told Greene that he and his team would respond to this proposal on Friday morning.S. with little success. Everyone agreed that the president of the new joint venture. Tanaka pointed out that CreditCorp managers would have little credibility with Japanese customers. Greene told Ando that he would have a problem going back to Banner with the present deal if Nagano Securities did not agree with their need to staff these key positions.

The context of the negotiation. When proposing a new idea or making plans. A negotiator who prefers a control orientation drives all aspects of the negotiation. which may be nonnegotiable or. A proactive approach to solving problems through persistence and creativity is employed. Schedules. To arrive at a mutually beneficial agreement. you expect to influence and change the negotiation environment to fit your needs. Opportunities and business propositions tend to be well thought out and take into consideration the needs of the other side. language and psychological space are manipulated to each side’s advantage. from choosing the physical location to setting the agenda. Environment All negotiators strive to control their immediate environment in a negotiation. Communications technology is used to bridge distance. You often assume that others should conform to your own approach to negotiating. both sides must conduct “cultural due diligence. Consultation before making any decision is assumed and expected. the physical location. time. A person who has a harmony orientation to the environment seeks out members of his group or the other side to arrive at a mutually beneficial solution. time and cultural differences. and the need to bargain are assumed and expected. A highly control-oriented person displays impatience with intangible and vague statements. You are not shy in taking charge of any situation and are highly optimistic and self-confident in your approach. Underlying cultural orientations and core values. Issues are reframed and alternatives selected to present a flexible position to all involved. the process of give-and-take. assessments and evaluations of ongoing discussions by the other side. Compromise and conciliation are used to avoid conflict and reduce the risk to all parties. Conflict over positions. The approach to risk is to look for precedent and maintain the status quo rather than to seek novel approaches to problem-solving. at best. marginally negotiable. Establishing and maintaining positive relationships is of key importance to you and the members of your team. harmony and constraint. As an individual negotiator. Opportunities are seized and risks taken to deliver dynamic and novel business propositions. As an individual negotiator. you readily assume that a compromise will be required to reach agreement. Training Management Corporation . The following section considers each of the ten dimensions of TMC’s Cultural Orientations Model™ and the ways in which each can manifest itself in the negotiating process. influence these positions. you expect to balance your own approach to negotiation with the needs of the other party or to meet external constraints. and there is the expectation that they will adjust to the other side’s needs or wants as well. responsibilities and performance standards are clearly communicated to both sides. There are basically three approaches to controlling the immediate environment or the context of the negotiation: control. Attempts are made to adjust initial positions to those of the counterpart. You exhibit stress when other negotiators display a win-lose or confrontational style of negotiation.” Cultural due diligence is the process of clarifying the other side’s cultural orientations and the resultant behavior before entering into the negotiation. Alternatives or options are selected to enhance problem-solving as issues are outlined and discussed.NEGOTIATING ACROSS CULTURES 14 The process of negotiation requires individuals and groups to adopt a position based on their interests and needs.

by contrast. Cultures with multi-focused and fluid orientations to time. You feel that time cannot be tightly defined or tracked for management purposes. straightforward situation that can be broken down into a series of tasks to be performed over time. The creation of elaborate and fixed contingency plans helps to mitigate risk or change. changing economic conditions or governmental regulations. and change is expected. they prefer a dynamic environment and welcome change. your approach to problem-solving is holistic. Time is highly valued and should be defined and managed precisely. Keeping to exact timelines and schedules is not essential. As an individual negotiator.THE IMPACT OF A constraint orientation defines positions. you expect that external forces and conditions beyond your control will determine the outcome of the negotiation. As an individual negotiator. when crafting acceptable solutions. You assume that you must act within the given limits of a set of negotiation parameters. not just individual issues. you accept the status quo and adjust your position to the limits set by the other side or the external constraints you cannot control. Forecasting future needs and planning for the future are limited. CULTURE ON NEGOTIATING BEHAVIOR Time Cultures with single-focused and fixed orientations to time are sometimes referred to as monochronic cultures. As an individual negotiator. Opportunities and business propositions are guided by considerations of security and of minimizing risk at all stages of the negotiation. they view events as well as relations over time as interconnected in a myriad of ways. They are called monochronic because they view time as being composed of a series of single events with definite beginning and ending times. they tend to focus on the entire negotiation. You have a tendency to frame issues and alternatives according to the demands. When negotiating. Individuals from monochronic cultures break negotiating positions into manageable issues and focus on one issue at a time in a step-by-step manner. As negotiators. Progress can be measured by how many issues have been resolved. Agreements are crafted to show immediate effects and to have their effect in the short term. Individuals in polychronic cultures do not view time as consisting of a series of discrete events that occur in sequential order over time. The approach to problem-solving is analytical. Timelines are rigidly defined and adhered to throughout the negotiation. You prefer to negotiate with clear guidelines and parameters given by superiors or those in charge. It is a major consideration when planning and making commitments. Therefore. they are able to pay attention to multiple tasks and relationships simultaneously. You often display frustration when you have to concentrate on one person. You easily get frustrated when people do not adhere to schedules or plans. Generally. you prefer a simple. actions and approaches of your counterpart. Instead. and various perspectives can be discussed during the negotiation. A reactive approach to problem-solving is employed. The most important issues are prioritized and handled one at a time. “Quick fixes” are acceptable. issue or question for an extended Training Management Corporation 15 . needs and interests according to the outside forces that limit or prevent action. Being punctual and keeping precisely to a schedule are seen as indications of good planning and reliability. Issues can be discussed at any time during the negotiation and often are reintroduced for further clarification toward the end of the negotiation. Renegotiation after the signing of the agreement is assumed. Consistency and predictability in business partners is sought from the other side. Issues and alternatives are restricted by strong religious beliefs. are called polychronic.

not personal. As an individual negotiator. quality of organizational life. or even decades. Those with a past time orientation expect longer-term planning horizons in which precedent and past relationships are taken into consideration.” When meeting new people in business. concepts and proposed changes. Decisions need to be well founded and well grounded before implementation can occur. Time is structured according to changing situational needs. As an individual negotiator. Considerable time is spent building rapport and trust before entering into a negotiation. As an individual negotiator. Precedents and past successes are important in solving problems and making decisions. Job satisfaction. You do not jump to conclusions or take action quickly. You tend to scrutinize issues carefully. The emphasis is on quality of life. Progress is measured in fixed milestones over years. you require a relatively long warm-up period. Relationships are business-to-business. The present time orientation emphasizes bottom-line results. As an individual negotiator. social occasions and ceremonial events may be utilized to overcome initial skepticism and suspicions of the other party. you are motivated by building and maintaining good. changes and counterproposals so long as they do not affect the longterm outcome of the negotiation. schedules and deadlines are seen only as guidelines or expressions of intent. Stability and continuity with traditions are important to those with a past orientation. harmonious relationships with team members. trusting personal relationships for the purpose of making negotiations easier to conduct. This lengthens the planning and orientation phases of negotiation. Small talk. It is important to ascertain the integrity and compatibility of your counterpart before allowing him to enter into a “closed network. Therefore. months. You are careful not to extend trust too quickly at the negotiating table. you are motivated by a desire to get the job done or to solve problems. rather than by building personal relationships. and plans are judged by how well they adhere to traditions or past precedents. weeks and days. Problem-solving focuses on tangible improvements over time and the quick fix is ignored. and progress will be measured in quarters. Those with a future time orientation expect agreements to be strategic in nature and to take effect over a longer period of time. you are motivated by profitable and beneficial results that occur in the future. but they are not Training Management Corporation . Those with a doing orientation value the process of resolving issues and accomplishing tasks at the negotiation table. and inclusion in challenging work are what motivate and reward you. affiliations and personal relationships.NEGOTIATING ACROSS CULTURES 16 period of time. You have a high tolerance for setbacks. Although you spend much time in developing relationships. you are motivated by promises of quick results and handling day-to-day problems or crises. therefore. a strong being orientation may impede flexibility and responsiveness due to your relatively slow decision-making processes. Personal relationships may develop. You display skepticism in the face of novel ideas. Although concerns for a long-term future or relationship are expressed in the negotiation. emphasis is on the immediate present and the short-term future. you hesitate to disclose information about yourself until trust has been built. Action Those with a being orientation value the process of building and maintaining both personal and business relationships with others. This present orientation often excludes the need for long-term planning or results.

The emphasis is on achieving external measurable accomplishments and goals. Meaning is conveyed not just in words but in the composition of the negotiation team. Negotiation issues are addressed through the use of passive language. Relationship-building. Resources are focused on planning a strategy and set of tactics to achieve agreed-upon goals. For example. You have an aversion to informal speech. Formal cultures place a high value on following business policies and social customs. You believe that it is important to minimize the surface appearance of conflict and criticism during the negotiation. who is invited to a meeting or asked to be on the negotiating team may have greater significance than what is discussed. you see the lack of formality in others as an indication of their lack of professionalism. which allows both sides to focus on the tasks of negotiating and less on building personal relationships up front. A strong doing orientation often leads negotiators to push the negotiation to closure in order to get a signed contract in the shortest period of time. education and social graces. Training Management Corporation 17 . the degree of formality and appropriateness of behavior in any given situation is taken to indicate the sincerity. manners and forms of address at the negotiating table. nonverbal behavior and the use of silence. It is important for the negotiation to be expeditious. they may not be viewed in detail or at length before a decision is made. Communication tends to be indirect. You tend to make plans and decisions based on incomplete information and time constraints. issues can be resolved through open and direct communication. You believe that prescribed norms are conducive to the overall process of putting the person at ease and reaching agreement. An open-network approach is followed. You focus on accomplishing tasks quickly and tend to emphasize reasonable achievements throughout the negotiation. Open conflicts are not seen as beneficial to the overall negotiating process. As an individual negotiator. symbolic or situational cues more than on explicit verbal or written cues to judge acceptance of your proposals. Although issues are considered. and a third party may be introduced to mediate differences. There also tends to be a stronger emphasis on social class and hierarchy and a respect for roles and procedures. It is important to observe specific etiquette and forms of conduct when negotiating. To avoid conflict in public. solutions are discussed behind the scenes. you rely on implicit nonverbal. subtle meanings and silence. task accomplishment and a commitment to agree upon deliverables. intentions and trustworthiness of the other party. Individuals from high-context cultures are relationship-centered and require voluminous exchanges of background information before business can be transacted. Reward and recognition are measured against established standards of performance. If the other side is as pragmatic as you are. A negotiator’s approach to sharing and exchanging information can be classified as being either high. As an individual negotiator. Business relationships are built on problem-solving. Saving and giving face in private interpersonal exchanges is as important as how face is managed in more public formal negotiation sessions.or low-context. clothing. To those with a formal orientation. focused and outcome-oriented. and they often lead to problems in negotiations. CULTURE ON NEGOTIATING BEHAVIOR Communication Differences in communication can be subtle. proper positioning and timing of proposals are of critical importance.THE IMPACT OF essential to conducting the negotiation.

if they are used at all. Trustworthiness and honesty are intricately tied to how you manage conflict and resolve contentious issues. strategies and tactics are communicated in detailed plans for individual negotiators. Therefore. close physical contact with others. concise communication followed by detailed documentation and an action plan.NEGOTIATING ACROSS CULTURES 18 A high-context person provides sufficient background and context to the other party at all stages of the negotiation. placing faith in the spirit of the law to govern the behavior of both parties. authority relationships. you tend to value the process of choosing and interpreting the words used in communicating proposals and issues. and prevents both sides from reaching an agreement. it is important to eliminate formality and prescribed forms of conduct in the negotiation. As an expressive communicator. Therefore. You need little background information about those with whom you negotiate or conduct business. and leaving options open for later discussion. You tend to be animated in your use of words and body language. In a business setting. public forum. you value emotional expressions and passionate responses in negotiations. trust and compatibility are not primary considerations when doing business in low-context cultures. negotiation and bargaining should take place in a structured. as the other side divines the meaning from the context of what is and is not said. Communication in a presentation tends to be direct and explicit. Plans tend to be detailed and depend upon a contractual relationship for implementation purposes. You may even seek. Conclusions are explicit and are captured in writing throughout the negotiation. Contracts are long. Contracts are short and general in scope. detailed and specific. Expressiveness is seen as one way to influence and persuade others to agree with your point of view. Conflict is seen as constructive and is resolved through direct dialogue in an open way. may not be explicitly stated. You believe that formality obstructs the flow of communication. You are uncomfortable in situations that require formal dress and forms of address. however. Negotiation issues are addressed openly or head-on. As an individual negotiator. You support the appearance of basic equality between team members and treat the other side as peers or colleagues during the negotiation. Conclusions. Observance of deadlines and schedules is more important than maintaining image or status among individuals or groups. As an individual negotiator. you value the flexibility and spontaneity team members bring to the negotiation. meaning is expressed in verbal and written formats to exchange information. and expect. You are motivated by clear. Silence plays an important role in expressing meaning. Professional and personal Training Management Corporation . Plans in high-context cultures tend to be implicit and depend more on relationships for implementation than they do upon a contract. waiting for an issue to disappear or introducing a third party to mediate a conflict may be seen as a sign of untrustworthiness or as promoting additional conflict. requiring relatively little information about the other side before conducting any business. Low-context individuals are primarily task-centered in their approach to work. saving face. puts social distance between two parties. High-context individuals place more faith in the spirit of the agreement between both parties. Team roles. In informal cultures. facts and opinions. For example. the use of informal language and behavior in all situations is seen as a way to invite the fair and equal participation of all to focus on solving the issues at hand. Relationships.

Negotiators prefer a relationship-oriented style of negotiation and select locations that enhance the development of trust and rapport. The location and conditions of the meeting facility can have a direct bearing on the outcome of negotiations. The conditions presented by public-oriented negotiators may seem overly small. you value factual. Private-oriented negotiators. Negotiators prefer a task-oriented style of negotiation and select locations that enhance the ability to problem-solve and reach agreement. Negotiators tend to stand closer together and tend to touch when communicating. Site selection is an important aspect of protocol because it affects psychological space or the climate of the participants. Communication is problem. negotiators generally prefer to put less distance between themselves and others and they may engage in frequent physical contact among members. Private cultures place an emphasis on closed-door meetings with minimal interruptions. it does not replace the need for faceto-face meetings. credibility and trustworthiness in negotiations. however. the size of the table or room size. objective. You prefer an emotionally detached way of presenting information in order to convince and persuade the other side. negotiators generally prefer to put a greater distance between themselves and others. the degree to which office space is demarcated as public or private and the rules governing the use of each type of space. In private-oriented cultures. impersonal and goal-oriented. In public-oriented cultures. Emotional expressiveness in others may cause you to doubt their professionalism. There is a psychological advantage to those negotiators who can select the location or leverage the culture gap created by differences in space orientations. crowded and noisy to private-oriented negotiators. To be ON NEGOTIATING BEHAVIOR 19 Training Management Corporation . As an instrumental communicator. Physical contact is limited.or issue-centered. Public cultures are accustomed to having open-door meetings with frequent interruptions. You tend to have limited tolerance for overt displays of emotion at the negotiating table. This “let’s-get-to know-each-other-better” style of negotiation may conflict with cultures that rely heavily on task accomplishment. Negotiators tend to stand farther apart and tend not to touch during conversation. The use of technology for communications may be expected and emphasized for negotiating across long distances. CULTURE Space Negotiators can be categorized according to their distinctions between private and public spaces. People in different cultures have contrasting personal space requirements as to such things as the distance they place between individuals. pragmatic exchanges of information. Your favorable evaluation of other negotiators may be linked to their expressiveness in communicating their issues. This “let’s-get-down-to-business” style of negotiation may conflict with cultures that rely on extensive socializing. may make public-oriented negotiators uncomfortable in the distance they place between negotiators through seating arrangements.THE IMPACT OF competence is tied to communication style and the eloquence of language used in the negotiation. While technology may be extensively used for communications. on the other hand.

therefore. As an individual negotiator. Changes in positions or strategies are expected. position. Planning is delegated and distributed among team members requiring buyin by those who will implement agreements after a contract is signed by those in power. A show of public respect and deference is given to those in power by using appropriate forms of address that reinforce hierarchical structures and social status. final selection is based on hierarchy and power. Changes in positions or responses to counterproposals are problematic. Individual negotiators are empowered to make a broad range of concessions and to seal agreements at the negotiation table. Individual negotiators expect to negotiate with others of equal status or power. Negotiators with a hierarchy orientation tend to see power and authority as centralized and controlled. on Training Management Corporation . rather than to those with a title or position. Individualism In most cultures of the world. since they require lengthy discussions and approval by managers not immediately involved in the negotiation. Power The degree of comfort with differences in power. time is less of a factor. It is not appropriate to bypass formal lines of authority in order to complete a task. since decisions can be made at the table. individuals identify strongly with groups and expect to work collectively to accomplish business goals. flexibility and authority to contribute his or her technical. Subordinates and individual team members rely less on their supervisors or team leaders. one must first determine whether the other party is collectivistic or individualistic in its approach to negotiation. The negotiation team is selected on the basis of functional expertise or experience in negotiating with the other side. and they rarely question decisions or contradict those decisions in public. they prefer consultation or confrontation to resolve issues. Although roles and responsibilities may be defined. and may openly contradict or challenge others in their own field of expertise. As an individual negotiator. The negotiation team is carefully selected. are collectivistic in their orientation to individualism. title and status. with roles and responsibilities in the organization clearly defined according to age. Although technical and managerial skills are considered. Most cultures. offers and agreements. negotiators need to be prepared to adjust to the site selection and space orientation of the other party. Managers higher up in the organization make all of the decisions. independent. each team member has the autonomy. managerial or interpersonal skills to the negotiation. you are uncomfortable with the use of official titles and forms of address that reinforce hierarchical structures or social status. Overall. Deference is given to those with expertise and experience. In these cultures. Negotiation in individualistic cultures places a high value on independence. When negotiating. you prefer to negotiate with a person of equal rank. concessions.NEGOTIATING ACROSS CULTURES 20 successful. Negotiators with an equality orientation minimize hierarchy by decentralizing power and authority to the lower levels of an organization. authority and status between parties in a negotiation can affect the outcome significantly as both sides jockey to influence and persuade each other. Subordinates and individual team members rely on their superiors or team spokesperson. individual attributes are not very important in forming individual identity.


tasks over relationships, and on achievements and recognition based on individual performance. As an individualistic negotiator, you focus on your own personal and professional skills when preparing for a negotiation. In fact, your interest and contribution decrease when the outcomes being negotiated do not benefit you personally. An individualistic negotiating team consists of a collection of individuals, each motivated primarily by his own personal success. Success is measured by the individual contributions of each team member and the overall outcome. As an individualistic negotiator, you value and admire self-driven, determined, self-motivated individuals. Accountability is allocated to individuals on the negotiation team, but responsibility resides primarily in the team leader. In individualistic cultures, there may be a preference for negotiating alone or in smaller teams, to save time, money and personnel. Value is placed on individual decisions rather than on those arrived at by consensus. Constructive confrontation is often employed to arrive at the best possible solution in the shortest period of time. Individuals are expected to make their views known when plans and strategies are being discussed and developed. Collectivistic cultures place a high value on subordinating individual interests to group interests, on relationships over task accomplishments and achievement, and on recognition based on group performance. Collectivistic negotiators focus on organizational skills, knowledge and authority when preparing for a negotiation. Negotiation teams are well coordinated, and roles are clearly defined. Conformity to group standards, policies and procedures is expected. Your identity is defined as a member of the negotiation team. Your loyalty is given to the group or company, not to the matter being negotiated. Contributions are made as an extension of the larger organization or group. Success is measured by the larger achievements of the organization, and accountability is diffused throughout the group. Value is placed on reaching consensual decisions over individual ones. As a collectivistic negotiator, you defend decisions made by the team, even if you disagree or have no role in their finalization. Conflict or confrontation that causes another person in the group to lose face is to be avoided if at all possible. Open conflict is seen as both negative and disruptive. Plans are based on the shared values of the group and implemented through the strength of group relationships, rather than through a simple assignment of tasks to individual team members. When negotiating, you may rely on a universalistic orientation that places a high value on standards, procedures, rules and law. If so, you treat others with fairness, openness and equality and expect them to treat you in the same way. The negotiation process should be well defined and standardized so as to meet your expectations of the “right way” of conducting business. You have a strong sense of right and wrong when dealing with issues of ethics and behavior during the negotiation. When presenting your position or determining your bargaining approach, you apply the appropriate rules, standards and principles to persuade and influence the other side. Negotiators who emphasize their uniqueness or the particular circumstances of a given situation in presenting their proposal are displaying a particularistic orientation. As an individual negotiator, you value the uniqueness of the situation or group, and apply different rules and procedures to help determine the outcome of the negotiation. Negotiation behaviors are adapted to fit the situation and the person/group with whom you are negotiating. There is no “right way” to negotiate or arrive at a decision, since there are multiple truths in each team’s



Training Management Corporation


approach or business realities. Although you may respect formal rules and procedures, you do not necessarily believe that they apply to you or to your unique situation. When presenting your position or determining a bargaining approach, you trust in established relationships and networks to influence the outcome.

Competitive cultures stress win-lose outcomes, task achievement, and getting the best possible deal at the end of the negotiation. Cooperative cultures stress win-win outcomes, interdependent relationships, and understanding the needs and expectations of the other side in order to arrive at a mutually beneficial agreement. As a competitive negotiator, you are motivated by the need to outperform others. Material success, achievement and performance are high motivators. The achievement of expected outcomes and projected results are drivers in the negotiation. Efforts are made to influence and persuade the other party to accept the superiority of your position, product and/or solution. As an individual negotiator you expect others to articulate, assert and defend their positions in the negotiation. Plans are developed and implemented quickly. Progress is measured and evaluated through meeting deadlines, schedules and contractual obligations. Proposals and issues are crafted for a specific detailed outcome, which is presented to the other side for their buy-in. As a cooperative negotiator, you are motivated by establishing mutually beneficial relationships that allow you to achieve your goals. Quality of life, being a member of a group, and job satisfaction all contribute to your motivation. Harmonious teamwork, consensusbuilding and the development of mutually beneficial interdependencies drive the negotiation. Efforts are made to influence and persuade by showing how your position, product and/or solution meets the needs and expectations of the other party. You expect others to seek, build and maintain supportive relationships that lead to consensus. Plans are developed and implemented slowly. Progress is measured and evaluated through customer satisfaction, commitment and fulfillment of obligations over time. Proposals and issues are crafted from general principles that are presented to get buy-in from the other side.

The degree to which negotiators are comfortable with uncertainty, change and new ways of doing business determines their approach to risk in a negotiation. People with a strong order orientation tend to follow and expect a predictable course of action. Security and confidence come from following tried-and-true methods. Efforts are made to reduce risk by instituting policies and procedures (both written and unwritten) and applying them consistently across all situations. As an individual negotiator, you are comfortable with clearly defined parameters and guidelines for negotiating with others. When faced with an unknown counterpart or a different approach to negotiating, high-order cultures display stress and frustration with changes, and are less willing to take risks. Changes in positions, or too many counterproposals, tend to lower trust and damage the relationship. A structured approach to negotiation with clearly defined team roles, consensus decision-making and formality all

Training Management Corporation


help to reduce ambiguity and uncertainty. Decisions require a lot of information, data, and time to evaluate, eliminate or moderate risk. Order-oriented negotiators see contracts as vehicles for recording in writing areas of responsibility and steps for implementation to be carried out by all involved. Organizations with an order orientation may find that they spend more time negotiating internally to reach consensus than they do negotiating externally with the other party. Flexibility-oriented cultures do not expect negotiations to follow a predetermined course of action. People with a strong flexibility orientation tend to have a high level of tolerance for change and deviation in plans. Success is based on how quickly the team can adapt to changing demands, conditions and considerations. As an individual negotiator, you value innovative and unconventional ways of doing things and are open to new ideas for solving problems in the negotiation. Your emphasis on newer, better and bigger benefits is used to influence and persuade the other side to agree with your proposals. Lack of flexibility in your counterpart results in a reduced level of trust and confidence. Positions and strategies are planned to provide the widest degree of flexibility or number of alternatives. Doing whatever it takes to achieve a good result is expected and rewarded. A less structured approach with loosely defined team roles, individual decision-making, and informality all contribute to a greater willingness to take risks. Contracts and agreements are seen as a necessary evil in reaching an agreement. Flexibility-oriented negotiators are comfortable with verbal agreements or broad contracts that allow details to be worked out later.



As a deductive thinker, you are more comfortable with information presented in a format that begins with a general introduction and ends with a specific conclusion. When evaluating a proposal or position presented by the other side, your focus is on the overall guiding principles. You base your own position on sound concepts or guidelines, then fit your data to support that position. You need a great deal of background information before getting down to the specific details of a negotiation proposal. As an individual negotiator, you prefer to focus on the overall proposal rather than single issues. Influence and persuasion strategies are based on how things should be, rather than on how things are. As an inductive thinker, you are more comfortable with information presented in a format that begins with a specific conclusion and then goes on to discuss information or data which support that conclusion. Your focus is on the specific issues or evidence required to persuade others that yours is the best proposal. You base your own position on expertise and experience. Data and evidence are analyzed to reach a specific conclusion. As an individual negotiator, you prefer to focus on specific contentious issues rather than on common ground or issues in agreement. Influence and persuasion strategies are based on how things are and what has worked previously––not how things should be. As a linear thinker, you prefer to convert issues into causal chains of events, documenting cause and effect to help you develop a negotiation strategy or set of tactics. Arguments and counterproposals should be logical, supported by sufficient evidence or data that will persuade the other side. As a negotiator, you prefer to look at discrete issues and how they affect you

Training Management Corporation



personally. You use agendas and the completion of sequential discussion points to measure progress. Checklists are helpful in keeping the negotiation on track. As a systemic thinker, you prefer to discuss issues within the context of the whole negotiation, and see all issues as being interdependent. Before developing a strategy, you need to get the big picture. Your approach is to ask many questions to ensure that you have sufficient background information from the other side before making any decisions. You prefer that arguments and counterproposals be holistic, integrating solutions that take into consideration how others will be affected. A negotiation planning sheet or checklist is considered helpful when planning how to respond to the other side’s objectives and issues.

Cultural Analysis of the Case Scenario
We may now use our understanding of how negotiating behavior is shaped by different cultural orientations to analyze the different expectations and negotiating behaviors of the individuals presented in our case scenario. The first contrast between the two negotiating sides is a fundamental difference in their orientation to the action dimension. Whereas the U.S. Americans are strongly doing-oriented, the Japanese display a being orientation with some leanings toward doing. This difference makes itself felt almost immediately after the arrival of the U.S. team, when Greene and his colleagues are treated to a lavish dinner at a well-known Japanese restaurant. For the doingoriented Greene, this dinner presents the first opportunity to begin preliminary discussions concerning the deal. His being-oriented Japanese counterparts, however, intend the dinner as an informal way of becoming personally acquainted with their counterparts and assessing whether they are trustworthy partners for a negotiation. To the Japanese, it is inappropriate to commence business in such a setting and so early on. Ando is therefore unwilling to respond to Greene’s attempt to engage in a discussion about the next day’s negotiations. Subsequent invitations over the course of the negotiation, on the part of the Japanese team and its leader, to have drinks or to spend an afternoon and evening at a nearby spa, are all further reflections of the Japanese being orientation. For the Japanese, such informal occasions are integral to the negotiation, because they foster personal ties and help establish good will on both sides. Although the doing-oriented U.S. Americans may enjoy these activities, they generally view them as a digression from the negotiation and, as such, a waste of time. Since their willingness to compromise does not derive from a sense of personal affinity or obligation, the U.S. Americans cannot recognize the full import of spending extended periods of time with their negotiating partners in social settings not discussing business. Further significant differences between the U.S. and the Japanese approach to negotiating derive from the combined effect of their opposite orientations to the environment, to individualism and to competitiveness. The Japanese orientations to these dimensions are harmony, collectivistic and cooperative, respectively, whereas the U.S.-American orientations are control, individualistic and competitive, respectively. These important differences find expression in a variety of ways.

Training Management Corporation


The Japanese desire to establish good will and a good rapport between the two sides, as mentioned above, derives as much from their harmony orientation as it does from their being orientation. Thus, the Japanese harmony orientation also plays a significant role in prompting them to invest time in purely social engagements with their U.S. counterparts. The U.S. negotiators, on the other hand, rely much more heavily on their ability to control the things in their environment in order to achieve their business ends. This control orientation is partly revealed when Banner comments to CNN that CreditCorp seeks to reduce its risks by diversifying globally. Banner’s elaboration on CreditCorp’s policy as being one of staying in a particular country so long as the venture is profitable and then pulling out once profits drop, reveals an approach that relies on controlling the surrounding business environment. Once control can no longer be exercised to Credit Corp’s advantage, the company pulls out. There is no effort made, however, to fit in with the surrounding environment in order to achieve results nor, alternately, is any great effort made to emphasize the human factor in business and attempt to improve business through the exchange of favors and obligations. This contrasts sharply with Ando’s revelations later on during the negotiation that Nagano’s relations with its customers relies, in part, on an exchange of favors, and it also contrasts with Nagano’s insistence that the joint venture retain 500 of Nagano’s current relationship managers. Both points indicate the strong presence of a harmony orientation in Japanese business culture. This harmony orientation is strengthened by and interacts with the Japanese cooperative orientation, which encourages loyalties to others and to the business organization as a whole. Thus, in his opening remarks, Ando describes the new joint venture with CreditCorp as a marriage “in which there is give-and-take on both sides.” This cooperative view of negotiating contrasts sharply with CreditCorp’s competitive orientation. Banner’s motto of “profit or perish” succinctly sums up the competitive orientation. The U.S. team’s focus on maximizing profits over considerations for the fate of the individuals involved in the two companies derives both from its competitiveness and from its individualism. The U.S.-American competitive orientation is furthered strengthened by its flexibility orientation to structure. This flexibility orientation allows the leaders of CreditCorp to take the risk of going into a country, testing the business environment and pulling out at the first sign of trouble with little sense of disruption or anxiety. The Japanese, who have an order orientation to structure, would feel much more uncomfortable with such an approach to business. In general, they are much more cautious than are the U.S. Americans when entering into new deals or ventures. This is one reason why the Japanese team raises the same questions and asks for the same information several times before feeling satisfied with the answers. Yet, although the Japanese exhibit an order orientation that contrasts with the U.S. flexibility orientation, the Japanese also demonstrate a certain flexibility that is not shared by the U.S.American team. Both cultures have a fixed orientation to time and they therefore expect meetings to begin on time and appointments to be made promptly. Yet, within the very set structure that the Japanese establish (order and fixed-time orientations), they exhibit flexibility in their willingness to manipulate the context of talks and the sequence of individual events, for the sake of the negotiations. The U.S. team, on other hand, is negotiating toward a schedule (the U.S. fixed-time orientation). They view the negotiating agenda as a carefully scripted series of events, arranged so as to ensure that they leave Japan within the allotted



Training Management Corporation

NEGOTIATING ACROSS CULTURES 26 period of time with a signed agreement.S. On many occasions. Our minds seek internal consistency among our beliefs. This is how we learn. will work in Mexico or France.S. California will approach solving an engineering problem in the same way that they do in Saudi Arabia. Americans have a linear orientation. We rarely validate this process or examine it closely. the Japanese have a systemic orientation. The Japanese. How we think and process information are programmed by our culture. team expects to follow a pre-set plan in a clear. motivating and managing subordinates are the same throughout a global company—that what works in Saudi Arabia will work in the U. Furthermore.S. Instead. however. while the Japanese view the events of the entire negotiation period as integrated whole––parts of which may be changed or manipulated without disrupting the overall aim––indeed.S. engineers from Dhahran. Managers may also assume that ways of leading. This difference in the expression of the fixed-time orientation derives from differences in the U. sequential order. To maintain Training Management Corporation . feel comfortable with a certain amount of digression and come up with unannounced trips and dinners. The difference arises again when Ando gives Greene an evasive response of “Yes. The Japanese and U.” in answer to Greene’s question about which of the three contentious issues Ando would like to discuss first—and Greene and his team are baffled. wish to consider all issues together and only arrive at a comprehensive agreement at the close of the negotiations. This sort of extrapolation from one culture onto another is dangerous. Whereas the U. Greene finds it difficult to get the Japanese to address them directly during formal talks. the U. The Japanese. and Japanese orientations to thinking. attitudes. since the issues are contentious and the Japanese would like to avoid conflict. Generalizations and Stereotypes in Negotiations It is often assumed that a person who shares the same business or functional culture with someone from overseas will behave more or less consistently in a given situation. values and so on. teams are also quite different in their approach to communication. The Japanese preference for more informal.S. Saudi Arabia may assume that their counterparts in San Jose. The U. direct and the Japanese indirect orientations emerges.S. Anticipating these differences and understanding the expectations of the other side is the first step toward effective cross-cultural negotiations. Thus. This difference in orientations to thinking is also revealed in how the two teams approach the negotiating issues themselves. the difference between the U.S. by contrast. For example. the Japanese wait to discuss these issues during private one-on-one conversations in informal settings. To them. we understand your proposal well. The contrast between Banner’s blunt comments about how CreditCorp conducts international business and Ando’s use of an analogy to express the Japanese approach to business is one of the first occasions. Americans expect to clear up one issue at a time and then move on to the next one.. these events are as much a part of moving the negotiations along as are the planned events. intended to further the overall aim. and that what works in the U.S. and how we interpret the world. social settings for interacting with their negotiating counterparts also reflects their high-context style of communication There are many differences that can occur when negotiating across cultures that can affect your success.

CULTURE ON NEGOTIATING BEHAVIOR 27 Training Management Corporation . an individual will develop his own stereotypes and generalizations about the other side’s particular interests. We seek explanations that meet our expectations. To negotiate in good faith. decision-making. protocol and status. good or bad. Without a frame of reference. concessions are made by the stronger party and positions are presented expressively. the importance of form. They must also share knowledge. Different cultural experiences produce different interpretations of the other person’s frame of reference. in which efficiency is prized. however. when negotiating across cultures. in the United States. assumptions and meanings that will be used and rules that will guide the negotiation process. tactics accepted. both sides must speak a common language. and the methods of persuasion and influence. The end result is often a reinforcement of our beliefs or stereotypes of expected behavior. persuasion used. Stereotypes help us maintain our image of the world. principles are accepted. it is difficult to negotiate across cultures. negotiations are viewed as a problem-solving exercise. compromises expected and fallback positions probed. New information that does not meet our beliefs. Behavior that is not understood or that does not meet our expectations in a given context is interpreted through the prism of our own values and cultural perspectives. obligations are sought and repaid. perceptions. we form ideas and beliefs as to what is right or wrong. For example. the choice of team members. attitudes and beliefs—all of which form a unique frame of reference. attitudes and values is ignored or rejected. may see negotiations as a basis for entering into a long-term relationship in which connections are paramount. we must be careful to properly observe and understand another person’s behavior. language. Culture affects negotiations greatly through the following areas: communication styles. Left alone.THE IMPACT OF how we see the world around us. Therefore. People from Latin America or Asia.

NEGOTIATING ACROSS CULTURES 28 Training Management Corporation .

Bargaining and Persuading Others (5) also involves both the doing and being orientations. Strategic Planning and Analysis (1) consists almost entirely of doing activities. the seven phases go in and out of being. A sevenphase model is presented to show how the use of time. NEGOTIATION Figure. 2. Reaching Agreement (6) returns to mainly being activities and in Follow-up and Maintaining Relationships (7) being and doing activities both come into play.1 The Seven Phases of International Negotiation: As this figure illustrates.and doing-oriented activities. whereas Orientation and Presentation (4) once again requires both doing and being activities. Network Entry and Approach (2) requires a mixture of doing and being activities. Building Personal and Business Relationships (3) is almost entirely composed of being activities. as the negotiator seeks to maintain relationships while planning for further negotiations. approach to task accomplishment. Training Management Corporation 29 . and role of relationships in business and persuasion strategies are exhibited differently across cultures.THE SEVEN PHASES 2 Chapter THE SEVEN PHASES OF INTERNATIONAL NEGOTIATION OF INTERNATIONAL The following model of international negotiation is provided so that you can examine how different cultural groups place emphasis differently during the negotiation process.

preparing for and planning the international negotiation. processes. • An awareness of the phases and principles of transcultural negotiations. needs and issues of negotiation. this phase requires careful attention.NEGOTIATING ACROSS CULTURES An Overview of the Seven Phases Phase 1: Strategic Planning and Analysis This phase involves strategizing. • A clear determination of key objectives. • The creation of internal organizational alignment and support. Success in this phase requires: • Planning an approach to entering a group. • An assessment of each side’s objectives. Success in this phase requires: • A clear understanding of expectations and interests. or it may take considerable time. historical. • Skill in designing and implementing a strategy that is culturally appropriate. financial. • The selection. Cultural. direct and quick. • Learning the cultural orientations of your counterpart in the negotiation. For individuals with a doing orientation. • A personal skills gap analysis of each team member. • A preliminary analysis of your counterpart’s cultural orientations and those of the organization he represents. • A deep analysis of one’s own cultural orientations and those of the organization one represents. for whom building relationships is not the primary focus. It is in this phase that the initial contact between you and your counterpart occurs. Phase 2: Network Approach and Entry This phase involves identifying. • The anticipation of the critical components in the negotiation phases. formation. • The effective adaptation of one’s own behavior to meet the expectations of the other culture. energy and formality. contingencies and logistics for each negotiation phase. network or company. 30 Training Management Corporation . • Understanding your counterpart’s network or system of relationships. coordination and role definition of the negotiation team. network or company. strategizing to enter and actually entering a group. The process can be straightforward. economic and political due diligence are all used to strategize an approach that will meet the needs of both sides.

building the business relationship precedes building the personal one. • A nonjudgemental approach. When personal relationships are built and business networks penetrated. problem-solving approaches and requirements. OF INTERNATIONAL NEGOTIATION Phase 4: Orientation and Presentation This phase involves gathering. Success in this phase requires: • Understanding the cultural norms and expectations that regulate personal and business relationships. all parties involved form an alignment. each side undergoes a period of orientation to its counterpart’s way of doing business. But how do we do this? In the United States. each side defines the business interests that will guide the future relationship. as found in the United States and Canada. Success in this phase requires: • Intercultural observation. its organizational culture. • Skills for giving. This alignment critically determines the tone for Phase 5. • Use of written correspondence to share information across cultures. Depending on the cultural region. building and developing personal and business relationships. Training Management Corporation 31 . constraints. as in Japan and China. based on this assessment. time and resources. a tolerance for ambiguity. assessing and presenting the information needed to outline interests. that precedes the actual formal and informal negotiation sessions can be brief. Each party seeks to understand the other’s goals. the individuals involved and the specific circumstances of the specific relationship. And.THE SEVEN PHASES Phase 3: Building Personal and Business Relationships This phase involves pursuing. • Understanding the key communicative and relationship needs of your counterparts. Based on this assessment and definition. Building effective relationships across cultures and organizations is critical for success. • Adapting one’s approach to establishing credibility and building rapport. The time taken for small talk and discussion. flexibility and openness. issues and needs. issues. Each side and person involved engages in a reassessment of the other. a trusting personal relationship precedes any business relationship. • Skills for presenting information. In other cultures. or it can be lengthy. • Knowing culturally appropriate conversation styles and topics. patience. this phase requires varying amounts of attention. unrelated to business. positions and visuals across cultures. receiving and eliciting information in negotiations. listening and interpretation skills. How we establish our credibility at the individual and organizational level differs by culture.

Success in this phase requires: • A clear understanding of how the counterpart defines a contract or agreement. Understanding which persuasion and influence strategies are preferred by your counterpart is critical to your success. content and context of an agreement differ greatly across cultures. and it is characterized by either a competitive and hard-bargaining approach or a more cooperative and problem-solving approach. • The ability to translate the culture-based expectations of both sides into a working agreement or contract. • The adaptation of agreement formats to accommodate both the negotiator’s own needs and those of the counterpart.NEGOTIATING ACROSS CULTURES Phase 5: Bargaining and Persuading Others This phase involves bargaining with and persuading others through the use of logic. and acceptance of. • A clear vision of the goals and outcomes desired on both sides. evidence and influence. In the United States. a verbal agreement or handshake may be sufficient. in other cultures. In the United States. The meaning. It is perhaps the most critical for long-term. Phase 6: Reaching Agreement This phase involves reaching and implementing an agreement. but they do little in terms of explaining how to maintain relationships over time. • Selecting culturally appropriate key bargaining strategies and tactics. contracts spell out the rights and responsibilities of each party. 32 Training Management Corporation . concessions or compromise in reaching an agreement may also be affected by the cultural orientations of your counterparts. Phase 7: Follow-up and Maintaining Relationships This phase involves following up on obligations and maintaining established relationships in a network or at the conclusion of a business deal. The use of. and they require attention. • Adapting influence and persuasion strategies to match the cultural orientations of your counterpart. profitable relationships across cultural and national boundaries. Success in this phase requires: • Understanding what is important and convincing to your counterpart. • Up-front clarification with all parties involved as to the expectations about agreements and contracts. the end goal of a negotiation is a signed contract. Maintaining the relationship and following up on agreements are of critical importance in most cultures outside of the United States. It rests upon culturally dependent perspectives. Cultural orientations can affect how binding an agreement is and what the roles and responsibilities of each party are after agreement is reached. values and attitudes toward decision-making.

time on structuring the negotiation process. I Spend I In I Balance Training Management Corporation 33 . NEGOTIATION I Use I Spend I Be I Acknowledge I Allow for business socializing to develop the more personal side of the relationship. OF INTERNATIONAL Showing a Commitment to Negotiating Internationally The following enumerates the most important points for showing commitment when negotiating across cultures. • A clear understanding of your counterpart’s expectations of a business or a personal relationship. accompanied by objective information. as an outsider.THE SEVEN PHASES Success in this phase requires: • The ability to educate all involved parties of the negotiator’s organization about the relationship with a particular vendor or client. correspondence. you may be trying to penetrate a network that has existed for a long time. expert testimonials and emotional appeals. status and authority by showing deference to position and title. the presentation phase. telephone conversation. formal in communicating initially. fax and e-mail to set the stage for the initial meeting. then match the other party’s expectations for formality in a business relationship. based on the seven phases described above. sufficient time to identify the decision-maker and the limits of that person’s authority. the other party’s presentation or persuasive arguments with your own rational approach. • An understanding of relationship obligations and duties. I Understand that persistence may be required to gain entry into the network and that. • Skill in translating the expectations of both sides after an agreement has been reached. place more emphasis on finding out the interests of the other side as opposed to just gathering factual information. and address procedural issues (formalities). and allow this to become part of the negotiation process.

NEGOTIATING ACROSS CULTURES 34 I Know the expected concession pattern of the other party and what bargaining tactics they might use during the negotiation. I Spend Training Management Corporation . sufficient time to maintain the relationship after the contract is signed. in order to ensure future success.

In this chapter. finally. Training Management Corporation 35 . issues. economic and historical background of the country and company with which you will be negotiating. we examine how cultural orientations affect the various aspects of each negotiation phase. identify the issues to be negotiated and choose a negotiation strategy and tactics. Investigate the political. • Discover what (and how) issues will be addressed in the negotiation. alternatives and options. • Conduct fact-finding on how they make decisions and who has authority in the organization. People with different cultural backgrounds bring different expectations to the negotiation table. Know yourself. positions. goods and services. Know the situation. How you see yourself and how you see the other side are important in positioning your points in the negotiation. and objectives. • Observe the styles of your counterparts at the table and away from it. Part of the strategic planning process is to get you to understand the negotiation both from your own point of view and from that of your counterpart. You also need to determine individual skills. select negotiators for your team. • Understand the importance of contracts and what forms of agreements are considered to be the norm. strengths and weaknesses. plan strategies and tactics. economics. and. check your facts and assumptions about the other party. Consider the ramifications of politics. brainstorm options and alternatives. and their issues and needs. culture and social organization. Identify your team members.NEGOTIATING EFFECTIVELY ACROSS CULTURES 3 Chapter NEGOTIATING EFFECTIVELY ACROSS CULTURES Each phase of the international negotiation process may be examined in detail to reveal what role culture plays in the process. Phase 1: Strategic Planning and Analysis Strategic planning requires that you do research on the other company. needs. You need to set objectives for the negotiation. practice your negotiating skills as a team. The following should be considered: • Learn about the other organization’s business. group skills and team roles.

alternatives and options. For example. as well as measure your progress and set a credible deadline for success. the greater the status and power that must be attributed to the chief negotiator.” which states that the number. and Canadian companies send smaller teams than do their international counterparts. Members from the other negotiating team may be chosen for their professional competence as well.S.S. • Reflect the roles of the people seated across the table. business and technical skills. needs. in negotiations with the Japanese. education. Perform cultural due diligence on the cultural background and orientations of your counterpart’s team members. on the whole. social prominence.-American negotiator being sent abroad to negotiate a complicated deal. 36 Training Management Corporation .S. but social competence. U. personal connections and consensus-building ability. past experiences with them. Then what size team is right? The size of the team should reflect the number of tasks required and the abilities of the individual negotiator(s). While there are no hard-and-fast rules for establishing team size. it is recommended that the same team members remain throughout the negotiation process. Your strategy should be to get your agenda adopted and include those substantive issues that you want to negotiate. financial status and reputation prior to the first meeting. and their objectives.-American negotiators are often chosen for their technical competence. Finally. • Include extra members for establishing informal channels of communication. the leader should consider an individual’s position in the company. and cross-cultural and interpersonal skills.NEGOTIATING ACROSS CULTURES Know others. U. Team size should: • Reflect the importance of the product or service being negotiated. investigate the foreign company’s business. seniority. When selecting team members. Team Selection What size team should you send overseas to negotiate with the Japanese? With the Germans? With the Brazilians? Can one person alone negotiate against a team of ten? It is not unusual to hear about the lone U. In fact. Remember that the agenda and other procedural elements of a negotiation are negotiable. You must also identify who they are. social background and personal connections will more than likely figure prominently in the process. markets. It is recommended that you remember the “Equal Dignity Rule. the chief negotiator may hold his position based on age. position and titles of team members should match those of the other side. circulate the agenda ahead of schedule to get agreement from members of your team and identify those who will participate. Another aspect of strategic planning is influencing the negotiation process by controlling the agenda. functional role and past successes. issues. In addition. A well-thought-out agenda will help you organize and prioritize the issues to be discussed. his title and function. age. The larger the team you send abroad. positions.

objectives. and it should be prepared to maintain an ongoing relationship with the other party. listening abilities. Status You may wish to consider adding a top-level executive to lend additional credibility to the seriousness of the negotiation or for ceremonial purposes. South Koreans sometimes have one team for negotiating and another for dinner and drinking that evening. skill mix. you may wish to identify and include any one or all of the following: seasoned negotiators. and attitude for getting things done at headquarters. status. you may begin to identify the characteristics of those individuals who should be members of your negotiating team. for example. experiences. Similarly. needs and issues of both parties. Skill Mix Depending on the content of negotiations. with each person filling a different role in the negotiation. This individual should also be responsible for serving as the team leader and for facilitating a unified team Training Management Corporation 37 . A Chinese party official may also be included. Your team should establish a unified approach. chief negotiator and note taker. This may also reflect the process of consensus-building or the need to require wider participation of different departments and levels. it is customary for the senior executives to establish the general principles of an agreement and have the more junior staff work on the details. technical experts. The Japanese negotiation team. language skills. Size Determine the size of your team carefully. as well as the cultural orientations of the other side. may include three or more levels of management. Teams should have people with the right balance of functional skills. Your team should consist of individuals who are recognized for their expertise. while a third team remains back at the office preparing for the next day. younger negotiators who may more easily establish rapport with their counterparts. Often the Japanese use multiple groups of people for both formal and informal negotiations.NEGOTIATING EFFECTIVELY ACROSS CULTURES Your team members should be as knowledgeable as possible about the culture with which you are negotiating and about their negotiation styles and strategy. weaknesses. Chinese teams often include representatives from the relevant bureaucracies or corporations. you do not wish to overwhelm or alarm the other party with the sheer number of your negotiators. legal experts and highly interpersonal communicators. ability to be team players. Based on your understanding of the strengths. You want to avoid being at a disadvantage by having to face a larger team across from you at the negotiating table. cultural knowledge and negotiation experience. You may wish to consider these elements in team selection: size. In many countries. Chief Negotiator One person on your team should be selected as the spokesperson for the team. as well as engineers and technicians who specialize in the good or service being negotiated.

the team should take breaks or use side discussions to ask questions and clarify understanding. Experienced international negotiators know that being nonjudgmental and showing interest in the other team’s culture and customs are also important. team members may lack the ability to make decisions or the authority to carry them out once they have been made. nonverbals and process. On occasion. Having high aspirations. Self-confidence and the ability to deal with ambiguity or ambiguous information are essential. As the chief negotiator or spokesperson of the team. and the ability to listen and be openminded and patient. Having the physical energy and stamina to travel across various time zones. teams from different cultures often fail to sufficiently understand their counterparts. The ability to build personal relationships through social competence (which includes effective interpersonal skills) is also a useful skill when negotiating abroad. When necessary. you should ensure that the team has had sufficient time to devise a strategy. The negotiation may also fail if it is poorly managed in terms of time or if there is a difference in how time is used by both teams. Even if your team members have a cognitive understanding of the other side. Another reason may be a weak leader or spokesperson in charge of the negotiation. prepare a proposal and develop suitable alternatives. Remember that team members should provide both verbal and nonverbal support to the spokesperson. Note Taker If desired. This person can also be the one to concentrate especially on language.NEGOTIATING ACROSS CULTURES 38 approach by determining when team members can and cannot participate freely in the negotiation. or lack conflict resolution skills that work in the other culture. Language skills. their decision-making process and/or their communication styles. Training Management Corporation . Why Team Negotiations Fail Why do team negotiations fail? Very often. They may be incapable of resolving conflicts in general. it is because team member roles and responsibilities are not clearly defined. you may enlist the aid of an individual to take notes in order to free up others on the team to concentrate on the negotiations. the openness to eat a variety of different foods. and the ability to drink socially may also be required. their culture. Having influence at headquarters and the power to influence others who will have to implement the contract are critical for future success. What Are the Characteristics of a Good International Negotiator? The characteristics of a good international negotiator include having product knowledge and good managerial and technical skills. setting goals and being persistent in the negotiation are characteristics of successful negotiators. are also highly valued. Being able to think under pressure and controlling your emotions are both signs of a good negotiator. tone. Furthermore. Team members may have poor communication skills or language skills. they may be unable to translate their understanding into a distinctive negotiation or communication style.

and understanding what membership in the network means are all required when we negotiate across cultures. In the latter. facts and figures. using direct mail lists. The major disadvantage to this arrangement is that the virtual location is characterized by lowcontext communication styles that rely on words.” as they say in sports. there may be jet lag or health problems. learning how to enter the network. such as the size of the team to send. When we begin conducting business overseas. Nevertheless. you control the negotiating room. facsimile. somewhere between the two locations. we need first to understand that a critical step for success is to effectively enter established networks. All of these can affect the location selected. identifying the right one. purchased name lists. In the former. the environment is unfamiliar. or whether you are the buyer or seller. whether you will be traveling abroad. The advantages and disadvantages to this choice encompass all the issues just listed. determining the introducing party’s status and sphere of influence in a particular network. this may not eliminate completely the need for face-to-face communication or the need to travel. Feelings. it is cheaper for you. cold calling is acceptable. as it encompasses numerous factors. Choosing to negotiate at their location has several disadvantages: you are under pressure to return home and save costs in time and money. How we establish a business relationship is important. You are the host. This works especially well for established partners who have a long history or relationship. Choosing to negotiate at your location gives you the “home field advantage. while in others a third party or a member of the targeted network is required. Another solution is to select a neutral location. Defining a network. voice mail.NEGOTIATING EFFECTIVELY ACROSS CULTURES Negotiation Location Deciding where to hold the negotiation is no easy task. both learn from and about each other.S. and the foundation for a longer-term relationship is more likely as you build on the relationship. there is no jet lag. In some cultures. and you have no control over the facilities for the negotiations. organization or company can make or break a budding business relationship. This type of location incorporates the latest in communication technology. video-teleconferencing. One solution is to alternate between their location and yours. including e-mail. and you save time and resources. trade shows and professional conferences facilitate networking. Phase 2: Network Approach and Entry Networking in the U. A more recent solution is to choose a “virtual location” at which to negotiate the deal. The advantages are that each side shares the costs. and Canada can be a quick and easy process. Cold calling. direct mail. nonverbals and other nuances of communication may be lost. Training Management Corporation 39 . expertise is readily available. joining professional organizations and contacting established business acquaintances can facilitate network entry. telephoning and groupware. You will have to chose between their location and your location.

NEGOTIATING ACROSS CULTURES 40 The purpose of entering a network in the United States is to identify potential customers or clients. Using a well-respected third party known to the decision-maker. gaining entry can be time-consuming as well as difficult. dress and appearance. Change. In Europe. A person’s connections. opportunities and access to decision-makers. Individuals are either born into closed networks or they join them through membership in professional associations or educational institutions. Outsiders may have considerable difficulty penetrating closed networks. Therefore. educational and family background. Another factor in successful network entry in Europe is your social status or your title and position in your company. Your education. In the United States. or providing a letter of introduction. The time taken to establish contact or to initiate network entry is minimal in the United States. Identifying the right entry point into such a network. Networks tend to be small.-American approach to networking is primarily informal. since these networks tend to be fairly open to outsiders. the burden is on the individual to generate further interest in the business relationship. Personal relationships and friendships are strong. or it might derive from individual achievement and/or knowledge. These single points of contact are timeconsuming to establish and may require multiple sources for successful entry. Authority may reside in top officials of business or government agencies. Training Management Corporation . selecting the “right” person to enter the network can significantly affect your success. In some Mediterranean cultures. and interpersonal skills all affect your ability to fit into a closed network. Initial credibility may be attached to you. Individual power may derive from such traditional sources of power as wealth and class. optimistic and relatively confident. In China. being a member of a network provides information. Network entry may also be difficult due to the bureaucracy found in European governments and agencies. The final goal is not becoming a member of the network. degree attained. Identifying those individuals or departments with decision-making authority can be difficult and may require insider knowledge or assistance. are measured by his access to and influence in established networks. family background. hierarchy is a crucial element in business. especially when dealing with the Chinese government. your product. Helping others within a network in China promotes goodwill and adds to your influence and ability to develop future contacts. and finding the person with the authority to make decisions are required for success. Loyalty to individuals who belong to the network or to whom you are obligated may take precedence in the business context. Therefore. or guanxi. is directly related to this ability. Once the contact is made. opportunities and risk-taking are an expected part of network entry. little time is spent in networking because of established networks or associations. Greece or Italy. your company or the profession to which you belong. Using one’s connections to assist others does incur obligations that need to be repaid. These closed networks are suspicious of outsiders and reluctant to be open about their business or to allow access to key decision-makers. such as Spain. however. major projects and business deals may require approval from these top officials. the end goal is the final sale.S. The result of networking is to qualify potential contacts as customers or suppliers who can assist you in conducting your business. “Face. contract or task completion. is essential for network entry in Europe. The U. therefore.” or respect for a person.

the first barrier to network entry in Japan may result from a person’s inability to recognize and fulfill obligations incurred. Being included in business deals engenders loyalty to individuals and solidifies the network of relationships. as consensus is sought within the hierarchy. Through a Japanese colleague. He was approached by a Chinese businessman from Singapore who was attending the exposition and wanted to buy the piece of equipment. selling the equipment was actually more cost-effective. access to the network will be denied.NEGOTIATING EFFECTIVELY ACROSS CULTURES 41 It is important to understand that repaying these obligations or providing opportunities to third parties who have introduced you to the network is critical for continued success. After several follow-up telephone calls and some months later. the likelihood of expanding your base of contacts within that company or industry is virtually assured. A person who introduces another person to his network. so. the quality of decision-making. This can also increase the time needed to gain access to the real decision-makers. His company had been successful in providing training and consulting services in the banking industry. Most networks within China and between overseas Chinese are fluid. consensus decision-making and the time required to develop a trusting relationship all slow down the process of network entry in Japan. where he was granted a meeting to introduce himself and his company’s goods and services. he was introduced to one of the Japanese banks. entering and building networks takes time and requires a credible third party. the salesman received more than a dozen requests at the lower price from a number of Chinese companies in the United States.S. If a good personal relationship is not established and favors or obligations not returned. is ultimately responsible for the future success of the introduction and the resulting business relationship. Europe and Asia Pacific. he was asked back Training Management Corporation . However. or inner circle of established relationships. Therefore. since Japanese networks work on the basis of favors and obligations. choosing someone to trust and have confidence in is merely the first step in the network entry process. the higher the person sent to enter the network and the higher the status of the person contacted in the network. If the right person is not identified or the proper introduction is not made. In Japan. If you enter at the lower level of a network or company. his experience and the trends he saw for training in the banking industry in the United States. The bank representatives he met spent most of the meeting asking him about his background. Both the third party and the targeted network contact must feel comfortable with the person being introduced. Once network entry has been granted. or the business relationship will never be implemented. Within a week of returning back to London. consultant in New York. Finding someone with the appropriate level of guanxi is critical for success. however. flexible and highly responsive to business opportunities. may be limited. An example of the difficulty of network entry in Japan was provided by a U. or level of authority granted. However. The salesman reasoned that the exposition he was attending was over and that the cost to ship the equipment back to England would be prohibitive. entry will be difficult. the more entry into the network will be eased. Maintaining the harmony of the group. An example of the reach of these networks was relayed by a colleague who witnessed a British medical manufacturer in Hanoi sell a piece of medical equipment for less than 40 percent of its market price. He offered his company’s brochure at the end of the meeting but failed to pitch the new online product. and he had decided to target Japanese banks in Manhattan for his latest on-line product.

In Latin America. The meeting went pretty much as the last one had. Having a connection to a person of power and influence in a network in Latin America is essential. Business decisions are often made at the top of the company or government agency. personal qualities. Both formal and informal channels should be leveraged to check on the performance and success of individual contacts and the organization with whom you want to do business. making the proper introduction essential. status. Over a set of tennis and drinks. being and formal orientations may slow down initial entry by outsiders. Outsiders need to establish personal relationships with someone who has the influence and power within a family business or social group. several months later. clan or tribe is the basic unit of society. Hierarchy and formalization of decision-making processes may be time consuming and may limit network entry efforts. customs and business norms helps ease the social exchanges and demonstrates respect to network insiders. network entry can be challenging. The success of this program led to more training programs.NEGOTIATING ACROSS CULTURES 42 to the Japanese bank. position and title are important. this would have been a simple business request to the local telephone company. and that it would take at least six months to have the lines installed. a more holistic approach to network entry is required for penetrating the network. After conducting more than ten of these programs. Business opportunities are provided first to family members. In the Middle East and Africa. and personal connections in the business and government communities. as compared to other countries. he was asked to return to the Japanese bank to conduct a pilot program for 20 bank employees. having a connection to a family member in the targeted company or to someone in the ruling class is essential. who subsequently introduced him to the vice minister of telecommunications at his villa over the weekend. policies or procedures governing business and government. Following protocol.S. He mentioned this to his Mexican business partner. This emphasis on status has led to entrenched hierarchies and bureaucracies that foster centralized decision-making and prolong the time required to get approval for business opportunities. In countries where the family. the businessman applied to the local telephone company and was told that it would cost him four times what it would have cost in the United States for the services requested. A U. a telephone crew was in front of his building digging the trench that would be required for the T-1 line. name or standing in the community.S. By the following Monday. and it would have taken a few days to a few weeks to install the necessary T-1 lines into an office. Status may be achieved by age. Therefore. businessman explained his dilemma to the government official.S. even if important contacts have been established. experience. offices to the office in Mexico City. the U. In the United States. told the following story. and now these banks represent over 50 percent of his on-line training programs. the fluid. Again. However. where he met several more members of the bank who were in charge of training and development. Having the right friends allows you to open doors and get tasks accomplished. regardless of rules. and the installation work was finished by the end of the week. In Mexico. Training Management Corporation . a person’s power is directly connected to his social standing. businessman opening his first office in Mexico City. he was introduced to five other Japanese banks by the senior Japanese manager in charge of training. His company produced video broadcasting services and required a T-1 line to stream video from his U. This led to successful entry into these companies. Here.

In fact. socializing and meetings aimed specifically at establishing personal connections. It is Training Management Corporation 43 . Non-business conversations and other forms of small talk are generally seen as a waste of time. between both parties. This may require informal breaks. One note of caution: following certain business practices or norms accepted in obtaining the influence or approval of these decision-makers or government officials—for example. Negotiators are well prepared and are armed with detailed documentation. bribes. Proposals are combed through with great attention to detail. Nonessential formalities are also seen as an impediment to getting the job done. Northern Europe Northern Europeans are concerned with formality and risk avoidance in negotiations. Americans with ease. clan.S. and members have clearly defined roles and responsibilities. and Canada is on getting the negotiation (task) completed in the shortest period of time. China and the Middle East. and agendas are used to provide direction and to measure progress. people may not distinguish between social and business events. Negotiation teams are functionally separated. or connection. The focus of negotiations is on developing and maintaining a personal bond. if your company has a product or service that is unique or superior to that of the competition in a particular country. favors. but their primary focus is on the family. Discussions can be highly technical and require in-depth knowledge of the details proposed. However. Time is viewed more flexibly than in Northern Europe. senior negotiators are seen as experts and are therefore well prepared. Impatience. The good negotiator is a technical expert who is also pragmatic and skeptical. Appointments should be made well in advance. The relationship between those who negotiate is on a company-to-company basis.NEGOTIATING EFFECTIVELY ACROSS CULTURES In places such as Russia. It is necessary to identify the person with the pertinent power and influence and to establish a personal relationship before continuing on to a business relationship. network entry is an essential part of any negotiation or business strategy when conducting business overseas or across cultures. rude behavior and poor interpersonal skills could prevent you from making the right contacts and developing business opportunities. with the least formalities. Positions are taken relatively close to the time of the final agreement. Individual contributions and efforts leading to real results are rewarded. the right network or company may come looking for you. In both Germany and France. Understanding the Negotiation Styles of Other Cultures The United States and Canada The primary focus in the U. Personal relationships are less important than getting a signed contract. In conclusion. Meeting times are fixed. the issue of network entry may be less important. or payments—may be illegal in your own country and can be an impediment to successful network entry. Quality is a key motivator. country or cultural group.S. Southern Europe Southern Europeans have the ability to use the doing orientation of U. requiring you to know the appropriate protocol for both social and business functions.

and extended meetings may be required to build rapport and trust.NEGOTIATING ACROSS CULTURES 44 not uncommon for personal issues or other pressing business issues to interfere with a negotiation schedule. colleagues or outsiders. with an established business relationship. However. U. The Middle East People in the Middle East put human relationships first. who you know is of primary importance. and the status quo is preferred over change. Nevertheless. Behavior is fixed. and efforts are made to get the best possible deal. they are required. as there is a strong reliance on networks and personal relationships in business. Asia In Asian cultures. in the Middle East. this advantage will disappear if a competitor from the other party’s country. The central question for a person from Asia is whether you are aware of these obligations as a “business friend.” Time is invested in developing relationships with other parties. This may mean that a meeting begins late.S. Training Management Corporation . The top person or owner makes decisions. Establishing a personal relationship is essential before turning to business. task accomplishment is still seen as the primary measure of success.S Americans and Canadians may regard this as a waste of time or as showing a lack of expertise. This may delay discussion of the tasks at hand. Negotiation activities will be more successful if conducted between family members and if a family member is part of your negotiation team. Time is fluid and flexible at all stages of the negotiation process. Entry into the group provides identity and protection. Canadians and many Europeans may regard such behavior as unethical. a delivery of a product is delayed or the negotiation is postponed to accommodate the prevailing fluid orientation to time. Demonstrating respect for the hierarchies present and adhering to proper formalities are not only expected. Latin America Identifying a personal link is important to doing business in Latin America. Latin Americans feel a need to determine whether the other side is trustworthy. honorable and compatible before doing business with them. Demonstrating commitment to the relationship and the ability to meet obligations is important. Formality is expected in the first few meetings until a relationship has been established. Bargaining is considered an art form. Meetings may include other parties and can be held in public areas. using family ties is not seen as a conflict of interest. Americans. Persuasion and influence are directly related to the quality of the relationship of the two parties. credibility and a basic understanding of how business is conducted. Relationships are more important than deals. has a similar product. Relationships are built over time. Fulfilling obligations and helping friends take precedence over business demands. The time needed to establish trust with your counterpart may be shortened if you have a unique good or service to sell. citing conflicts of interest. To be successful a person must demonstrate trustworthiness. Obligations exist between two parties who negotiate. But. Having an established relationship is the first requirement for doing business. Blood relationships and extended family are considered to be the most significant––more significant than relationships developed with friends. and some U.

personal relationships are viewed suspiciously. some follow-up e-mail messages. to develop rapport and trust. In other cultures. Phase 3: Building Personal and Business Relationships How you go about creating personal and business relationships will depend on the cultural group with which you are doing business. initial face-to-face meeting to get started. Americans to break into these networks. Often in business.S. Americans. This is largely the result of long-lasting. relationships tend to take a long time and much effort to develop. building business relationships may require much more investment of time and effort than expected. or a brief.NEGOTIATING EFFECTIVELY ACROSS CULTURES All the above regions encompass many countries and cultures that may deviate in or act in another fashion from the broad generalizations given. friends and family. superficial relationships rather than those that require a long time to solidify. This decision will Training Management Corporation 45 . this might require only a telephone call.S. in particular. A successful international negotiator understands that every culture is different and that an understanding of the local culture and customs is required before proceeding.. In high-context cultures. In the United States. colleagues. a few business cards might be exchanged at professional associations or a list of contacts might be received from a supervisor to develop a network at the company. In Europe. it is assumed that a business relationship exists. friendships can be formed quickly with casual acquaintances. Many people have commented that U. It may be difficult for U. informal. it is likely that a personal or family relationship preceded the business relationship.S. If two individuals or companies have been doing business for a while. Because each individual person is unique— the result of family. long-lasting relationships. tend to form quick. relatively little time is devoted to building business relationships. and business can be conducted without the need for deep. such as those of Asia or Latin America. In the Middle East and other traditional cultures. well-established networks of customers. Many times. since it is thought that such relationships could lead to a conflict of interest or to unethical behavior. In Canada and the U. Only by taking all of this into consideration can you truly be prepared for negotiating across cultures. they also may require this association prior to initiating or completing a business deal. In the United States. One cannot assume that cultural norms or business practices are generalizable across an entire region. participants not only want to spend time with the other person. this step may involve important strategic decisions and the right introductions to the right people. Spending several minutes at the beginning of a meeting is considered sufficient time for establishing rapport and developing common ground before turning to business. but a personal relationship may or may not be involved. Over time. a decision will be made regarding the potential business partner. and over several meetings in various locations and settings. social and corporate influences—it is important that you adjust your approach accordingly. If two individuals or companies have been doing business for a considerable period of time.

. Miller. He was approached by Tom Miller. In Germany. In Latin America. a person builds trust by being reliable and predictable through task accomplishment over extended periods of time. However. Americans do not necessarily feel that they have to like someone or have a personal relationship in order for someone to do business with them. Different expectations as to how networking is done provide an example of how culture can affect the building of personal and business relationships.S. having a personal relationship is a prerequisite to establishing a business relationship.. “Hey. To build and maintain a business relationship with someone of another culture with whom you will be negotiating. We see this in the following anecdote. reliable business relationships overseas? • Do I need to develop personal relationships to generate business? • How important is socializing to building a business relationship? Determining when to enter into a business relationship or a personal relationship. In Germany. a German working in the U. Miller asked Schmidt what he was doing in the U. American who quickly introduced himself and told Schmidt his name. his occupation.S. interrupted Schmidt by yelling across the room. seeing a colleague in the crowded room. The decision to engage in a business relationship is reached as a result of repeated interactions on a personal level over time.S. after two minutes. a U. how to pursue the relationship. Uwe Schmidt. was attending a local networking group of professional quality managers. where he worked and what he did for a living. Bob come over here and meet my friend Uwe!” Miller’s behavior and use of the word “friend” offended Schmidt.S. companies move toward building long-lasting.S.S. true personal relationships take time. Schmidt began explaining what he had been doing in Germany before his arrival in the U. U. Here are some important questions to ask yourself before attempting to initiate a business relationship across cultures: • With which company should I do business? • When should I pursue a business relationship? A personal one? • What kinds of activities are involved in building a business relationship? • How should one build rapport and trust in a personal or business relationship? • How should I pursue or maintain a personal or business relationship? • How much time should I spend initiating a business relationship? • How and when do I follow-up on existing relationships? • Why should U. his schooling. Relationships are not made based on a quick informal introduction. even years. his reasons for coming to the U. what activities to initiate and how much time to spend on this step are all crucial considerations for the success of a negotiation.S.NEGOTIATING ACROSS CULTURES involve an evaluation of the other person’s trustworthiness or ability to meet future obligations required of a business relationship. In contrast. you should: 46 Training Management Corporation . and so on.

In Japan. informal settings in restaurants. • Use informal channels to gather information and establish trust. customers and suppliers. each side defines the business interests and objectives that will guide the future relationship. the success of which determines the tone of the next phase. dependencies and a shared perception of the situation.” • Create value by providing mutual benefits. and explore potential business partnerships. interests and objectives. With these in mind. • Show an awareness of the time and effort needed to reach a consensus. • At the conclusion of a negotiation. • Maintain the continuity of your team members over time. and the defining and prioritizing of issues at the table. but also to build personal relationships with colleagues. all parties involved move to create an alignment and a strategy for the negotiation. Once you have entered the network successfully and have started the process of building personal and business relationships. each side undergoes a period of orientation to their counterpart’s way of doing business. Based on this assessment and definition.S. • Check the other person’s assumptions. market and industry. • Value the process of formality. • Develop trust by accomplishing tasks reliably and consistently over time. Russia and China. • Observe the hierarchy. The Japanese are willing to spend the extra time and money after working hours to meet customers or subordinates in order to air issues or dissatisfactions. Each party understands the other’s goals. position. roles and functions of the other team’s members. Phase 4: Orientation and Presentation The orientation phase consists of introductions. expectations. For example. Americans focus on bargaining and getting a signed contract. • Develop rapport through “small talk” and socializing. status. constraints and problem-solving approaches. communicating while drinking is an integral part of negotiating in Japan. needs. ceremony and rituals over getting results or “staying on track. Whereas U. opening statements. Everyone involved engages in a reassessment of the other.NEGOTIATING EFFECTIVELY ACROSS CULTURES • Know your customer’s situation. In addition. to their organizational culture. an overview of the situation. follow-up with personal contact and communication. Training Management Corporation 47 . exchange information on competitors or new company activities. They also allow the Japanese to give feedback or to convey unpleasant news. something usually not given in public. bars and golf courses are not only used to conduct business. individuals from most other cultures focus on the relationship rather than the deal. to the individuals involved and to the specific circumstances of the relationship. needs. informal discussions over drinks allow for a more relaxed atmosphere in which to learn more about the other person.

S. the other people involved. the more power you will have in the negotiation. Before focusing on business specifics. who direct most of their effort and time to achieving the goal of the negotiation. Americans. time is money. the people representing the other side or the specific business situation depends on our own culture and business practices. and the resources that your organization can bring to bear in the negotiation. Your influence is a result of your own experience. is an important part of building a business relationship. Orientation to the Other Party What are the other party’s overall objectives in the negotiation? Their goals? How do their objectives and goals compare with your own? The more information you have about the other party’s objectives. you should clearly outline for yourself what issues are most important to you. any precedents or decisions previously made. the background or history of a situation. What are their issues? Is there common ground? What strategies will they use. For them. What is the objective of the negotiation? What issues are being brought to the negotiating table? Which are negotiable. Issues should be linked or separated as needed. Your confidence will be directly tied to the power you have to influence the other party. the experiences and expertise of your team members. and should not be wasted. you can list each issue and an appropriate strategy for each. The opportunity not to be missed. time and resources. focusing instead on the specifics of an issue or problem.NEGOTIATING ACROSS CULTURES How we orient ourselves to a specific company. or the deal to be closed. This contrasts sharply with the practice of U. and what limits will they set for each issue? Based on this analysis. to allow for flexibility in the negotiation. It could be any one or more of the following: • Backup service • Compensation for failure • Delivery • Discounts 48 Training Management Corporation . Concessions for each issue should be identified for use in the negotiation. and learning how to present your proposal in the most effective way. Upper and lower limits should be set for each issue. The time and specificity devoted to a relationship at the start are critical to successfully doing business across cultural groups. individuals from more traditional cultures want to understand the whole environment. which is a signed contract or agreement. issues and needs. Depending on the cultural region. The result is that they spend as little time as possible on small talk. and the credibility of the company. on both sides. Issues should be prioritized in order of importance. what issues will likely become sources of conflict or areas of disagreement? Which Negotiation Issues Are Important to You? First. goals. and which are not? Once all of the issues have been identified. Orienting yourself to the other culture. Once you have completed this process for your side. Assessing the importance of this phase of orientation and presentation is most important in cross-cultural negotiations. this phase requires varying degrees of attention. is uppermost in their thoughts. you should do the same for the other party.

options and time frame.NEGOTIATING EFFECTIVELY ACROSS CULTURES • Distributor/supplier agreements • EDI: electronic data interchange • Exclusive rights • Inventory holding • Intellectual property • Method of payment • Penalty clauses • Price • Proprietary information • Quality • Quantity • Specifications • Stock holding • Technical support • Technical training • Technology transfer • Warranty Then you should develop a full analysis of the other party’s needs. expectations. industry. Counterpart Analysis Step One In what business environment does the other party currently operate? Start by analyzing the economic situation. needs. decision-making processes. and goods or services offered. interpersonal. organizational) and expectations? How will they structure the negotiation process? Be sure to frame your assessment with a detailed analysis of needs and expectations on three levels: Situational: Does the situation in which your interactions occur dictate specific behaviors/actions? Training Management Corporation 49 . etc. What negotiation strategy would run counter to their expectations and/or preferences? Step Two What is the optimal outcome of the negotiation from your counterpart’s point of view? Given your analysis in Step 1. that your counterparts bring to this situation? Determine what negotiation strategy your counterpart is likely to prefer. alternatives. Will you be talking to an individual representative or to a team? What assumptions can you make about their dominant cultural orientations or preferences? What are the likely goals.. how does your counterpart define the optimal outcome? What strategy will they devise to meet their needs (situational. interests. market. interests. Describe your counterpart and how you will encounter him or her. One way to obtain this information is to do a counterpart analysis.

Position People tend to adopt a single position where their interests and needs are concerned. Remember that core cultural values are not open to negotiation. 50 Training Management Corporation . what forces from the business environment and your counterpart’s cultural orientations will affect the negotiation? Since you will have less information on your counterparts than on yourself. you must be aware of which sorts of items are negotiable and which are not. Deeply held values can affect the issues and needs that are presented on both sides. But positions can lock negotiators in a box. Understanding your counterpart’s needs will allow you to be more flexible and provide more alternatives during the negotiation. Overall. Identifying interests and needs is the cornerstone of successful negotiations. Outline the information needed to increase the certainty of the situation.? Organizational: What are the counterpart’s organizational levels that affect the process. etc. Focus on the underlying interests and needs. more often. From the understanding generated in steps one and two. attitudes. Although interests and needs can be expressed in the actual stated positions. and how do they contribute to the situation? Step Three Examine the driving and restraining forces that will affect your counterpart’s overall strategy. problem-solving. language and nonverbal cues are easily observed by you or your counterpart in the negotiation. Cultural values. however.NEGOTIATING ACROSS CULTURES Interpersonal: What are the needs on an interpersonal level with regard to relationship. your counterpart’s cultural orientations play a central role in influencing negotiations. Core Values Although they often remain unarticulated. beliefs and values that drive behavior at the negotiation table. not on the stated position. Interests and Needs Interests and needs can be both tangible (products) and intangible (emotions and ideas). are usually not negotiable. These positions are stated as demands or preferences. it is important to distinguish between those forces that you are certain will affect the negotiation from those that may or may not have an impact. What are less likely to be observed are the underlying customs. What Is Negotiable? When negotiating across cultures. they are beneath the surface of what is said and done. communication and cognitive styles. negotiators should look beyond present positions to the other side’s underlying interests and needs. affinity and alignment. decision-making. etc. objectives. Behavior.

By contrast. Loss of “face” is a deal-killer. in a low-context culture. especially when the low-context negotiator tries to move the negotiation forward by offering a concession and the high-context negotiator responds with more questions or silence. the Chinese position at the outset. agreement is also sought on pre-conditions or principles before entering into formal talks. or acceded to. such as Mexico. Risk is reduced by following protocol and communicating in a ceremonial. The U. By the time the high-context negotiator presents his position. invent new solutions. building consensus through informal channels and using a non-threatening approach. U. but is likely to add to frustration on both sides. If they are uncertain about their negotiating position. for example.S. In high-context cultures.S. there is little room to maneuver. while relationships are secondary to commitment and follow-through. choose among alternative ways of handling the problem as defined. This low-context approach to negotiating focuses primarily on achieving results above all else. This can result in the low-context negotiator making counterproposals and concessions before knowing the other’s position. you have implicitly agreed to. the contract ensures that obligations are met. approach may not work well in high-context cultures in which building personal and business relationships between negotiating partners is the top priority.NEGOTIATING EFFECTIVELY ACROSS CULTURES Contrasting Low-Context and High-Context Negotiation Approaches The U. The low-context negotiator will present his position up front. while the high-context negotiator will reveal his or her position gradually or not at all. the Chinese usually present their position first only when they believe they have the edge in expertise or power. In high-context cultures. personal relationships and connections are used to influence the outcome of negotiations. and ignores the larger issue of the human relationships involved. guilt and dependence between parties. In China. obligation. Persuasion and influence tactics are used with incremental concessions to reach what is seen as a reasonable compromise. expressive way. and a process of give-and-take ensues until a contract is signed. Each side presents its proposal to the other. negotiators expect to treat everyone at the table in an egalitarian manner by focusing the process on issues. For example. standing.S. It also assumes that each side will take a similar approach or bring to bear a set of negotiation tools and techniques that are understood by both parties. The rule is: no surprises. the ultimate goal is to establish a personal relationship in which favors are given and received. reputation and honor are paramount in the negotiation. Only by developing rapport and building trust can a highcontext person be assured that obligations will be met over time. approach to negotiating is to view the process primarily as a problem-solving exercise in which both sides define the problem. Discussions are businesslike and to the point. The high-context negotiator tries to learn as much as possible about the low-context negotiator’s position before presenting his own position. By accepting these principles. This high-context approach avoids potential conflict and reduces risk. The Chinese pursue their negotiation objectives through a variety of strategies or tactics that leverage feelings of friendship. rather than on personalities. In Japan. asking for your position first. and set the terms and limits necessary to guide a solution. negotiators reduce risk by establishing preconditions and assurances. In China. they will Training Management Corporation 51 .

The psychological issue of status consciousness or past history may result in a negotiation strategy that appeals to positions of dependency or weakness when negotiating with the United States. Because of their preoccupation with status. China. Americans see formal communication as a barrier to discovering the interests of the other side. when and what type of information is shared can all be affected by cultural orientations. Past history. used appeals for aid and special treatment when dealing with the United States. Egypt and Mexico are some of the countries that have used this strategy successfully in various international negotiations. Status-consciousness and historical grievances have produced a collective sensitivity in both China and Mexico that is hard to ignore when negotiating a new agreement between two companies. they see informal communication and the removal of protocol as the best way to develop a business relationship. the Chinese can gather important data that are used to adjust their position and strategy later on in the negotiation. may influence a country’s position in a negotiation. has often claimed that it is a poor country and that. will affect how they set their priorities and goals. India and China have. products and industry? How will we structure the presentation of information to the other side? In a deductive or inductive way? In a linear or systemic manner? What is the Training Management Corporation . even when the Chinese state their position first. Knowing how and when to ask questions is important to obtaining the information required to understand the other party’s interests and needs. the order of discussion. High-context negotiators may also differ from low-context negotiators in the values they seek to promote or defend based on their interpretations of history or sovereignty. Some cultures may spend more time on procedural issues. rich countries such as the United States should pay more for Chinese products or for doing business in China. identifying the issues that will be discussed. What kind of information does the other party need to know about us? What kind of information do we need to know about them? What specific information do we need on their business. Japan. negotiators from China and Mexico will try to establish their superiority at the earliest stage of the negotiation. and the purpose of the discussion. therefore. This. Although there are no easy answers. structuring the negotiation process using formalities and rules of procedure.NEGOTIATING ACROSS CULTURES 52 ask the other side to go first. National dignity is a sensitive issue when a country has suffered occupation or loss of national territory or when an industry has suffered exploitation by a stronger country. However. how people communicate with each other. The assumption is that informality breaks down barriers and allows both parties to spend time gathering the information needed for a successful negotiation. as well as real or imagined slights.S. By letting the other side speak first. U. Presentation of Information How information is presented. Knowing the other side’s interests and needs will determine how you will present your proposal and information during the negotiation. it is important to decide how to respond to such strategies and tactics when they are used by the other party. in turn. initial positions are seen as guiding principles that may serve to conceal real objectives. in their drive for autonomy. for example. North Korea.

Because nonverbal cues and unstated contextual information play a minimal role in conveying meaning. Briefly introduce your company. earlier relationships. facts and data to convey meaning.S. however.. Highcontext cultures. a shared frame of reference (system of meaning) to make effective communication possible. Before presenting differences. and point to. Provide a well-planned. industry trends and any other relevant information that may be important to the other party. information is exchanged verbally and nonverbally. The challenge in a multicultural environment is to ensure that the message being sent is the one received by the other party. Be sure to take the time to establish rapport through small talk and a free exchange of information. Low-context cultures rely primarily on words. Opening Presentation Before making your opening presentation or stating your proposal at the negotiation table.NEGOTIATING EFFECTIVELY ACROSS CULTURES process for presenting or exchanging information? What is the use of questions to gather information or confirm what has been revealed? How should we structure the agenda or process of the negotiation? How do we decide what issues. right?” The answer to this rhetorical question is that communication is one of the most difficult problems in negotiating across cultures. there is no overriding need for the prior existence of. objectives and needs should be addressed first? How can we be sure that the information we get from the other side is accurate? While this phase of the negotiation process is less important in the U. you should provide translated written materials. Communication is the process by which people share information. identify common ground and mutual expectations based on information gathered before the talks. give both sides the opportunity to be heard and understood. Canada and some Northern European countries. This “working history” can help to create an environment for mutual agreement. understanding is not problematic. detailed presentation supported by data and visuals. “If English is the international language of business and technology. on the other hand.-American manager was heard saying. do not only rely on words but also on the depth and breadth of a shared system of meaning and knowledge that derives from some shared cultural Training Management Corporation 53 . Be aware of. If this has not occurred earlier in the negotiation. if possible. Finally. negotiations become more difficult.S. Information in all these contexts must be interpreted as to its real meaning. your business and products. we should have no difficulty speaking to and negotiating with people from other cultures. titles and positions. regardless of what language is being spoken. introduce team members. Review the agenda and clarify the ground rules for the negotiation. Identify your position by clarifying the issues as you see them. In a negotiation. import and emotion through the exchange of verbal and nonverbal messages. Describe how your position benefits the other side and fits their needs. including names. knowing how your overseas counterpart approaches this phase is likely to increase the chances for success. If people share a common frame of reference (system of meaning). Communicating Across Cultures A U. Without such a common frame of reference. or introduction to.

assumptions and perceptions during a meeting or negotiation. Americans may interpret such behavior as unprofessional. and where meetings are held.” “honesty. are important as well. When communicating with individuals from a high-context culture. including historical. • Explain your own thinking. Give your interpretation of events and ask a person from the other culture or country for theirs. such as Japan or Mexico. body control. perceptions or styles. • Listen carefully and clarify such value-laden terms as “fair. Ritual and choreographed arrangements are meant to convey messages about rank and reputation in hierarchical societies that can often be misunderstood.S. cultural and business reasoning. use of space. • Examine areas where there are differences in values. symbols and implied meaning. perceptions and expectations should be clarified and confirmed. 54 Training Management Corporation . U. High-context cultures. thus believe that foreign negotiating partners must first be inducted into their cultural and business-cultural context before business can be properly addressed. the use of facial expressions and body language may be too subtle for U. In Asia. Where people sit.S. Low-context individuals fail to understand the emphasis put on nonverbals. The manipulation of protocol and ceremony by other cultures for their own purposes is not to be underestimated in international negotiations. • Describe what you observe.NEGOTIATING ACROSS CULTURES context. • Use informal channels or third parties to get information or to clarify misunderstandings. movement. If understanding is not frequently clarified and confirmed with persons from another culture. miscommunications and misunderstandings are likely to occur. symbolism and small talk should be reduced to a minimum to allow both parties to get to business matters as soon as possible. Then share your expectations.” “logical” and “working together. • Give relevant background information to the other person. whereas Mexicans may see the U. the use of protocol. Clarifying and Confirming Assumptions.” Do not be judgmental. When communicating with those from a low-context culture. based on what is said and done during a negotiation. you should allocate more time for small talk and the exchange of background information before turning to business. Nonverbal Behavior Nonverbal communication includes facial expressions.” “teamwork. Here are some strategies for clarifying and confirming: • Summarize what you hear and clarify what you do not understand. gestures. Americans to read successfully. dress and ceremony. Mexicans are not shy about using emotions and extreme body language at the bargaining table. Americans’ lack of response to such behavior as a sign of heartlessness.S.

• Provide opportunities for other people to be heard at breaks or other informal moments. as well as advise the negotiation team of actual or potential misunderstandings––cultural or otherwise. jargon. Just because someone speaks another language does not make that person a good interpreter. • Use reflective listening: restate what you have heard as an empathetic response. English speakers should modify or internationalize their speech.NEGOTIATING EFFECTIVELY ACROSS CULTURES • Observe nonverbals to understand your counterpart’s gestures. sports analogies and slang. Interpreting is a skilled profession and requires special abilities and training. Instead. • Break often to allow for informal discussions and questions. Training Management Corporation 55 . facial expressions and verbal cues. • Pronounce your words clearly. • Use specific action verbs. we must bear in mind that many people speak English as a second language. • Confirm any discussions or arrangements in writing. Pause and let the speaker continue. relaxed atmosphere in which to discuss your assumptions and promote cooperation. • Use data. • Listen actively and clarify misunderstandings. • Summarize frequently and carefully. To ensure that their message is understood. • Allow sufficient time for the other party to process information. Modifying Your Language Although English is becoming the international language of business. • Use silence and pauses to your advantage to get additional information. • Use simple vocabulary and common meanings of words. Having your own interpreter who is familiar with your business and your terminology is critical. verbs. Using Interpreters Interpreters are often used during negotiations to increase the effectiveness of communication across cultures. • Acknowledge and validate the other person’s viewpoint. The following tips are offered for more effective communication with non-native English speakers during a negotiation: • Err on the side of formality. • Be aware that there are alternative spellings for some English words. values and needs. • Use alternative meanings carefully. An interpreter can assist with the accurate communication of ideas between two parties. • Do not ask “why”. Pay special attention to unarticulated indications of some difficulty or an answer of “no. • Avoid idioms. • Speak slowly. use “what” and “how” questions. • Avoid complex. using short sentences. graphs and figures for easy understanding.” • Create a positive. or two-word.

• Do not interrupt the interpreter while he or she is speaking. and write out all points to be discussed at the meeting. • Speak only for short periods at a time (30 seconds maximum) and then give the interpreter time to interpret. 56 Training Management Corporation . Trust is higher when both sides have shared interests or common ground. Avoid idioms. The next step is understanding how cultures like to structure. sports analogies and slang. The final step is devoting the time and resources needed to build and maintain the relationship. share and process information to be used in decision-making. In international negotiations. • Do not be surprised if a speaker speaks at length and the interpretation takes less time (the reverse may also happen). The first step in establishing trust and rapport is learning how to communicate effectively across cultures. confirm all discussions/arrangements in writing. using simple vocabulary and short sentences. The other party’s openness and ability to exchange information is directly proportional to the level of trust established before the negotiation begins. during the negotiation. • Plan each statement carefully. • Allow the interpreter adequate time to interpret what has been said and to clarify those points not understood. • After the meeting. • Speak clearly and slowly. communication. Phase 5: Bargaining and Persuading Others The overall aim of your influence-and-persuasion strategy is to change the other party’s perspective so that they agree to your demands. and keep your emotions in check when speaking. not their interpreter. jargon. be suspicious if this is a consistent pattern with the interpreter. you need to be aware of cultural differences. A person’s ability to make promises or commitments is directly proportional to that person’s level of trust in you and your company. • Prepare an agenda. • Take breaks often to allow the interpreter to rest and to check with you informally on the progress of the meeting. as this may cause misunderstandings. and prepare written materials ahead of time. • Talk to.NEGOTIATING ACROSS CULTURES The following points are provided to assist negotiators in using interpreters more effectively: • Brief the interpreter in advance. • Treat both your interpreter and their interpreter with respect. power and thinking may affect the influence strategy you should use. • Allow the interpreter to take notes while you and your counterpart are speaking. Different cultural orientations to time. and look at. However. • Maintain a pleasant manner. your host.

influence and persuasion strategies are considered the core of selling and negotiating. as in Latin America. • Affinity: I like you. Informal face-to-face meetings and social activities are important in getting to know your counterpart and developing the trust and rapport required for more formal negotiations. and you are my friend. so why won’t you comply with my request? • Punishment: I will continually punish you or provide negative results until you comply with my request. I will reward you. it is important to identify the decision-makers and the people in authority before entering into either personal or business relationships. In Latin America. Training Management Corporation 57 . negotiator is knowing which influence and persuasion strategies will be used. Greece or Italy. Although culture plays a strong role in shaping persuasion strategies. thereby saving face. so why won’t you comply with my request? • Pre-giving: I have helped you or given you something in the past.NEGOTIATING EFFECTIVELY ACROSS CULTURES Persuading Others In the United States. Information that cannot be shared in a more public setting can be shared privately. but informal meetings and discussions to persuade others are crucial. Whether the approach is competitive (win-lose) or collaborative (win-win).S. as well as exercising a formal orientation are required. The most typical persuasion strategy used in the United States is the rational or logical approach supported with data and evidence. I will punish you. linear and supported by objective data. what is important to the U. This will require extra patience and time. Although disagreements will be couched in polite language to avoid embarrassing others––especially those in power––interruptions and fighting for “airtime” are not unusual. Americans may find that when dealing with negotiators from Spain.S. expert testimony and documented results are likely to be successful in persuading U. based on past favors or obligations. U. Presenting information on pricing. • Debt: You owe me. information and interests may be revealed during the persuasion process rather than in earlier phases of the negotiation process. almost all cultures use one or more of the following approaches: • Promise: If you comply with my request. specifications. the presentation of persuasive arguments within formal sessions is always part of the negotiation process. • Threat: If you do not comply with my request. facts.S. and avoiding the sense that one or the other party has been compromised. Americans and Canadians. persuasive arguments are rational. Data. In Europe and other cultures. features and benefits are typical influence strategies. To be successful. language and interpersonal skills. so you should comply with my request. In Europe. the persuasion process can take place outside of formal negotiation sessions. The communication style is more expressive and emotional than that found in the United States. In Asia. where the hierarchy and formal orientations are strong.

The French negotiator may start with a general opening statement of understanding and provide subsequent details to support that position over the course of the negotiation. binding contract that represents the mutual interests of both parties. In high-context cultures. It is important to correctly interpret what you observe during the negotiation. U. not on feelings. emotions or personal relationships. for a moral person would agree with my request. 58 Training Management Corporation . There is an assumption that a persuasive argument or logical reasoning is the best way to avoid a contest of power or a confrontation. negotiators may end up with a signed contract. it is extremely difficult to introduce new information or to make changes to that position. In contrast. The overall proposal may be systemic or holistic in nature. Once a position has been presented. managers present a single position or lay out arguments based on strategic planning before the negotiation begins. he may employ. data and other evidence. the end objective of the negotiation is to draw up a detailed. such as Mexico or Japan. the outcome or results will reward or benefit you. you are not a moral person. but the process of negotiating the agreement may be determined by how well individual negotiators fulfill the obligations implicit in the relationships that exist between both parties. It is most important that nonverbal cues—from eye movements to facial expressions and from body language to hand gestures—be recognized and understood. the issues to be negotiated and the tactics agreed upon prior to the negotiation. Americans and Canadians generally have an inductive approach to presenting their proposals. • Esteem: If you comply with my request. • Expertise: If you comply with my request. and issues are followed in sequence over the course of the negotiation.S. The overall approach is based on a negotiator’s own experience. U.S. in which the focus is on general issues that lead to specific guiding principles. what by U. French managers use a deductive approach when presenting their proposals.S. In low-context cultures. such as the United States. Using Logic and Reasoning The type of logic and reasoning used to persuade others is also shaped by culture. The use of a personal or emotional appeal based on current or past relationships is less persuasive in the U. well-reasoned argument. Logic follows to support conclusions. the approach follows a more deductive process.NEGOTIATING ACROSS CULTURES • Moral appeal: If you do not comply with my request. standards would be a weaker counter argument of past problems or obligations. Americans and Canadians are persuaded by expert opinion and supporting factual information. Agendas are linear in nature. and Canada than it is in Latin America or Asia. In Latin America. those whom you value will think better of you. Many information and influence strategies may be conveyed nonverbally.S.S. When a high-context individual is confronted with a strong. U. • Emotions: You will feel better if you comply with my request. Appeals to the other side are based on facts. Specific points or issues are presented within the logic of a general conclusion.

timely manner. For U. success can be found in a person’s ability to make an emotional appeal or in her ability to count on a personal relationship to persuade. is essential for success. To avoid open conflict. persuasion strategies are laid out in precise arguments with sufficient supporting evidence to justify a conclusion. In high-context cultures. a high-context person may agree to something. The U. Win-win: concerned with the exchange of information and collaboration. Win-lose bargaining assumes that the negotiation is a competition in which both sides attempt to align personal relationships and empirical data to obtain their ultimate objectives.NEGOTIATING EFFECTIVELY ACROSS CULTURES A strong verbal argument is seen as persuasive in the United States. but then not follow through. Areas of difference are identified and solutions sought. Much of a person’s success in the United States is due to her ability to present empirical data as objective evidence for effective arguments. Choosing the appropriate influence strategy for a given situation and presenting it in a persuasive manner is the essence of a successful negotiation. the emphasis of sales and negotiation is on the bargaining and persuading phase of the process. One’s behavior at the negotiating table can determine the success or failure of the negotiation. Adapting and using effective communication skills is fundamental to presenting information effectively.” These indirect responses and understatements allow the person to save face. and how to use it at the negotiation table. The first type uses tactics that are aimed at gaining the upper hand. evidence and influence is effective in a particular culture. a high-context person may use an indirect response to say “no.S. while the second uses a problem-solving approach. This entails separating negotiation issues from the relationship and looking at positions to find common ground. it is always easier to agree or to express words of goodwill and encouragement than to disagree in public. This does not mean that a person from a high-context culture may not prepare and present a persuasive logical argument in a negotiation. Approach to Win-Win Negotiations The U. In the United States. the inability to understand or read between the lines of an indirect “no” often results in an evaluation of the other person as insincere or evasive. Bargaining ranges are identified and Training Management Corporation 59 . Win-win bargaining assumes that the negotiation is a mutual endeavor in which both sides engage to arrive at a mutually satisfying arrangement.S. Two types of bargaining are: Win-lose: concerned with gain or competition. When confronted with a strong argument or presentation. Remember that for high-context individuals. the other party. In low-context cultures.S. Bargaining Approaches to bargaining when persuading and influencing others differ widely across cultures. approach to win-win negotiations assumes a cooperative process aimed at creating value by finding interests that both partners have in common. and precise information is transmitted in a concise. Learning which strategy of logic. negotiators.

without understanding the needs and wants of the other party. politics or bureaucracy may reduce the level of trust required to reach an agreement. honesty and trust. The better solution is to try and find ways of providing real value to the other party. For example. This will prevent you from engaging in real problem-solving. positional negotiations. you may decide to split the difference on price or compromise on some aspect of quality or specifications. If you value something highly and the other party values it equally. of bargaining is therefore considered to be very important in and of itself. Remember that bargaining is only one aspect of negotiating the deal and that it may occur throughout the negotiation period.NEGOTIATING ACROSS CULTURES 60 both upper and lower limits are set. A Clash of Cultural Orientations? To illustrate how variously bargaining is regarded across different cultures we may examine the contrast between Japanese and Saudi negotiating styles. Although reaching consensus is important to the relationship between parties. This can lead to a win-lose mentality or to adversarial. the greater the range of outcomes possible. you will be unprepared to respond to their ideas and concerns in the negotiation. and alternatives are provided to create value. By focusing on what you want to get. as a means of establishing a personal relationship built on a mutual perception of value. In many situations. and used. The realistic point in between requires each party to decide on a fallback position and a walk-away point. Saudis. The process. The best approach is to start with the least contentious issues and establish small wins for both sides. and then finding some realistic point in between to settle upon. or act. will often open with a price much higher than the one that they would ultimately Training Management Corporation . bargaining involves more than dividing value between two parties. at little or no cost to you. A focus on common ground and mutual interests is used to strengthen the overall relationship. Both sides are better off with such a solution and receive value in return. you may approach the negotiation in a linear fashion. it is good to remember that the greater the number of options or alternatives you have. A win-win approach to negotiating often assumes a level of trust that usually does not exist in cross-cultural negotiations. identifying those issues or differences in which the gap is the widest and trying to bargain your way to a realistic midpoint. Setting a Realistic Bargaining Range Negotiators in the United States and Canada often prepare for a negotiation by trying to figure out what they would like to get and what is the least they would settle for. Bargaining in the Middle East is expected. however. because hierarchy and high-context orientations influence decision-making and slow the progress of the negotiation. Once differences in position and interests have been identified. This will leave more time for the most important issues in the negotiation. it may lead to a less than satisfactory agreement. Thus. The overall goal of a win-win negotiation is to maximize the gains for both sides. Concessions may not be reciprocated. Fallback positions are established. A win-win scenario requires that there be reciprocity in concessions and the desire to move the negotiation ahead quickly. for example. Also.

Conflict is inherent to the process and differences of opinion regarding value are expected. The Saudis will spend a lot of time bargaining. give concessions. but this may be interspersed with small talk and rapport-building to establish the credibility of both sides. Concessions should be made at the table and responded to by the other party with agreement or counteroffers. they do not expect to bargain at all. with the appropriate concessions and compromises. What is important to both parties? For the Saudis. If they are the seller. the process of conceding generally proceeds in a sequential manner in which both sides discuss each issue and propose concessions or compromises to reach a mutual decision. or not at all. Concessions and Compromise Concessions and compromise do not come easily when negotiating internationally. the Japanese may feel that the Saudis are not serious in negotiating a deal. pursue compromise and make decisions at or away from the negotiating table form the core of the negotiation process. If one party explores issues in a linear fashion. The Saudis expect to bargain their way to a final agreement. all issues are considered at the same time and may not be separated from one another. what is paramount is the need for both sides to understand their respective roles and responsibilities in the bargaining process. The Japanese. Concessions are often dependent on the influence and persuasion tactics used in the negotiation. For the Japanese. they expect to have the buyer accept their price with as little bargaining as possible. How we communicate. All efforts are therefore made to keep bargaining to an absolute minimum. but a general sense of fairness is expected. The differences in approach could lead to failure in the negotiation. All issues are discussed and resolved one at a time. substantial mistrust and misunderstandings may occur when negotiators from these two cultures gather around the negotiating table. Japanese buyers expect Japanese sellers to understand their needs and propose a reasonable price. Not all concessions require a quid pro quo. address issues. concessions may happen at the end of the negotiation. If a more systemic approach is taken. compromising and cooperating. the Japanese present a price that is very close to their actual asking price and that is the result of extensive information-gathering and consensus-building within their team. on the other hand. they are likely to make concessions on a point-bypoint basis. In this case. Training Management Corporation 61 . When the Saudis open with a high first offer. And when the Japanese provide a price that is the industry standard and refuse to bargain. it may be the need to develop a personal and business relationship through the act of bargaining. try to avoid conflict at all cost. If they are the buyer. In contrast to the Saudis. Understanding what influence strategies and bargaining tactics will work for both cultures improves the likelihood of success. Given the different expectations for bargaining between Saudi and Japanese negotiators. They expect to share information in the negotiation and persuade the other party that their position is reasonable. and this can take a long period of time. the Saudis may feel that the Japanese are not serious.NEGOTIATING EFFECTIVELY ACROSS CULTURES be willing to settle for. Each culture has different preferences for conceding. In the United States and Canada.

Do not feel the need to reciprocate all concessions given by the other side. Defer concessions on important issues until later in the negotiation. proposals and concessions the other party is likely to make before finalizing an agreement. Americans tend to see the formal agreement or contract as the end result of a negotiation. Make concessions slowly. do not make a counterproposal. negotiators may use concessions and compromise to speed up the negotiation. proposals. Tie concessions together to get something in return. may lead to feelings of mistrust or lowered satisfaction from the other party. whereas the Japanese or Chinese see it as the beginning of an adaptive process requiring changes or adjustments as the environment or circumstances change.” U. Concessions. Speeding Up the Negotiation Process Although U. Both parties strive to create an environment in which they can concede on issues and still maintain “face. In some cases—in China. compromise is taken as a loss of “face. however. Be willing to let the demand await further discussion. such as Russia and Mexico.S. the buyer is in the superior position and will structure the negotiation. such as company brochures and product specifications.NEGOTIATING ACROSS CULTURES In Japan.” It is viewed as a sign of failure and weakness or as evidence of faulty reasoning from your initial position. and start with small concessions that cost you little but add value to the position of the other party. Also. • Allow time for small talk and rapport-building. When making concessions. for example—the formal agreement expresses an ideal situation. In other cultures. find it extremely difficult to make concessions or change the contract after it is signed. both parties strive to understand each other’s position and to agree on how to best meet the other party’s expectations. and it is expected that deadlines and specifications will change with changing circumstances. If the other side makes a high initial demand. at the end of the negotiation. if any.S. • Anticipate repetitive questioning. the side that gave fewer concessions usually has the more advantageous agreement. Other ways of speeding up the negotiation process are as follows: • Send information. The buyer should consider the needs of the seller and try not to take advantage of the seller’s lower position. There is an expectation that. 62 Training Management Corporation . opportunities and concerns while working toward mutual agreement. U. the seller will give something of value to the buyer. do not make the first offer or accept the first offer made to you. however. who use concessions and compromise before the contract is signed. Americans.S. the other culture and the other person. • Show interest in the other country. Waiting until the end of the negotiation to make concessions. and others. • Outline issues and concerns in advance. are made at the end of the negotiation. In Japan. At the end of the negotiation. The Japanese consider all of the issues. many cultures do not use this approach. this might allow your counterpart to predict how and when you will make concessions. do not follow a consistent pattern of concessions. before the meeting. The goal is to continue discussing all ideas.

: Can I put you down for. • Identify disagreements and sticking points between and after sessions. U. the Japanese bowed his head. feel free to answer with less detail when repeating responses. shifted in his seat when the U. American asked him how much he would buy in the year 2000. and averted his eyes during subsequent responses.S. conflicts are inevitable. • Establish informal channels of communication at the operational level. the best response is to provide an overview of the current situation as you perceive it. informal talks. American who are negotiating a deal: U. For a fellow Japanese. For example. • Accept all offers for after-hours entertainment and meetings. • Attend all ceremonies and give appropriate gifts. U.S. • Send correspondence to and visit partners regularly.S. Also important is understanding how another culture recognizes conflict and the associated behaviors in resolving that conflict. let’s say.NEGOTIATING EFFECTIVELY ACROSS CULTURES • If you have provided complete answers to questions. you may find yourself in a situation in which a conflict or disagreement must be resolved. read the following dialogue between a Japanese and a U. • Use one team spokesperson and have her act as a facilitator or gatekeeper for the team’s responses. these nonverbal behaviors would have indicated disagreement or a negative response. When you negotiate across cultures. apologies or postponements to change the general atmosphere or feelings of the other side. • Use breaks to check on progress and explore issues. We have every intention of ordering parts in 2000. When you believe that there is a conflict in a negotiation. • Change the location of the discussion to create a good atmosphere. In this exchange. Develop a process for determining who will respond to which questions. anticipating conflicts—is critical to success.S. Phase 6: Reaching Agreement Identifying and Resolving Conflict Before reaching agreement or getting a contract signed. • Use recesses.S. a 15 percent increase from last year? J: Yes.: So what quantity of parts will you be buying in the first quarter of 2000? J: Yes. Resolving conflicts—better yet.: What do you think of our proposal? J: Your proposal is of interest to us. 15 percent may be a little difficult for us. Provide additional information for further Training Management Corporation 63 . and differences between two parties can be enormous.

if you are unable to resolve the conflict with the negotiation team. To break the deadlock. identify points of difference after again reviewing common ground or points of agreement. raising issues to upper management or developing transitional agreements. Breaking deadlocks is a key skill in international negotiation. deadlocks over principle beliefs. Outline areas of common ground. ask them for their understanding of the current situation. incremental steps. Do not hurry to resolve the conflict with quick concessions or compromises. as well as what you hope to achieve in the negotiation.S. Show your sincerity in wanting to resolve the conflict by stating your intentions or desired outcome. appropriate. If the other side is reluctant to respond to your presentation of the conflict. We discussed the matter together at great length in Tokyo and Dallas over a period of several months. Use small.NEGOTIATING ACROSS CULTURES clarification. if necessary. $3 million worth of test equipment for our new manufacturing facility. However. delivery dates and specifications. but only at the expense of longer-term resentment and damage to the overall relationship. we came up with what I thought was a common understanding on pricing. The two most common tactics used to break a deadlock or stalemate are compromise and coercion.S. escalate the conflict or issue to reach higher management. For several weeks the Japanese sent numerous faxes to Dallas asking many questions about certain standard clauses in the 64 Training Management Corporation .-American computer firm tells the following story about his experience regarding a contract with a Japanese supplier: I was working with one of our Japanese suppliers to purchase U. Deadlocks can be broken by changing the framework of the talks. attitudes or values may prove difficult to negotiate. A better approach may be to manipulate the context or location of the negotiation. Finally. the pressure exerted by one side must be credible. During our final meeting. In private. Deadlocks Conceptions of time are crucial during the agreement phase of the negotiation. Coercion may produce short-term benefits. Issues of face loom large as needs are fulfilled. then try to introduce a third party who can mediate on your behalf. If this is not possible. Be patient and persistent in trying to resolve the issue. More pressure is felt as deadlines approach and decisions still have to be made about the form of the agreement or contract. Getting a Signed Contract An executive at a U. in proportion to the issue being discussed and convincing to others and must lead to a mutually beneficial outcome. Deadlocks over major areas of disagreement may either be resolved negatively (no agreement) or positively (major impediments are removed). We submitted a lengthy contract in English outlining the rights and responsibilities on both sides. Take a break and talk with your counterpart informally over coffee or at dinner. Review the current business environment and the history of the relationship. Success will ultimately depend on both sides focusing on and addressing the needs of the other side. Outline what you see the other side trying to achieve in the negotiation.

Living by the written terms of the agreement governs post-negotiation behavior in the United States. Formal agreements in Mexico are often elaborate works of eloquence and may represent expressions of an ideal situation rather than actual terms and conditions to be followed absolutely. the other party will respond to a clear. Specific details will follow the more general agreement of understanding. In many cultures around the world. all parties are expected to live up to the terms of the contract. entry into the network of family and friends is the critical step in building trust to reach a final agreement. My Japanese counterpart told me. the development of a personal relationship may precede the formation of a business relationship.” We received the test equipment on schedule but I never did receive a signed contract. but the ultimate decision will be based on whether they feel that you were simpatico (displaying a sense of honor or dignity) in the negotiation. In some cultures. the terms of an agreement will be adhered to even if an official contract is never actually signed. This requires an investment of time and resources before an agreement can be Training Management Corporation 65 . Commitment is measured by the ability of the other party to meet the terms of the contract. cultural orientations can also affect how agreements are expressed. We will send it in a couple of days. A handshake will suffice. we still hadn’t received a signed contract from the Japanese supplier. Do both parties give a verbal agreement and shake hands on the deal. Since the roles and responsibilities of all parties are spelled out in detail. and the agreement is not seen as a flexible document that can easily be changed. In the following paragraphs we outline how some other cultures approach contracts and agreements. When negotiating across culture it is therefore important to understand the preferred way of reaching agreement in the particular cultures in which one is working. This executive’s experience is not uncommon. and reaching agreement is expected to take a prescribed length of time. rational argument. In Japan. The contract is expected to detail the terms of the agreement. This process is linear. Even a cup of coffee or tea can indicate that an agreement has been reached. There may be cultural preferences in deciding what form an agreement should take. spelling out product specifications. “Smith-san. or do they send a letter of understanding that broadly outlines what was negotiated and understood by both parties? While contracts and agreements are regulated by the laws and rules of both parties. I called Tokyo to ask for a signed agreement. or it may be the starting point for an ongoing negotiation as circumstances change. the contract may be a platform for developing further business relationships. In the United States.NEGOTIATING EFFECTIVELY ACROSS CULTURES contract. The contract is viewed as providing security to all parties and is seen as a way of building trust. In the United States. we understand your situation and we agree to sign the contract. the purpose of the negotiation is to work toward the goal of a signed contract. and how binding. with a letter of agreement following. there is little ambiguity or change required after the contract is signed. In Saudi Arabia. Two weeks before the first order of equipment was supposed to arrive in Dallas. as well as rewards and punishments for compliance and noncompliance. In Mexico. As the deadline for the project grew near. specific or long it should be.

keiyaku. Understanding that contracts may not signal the finality of a negotiation is a key step in securing the commitment you will need in order to do business across cultures.S. whereas a domestic negotiation may result in a letter of understanding.S. For many Chinese. The contract. The Japanese word for contract. timing and legal responsibility. especially if circumstances change or if they later feel cheated or legally trapped. memorandums of understanding or letters of agreement are preferred over contracts. contracts are general in scope and terms are broad. but Koreans may not feel bound by what is written in the agreement. connotes a set of promises by both sides to work together. In Brazil. contracts are adhered to as closely as possible. different cultures may approach the agreement phase of the negotiation process with different expectations.-type contract. Your Chinese counterparts will therefore adhere to a written contract as best they can. As the preceding synopses demonstrate. Following is a series of questions every negotiator should ask himself concerning his counterparts’ views of contracts and agreements: • Is a contract or an agreement the end goal of your negotiation process? • What is the meaning of a contract or agreement in the other culture? • How are agreements reached? • How binding are agreements over time? • How specific or detailed should agreements be? • Are agreements written or verbal? • What penalties are incurred if the agreement is not honored? • How do you work toward a mutually beneficial agreement? • Have both parties clarified their expectations regarding the format of the contract? • How do parties follow up on or show commitment to an agreement? 66 Training Management Corporation . is an expression of the principal guidelines for the business relationship. The status of legal contracts in Russia is questionable and should be thoroughly investigated. and they reflect the focus on technical expertise that is present throughout the negotiation. contracts may seem overwhelming and can be perceived as displaying a lack of trust among the parties. This allows for flexibility in continuing discussions on specific details. no matter how detailed. International deals may result in a U. In South Korea. In China. Changes to a contract after signing are taken as an indication of poor preparation or lack of expertise. In Russia. contracts can be detailed.NEGOTIATING ACROSS CULTURES reached. In Germany. and personal relationships go a long way toward ensuring that the terms of an agreement are carried out. contracts are not held in high regard. but they may not feel bound by it. Detailed and lengthy U. reaching an agreement is the signal that the “real” negotiation has just begun.

On-site reviews: while “inspection” may be a formidable term. but in Japan and China. most likely. Group pictures should be taken to commemorate the event. Ideally. however. Ceremonies and follow-up activities focus awareness on the relationship. Clerical personnel can. the past performance of the other party. and U. Americans may feel that ceremonies are time-consuming. your relationship. Gifts are taken as signs of gratitude and friendship. Individuals who have been especially helpful. The specific monitoring activities are predicated upon the nature of the agreement.S. a letter of appreciation should be sent and read during the ceremony. according to your relationship with your counterpart. The following techniques may be helpful in monitoring compliance. handle most routine communications. individual gifts can be given to each of the negotiation team members or company representatives who were involved in the ongoing discussions. Cultures that require both a personal and business relationship have high expectations that negotiators and the personnel responsible for implementing the contract will maintain in close communication. your company or its products. their top management and each member of the team is also suggested. expensive and unnecessary. third parties and colleagues should be given a gift privately after the Training Management Corporation 67 . letters and social contacts can serve to monitor compliance. for example. Signing ceremonies and elaborate receptions or banquets to celebrate the signing are seen as extensions of the contract. Symbolic interactions: formal banquets and social events underscore sincerity and demonstrate the importance of the relationship. While a single gift can be given to a company. Informal contacts: phone calls. The Importance of Ceremonies and Gift-Giving U. S. Americans should expect to participate fully. More complex matters. the structure of your organization and the performance activities themselves. much like informal negotiating. Giving appropriate gifts to the other party. Your specific application of these techniques will vary from instance to instance. negotiators and key personnel see ceremonies as a ritual necessary to finalize an agreement or contract. technical experts and top managers.NEGOTIATING EFFECTIVELY ACROSS CULTURES Monitoring Agreements and Contracts It is important to monitor agreements for compliance and to maintain the relationship that was established during the negotiation process. the gifts should be symbolic of the relationship. If your CEO or top officers cannot attend the final ceremony. or representative of your home country. Third-party channels: mutual contacts may be able to provide you with inside information. an on-site “visit” may be acceptable. will require input from lawyers. and are ritually exchanged to bind relationships.

if a transaction does not violate the laws and regulations of the country. Issues are viewed as occurring in shades of gray. but the beginning of a longer business relationship. resident. not in black and white. Phase 7: Follow-up and Maintaining Relationships In many cultures. Maintaining personal and business relationships is essential for long-term success. Conversely.-American ethical standpoint often results in inappropriate business-cultural behavior. Put simply. right is right or wrong. Discussions may be reopened at any time and for any reason.S.S. this means that you need to understand the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) enacted by Congress in 1977. such as travel related to the promotion of goods or services. a written contract is not the end of the negotiation.S. Once you have established that the transaction does not violate the regulations of the FCPA. because transactions and behaviors are clearly defined as being either right or wrong. In addition. and it was made for reasonable expenses. Gifts should be of quality and wrapped appropriately. with the expectation of receiving a contract or other business operations in the foreign country. this offer to a government official cannot be used to direct business to any person or to assist the company in obtaining special preferential treatment. Business relationships in high-context cultures often involve a set of obligations and duties that go beyond the business deal. When working in particularistic cultures. you should find out whether or not it is appropriate for you to open any present or gift offered to you during the ceremony. In these contexts. one must weigh the need to do the “right thing” against the need to get the contract or to get the job done. When working in universalistic cultures. then it does not violate the FCPA. Signing the contract does not necessarily conclude the sales or negotiation transaction. If you are a U. Since the U. Ethics in Negotiation How should you deal with the different ethical and legal requirements of foreign countries? What if the business practices of the host country require payments to facilitate a deal or payments to a government official to obtain a permit? In such cases. and in many cases. your corporate culture must foster a climate of integrity. however. First. promise of money. lost business. You must ask yourself whether the action you are about to take is legal.NEGOTIATING ACROSS CULTURES 68 contract has been signed. the choices are often easy. Remember that some cultures do not have the custom of opening presents in front of others. or something of value to another foreign official for the purpose of influencing any act or decision that would assist the U. Training Management Corporation . depending on the business context or situation. Employees must exercise judgment in determining how to employ their company’s ethical standards without being judgmental of the other culture or its values. you must decide if the particular action is nevertheless morally acceptable to you and your company.S. a U. we must analyze the situation on two levels. and the company’s bylaws must clearly outline what does and does not constitute ethical behavior. company employee may not offer a payment. company in obtaining or retaining business. so do not insist that the receiver open or unwrap your present when you give it.

e-mail and videoconferencing are frequently accepted as efficient substitutes for face-to-face meetings. the better your rapport with a person or the longer the relationship has existed between two parties. This may not be true for cultures in which hierarchy is still important. regular telephone calls or written correspondence. The assumption. however. very little effort may be devoted to maintaining the relationship over time. Maintaining the business relationship requires periodic face-to-face meetings. groups or individuals long after the contract is signed. long-term advantages to both parties over time. which comes with the requisite obligations. e-mail and groupware in the United States is seen as a way of lowering hierarchy and organizational levels through access to information. When negotiating with an individual or party from a high-context culture. is that a business relationship does not require a personal relationship between two parties.S. The terms of the contract are viewed as governing the form of business between two companies. Since 75 percent of all communication is nonverbal.S. Americans see maintaining the business relationship as a cost-effective way to maintain a competitive advantage or the security of goods or services. In low-context cultures. The agreement takes precedence over personal relationships. The ease that technology brings to communication across geographic distances and time zones. Socializing on a periodic basis will create opportunities to listen for relevant information. to discover unmet expectations. meaning can certainly be lost when using a lower-context form of communication technology.S. such as the United States and Canada. build and maintain relationships through electronic means. it is best Training Management Corporation 69 . Using e-mail. such e-mail. When negotiating with highcontext and being cultures. however.S. or to identify future problems. Communicating Using Distance Technology U. The process of maintaining the relationship can have significant. Turnover. can actually become a source of frustration and difficulty. U. new assignments and the next deal often preclude the time or resources to follow-up on previously established relationships. status and power of the other party. This may well increase the respect. such as Japan and France. For example. a higher value is placed on face-to-face interactions and reading the nonverbals of the person with whom you are communicating during the negotiation. the more likely it will be that a lower context of communication can be successful. Although personal relationships may occur as a result of long-term business interactions. companies find it difficult to maintain negotiation teams. faxes and e-mail messages. negotiators with limited budgets and little experience in traveling and negotiating abroad may try to initiate. Early detection of potential problems allows your company or group to approach problem-solving in a culturally appropriate manner.NEGOTIATING EFFECTIVELY ACROSS CULTURES U. Both formal and informal exchanges are recommended to maintain the network after the deal is made. in order to take advantage of established relationships. however. In high-context cultures. Americans should use the same team members for new contracts. As a rule. U. voice mail and teleconferencing increases the potential for misunderstanding by ignoring cultural preferences for communication or by making the need for cultural adjustment less obvious. will often maintain the same negotiating team or personnel when negotiating future contracts or agreements. including letters. Other cultures. as in Germany or Mexico. if possible.

face-to-face or by other means? • How well do the people who are communicating know each other? • Do the two parties have a rapport with each other? • How will important information be communicated between parties? • How can technology be used to build a stronger business relationship? • What language will be used in both written and verbal messages? • What are the most convenient times for all parties to communicate? • Has a communication format or preference been identified for everyone to use? Conclusion Together. during and after the negotiation? • Do both parties have equal access to comparable communication technology? • How does each culture prefer to communicate. not to replace them with electronic technology. to telephone. Remember that the ultimate purpose of such communication is to build and enhance relationships. the Cultural Orientations Model™ and the seven-phase model of negotiations provide an comprehensive framework for analyzing and understanding how negotiations occur across cultures. Adapting your own approach to a specific cultural style of negotiating–– and understanding how culture 70 Training Management Corporation .NEGOTIATING ACROSS CULTURES to arrange a face-to-face meeting early on and to establish sufficient rapport before moving to a lower-context form of communication. a regular pattern of communication. A telephone call could follow the fax to ensure receipt and to give the other party a chance to respond. Although one may argue that the negotiation process is universal across all cultures. All negotiators need to recognize the potential for dissonance and misunderstanding in negotiations across cultures. to e-mail should be established between the two parties negotiating. After a face-to-face meeting. In general. making the most of multiple technologies ranging from videoconferencing. a fax should be used to summarize information shared or decisions made. Knowing the communication preferences of the other party is crucial for successful negotiations. to faxes. Preparation is the key factor in preparing to negotiate successfully across cultures. The following questions should be asked when considering a communications strategy for use in an international negotiation: • What technology can be used on a regular basis to maintain the relationship before. There is a need to synchronize communication and negotiation strategies within the negotiating team. we must not dismiss or minimize the impact of cultural differences or orientations.

distance and time in the negotiation process? • How do we establish a business relationship? A personal relationship? • How do we assess the other party’s expectations. power. experience and skills do I need to conduct business in that culture? • How do I build trust and rapport with the other party? • What influence and persuasion strategies can I use to reach an agreement? • How do we handle issues of culture. makes decisions and solves problems fundamentally differ from our way? • What tactics. barriers and requirements? • How should we present and ask for information at the negotiation table? Away from the table? • How important are hierarchy. wants and issues? • What is important to the other party in terms of their goals. constraints. The challenge is to keep open channels of communication to allow both sides to explore opportunities and alternatives so that mutual agreements can be reached.NEGOTIATING EFFECTIVELY ACROSS CULTURES affects the seven phases of the negotiation process and the specific strategies or tactics to be employed––is crucial for success. The ongoing study of international negotiations provides persuasive evidence of the continued impact of cultural differences on negotiation. position and authority to the other party? • How many team members should we have. Following is a summary of critical questions to ask yourself before attempting to negotiate across cultures: • Does the way in which the other party communicates. goals and behaviors. and what qualities should each team member possess? Training Management Corporation 71 . strategies and behaviors will the other party use in the negotiation? • What knowledge. needs.

NEGOTIATING ACROSS CULTURES 72 Training Management Corporation .

Power: How individuals view differential power relationships 7. Thinking: How individuals conceptualize Training Management Corporation 73 . Structure: How individuals approach change. Individualism: How individuals define their identity 8. ambiguity and uncertainty 10. Space: How individuals demarcate their physical and psychological space 6. objects and issues in their sphere of influence 2. Time: How individuals perceive the nature of time and its use 3. risk. Competitiveness: How individuals are motivated 9.CULTURAL ORIENTATIONS MODEL™ QUICK REFERENCE A Appendix CULTURAL ORIENTATIONS MODEL™ QUICK REFERENCE 1. Action: How individuals conceptualize actions and interactions 4. Communication: How individuals express themselves 5. Environment: How individuals view and relate to the people.


Brake. Graham. 1985. Pierre. Fisher. and Russell W.RESOURCES RESOURCES The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language. 1991. and Yoshihiro Sano. Smart Bargaining: Doing Business with the Japanese. MA: Ballinger Publishing Company. 1988. Dean Allen. New York: John Wiley & Sons. 1990. New York: Random House. Casse. 1994. Griffin. and Rebecca A. The Japanese Negotiator: Subtlety and Strategy Beyond Western Logic. 1983.. Inc. Robert M. Kenichi. 1992. NJ: Richard D. ME: Intercultural Press. 1985. Trenholme J. 1992. New York: McGraw Hill. 1990.. Robert M.. and Surinder Deal. Princeton. Terence. Yarmouth. Inc. Keiretsu: Inside the Hidden Japanese Conglomerates. New York: John Wiley & Sons. New York: Houghton Mifflin Company. and Thomas Walker. Lennie. The Global Negotiator: Building Strong Business Relationships Anywhere in the World. Danielle Medina Walker. Daggatt. Getting to Yes. and Lewis Griggs. World-Class Negotiating: Dealmaking in the Global Marketplace. Bargaining Across Borders: How to Negotiate Business Successfully Anywhere in the World. Honoring the Customer: Marketing and Selling to the Japanese. New York: McGraw Hill. Roger. March. Hendon. Cambridge. Miyashita. Hendon. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Tokyo: Kodansha International. New York: Harper Business. 1995. Copeland. Foster. Donald W. Training Management Corporation 75 .. and William Ury. John L. Going International: How to Make Friends and Deal Effectively in the Global Marketplace. Irwin. March. Doing Business Internationally: The Guide to Cross-Cultural Success.. 1984. and David Russell. Managing Intercultural Negotiations.

Robert T. and Michael Copeland. Stripp. MD: Lexington Books.1989. Houston: Gulf Publishing. Fort Worth. Robert T. Rosalie L. Getting Your Yen’s Worth. and William G. TX: Dryden Press. 1991. Dynamics of Successful International Business Negotiations. Schuster.NEGOTIATING ACROSS CULTURES 76 Moran. Training Management Corporation . Tung. Lexington. Camille. 1996.. Business Negotiations with the Japanese. 1984. Global Business: Planning for Sales and Negotiations. Houston: Gulf Publishing Company. Moran.

24 particularistic. 42. 22-23. 40-41 keiyaku. 60-61. 63. iii. 59. 3. 42. 24-25. 1. 48. 20. 47. 31. 53. 20. 38. 30-31. 24-25. 11-12. 26 expressive. 65 systemic. 49. 29. 69-70 Equal Dignity Rule. 43-44. vii. 2-3. 14. 20-21. 33. 24. 44-45. 38. 59. 68-69 indirect. 19. 9. 20. 2 negotiation. 1-2. 26. 73 private. 21. 73 direct. 61. 47. 56. 18. 52. 15 multicultural. 59 informal. 51. 24-25. 21-22. 41-42. 29. 36 ethics. vii. 38-39. 17. 24-25. 39. 60. 6-39. 64. 10-13. 17. 47-48. 26. 58. 26. 58-60. 71. 51. 25-26. 19 low-context. 45. 21. 68 power. 11-12. 41 individualism. 12. 60. 43. 1-5. 73 competitive. 65. 56. 51. 58. 26. 29. 3 decision-making. 64 conflict. 51. 21. 44 future. 36-37. 32. 64. 73 flexibility. 19. 25. 24-25. 24. 24. 73 constraint. 15. 73 collectivistic. 39. 24 individualistic. 18. 45 globalization. 41.INDEX INDEX agreement. 73 fixed. 37. 45-48. 54 harmony. 23. 17-18. 71 bargaining. 18-19. 13-14. 54. 48-50. vii. 59 structure. 35. 59. 14-15. 6670 across cultures. 68 universalistic. 53. 17. 46. 58 inductive. 35. 32. 63. 2. 52. 22. 67 monochronic. 14. 2 culture. 69. 31. 50. 27. 36. 69 management. 23. 47. 21-23. 25 thinking. 37. 52. 52. 75 Casse. 6. 34. 44 Cultural Orientations Model (COM). 22-23. 24-25. 61 time. 54. vii. iv. 33. 40-42. vii. 38. 47. 6. 29. 17-18. iii-vii. 20. 22-24. 1-3. 56. vii. 69-70. 23. 58-59. 20-21. 57-59. 20-21 hierarchy. 73 equality. 73 being. 56. 50. 15-16. vi-vii. 4042. 58 linear. 16 present. 53 neg. 22. 43 Training Management Corporation 77 . 42-45. 70-71 behavior. 67. 65-66. 67 instrumental. 49-50. 16-17. 10-13. 18. 69 competitiveness. 23. 66-67. 17-19. vii. 32. 14. 15. 39. 25-26 fluid. 57-58. 55. 14. 4. 56. 52. 1-4. 45. 32. vii. iii. 60-67. 16 past. 17. 59 environment. 16. 56-57. 60 e-mail. 51. 25. 26. 26. 44. 20. 11-15. 29. 8. 69. 2-3. 53. 1-5. 61 continua/continuum. 48. 14. vii cross-cultural competence. 24-25. 14-15 control. 73 deductive. 65. vii. 61. 17-18. 3233. 68-71 Deal. 35. 32. 18. 54. 22-23. 71 space. 14-15. 56. 30. 26-27. 22. 25-27. vii. 45. 74 action. vii. 5961. Pierre. 14-16. 43 communication. 42. 57. 51-54. 18. 50. 48. 50-59. 36-37. 20. 51-53. vii. iv-vi cultural orientations. 39. 37. 70 FCPA. 52. 69. 20. 15. 2. 68 fax. 27. 5-6. 57 high-context. 52. 64 public. 51. 42 doing. Surinder. 58. 24. 57 generalizations. 17-19. 21. 1 guanxi. 57 formal. 32. 25 order. 13. 48. 39. 60-62. 26. 17. vii. 16. 23. 26. 33. 2. 25-26. 3 compromise. 64 concessions. 10 letters. 16. 26-27. 32. 24. 60-62. 21. iii. 66 kieretsu. 57 cooperative. 61-63. 38. 67 managers. 26. 24. 22. 21-22. 68 fighting. 68 defined. vii. 17. 56-57. 3. 16-17. 19. 2-3. 54. 62. 63-64 consensus. 26-27. 2. 51-54. 11. 27.

59. 5. 27. 44. 69 approach. 37. 32. 65 nonverbal communication. 29-30. 39-44. 15-18. 32-33. 51. 10 stereotypes. 18. 51. 29. 20-27. 65-69 business relationships. 67 polychronic. 26-27 tactics. 63-64.NEGOTIATING ACROSS CULTURES 78 network. 1-3. 31. 45. 57. 71 team selection. 61-62. 47. 39-43. 30. 56-57. 16. 16-18. 18. 58-59. 31-32. iv. 51. 51. 47-49. 59 phone. 32. 16-17. 8. 68. 33. 22. 2 persuading. vii. 54 Training Management Corporation . 65. 67. 61. 69 resolution. 66. 39 entry. 68 personal relationships. 40-47. 58-59. 16-17. 19. 53. 56-57. 29. 45-47. 40. 31. 15 presentation. 6-14. 1. 69-71 relationships. 47. 10. 29. 27. 38 saving face. 31. 59-60. 29. 54 onsen. 44-47. i. 12 orientation. 71 team. 61. 25. 10. 51. 2-3. 7. 38. 34-35. 75 maintaining relationships. 30. 47. 31. 12-13. 36-37 teamwork. 38. 42-47. 53. 52-53. 69 rapport. 14-17. 29-30. 53. 35-39. vii otium. 69. 32. 57. 51-52. 17-18. 2. 65. 57-59. 55. 21-22. 64 problem-solving. 57 shukko. 64. 23. 29-32.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful