Introduction
As our text warns; ‘cross cultural negotiation is not for the faint of heart… this is a difficult job that requires very specific skills as well as the ability to handle significant amounts of conflict and stress’ (Steers, Nardon, & Sanchez-Runde, 2013p. 230 ). This week we delve further into our consideration of the intercultural competence skill sets required of managers, and this week our topic is specifically related to global negotiations.
Learning objectives
At the conclusion of this topic you should be able to:
- evaluate ‘corruption’ and consider your personal values in relation what constitutes ethical management behaviour
- recognise the complexity of cultural relativity in relation to ethical decision making
- identify key culture-specific considerations in cross cultural negotiations
- describe common problems experienced when using interpreters during cross-cultural negotiations
- analyse culture-based influences on bargaining strategies and tactics
|
|
Required reading
Prescribed Text
https://login.ezproxy.lib.rmit.edu.au/login?url=http://www.rmit.ebli b.com.au.ezproxy.lib.rmit.edu.au/patron/FullRecord.aspx?p=1113101
Chapter 7
Journals
Adler, Nancy J., & Graham, John L. (1989). Cross-Cultural Interaction: The International Comparison Fallacy? Journal of International Business Studies, 20(3), 515-537. doi: 10.2307/155189
https://login.ezproxy.lib.rmit.edu.au/login?url=http://www.jstor.org
/stable/155189
Graham, John L. (1985). The Influence of Culture on the Process of Business Negotiations: An Exploratory Study. Journal of International Business Studies, 16(1), 81-96. doi: 10.2307/154485
https://login.ezproxy.lib.rmit.edu.au/login?url=http://www.jstor.org
/stable/154485
The two articles above are cited extensively during this chapter of our text book. They provide considerable further depth into the original analysis of behavioural differences in cross-cultural negotiations
Osman-Gani, Aahad M., & Tan, J.S. (2002). Influence of Culture on Negotiation Styles of Asian Managers: An Empirical Study of Major Cultural/Ethnic Groups in Singapore. Thunderbird International Business Review, 44(6), 819-839. doi: 10.1002/tie 10048
https://login.ezproxy.lib.rmit.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com
/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=13638353&site=ehost- live&scope=site
The above article is from the prolific human resource researcher A. Osman- Gani, who is based at NTU Singapore. Whilst many management and business texts focus on culture-based negotiation differences between ‘East’ and ‘West’, this article looks at those differences within a South East Asian context (e.g., amongst ethnic sub-cultures in Singapore)
Steidlmeier, P. (1999). Gift Giving, Bribery and Corruption: Ethical Management of Business Relationships in China. Journal of Business Ethics, 20(2), 121-132. doi: 10.1023/A:1005960026519
https://login.ezproxy.lib.rmit.edu.au/login?url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A
:1005960026519
This article provides a relatively balanced and practitioner-focused consideration of the nature of bribery and corruption in the context of foreigners doing business in China.
Magazine articles
Voreacos, D. (November 2013). China’s Bribery Culture Poses Risks for Multinationals
https://equella.rmit.edu.au/rmit/file/557932ed-4d49-4c09-8cf9- 7766baa1f645/1/140513_3_034.pdf
This magazine article considers ethical business behaviours and the risks facing multi-national organisations facing sanctions from ‘home country’ legislation as well as offshore.
Very much lost in translation (2012, Nov 02) The Economist (Online)
|
https://login.ezproxy.lib.rmit.edu.au/login?url=http://search.proquest.com. ezproxy.lib.rmit.edu.au/docview/1125773743?accountid=13552
2
This brief article is a personal, practitioner reflection from someone working with interpreters in a developing country
Cultural relativity and ethical choice
Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner (1997p. 34) conducted research where they presented a case-study dilemma to workshop participants from a variety of nationalities. The case study follows:
“You are riding in a car driven by a close friend. He hits a pedestrian. You know he was going at least 35 miles per hour in an area of the city where the maximum speed limit is 20 miles per hour. There are no witnesses. His lawyer says that if you testify under oath that he was driving at only 20 miles per hour it may save him from serious consequences. What right has your friend to expect you to protect him?”
What is your opinion in relation to the statements below? (no need to share)
- My friend has a definite right as a friend to expect me to testify to the lower figure
- My friend has some right as a friend to expect me to testify to the lower figure
- My friend has no right as a friend to expect me to testify to the lower figure
This is an intriguing exercise, which helps to demonstrate cultural relativity in relation to ‘right and wrong’. In Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner’s research, you may be surprised to know that there were notable culture- related patterns of response. People from universalist cultures such as Switzerland, the USA, Australia, Ireland, Canada and Sweden were of the opinion that as the seriousness of the friend’s transgression increased, so their obligation to help decreases. However people from more collectivist cultures such as Venezuela, Russia, China, India, Greece answered that as the friend’s potential to be in serious trouble with the law increased, so did their responsibility to help the friend.
After reading the research responses, what do you think now? Does the other way of considering the situation have any merit in your view? Some would hold the opinion that the collectivist response is corrupt. However another way to consider it is that people from collectivist cultures might consider that law becomes a weapon in the hands of a corrupt elite, or that the long term ethics of treasuring relationships is the most important factor here (Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner, 1997).
The reading for this week from Steidlmeier (1999) further considers the challenge of dealing with a prevalent social custom in China, that of gift giving. The Bloomberg article highlights the risks to organisations when engaging in questionable negotiation tactics and demonstrates that the risks to MNC’s exist in sanctions from home country legislation as well as overseas. However, there is a caveat offered: Steidlmeier (1999) advises outsiders to avoid jumping to the conclusion that Chinese are ‘promiscuously corrupt in their business practices’ (Steidlmeier, 1999p.
121) when he notes that the Chinese media is itself preoccupied with the ‘corruption debate’. As you read these articles and conduct your own research you will most likely wonder, as the author asks, ‘what is a company doing business in China (as an example of many) to do…behave ethically, legally, or do whatever it takes’? In the past weeks we have discussed cultural competence, influence and relativity. All of these concepts come deserve consideration when making decisions about that question.
Managing the negotiation process: using interpreters
We have already considered the benefits and challenges of becoming multilingual for business purposes. For managers who are required to conduct negotiations globally, often on a ‘fly in-fly out’ basis, it is often unreasonable to expect to speak the language of the other negotiating party and therefore interpreters are required. To the uninitiated, the use of interpreters might seem to surmount the language-barrier problem, however anyone who has worked with interpreters will surely advise working effectively with an interpreter brings its own set of challenges, requires a whole new skill set and, moreover, is simultaneously associated with our previous discussion about ethics.
In Australia, and many other countries, we have a National Accreditation Authority for Translators and Interpreters (NAATI). You are encouraged to visit the NAATI website and read some of their ‘information sheets’, in particular those related to ethical interpreting. NAATI, rightly, advocates the use of qualified interpreters, however it is not always feasible or even possible to use a qualified interpreter offshore and what usually happens then is that someone who happens to speak both languages (not matter how well) is asked to translate.
Cultural comparisons of bargaining tactics
Adler and Graham (1989) undertook foundational research into how people from different cultures behave during negotiations. One of their key findings, perhaps unsurprisingly given our discussions during the past six weeks, was that people behave differently when negotiating with people from familiar cultures than they do when negotiating across cultures.
These differences were identified in a range of variables including processes, outcomes, satisfaction levels, cooperation, joint profit outcomes, obstinacy and acculturation. Pages 232 – 240 of our text illustrate some of the differences that researchers have found in negotiating strategies (e.g., in competitive vs. problem-solving bargaining), and bargaining and concessions (e.g., sequential bargaining vs. holistic bargaining).
Summary
This weeks’ discussions could have been quite challenging on a personal level, and no doubt they will continue to be so for all of us as managers ‘in the field’ of global interaction, particularly during the stress-laden process of negotiation. Amongst all the inherent culture-related ambiguity we are considering here, there is still certainty; that is, that successful managers need to be comfortable with negotiating in multicultural environment and building and maintaining interpersonal relationships. The goal of a negotiation is to come to agreement and to implement a legal, hopefully ethical, working relationship that will usually result in a contract. Yet we have seen that even contracts are influenced by cultural constructs, and should be seen as the beginning of a relationship that will continue to require a high level of intercultural competency to bring to fruition. Our next topic is to consider leadership strategies, and evaluate models that may help global managers achieve success.
