Introduction
People from different cultural backgrounds negotiate in cross-cultural negotiations. While the usual expectation is that cross-cultural negotiations occur between other countries, studies between distinct cultures within the same country can also occur, such as studies involving European-Americans and Native Americans (Groves, 2015). Multicultural communication and intercultural negotiations are both part of modern business and government procedures because of globalization and the expansion of international business relations. With this new understanding, having an appreciation for cross-cultural negotiations is critical. Understanding the influence of the other party’s culture is critical to negotiating effectively. Although communication styles, body language, clothing patterns, and alternative ways of communicating agreement or disagreement are crucial in cross-cultural negotiations, everyone also needs to follow standard communication guidelines. It is likely the most challenging factor to expect and be ready for in a negotiation where an agreement is not met.
Negotiating Styles
The vast majority of negotiators have one of these five negotiating styles, and they show the characteristics corresponding to their style (Caputo et al., 2019). Some of the widely used negotiation styles include:
- Competing. People who are skilled at making proposals exhibit an assertive, self-confident, and results-oriented style. In general, these individuals pursue their interests, sometimes at the expense of their counterparts, and may even be domineering. This is a style that is rated as more assertive and less cooperative.
- Avoiding. People who display this negotiating style are typically less assertive and calmer. They prefer to stay out of or avoid the conflict. They remain neutral, objective, or remove themselves from the situation. There is some degree of self-sacrifice in this type of relationship. This style is characterized by a lack of assertiveness and cooperation and is not concerned with the agreement’s details.
- Accommodating. Negotiators who focus on building rapport with their counterparts use this style to lessen the differences and focus on the other party’s needs. This has a higher degree of cooperation but is also less assertive. Negotiators, particularly those who focus on the relationship, often view substance in an agreement as an afterthought.
- Compromising. Typically, mediators who display this style expect to exchange concessions, reach a middle ground agreement, and satisfy both parties’ needs. This style is in the middle of assertiveness and cooperation while also seeking to form a reasonable agreement while still maintaining some connection.
- Collaborating. Negotiators who have this style often exhibit being straightforward and communicative. They concentrate on developing novel and inventive solutions that fulfil all parties’ demands and make many suggestions for potential solutions before making a final decision. Assertive and cooperative, these styles promote both the agreement and relationship at hand, providing vital support for both. Taking the time to develop long-term goals over efficiency and not settling for less than what is genuinely desired are both elements’ negotiators tend to focus on.
The negotiation styles each have advantages and disadvantages because a single approach is more effective than the alternatives in some situations. Furthermore, one should understand that favourable deals that benefit their interests are more likely to lead to better negotiations because relationships that allow for easier and more beneficial transactions to be built are easier to build. Engaging in negotiations will set a bad precedent in terms of long-term client relationships or recent hires. A successful negotiator understands their negotiation style, is familiar with their counterpart’s style, and does everything possible to accommodate their counterpart’s style to facilitate successful negotiations. It is critical to strive for collaborative styles while also paying attention to relationships and meeting assertiveness in their own needs to have productive working relationships. Caution and observational skills are also required, and values must be maximized.
In some cases, a collaborative approach may not be the best approach. Still, the results obtained from this negotiation style are more positive when applied to business-related discussions because the relationships are long-term and have a significant impact on external and internal interactions, and thus are necessary for meaningful negotiation outcomes. When it comes to negotiation styles, cultural differences are significant. During a delicate negotiation between two or more parties, both verbal and nonverbal communication can impact. It is critical to learn about cultural differences and business etiquette before entering into any significant negotiations. In addition to cultural differences, geographic, historical differences, political systems and educational opportunities, and exposure to different cultures and communication styles all can influence negotiation styles.
In addition, it is essential to remember that other cultures may have a variety of rituals and desires and expectations that can be or cannot be negotiated. Communicating effectively in a counterpart’s language can appear to be a significant advantage in complex negotiation, and it frequently is. Language can also be deceptive, leading a negotiator to believe that they have an open window when in reality, they do not have one as wide as they would like. The key to establishing long-term negotiations is a precise language and attempts to communicate in the other side’s language confusing, which can jeopardize the precision of negotiations. Understandably, learning how to communicate in cross-cultural situations can appear to be a difficult task.
Cross-cultural negotiations necessitate additional considerations, such as different communication styles, body language, clothing patterns, and alternative ways of communicating agreement or disagreement over the terms of an agreement. Therefore, many negotiators are concerned about the risk of ruining a significant deal or creating long-term embarrassment for themselves. The critical skills required for negotiations include identifying the parties’ interests, analyzing situations, and compromising.
The rewards are unmatched when one knows how to compromise in cross-cultural contexts, but constant learning, interest, and respect are required. The approach one takes in a negotiation where an agreement is not met is probably the most challenging factor to anticipate and prepare for. When one goes to great lengths to find a potential counterpart, there is an added sense of urgency to reach a compromise. However, going into a negotiation with this in mind may be advantageous. Communication is one of the essential building blocks of a successful relationship. In international negotiations, there are four dimensions of culture to take into consideration (Green, 2016), and they include:
- Power inequality. Most people wouldn’t be able to tell the difference between different levels of power, even if they had a clear picture of the power structures in a country. For example, in Russia, where power tends to be concentrated at the very top of the hierarchical chain of command (Malik, 2021). Executives or government officials of various levels will engage in negotiations, only to have them renegotiated by lower-level officials.
- Individualism/Collectivism. Some people grow up thinking of themselves as individuals, while others grow up understanding themselves as part of a larger collective. In the United States, individualism is highly esteemed, whereas countries in the Pacific Rim, such as China and Japan, value collectivism. Societies are organized according to this way of thinking, and decisions are also made in this manner.
- Masculinity/Femininity. This factor is focused on determining how traditional or stereotypical gender roles society supports. A critical aspect of the third dimension is that society pushes its members to succeed or to take care of themselves. Since femininity is linked to characteristics like elegance, nurturance, and passivity, masculinity is described as including traits like ambition, a desire for money, and gender roles (Andrijauskienė & Dumčiuvienė, 2017). Possible characteristics associated with femininity include the desire to care for and nurture others, acceptance of alternative sexualities, environmental awareness, and gender fluidity.
- Aversion to Uncertainty. It is called uncertainty avoidance when referring to an individual’s degree of comfort with unstructured or uncertain situations (also known as uncertainty tolerance). Some cultures have difficulty with ambiguity, so business people prefer regulations and rules to negotiating (Andrijauskienė & Dumčiuvienė, 2017). Cultural values are described in broad terms, and it is unlikely that everyone in a specific culture will hold to every element of those values.
These descriptions can apply to any culture, but they can also be more detailed, based on the specific characteristics of the culture being described. As one conducts international negotiations, keep these considerations in mind. From Dr Conlon’s research, it can be concluded that different cultural subtleties affect various stages of the negotiation process, including; When there is a great deal of uncertainty in a given situation, those who come from cultures with a high level of uncertainty avoidance, for example, are more likely to be meticulous in their planning (Maheshkar, 2018). People from other cultures would feel uncomfortable when surprises happen, as ambiguity is not something they are accustomed to.
When negotiating, the culture’s masculine/feminine characteristics influence the importance placed on interpersonal relationships. Cultures with a higher percentage of females will emphasize interpersonal relationships, while they will also have a stronger tendency to exhibit collectivism in their thought processes. Distributive bargaining, a more competitive negotiation style, is more frequently employed by negotiators from masculine cultures. One is more likely to see power use in negotiations with negotiators from a male culture, and they might also be more rule-based in their approach. When most negotiation with people from collectivist countries occurs in groups rather than between individuals, negotiations with collectivist countries often occur. Thus, it would be unrealistic to expect to have one-on-one negotiations with someone from Japan or China.
Due to the slower negotiation speed in a collectivist culture, one can expect consensus to take longer for it to be met. One may be more comfortable dealing directly with the decision-maker, but the negotiating parties may only be the first link in a long chain of people one must deal with. An agreement can be reached in a low power distance country, but it will have to be approved and implemented by someone higher up the hierarchy before it can be accepted in a high-power distance culture. How cultural values influence negotiating norms and standards are well-known. To gain an advantage, it is imperative to recognize and comprehend the impact that the other party’s culture has on the negotiation strategies employed by that party.
Conclusion
In conclusion, to strike a compromise in a negotiation, each party must relinquish something while accounting for the other party’s culture. The two parties will only come to mutual respect once they have established that respect and are more likely to negotiate on agreeable terms and establish a mutually beneficial negotiation process. Optimal results are possible in the negation process regardless of cultural differences.
References
Andrijauskienė, M., & Dumčiuvienė, D. (2017). Hofstede’s cultural dimensions and national innovation level. In DIEM: Dubrovnik International Economic Meeting (Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 189-205). Sveučilište u Dubrovniku.
Green, H. M. (2016). Understanding Negotiating Styles. Training Industry.
Groves, K. S., Feyerherm, A., & Gu, M. (2015). Examining cultural intelligence and cross-cultural negotiation effectiveness. Journal of Management Education, 39(2), 209-243.
Maheshkar, C., & Sharma, V. (Eds.). (2018). Handbook of research on cross-cultural business education. IGI Global.
Malik, T. H. (2021). Sino-Russian negotiation styles: A cross-cultural analysis of situated patterns. Asian Journal of Comparative Politics, 6(1), 3-24.