WORKING IN A TEAM: HOW DO VARIETY OF

NATIONALITIES OF NEGOTIATION TEAM

MEMBERS INFLUENCE THE OUTCOME OF

INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS NEGOTIATIONS?

Marcus B. Zarway

ABSTRACT: Negotiation is a life phenomenon and has taken a center stage in domestic or

international business dealings. It has become as important as any other corporate functions

because it determines the future of a business. Negotiation is often used to initiate international

business relations and deals making processes, and these processes are carried out by team of

experts representing each side. These teams in many cases are made up of different nationals who

involvement can influence the outcome of the negotiation. This paper seeks to analyze the impact

of variety of nationalities on a negotiation team, how it influences the success or failure of a

negotiation and how the process can be managed to avoid adverse effects during negotiation.

The author is completing an MSc International Oil and Gas Management focusing on Petroleum Policy, Stakeholder

(Local Content & CSR) Management, Negotiation & Contracts at CEPMLP, with BSc (Hons) in Marketing &

Business Development from GIMPA, Ghana. He’s a certified IFC SME Trainer and affiliated with the Association of

International Petroleum Negotiators and the Society of Petroleum Engineers. Email: zarwaymarcus@yahoo.com.

i

TABLE OF CONTENS

Abbreviation…………………………………………………………………………………... ii

1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 1

2. Negotiation ............................................................................................................................. 3

2.1. Negotiation Defined ........................................................................................................ 3

2.2. International Business Negotiation: Definition and Trends ....................................... 4

2.3. Negotiation Team: Planning and Preparation ............................................................ 6

3. Nationality and Culture ........................................................................................................ 9

3.1. How differences in Nationalities on Negotiation Team Affects Team’s

Performance? ............................................................................................................................. 9

3.2. Assessing Cultural Difference in Negotiation Team: Lessons from Hofstede’s

Cultural Dimensions ................................................................................................................. 9

3.3. How Culture Affects Negotiation Outcome: Salacuse’s Top Ten Step Analysis .... 11

4. Managing Diversities ........................................................................................................... 14

4.1. Managing National and Cultural Diversities in a Team ........................................... 14

4.2. Managing cross-culture in International Business Negotiation ............................... 14

5. Conclusions........................................................................................................................... 16

6. Reference List ...................................................................................................................... 17

APPENDIXES ............................................................................................................................. 20

ii

ABBREVIATIONS

BATNA Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement

B2G Business to Government

B2C Business to Customer

B2B Business to Business

1

1. Introduction

Negotiation is not new in the world of business; right from the days of barter trade, negotiation has

been practiced. However, it was considered a specialized engagement reserved for technical

knowledge.1 It encompasses business transitions, conflict resolutions, and political bargaining

among others. The evolution of knowledge, technology and globalization has made negotiation a

societal norm in every transaction.

Globalization and human mobility have also induced complex business environments that require

specialized knowledge and skills for businesses to thrive. As a result, companies now employ

skilled labours irrespective of their national origins (cultural backgrounds), which impact

employers either positively or otherwise due to cultural difference embedded in nationality variety.

Some of these foreign employees are often included on organization’s negotiation teams because

of their expertise. Their inclusion can be rewarding in international business negotiation but can

also adversely affect the outcome of negotiation due to ideological conflict within a team and

outside influence from nationality and culture.

Managing diversities in negotiation teams have raised concern among managers and legal

practitioners in international business negotiations for the impacts they exert within teams and on

the outcome of negotiations globally. Throughout this research, the terms team and group are used

interchangeably as well as international and global.

This paper will analyze nationality variety in negotiation teams in the context of international

business negotiation and how negotiation teams are/should be planned. It will further assess

nationality and cultural differences in negotiation teams, how these differences impact intra-team

performance using Hofstede’s five cultural dimensions. Salacuse’s ‘ten steps’ elements will be

used to assess the effects of culture in inter-organization negotiations. Finally, explore mechanisms

employable to manage nationalities and cultural diversities, and cross-culture in international

business negotiations. This paper therefore will conclude by looking at the various theories and

models employed, the arguments proffered to identify how nationality variety can influence the

1 Fox, W. F., International Commercial Agreements: A Primer on Drafting, Negotiation and Resolving Disputes (3rd

ed.), (The Hague: Klugue Law International, 1998) pg. 178-191

2

outcome of international business negotiations and what options are available for management as

guiding principles to effectively manage negotiation teams.

3

2. Negotiation

2.1. Negotiation Defined

Everyone is a negotiator, because negotiation is a reality of every day’s life. It takes place in

many forms; from the conscious to subconscious, as a trade-off, soft or hard, or hybrid (soft

and hard)2. Therefore, negotiation has been viewed by many authors from different

perspectives. This section focuses on general, commercial and legal definitions of negotiation.

According to Fisher, Ury and Patton, negotiation is “a back-and-forth communication

designed to reach an agreement when you and the other side have some interests that are

shared and others that are opposed.”3 Their definition is premised on life tendency, that

whatever one desires is negotiated for to get it. From a procurement perspective, negotiation

takes place “when parties come together to reconcile their differing positions, when there is

much value at sake.”4 Sollish and Semanik see negotiation as a buyer and supplier engagement

which may be undertaken by an individual (sole sourcing) or a team (competitive bidding)5. In

most cases, the purpose or value determines the method used. Legally, negotiation

encompasses commercial, legal, political and social relationship. ‘It takes a more formal

approach in a direct or an agent (a lawyer) and principal relationship.”6 In such case,

negotiation and potential contract process may require sophisticated legal details.

However, there is no such thing as ‘negotiation formula’ in the world,7 the context determines

the form and manner of negotiation. It can be through physical or virtual means. Central to

negotiation is a need for mutual benefits, whether it is a domestic or international negotiation.

This paper primarily focuses on international business negotiation, team work and nationality

variations in modern negotiations.

2 Fisher, R., et al., Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without giving In (2nd ed.), (London, UK: Random House

Business Books, 1991) pg. XIII-XIV 3 Ibid 4 Sollish, F., and Semanik, J., The Procurement and Supply Manager’s Desk Reference (2nd ed.), (Hoboken, New

Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2012) pg. 155-156 5 Ibid 6 Supra note 1 7 Katz, L., Negotiating International Business: The Negotiator’s Reference Guide to 50 Countries Around the World,

(Booksurge, LLC & Charlesston, SC, 2007)

4

2.2. International Business Negotiation: Definition and Trends

Globalization creates a world without borders. Barriers to trades, investments and migration have

been reduce, legal framework and communication improved, thus reduced risks of dealing with

unfamiliar partners.8 These conditions facilitate the increase in international business relationships

that require negotiations.

This section will give an overview of international business negotiation. According to Stephen E.

Weiss, international business is defined as “the deliberate interaction of two or more social unites

(at least one of which a business unit), originating from different nations, that are attempting to

define or redefine their independence in a business matter.”9 This embraces business-to-customers

(B2C), business-to-business (B2B), and business-to-government (B2G) and aims at creating

business relations.

International business negotiation can be traced back to the dissertation of Kapoor (1970) follow

by the work of Van Zandt (same year) printed by Harvard Business Review with focus on India

and Japan respectively.10 Since then, international business negotiation has gain prominence in

professional development. Ghauri and Usunier posited that international business negotiation

takes place in a framework grouped into three variables: background, process and atmosphere.11

This paper only discusses the processes as they relate to the topic. Figure 2.2 is a diagram designed

with color pattern that depicts the situations at each stage:

8 Johnson, G., et al., Exploring Strategy: Taxes and Cases (9th ed.) (Harlow, England: Pearson Education Limited,

2011) pg. 266 9 Weiss, S.E., International Negotiation 11: 287-316, 2006, referencing himself in: Analysis of Complex Negotiation

In International Business: The RBC Perspective. Organization Science, 4(2), 1993, 269-300 10 Ibid 11 Ghauri, P.N., and Usunier, (eds), International Business Negotiation, (2nd ed.), (Oxford, United Kingdom:

ELSEVIER Ltd., 2003) Pg. 5-15

5

Figure 2.2: International Business Negotiations’ Framework

Source: Ghauri and Usunier, (2003), and redesigned in colors by the Author

a. Pre-negotiation

Pre-negotiation sets the stage for negotiation.12 It is fundamental to planning, facts finding and

preparation. At this stage, the parties try to understand each other needs and demands, gather and

share information about companies, infrastructure and socioeconomic condition of their countries

in informal meetings.13 The intention is to define the problem to be solved and build trust and

formulate internal strategies. This makes pre-negotiation most important than formal negotiation.14

At times, initial deals can be agreed here. The author highlighted this stage ‘green’ in the diagram

above to signify the lack of information to start negotiation and the willingness to exchange

information.

12 Lewicki, R.J., et al., Negotiation, (Burr Ridge, IL Richard D. Irwin, 1994). 13 Supra note 9, pg. 8 14 Supra note 9, pg. 10

International Business Negotiations’ Framework

6

b. Negotiation

Negotiators come in contact face-to-face, engage in strategies, tactics and methods of persuasion.

At this stage, each party’s preferences and expectations are explored, alternatives sought for a

common ground (still 'green'). Where there are indifferences, deadlock (gets 'red') may set in.

Deadlock often occur as a result of approaches used and perceptions created. These are to a larger

extent influenced by cultural difference. To have a successful negotiation (be 'yellow'), negotiators

must be sensitive to cultural difference; since negotiation is progressive.

c. Post negotiation

This can also be considered ‘follow up stage.’ It assumes parties accept to trade-off and reach an

agreement which leads to the development of concessions or contracts (yellow – ‘the light’).

However, it is cautioned that due care must be take about the language used which might revert

the process. The better understanding both parties have, will determine the successful

implementation of the agreement. The entire negotiation process is never certain from stage to

stage. Therefore, special attention must be given as well to deciding who make up a negotiation

team.

2.3. Negotiation Team: Planning and Preparation

Growth in the size of businesses, complexity in technology, environment and specialized skills,

backed by globalization are responsible for the demand for teamwork in negotiation,15 which must

be plan well. Planning supersedes everything. It uses past information, present experiences to

forecast the future. Working in a team is a complex process, thus requires team building when it

comes to team negotiation. Negotiation team is “a group of independent people that join and act

together as a single negotiation party because of their shared interest, related to a negotiation,”16

…… “and who are all present at the negotiation table.”17 The outcome of any negotiation depends

15 Huczynski, A.A., and Buchanan, D.A., Organization Behavior: An Introductory Text (6th ed.), (Harlow , England :

Pearson Education Limited, 2007) pg. 377 16 Sanchez-Angix, V. et al., Studying the Impact of Negotiation Environments on Negotiation Team’s Performance,

ELSEVIER: Information Sciences 219 (2013) pg. 18. 17 Thompson, L., et al., Team Negotiation: An Examination of Integrative and Distributive Bargaining. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 70, (1996), pg. 66-78.

7

on how well the team is developed. Sandstorm el al., (in Huczynski and Buchanan, 2007),

suggested four variables useful in developing a team:18

a. Interpersonal Process: A team that is composed of different nationalities can only

achieves effectiveness when team members successfully go through stages of transition to

be accepted in a team. In his work, David Body termed these stages as: forming, storming,

norming, performing and adjourning.19 These stages are apparent not only because of

nationality, but cultural and professional differences as well.

b. Role Play: Individual team member’s role must be clear and coordinated by a team leader.

This must be done carefully to avoid stand-alone (dyadic) negotiation due to interpersonal

differences; which are inevitable in a diverse team and can erode the monolithic interest of

a team in any negotiation.

c. Norms: Variety of nationality induces differences in cultural norms, and norms of behavior

often come in conflict in a team. Nonetheless, individual national and/or cultural norms

can be modified by organizational culture into a monoculture as a unifier.

d. Cohesion: Cohesion enhances cooperation, behavioral pattern, and motivates team

members to fully contribute to team effort. Cohesion is good but must be guided my

principles, without which familiarity and complacency may set in and result to

‘groupthink’.20

Apart from planning a team well, it must also be prepared for negotiation. This includes decision

about who gets on the team, what role each team member plays and at what time.21 A selection

process that is based on qualifications and seniority, and underrates national and cultural

differences is doomed to encounter problems. To avoid this, the team must be trained. It is

18 Supra note 14, pg. 401-402 19 Boddy, D., and Paton, s., Management: An Introduction (5th ed.), (Harlow, England: Pearson Education Limited,

2011) pg. 124-126 20 Supra note 18, pg. 217 21 Berghoff, E.A., et al. (eds.), International Negotiations Handbook: Success through Preparation, Strategy and

Planning (pfd), PILPG and Baker & McKenzie, 2007, pg. 18-22. Available at:

http://www.bakermckenzie.com/files/Uploads/Documents/Supporting%20Your%20Business/Featured%20Services/

bk_internationalnegotiationshandbook_dec07.pdf (last visited, April 21, 2013).

8

important that the team develop an effective negotiating memory together in training.22 Because

a team that trains and practices together outperform other teams very well in terms of “accuracy,

shared understanding and efficiency.”23 The more training, the better and powerful the team

becomes. Success in negotiation can be assured when there is power and control over the process.

Power according to Roger Fisher comes from:

“skills and knowledge;

good relationships;

a good alternative to bargain (BATNA);

power of an elegant solution;

legitimacy or autonomy; and

Commitment.”24

He considered ‘determination, resources, momentum and powerful friends as alternative sources

of power.’ These attributes emanates from individuals and team cohesion. Therefore, a team that

is fragmented on the basis of nationality and/or cultural differences will lost negotiation power and

failure is eminent. Having assessed negotiation and team, Chapter three will access nationality and

culture using different models to ascertain how they influence intra-team and inter-team

performances in negotiations.

22 Moreland, R., et al., (eds.), Theory and Search on Small Groups, (New York: Plenum Press, 1998) pg. 37-60 23 Brodt, S., and Thompson, L., Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, Educational Publishing

Foundation, Vol. 5. N0. 3 (2001), pg. 208-219. 24 Burnstein, D., Interest-Based International Business Negotiation, in ABA Guide to International Business

Negotiations: a Comparison of Cross-Cultural Issues and Successful Approaches (2nd ed.), (Silkenat, J.A., and

Aresty, J.M., Eds., Chicago: ABA Publishing, 2000, pg. 159-172.

9

3. Nationality and Culture

3.1. How differences in Nationalities on Negotiation Team Affects Team’s

Performance?

Globalization and labour mobility are responsible for increased variation in nationalities in

multinational companies. Forming a negotiation team incorporates all persons irrespective of

origin, but affects team performance in many ways. Negotiations are stall because of behavioral

problems emanating from national origins, prejudice (from emotions), class, and gender and age

variance.25 Nationality and culture are not necessarily the same or always reciprocate each other,

but have strong tire and influences each other many times and can impede group/team performance

in either way.

A diverse negotiation team can perform well when there is a close relationship among team

members. Research has shown that negotiation teams that perform very well are teams that

demonstrate high intelligence and accurate judgment,26 backed by shared understanding and

commitment. However, some negotiation teams perform poorly due to lack of identity,

accountability, engagement, and performance goals.27 Having a negotiation team of different

nationals can be rewarding, but until coordinated well, intra-team rivalry will affect performance

negatively.

3.2. Assessing Cultural Difference in Negotiation Team: Lessons from Hofstede’s

Cultural Dimensions

Cultures are different from one society to another, the same applies to cultural practices in one

country and the other. Culture is “the collective programming of the mind that distinguishes the

member of one group or category of people from the others.”28 Culture therefore influences the

framework of an organization and provides the context in which negotiation takes place. In order

to analyze cultural differences in the context of negotiation, Hofstede’s Five Cultural Dimension

are used: Power distance, individualism – collectivism, masculinity – femininity, uncertainty

25 Ibid 26 Supra note 16 27 Erve, M. and Somech, A., Is Productivity loss the Rule or the Exception? Effects of Culture and Group-based

Motivation. Academy of Management Journal, 39, (1996), 1513-1537. 28 Hofstede, G. and Hofstede, G.J., Culture and Organizations: Software for the Mind. (New York: McGraw-Hill

2005) pg. 400

10

avoidance, and short-term – long-term orientation.”29 To clearly illustrate the dimensions,

examples between the Asians (Japanese) and Western (American) cultures will be used alongside:

a. Power Distance

Power distance posits social inequality in a team/group and the extent to which power is distributed

(equally or order wise) in an organization, and how the less powerful member are willing to

cooperate. It shows how members depend on each other. In larger organization where power

distance pervades, decisions are taken at the top and protocol and formality become the norms.

Setting up a negotiation team comprises difference nationals (e.g. Asians and Westerners),

ideological clash is inevitable. The Japanese for example believe in hierarchical system, while

Americans believe in fast, flat and flexible management system.

b. Individualism – collectivism

Looks at the relationship an individual has with a team/group. It portray individual tie to societies

as either loose (individualism) or close (collectivism). Negotiators from collectivist (Japanese)

culture tend to have large negotiation teams to ensure collective decision making. The reverse is

true for the individualist (Americans). Hence, negotiators from these backgrounds put in the same

team, requires considerable care.

c. Masculinity – Femininity

Masculinity culture stresses being confident and competitive. On the other hand, femininity culture

emphases accommodative behavior, concern for long-term relationship and mutual benefits.

Therefore, negotiators from masculinity background are task-focus and demanding, whereas those

from femininity cultures are cooperative and stress the need for harmonious relationship. These

concepts relate to negotiation styles; discussed in the next section. The problem is, which one must

a negotiation team adopt and at what time, is a decision that worth thorough thoughts.

29 Hofstede et al., Cultures and Organizations (Software of the Mind): Intercultural Cooperation and Its Importance

for Survival (New York, USA: McGraw-Hill Companies Inc,, 2010), pg. 31

11

d. Uncertainty Avoidance

Employees from a hierarchical system of management think and act differently as well as those

from a fast, flat and flexible system of management. Moving from the former to the latter system

creates uncertainty for staff and vice versa. Uncertainty therefore refers to the extent to which

employee feel insecure due to unknown circumstances. When this happens, going through the

stages of team development becomes a problem and often leads to psychological derangement.

e. Short-term – Long-term:

This dimension relates to time. Negotiators with short-term mindset expect quick deal in a

negotiation due to time consciousness. Those from a long-term orientation seek to establish a long-

standing relationship; they emphasize relationship building first before deals are made. Making

fast deal in a negotiation has the propensity of a team losing on deals. Contrary, a stalled

negotiation means time and resources (money), and may lead to a deadlock and/or no deal in a

competitive environment.

The diagram in Appendix (A) shows Hofstede’s cultural dimensions models and how they are

apply in various countries globally.

3.3. How Culture Affects Negotiation Outcome: Salacuse’s Top Ten Step Analysis

“International business negotiations do not only cross borders, they also cross cultures. Culture

significantly influences the way people think, communicate and behave.”30 To understand

negotiators on the other side of the table who performance may influence outcome, Jeswarld W.

Salacuse suggests ‘top ten’ elements to assess cultural differences and behavioral pattern of the

other party in an international business negotiation

The firs element is the Negotiation Goal (contract or relationship?): Negotiators from diverse

cultural backgrounds have different purposes for negotiations. For some, signing immediate

contract is their foremost interest, while others see it as creation of relationship. These approaches

30 Salacuse, J.W., Negotiating: The Top Ten Ways that Culture can Affect Your Negotiation, Ivey Business Journal,

September/October, 2004, at: http://www.iveybusinessjournal.com/topics/the-organization/negotiating-the-top-ten-

ways-that-culture-can-affect-your-negotiation#.UXX1b8rESTs (last visited, April 22, 2013).

12

explained why Asians negotiators spend more time at the pre-negotiation stage, while their

American counterparts tend to speed up negotiation to sign a contract.

The second is Negotiation Attitude (win-lose or win-win?). Cultural or personality difference

influences negotiators’ approach. Some consider it as win or lose battle that often lead to a

deadlock and prolong progress. Instead, others view it as a collaborative and problem-solving

process for shared benefits. Negotiators who take either side are competitive or cooperative

respectively.

Third among the elements is Personal Style (informal or formal?). In a formal style, negotiators

insist to be addressed by title by their colleagues and reframe from personal attacks. Informally,

negotiators like to be called by their first name, wanting to develop friendly relationship with the

other team.

Forth is the mode of Communication (direct or indirect): In some cultures, communication is

direct, whereas other use figurative speech, gestures, facial expression, and other body languages.

In culture like the Americans, you get direct response and for the Japanese indirect. Confrontation

of each of these styles in negotiation may lead to friction.

Fifth, is Sensitivity to Time (high or low?): For the Americans, a deal is only made when a contract

is signed, so a quick deal is prefer to avoid formalities and wasted time (money). On the other

hand, Japanese will want a gradual process to build relationship in order to know if the parties

wish to have a deal.

Emotionalism (high or low?): Some negotiation team start by making their maximum offer and

build downwards, conversely, others begin with building-up approach by making their minimum

offer. In practice, Americans favor the building-down while the Japanese prefers the building-up.

The seventh looks at the Form of Agreement (General or Specific?): The purpose of negotiation

is to have a written agreement, but this can also be influenced by cultural factors. A Japanese or

Chinese will prefer a general type of contract in the form of principles because they believe that

the essence is to have a relationship. Contrary to this, an American will prefer detailed contract

that encapsulate every term and condition and be used as future reference.

13

Building an Agreement (Bottom Up or Top Down?): This element seeks whether a negotiation

should begin with a contract or general principles and continue to specifics as the negotiation

progresses or vice versa. Different culture patronizes one approach than the other. In a real world

situation, the French would like to start agreement on general guidelines whereas the American

would like to first agree on specifics. The ninth element is about leadership.

Team Organization (one leader or group consensus?): In any negotiation, it is important to

understand how the other team is organized and who leads it in terms of decision making. By

practice, some negotiation teams have a leader who possesses all authority (typical American) to

decide for their side. The Japanese and Chinese prefer team and group consensus before any

decision it made. The latter takes time to reach a decision and the former takes decision on the

scene.

Finally, Risk Taking (high or low): According to Hofstese, some culture are risk sensitive than

the others, so any transaction that involve high risk is not of preference to them. These elements

and conditions depict the determinants of negotiators’ attitudes which influence the approach they

chose to adopt. Negotiators are therefore urge to know the implications of these culture diversities

to mitigate their impacts in any negotiation. Figure 3.3 is a summary diagram of the elements.

Figure 3.3. The Impact of Culture on Negotiation

Source: Salacuse, September/October 200431

31 Ibid

14

4. Managing Diversities

4.1. Managing National and Cultural Diversities in a Team

Nationality and culture are different. There are people from the same country but not of the same

culture.32 However there are centrally coordinated cultures (national culture) that influence

individuals’ behavioral pattern at the national level. Managing nationality in negotiation is much

easier than culture, because persons who migrate to other countries (depending on age and will)

may choose to adopt the culture of the resident country. What management needs is to build a

team of consensus (“fusion”) where every team member is allowed to participate and contribute

his/her expertise.33

Where nationality is less of a matter, cultural differences in negotiation is inevitable. People from

the same country can still be different on cultural believes and norms that invariably influence

their attitudes. For example, the Christians and Muslims in Egypt. Janssens and Bratt further

recommended that large team must be divided based on tasks, by doing so; it promotes

collaborations and cooperation that reduce friction despite individual cultural differences.34

4.2. Managing cross-culture in International Business Negotiation

Managing cross-culture requires understanding both cultures to a negotiation. Managing separate

cultures is difficult than monoculture. Global diversities make it impossible for negotiators to fully

understand the culture they may encounter in negotiation no matter the skills and experience that

one has. It is important therefore, to identify major areas of cultural difference between one’s team

and that of their counterpart, while assessing your team style and approaches as well. An

understanding of these intricacies can help anticipate potential sources of misunderstanding.35

Negotiation style and approaches may be influenced by other factors apart cross-cultural factors.

They include but are not limited to personality, nature of the transaction to be engaged into and,

prior business experiences. Beyond these, languages are the key determinant of negotiation

32 Salacuse, J.W., Ten Ways the Culture Affects Negotiating Style: Some Survey Results, Negotiation Journal,

Plenum Publishing Corporation, July 1998, pg. 225. 33 Janssens, M., Brett, J.M., Group & Organization Management, Vol. 31, N0. 1, 2006, pg. 124-153, SAGE

Publication 34 Ibid 35 Supra note 33, pg. 223.

15

success. Raymond Cohen, in his book ‘Negotiating Across Culture’ posited two contexts on the

basis of languages and how they are use in societies. He labeled them “high context societies and

low context societies.”36 The characteristics and applications of these contexts are summarized in

Appendix: B. It is therefore important for any negotiator or executive to be aware of these cross-

cultural vices and how to approach them. As much as these vices are inexcusable in cross-culture

negotiation, one best alternative approach that works well is ‘back channel negotiation’. Back

channel, when implemented sincerely can break deadlocks for a successful outcome of an

international business negotiation.

36 Cohen, R., Negotiating Across Culture: International Communication in an Independent World (revised ed.),

(Washington DC: USIP 2002) pg. 36-38

16

5. Conclusions

The effectiveness of current corporations is entrenched in teamwork. Team brings together

individuals with diverse expertise, knowledge, experiences that are shared among professionals.

This makes problem solving and decision marking effective than what an individual would do.

The same team spirit has been adopted in business negotiations. Due to Globalization, and cross-

border businesses, negotiation has taken international trend.

International business negotiation has a long history in the extractive industry and other form of

businesses conducted by specialized people (often lawyers). However, advancement in technology

and the complexity of current businesses have given negotiation prominence in business

transitions, and now involve specialist and business executives. Nevertheless, negotiation is

characterized with difficulties; especially managing a negotiation team. This is because of different

nationalities who are involved. They come with dynamics and diversity of professional

experiences that can enhance or impede negotiation because of culture and personality difference

which often conflict with each other on the basis of ideologies and beliefs. To be successful in

international business negotiations, management must carefully coordinate the diverse cultures

into a corporate culture. This can be achieved by building a team spirits through trainings and

shared responsibilities.

Beyond the corporate level, cross-border transitions have become inevitable in modern businesses.

Therefore, a negotiation team of any organization must be cognizant of the culture of other people.

This is because culture influence the way people do business to a larger extend. Classical example

is the business culture of the Chinese and the Americans which are seemingly opposite. By

knowing the cultural patter of another negotiation team can help an organization’s negotiation

team to develop the best strategies and tactics to handle and counter their counterparts on a

negotiation table. Above all, success in negotiation is largely dependent on how well a team is

planned, organized and prepared.

17

6. Reference List

SECONDARY SOURCES

Books

Boddy, D., and Paton, S., Management: An Introduction (5th ed.), (Harlow, England: Pearson

Education Limited, 2011) pg. 124-126.

Cohen, R., Negotiating Across Culture: International Communication in and Independent

World (revised ed.), (Washington DC: USIP, 2002) pg. 36-38.

Fisher, R., et al., Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without giving In (2nd ed.)

(London, UK: Random House Business Books, 1991).

Fox, W. F., International Commercial Agreements: A Primer on Drafting, Negotiation and

Resolving Disputes (3rd ed.), (The Hague: Klugue Law International, 1998) pg. 178-191.

Ghauri, P.N., and Usunier, (eds), International Business Negotiation, (2nd ed), (Oxford,

United Kingdom: ELSEVIER Ltd., 2003) Pg. 5-15.

Hofstede, G. and Hofstede, G.J., Culture and Organizations: Software for the Mind. (New

York: McGraw-Hill, 2005) pg. 400.

Hofstede, G., et al., Culture and Organizations: Software of the Mind. (New York,: McGraw-

Hill, 1991).

Huczynski, A. A., and Buchanan, D.A., Organization Behavior: An Introductory Text (6th

ed.), (Harlow, England: Pearson Education Limited, 2007) pg. 377.

Johnson, G., et al., Exploring Strategy: Taxes and Cases. (9th ed.) Harlow, England: Pearson

Education Limited, 2011) pg. 266.

Katz, L., Negotiating International Business: The Negotiator’s Reference Guide to 50

Countries Around the World, (Booksurge, LLC & Charlesston, SC, 2007)

Sollish, F., and Semanik, J., The Procurement and Supply Manager’s Desk Reference (2nd

ed.), (Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2012) pg. 155-156.

18

Journals

Brodt, S., and Thompson, L., Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, Educational

Publishing Foundation, Vol. 5. N0. 3 (2001), pg. 208-219.

Burnstein, D., Interest-Based International Business Negotiation in ABA Guide to

International Business Negotiations: a Comparison of Cross-Cultural Issues and Successful

Approaches (2nd ed.), (Silkenat, J.A., and Aresty, J.M., Eds., Chicago: ABA Publishing,

2000, pg. 159-172.

Erve, M. and Somech, A., Is Productivity loss the Rule or the Exception? Effectives of

Culture and Group-based Motivation. Academy of Management Journal, 39, (1996), 1513-

1537.

Janssens, M., Brett, J.M., Group & Organization Management, Vol. 31, N0. 1, 2006, pg.

124-153, SAGE Publication

Lewicki, R.J., Littterer, J.A., Minton, J.W., & Saunders, D.M. (1994). Negotiation. Burr Ridge,

IL: Richard D. Irwin.

Moreland, R., et al., (Eds), Theory and Search on Small Groups, New York: Plenum Press,

(1998), pg. 37-60

Salacuse, J.W., Ten Ways the Culture Affects Negotiating Style: Some Survey Results,

Negotiation Journal, Plenum Publishing Corporation, July 1998, pg. 225

Sanchez-Angix, V. et al., Studying the Impact of Negotiation Environments on Negotiation

Team’s Performance, ELSEVIER: Information Sciences 219 (2013) pg. 17-40

Thompson, L., et al., Team Negotiation: An Examination of Integrative and Distributive

Bargaining. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, (1996), pg. 66-78.

Weiss, S.E., International Negotiation 11: 287-316, 2006, referencing himself in: Analysis of

Complex Negotiation in International Business: The RBC Perspective. Organization Science,

4(2), 1993, 269-300

19

Others

Internet

Berghoff, E.A., et al. (eds), International Negotiations Handbook: Success through

Preparation, Strategy and Planning (pfd), PILPG and Baker & McKenzie, 2007, pg. 18-22.

Available at:

http://www.bakermckenzie.com/files/Uploads/Documents/Supporting%20Your%20Business

/Featured%20Services/bk_internationalnegotiationshandbook_dec07.pdf (last visited, April

21, 2013).

Organizational Learning and Learning Organizations

http://idreflections.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/managing-diversity-through-community.html

(last visited, April 22, 2013)

Salacuse, J.W., Negotiating: The Top Ten Ways that Culture can Affect Your Negotiation,

Ivey Business Journal, September/October, 2004, at:

http://www.iveybusinessjournal.com/topics/the-organization/negotiating-the-top-ten-ways-

that-culture-can-affect-your-negotiation#.UXX1b8rESTs (last visited, April 22, 2013).

20

APPENDIXES

Appendix (A):

Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions Models

Source: Organizational Learning and Learning Organizations

21

Appendix (B):

Raymond Cohen’s Language context of Societies

Low Context Societies

E.g., USA, Germany, Canada, England, & France

High Context Societies

E.g. Japan, Mexico, Indonesia, & Philippines

Language Uses & Context:

Use language to share facts, rights and to

persuade;

Language Uses & Context

Use language to allude, avoid saying no, connect

with others and make them feel as ease

To share individual concerns, efforts opinions,

and rights;

Individual concerns and efforts are not very

important; social roles and connections are the

important fact anyone can communicate;

What you are doing is more important than your

societal role; emphases is on written and formal

communication, use of flowery phrases is

consider districting;

The focus is on verbal communication; the use of

flowery phrases is a way of honor; efforts made to

communicate a relationship, and the meaning of

specific words;

Family is very important except doing during

business hours; while avoiding guilt is important,

it’s possible to move and start life in different part

of the country; and

Family connections are 24/7 matter of concern;

avoiding shame is better than death; and

There is less attention for very old and very young

people.

Communal leadership are more authoritarian; the

young and more are more receive.

Source: Cohen 2002, design by Author.