Cross-Cultural Dimensions in Negotiations free essay sample

One important aspect, and difference, relates to culture as negotiation style is to a great extent determined by culture. Clashing cultures can create misunderstandings and difficult challenges for negotiating parties, and may be even collapse of the process ultimately. Understanding and appreciating cultural impacts is essential in achieving successful intercultural communication and negotiation, despite differences. Parties involved must therefore obtain an understanding and respect of cultures present. Without reflection and consideration of this aspect the negotiation process and outcome could end in failure. Negotiation has been defined as a discussion between two or more parties aimed at resolving incoming goals (Pruitt amp; Carnevale, 1993). Negotiation however is an art practiced everyday in day-to-day social interact with others. Among the interaction and communication between parties during the process to resolve perceived incompatible goals, if parties which are in the process are not understanding very well each other’s values as well as culture ,misunderstanding or collapse may face the process. We will write a custom essay sample on Cross-Cultural Dimensions in Negotiations or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page This concerns all kinds of negotiations, domestic, national, or nternational negotiations, but it could be clearer in the International negotiations. The International community and the interdependent relationships amongst the nations is ever-growing, causing increased communication across cultures. Culture is the most important variable affecting international negotiations and the values and norms that are encompassed by culture can affect negotiations . Cultural values establish what members perceive as important, while cultural norms outline, and guides what is considered proper and improper behavior. Together, cultural values and norms influence how one perceives situations and how one reacts to the behavior of others. Cultural differences play a role in the outcomes of negotiations . Using American culture -as western culture – vs. Sudanese -as eastern culture, for comparison, with intentions to gain some insights into the dynamic world of cross-cultural negotiation. In a negotiation context it is common to define culture in terms of an identifiable group of people sharing the same values and beliefs (Lewicki, amp; Barry, Negotiation, International Edition, 5th edition, 2006) A common and potentially dangerous misconception held by some scholars , is that people from all over the world conceptualize in an identical manner. Certain conceptualizations are often considered universal and can lead to difficulties in different areas of international cooperation. Decision makers, who are working in a cross-cultural environment and making decisions- as well decision on negotiations- based only on their own culturally specific treatment of an issue, idea or situation can result in miscommunication and, ultimately, misguided outcomes. Decision makers from the west, when negotiating people from east, could consider the cultural differences, between those two societies. Culture is not genetically inherited, and cannot exist on its own, but it is always shared by members of a society (Hall 1976). Culture is passed from one generation to the other, it is changing all the time because each generation adds something of its own, before passing it on. In psychological research, culture is analyzed by grouping the people of the world into two groups: Individualism (I culture) and Collectivism (we culture). A culture is considered ‘Individualist’, if the members of the group are supposed to care for themselves and their immediate family only (Hofstede and Bond, 1984). This is a dominated culture in most Northern and Western European countries and North America (Inkeles, 1983; Triandis et al. , 1988). In contrast, Collectivist conceded that culture refers to societies in which people from birth onwards are integrated into strong, cohesive in-groups, which throughout a persons lifetime continue to protect them in exchange for unquestioning loyalty (Hofstede, 1991). This is culture mainly dominated in Africa, Asia, and the Middle East. (Ayyash-Abdo, 2001). Experiences with individualistic cultures such as the United States and collectivist’s cultures like Sudan or Russia show that in the United States, attainment of positive outcomes is emphasized and valued, whereas in Sudan, and Russia, avoiding negative outcome is emphasized and valued. In the United States, where the cultural value is individualistic, the realization of positive conclusions is stressed and respected. The Russians and Sudanese tend to have a more cautious approach because they do not want to lose. Therefore, collectivists Sudanese are more likely to cooperate in negotiations where they stand to lose. Individualists, like the Americans, are quite happy to leave a negotiation if it does not result in a profitable deal for them. It is very important to mention that in collectivistic cultures, people there- as we have in Sudan-value relationships and social networks far greater than in individualistic cultures like American do. Sudan is ideal example much for collectivism, Sudanese place relationships as an important aspect to business success and they are loyal to those they have formed a personal relationship with. They tend to deal with those whom they have developed a personal relationship with as opposed to those who can offer them a better deal, then they care very much about post negotiation or agreement period. Consequently, this is same we can mention, talking about the collectivistic Russians, Asians, Arabs and other Africans, we can find that they are more interested in finding out about you, your future’s plans and your future’s relationships. According the above mentioned, it appears that American negotiators should be well prepared to foster informal as well as formal relations with people from collectivistic societies. Knowing that collectivistic cultures grow and develop in group-win-win situations can lead to positive integrative decisions. As we have seen, collectivism has a group orientation; therefore, U. S. counterparts are slower to adapt to groups projects than Sudanese or even neighboring (to U. S) Mexicans. Mexicans just like Sudanese or other African or Asian collectivists, exhibit genuine team spirit and a willingness to help everyone in the group while promoting higher levels of inter-group communication.