Viktor Andersson & Alexandra Mets
Cross-Cultural Business
Negotiations
The Impact of Business Cultures from a Swedish Perspective
Business Administration
Bachelor’s Thesis
15 ECTS
Term: Fall 2019 Supervisor: Bo Rundh
Acknowledgements
We would like to extend our gratitude to our supervisor Professor Bo Rundh at Karlstad University for his expertise and guidance throughout the process of writing our thesis. We would also like to thank our respondents for taking their time to prepare and participate in our study; without you this study would not have been possible. Conclusively, we would like to acknowledge the opponents and additional supervisors present during our seminars who have given us helpful criticism as well as their encouraging words.
Viktor Andersson & Alexandra Mets Karlstad University, 17 January 2020
Abstract
With our increasingly competitive globalized economy, we are experiencing an emerging trend of firms competing on new international business markets (Bell et al. 2001; Huang 2010). In order to successfully negotiate in an international context, cultural sensitivity needs to be taken into consideration (Manrai & Manrai 2010). This study aims to examine how and to what extent professional negotiators’ international negotiation process is influenced by different business cultures. The study was made by in-depth interviews of five Swedish based professional negotiators and their experiences from negotiating in France, Brazil and Singapore. The mentioned negotiation process was based on Ghuari’s (2003) international business negotiation model which consists of a pre-negotiation stage, a face-to-face pre-negotiation stage and a post-pre-negotiation stage. These stages have been analyzed and interconnected with several cultural variables such as cultural intelligence, adaptation, communication, hierarchy and the Hofstede (2011) parameter of collectivistic versus individualistic cultures to substantiate our two research questions: 1) How does culture intervene in the different stages of the negotiation process? And 2) How are the negotiators adjusting their negotiation strategy to better accommodate the specific culture? The empirical findings showed that there are several differences in both the French, Brazilian and Singaporean business culture as well as the negotiators’ experiences of their need of adapting to the culture they are negotiating with. The data highlighted the importance of cultural understanding and obtaining the knowledge in a pre-negotiation stage in order to prevent unnecessary misunderstandings which could obstruct the negotiation. The major differences which required the negotiators’ understanding and adaptation was the crucial factor of building a relationship with the Singaporean delegation, the French’s tough negotiation approach and the hierarchical setting in Brazil. The conclusions demonstrated the benefits of cultural adaption as well as the potential pitfall of over-adapting and the imperative preparatory work needed in the pre-negotiation stage of the negotiation.
Keywords
International Business Negotiation, Cross-Cultural Negotiation, Negotiation Process, Culture, Communication, Hierarchy, Cultural Adaptation, Cultural Intelligence, France, Brazil, Singapore.
Table of Contents
1. INTRODUCTION... 7 1.1. PROBLEMATIZATION ... 8 1.2. PURPOSE ... 9 2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ... 10 2.1. INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS ... 10 2.2. NEGOTIATION... 10 2.3. ANEGOTIATION PROCESS ... 11 2.3.1. Pre-Negotiation ... 11 2.3.2. Face-to-Face Negotiation ... 13 2.3.3. Post-Negotiation ... 13 2.4. NEGOTIATION STRATEGIES ... 14 2.5. CULTURE ... 14 2.5.1. Cultural Adaptation ... 14 2.5.2. Cultural Intelligence ... 152.5.3. Individual versus Collective Behaviour ... 15
2.5.4. Hierarchy in the form of Power Distance ... 17
2.5.5. Pattern of Communication ... 17 3. METHODOLOGY ... 19 3.1. RESEARCH APPROACH ... 19 3.1.1. A Deductive Approach ... 19 3.2. DATA COLLECTION ... 20 3.3. IN-DEPTH INTERVIEWS ... 21 3.4. INTERVIEW GUIDE... 23 3.5. ANALYTICAL METHOD... 23 3.6. VALIDITY ... 24 3.7. RELIABILITY... 25
3.8. RESEARCH ETHICS AND CONFIDENTIALITY ... 25
4. EMPIRICAL FINDINGS ... 27
4.1. BUSINESS CULTURE ... 27
4.1.1. Cultural Adaptation ... 28
4.2. COMMUNICATION... 28
4.2.1. Verbal and Explicit Communication ... 28
4.2.2. Non-Verbal and Implicit Communication ... 29
4.2.3. Communication when dealing with conflict ... 30
4.2.4. How to prevent misunderstandings ... 30
4.3. HIERARCHY ... 31
4.3.1. Who is the decision maker? ... 31
4.3.2. Who negotiates? ... 32
4.3.3. Hierarchical Communication ... 32
4.4. CUSTOMER RELATIONS ... 33
4.5. THE UTILIZATION OF DIFFERENT APPROACHES ... 34
4.5.1. Approaching a favourable result ... 34
4.5.2. Mixed Opinions and Expectations ... 35
5. ANALYSIS ... 36
5.1. BUILDING A FOUNDATION FOR RELATIONSHIPS... 36
5.2. NEGOTIATION APPROACH ... 38
5.2.1. Problem-Solving ... 39
5.3. INDIVIDUALS’ADAPTATION ABILITY ... 40
5.4. COMMUNICATION... 41
5.5. HIERARCHY ... 43
5.6.1. Pre-negotiation ... 46
5.6.2. Face-to-face negotiation ... 47
5.6.3. Post-negotiation ... 47
6. CONCLUSION ... 48
7. LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH ... 50
REFERENCE LIST……….……….………...…………..51
APPENDIX 1……….……….………56
APPENDIX 2……….……….………58
1. Introduction
An essential component of Sweden’s economic well-being has been the vast variety of industries and the possibilities of export they offer (SCB 2019). In order to provide another country with a product or service, an international trade has to occur through a mutual exchange (de Moor & Weigand 2004). However, in international business, transactions do not only cross borders but they also cross cultures (Salacuse 1999). As a result of this, cross-cultural negotiators are faced with the challenge of functioning efficiently in intercultural contexts (Kim 2017).
Modern technology has provided us with unprecedented development in communication, transportation and information technology. This leap in technological development has created the possibility of global integration, where we can instantly communicate with anyone, anywhere, at any time (Teitel 2005; Bell et al. 2001). With our increasingly competitive globalized economy, we are experiencing an emerging trend of firms competing on new international business markets, developing trade agreements and establishing international alliances worldwide, which is why successful businesses can not solely rely on the domestic market (Bell et al. 2001; Huang 2010). Firms are forced to adapt to this internationalization in order to stay competitive and not miss out on untapped market potential (Bell et al. 2001).
The shift to a global economy presents a few issues that companies need to deal with in order to operate successfully in an international context. Foreign markets require a different approach than domestic markets, where aspects like cultural understanding and adaptation becomes increasingly more important (Lagrosen 2004). Therefore, organizations need to become aware of the importance of the differences in culture and communication styles in order to secure their role in the international business world. Culture has the power to impact organizations’ strategic decisions, which is why the possession of cultural knowledge is vital to strengthen and determine, a company’s position in the market (Huang 2010). Many of the rules taught and used domestically may not apply in cross-cultural negotiation, especially since they might not be acceptable in the respective cultural settings. The actors involved in cross-cultural negotiation will encounter parties from different cultural backgrounds, nationalities, and people who speak different native languages, which makes it imperative for international business actors to understand the local specificities and take cultural factors into consideration (Herbig & Gulbro 1996).
1.1. Problematization
Culture fundamentally impacts how people think, behave and communicate, and therefore also why and how they act the way that they do (Salacuse 1999). The complexity and diversity of the world’s cultures makes it hard for one negotiator to assimilate and master them all, which is why cultural differences can create barriers or even block negotiations all together (Salacuse 2004). The fact that prior research, such as works by Hofstede (2011), Hall (1976) and the previously mentioned Salacuse (2004) demonstrate the diversity in different cultures, it is not too farfetched to assume that culture also affects how we negotiate and our motives behind it. A lack of understanding in the area of the interaction process and different ways of communicating can therefore lead to difficulties and subsequently affect the outcome of a negotiation (Korac-Kakabadse et al. 2001; Luo 1999). However, it is important to highlight the fact that not all researchers agree with the magnitude of culture’s effect on international negotiation. Zartman (1993) for example argues that the act of negotiation is negotiation no matter with whom it is conducted or where it takes place.
While extensive research has been done in the field of domestic business negotiations (Thompson 1990; Sujan et al. 1988; Eppler et al. 1998; Perdue 1992), the international negotiations literature is predominantly disjointed and normative (Simintiras & Thomas 1998). Furthermore, broad cultural variables have been used to explain negotiation, but research highlighting the mediating variables interconnecting those cultural variables with negotiation behaviour has been left widely unexplored (Leung 1997). Thus, there is still lack of research in how cultural variables affect each step of the international negotiation process, a knowledge gap we aim to address with this study.
This study aims to examine how the professional negotiators’ international negotiation processes are affected by foreign business cultures from a Swedish perspective. It takes a unique turn by examining negotiators employed at two Swedish firms operating as suppliers in two of Sweden's largest industries, and the specific three markets studied: France, Brazil and Singapore. These markets differ in regard of culture, but we do not yet possess the knowledge of how these three markets influence Swedish based negotiators’ negotiation processes. How do the negotiators adapt and when do they feel the need to adapt? By analyzing how these markets impact the negotiators’ negotiation process from a Swedish perspective, we aspire to conclude new helpful data regarding how
their negotiation processes are affected by foreign business cultures as well as pinpoint the reasons behind it.
1.2. Purpose
The purpose with this study is to examine how and to what extent different business cultures influence professional negotiators’ international negotiation processes. The paper will highlight and enhance the differences of the negotiation processes implemented in the French, Brazilian and Singaporean market by utilizing concepts we deem relevant in the areas of culture, communication and international negotiation.
The purpose is further divided into two research questions:
1. How does culture intervene in the different stages of the negotiation process?
2. How are the negotiators adjusting their negotiation strategy to better accommodate the specific culture?
2. Theoretical Framework
This thesis aims to examine how, and to what extent, culture impacts professional negotiators’ cross-cultural negotiation process from a Swedish perspective. Our theoretical framework is partly based on Ghauri's (2003) international business negotiation model in the sense of the three stages illustrating an international negotiation process. We consider these stages to be relevant not only due to the process it illustrates, but the way it values cultural dimensions. In addition to this, the model has been referenced to in the field international negotiation research (Khakhar & Rammal 2013; Ott 2011; Liu & Deng 2014) and we believe it to provide a holistic and comprehensive view of the phenomenon that is an international negotiation process. We will present theories both supporting the three stages as well as proclaiming other points of view on the matter in order to gain a deeper and more nuanced understanding of the field of study. In addition to this, only models and theories we deem to be relevant to our research will be identified, defined and later analysed. This includes cultural aspects such as communication and hierarchy.
2.1. International Business
Over the past decades, there have been fundamental changes in the world economy. Globalization, reduction of trade barriers and technological advancements have altered the importance of geographical and cultural distances in global terms (Herbig & Gulbro 1996). In order to reap the rewards of expanding to international markets, companies have to create an understanding how to conduct business and negotiate in an international context (Herbig 1997).
2.2. Negotiation
Negotiation is defined by Herbig (1997, p. 158.) as “… the process by which at least two parties try to reach agreement on matters of mutual interest.”. There are several different types of business negotiations such as trade, merger, labor management and political negotiations (de Moor & Weigand 2004). Trade negotiations are common since sales constitute a majority of business transactions and can be seen as a cooperation between two or more business partner who like to explore new business opportunities through a mutual exchange of services, money and goods (de Moor & Weigand 2004). All
participants present in a negotiation have different explicit and implicit preferences and these need to be taken into consideration. A negotiation can be seen as a social interactive process since the preferences of the participants shape behaviours and the offers that are presented. In other words, the behaviour of a party depends on the behaviour of the negotiation partner and therefore needs to be adapted thereafter. This in turn indicates that good communicative behaviour can further and realize long-lasting relationships, whereas poorly customized communication potentially can dissolve a relationship (Schoop et al. 2010). Since each country has its own negotiation style based on their culture, a successful international business negotiation needs to take cultural sensitivity into consideration which in this sense indicates the realization of a counterpart’s characteristics and behavior, and thereby customizing a negotiation style accordingly (Manrai & Manrai 2010).
2.3. A Negotiation Process
The approach of fragmenting the negotiation process into different stages has been adopted by several researchers. For instance, Graham (1985) divides the negotiation process into four stages to illustrate how parties use different strategies and tactics in each stage, and how it can affect the outcome of the negotiation. Furthermore, Ghauri (2003) divides international business negotiations into three stages: pre-negotiation, face-to-face negotiation and post-negotiation, where each stage refers to actions and types of communication made by a party during each specific phase.
2.3.1.Pre-Negotiation
The pre-negotiation stage begins when a party contacts another with the intention of doing business with one another (Ghauri 2003; Reynolds & Simintiras 2000). Perdue (1992), Salacuse (1999) and Ghauri (2003) argues that negotiation is a problem-solving process which is why an identification of the problem to be solved is necessary and can be extracted from the combined needs and preferred result of the process. The identified problem is vital since it reflects the expectations of the negotiation and generates commitment from both parties which furthers cooperation to secure a favourable outcome. The contact during the pre-negotiation stage is rather informal and evaluative; before entering the face-to-face stage, it is important to identify the decision-maker in
the other party as well as how they make their decisions. How a delegation is organized to negotiate a deal is generally based on culture, especially in regard to individualistic and collectivistic preferences (Ghauri 2003; Salacuse 1999). When conducting international business, building a strong foundation for social relationships can be of great help in generating trust and confidence which in turn increases the chances of reaching an agreement (Salacuse 1999). That is why this informal and social stage of the negotiation often is more important when it comes to international business than the more formal face-to-face stage (Ghauri 2003). These relationships can for instance grow stronger by inviting the counterpart to the other’s country and office. By doing so, they can start to understand each other’s interests and fears, in addition to their priorities. During these encounters, keeping it informal and avoiding topics connected to the negotiation itself can be beneficial for the relationship building process (Ghauri 2003). Additionally, when it comes to building trust, an understanding of how culture affects communication style, business ethics when it comes to illegal payments, and the level of informality is vital (Graham & Adler 1989). To avoid enabling a culture clash, misunderstandings and conflicts, it is important not to over-adapt to a culture nor fail to adapt over all (Semnani-Azad & Adair 2011). For the negotiation to be successful, it is important to try and anticipate the other party’s reactions, behaviour and arguments which can be done through cultural knowledge and an understanding of the party’s position. The predictions allow the party to formulate new arguments, alternatives and to adjust the strategy to better fit the negotiation style of the counterpart (Ghauri 2003; Bülow & Kumar 2011). It is crucial to remember that arguments need to be tailored to a specific culture and that one standard argument will not work throughout the world. It is also necessary to try and look at the situation from the other’s point of view to demonstrate understanding which provides a positive atmosphere of cooperation and sympathy. Being an attentive listener is always an essential trait, but international negotiations especially requires you to hear the implicits and to be able to read between the lines (Ghauri 2003; Manrai & Manrai 2010; Salacuse 1999).
2.3.2. Face-to-Face Negotiation
In this stage, all parties involved need to be aware of the fact that each side views the situation in its own way, with their own perceptions of the process and expectations for the outcome (Salacuse 1999). The main concern here is to reach a satisfactory outcome for both parties by exploring the differences in preferences and expectations (Ghauri 2003). Knowing how your opponent presumably will respond is vital for your strategic planning and allows you to adjust expectations and tactical moves. This process is described as a part of the information-processing model which implies having assumptions about the opponent (Druckman & Harris 1990). Some negotiators prefer to structure the negotiation in a cooperative manner, where the initial focus is on discussing issues of common interest to create an atmosphere of cooperation. The choice of strategy can vary depending on who is involved in the negotiation (Ghauri 2003).
Due to the fact that international negotiations inherently involve a discussion of differences, parties must be aware and adapt to each other’s cultures and traditions in order to enable a satisfactory outcome for both (Ghauri 2003; Reynolds & Simintiras 2000). In some cultures, creating social bonds between parties is considered being far more important than solely focus on the potential economic gains of the negotiation. People from these countries take their time to build personal relationships before they consider any form of agreement or deal (Ghauri 2003). However, all researchers do not support the notion that culture has a significant impact on international negotiations (Zartman 1993). Another problem raised within the research of cultures’ impact on international negotiation is the issue of generalizing large cultural groups. Since negotiations in international settings usually involves multi-national organizations, it is not uncommon that the staff of these organizations are international as well. This creates a problem when generalizing a group of people to a certain cultural consensus (Bülow & Kumar 2011).
2.3.3.Post-Negotiation
In the post-negotiation stage, the emphasis should be on aligning the outcome of the negotiation with the parties’ objectives. If they manage to reach a point where the objectives have been met, then it is considered a satisfactory outcome (Ghauri 2003). Negotiating successfully is not a question of reaching a
“win-lose” scenario, but a problem-solving approach aimed to reach a “win-win” outcome (Salacuse 1999; Ghauri 2003). Thus, negotiators must be willing to make concessions in order to reach an agreement that is considered satisfactory for both parties (Graham 1985). However, not all cultures have the mindset of a problem-solving and collaborative outcome, which is why it iss important to know which type of negotiator that you are about to face (Salacuse 2004).
2.4. Negotiation Strategies
The chosen strategy can be used throughout the whole bargaining process, or it may be altered along the way; the strategy might not specify every single response for all conceivable events (Odell 2002). The three main strategies presented by Ghauri (2003) are: 1) tough, 2) soft, and 3) intermediate strategy.
1. When utilizing a tough strategy, a party starts with a high initial offer with no sign of budging. In addition to this, there is no expectation of the other party to comply.
2. The soft strategy is in many ways the opposite, where a party makes the first concessions and avoids making a high initial offer in hopes of the other party reciprocating.
3. In intermediate strategy, the initial offer is often set in some kind of middle ground and if a realistic offer is made, it is accepted.
2.5. Culture
Matsumoto (1996, p. 16) describes culture as: “... the set of attitudes, values, beliefs, and behaviours shared by a group of people, but different for each individual, communicated from one generation to the next.”.
2.5.1.Cultural Adaptation
Considering the increase in the number of multicultural instances and international negotiations, the need to adapt to the cultural environment has grown significantly (Beaton et al. 2000). Cultural adaptation refers to the process and time it takes to integrate into a new culture, as well as having an expanded worldview to include relevant constructs from other cultures. The two
fundamental experiences of the cross-cultural adaptation process are deculturation of original cultural habits and acculturation of new ones. The essential parts of the adaptation process are one’s ability to communicate in accordance to practices and norms of the culture (Kim 2017). Despite the fact that individual circumstances will be unique and varied, all people in a new and unfamiliar environment will embark on the project of cross-cultural adaptation. Individuals engaging in intercultural situations must learn to identify differences and similarities between the new environment and their home culture (Kim 2017).
2.5.2.Cultural Intelligence
Cultural intelligence, or cultural quotient, is described by Van Dyne et al. (2017) as the capability to function effectively in intercultural contexts. The concept has become increasingly important for individuals and organizations in order to cope with our current multicultural and diverse world. Contemporary organizations are starting to recognize the value of cultural intelligence and bridging cultures for both organizational and personal success (Van Dyne et al. 2017). Cultural intelligence consists of four factors: 1) metacognitive cultural intelligence (the capability to obtain and comprehend cultural knowledge), 2) cognitive cultural intelligence (the knowledge about cultures, their differences and similarities), 3) motivational cultural intelligence (confidence and interest in functioning effectively in intercultural contexts), and 4) behavioural cultural intelligence (the capability to be fluent in behaviour in intercultural interactions) (Van Dyne et al. 2017; Ang et al. 2007). Some researchers are critiquing cultural intelligence, stating that the concept can be problematic and urge that it should be treated as a hypothesis rather than a well-proven construct until more solid research evidence emerges (Blasco et al. 2012). However, most of the research recognize the value and focuses on refining the concept rather than abandoning it.
2.5.3.Individual versus Collective Behaviour
Hofstede (2011) presents individualism as a society that allows a strong degree of independence among its citizens where individuals only take care of themselves and their immediate family. Collectivism on the other hand represent a society where individuals can expect their ‘clan’ to take care of them
in exchange of an unquestioned loyalty; the self-concept is ‘we’ instead of the individualistic ‘I’. In addition to this, collective societies value group decisions rather than individual decision making, and individual initiative is considered frowned upon (Bochner & Hesketh 1994).
1. Task versus Relationship Orientation
In the task oriented individualistic culture, neither friendship nor bad blood should affect a business deal. Contradictory, the collectivistic culture benefits friends and ‘tribesmen’ which get better deals than strangers; the collectivistic culture values relationships over tasks and vice versa in individualistic cultures (Hofstede 2011). However, an individualistic society also indicates signs of ingroup favouritism, and it being of favour to have friends in high places and general connections (Bülow & Kumar 2011). In collectivistic cultures, a part of investing in relationships and trust can be through the act of gift giving. This act can complicate business deals with individualistic cultures which considers this act to be a type of bribery; something that is not too frowned upon in collectivism (Hofstede 1984). If a culture is considered relationship oriented, the relationship is the main focus and the business and the business opportunity springs from it, and not the other way around (Bülow & Kumar 2011).
2. The Importance of Face and Harmony
In individualistic cultures, openness and directness is considered important which is also why it is preferred to resolve conflict immediately instead of suppressing it. This is in contrary to the collectivistic society where there is custom how people should behave towards each other, and where a violation of these could threaten the social framework. Following customs and harmony is more important than openness which in turn could lead to disharmony (de Mooij & Hofstede 2010). In Confucian cultures, the concept of face can be defined as an individual’s self-esteem. Losing face is related to feelings of guilt, embarrassment and shame; shame being a very important emotion in Confucian societies (Ng 2001; Ho et al. 2004). The biggest concern within the Confucian culture is to avoid losing face rather than
gaining it, which can be seen in the social dynamics where the social motive is to avoid disapproval and rejection. This can be seen as contrary to the American society where the objective is to seek approval, popularity and acceptance (Ho 1994; Ho et al. 2004).
2.5.4. Hierarchy in the form of Power Distance
Hofstede’s cultural dimension ’power distance’ measures a culture’s acceptance and expectation of the fact that power is distributed unequally in a society. Furthermore, a high power distance indicates an important emotional distance between superiors and subordinates (Basabe & Ros 2005). Acceptance of hierarchical inequality also extends to the distribution of social status, wealth, prestige and the class system. There are two themes of work related power distance: 1) people from high power distance countries tend to act submissively in the presence of a superior and are afraid or unwilling to disagree with people of a higher hierarchical status, and 2) a high score in the dimension of power distance indicates that subordinates preferred that a manager’s decision-making process and supervision should be paternalistic and autocratic (Bochner & Hesketh 1994). This in contrast to subordinates from countries of low power distance who prefer a more participative and consulting manager. By analyzing Hofstede’s descriptions, it can be predicted that people of high power distance prefer close supervision, have formal superior-subordinate relationships and are more task oriented (Bochner & Hesketh 1994).
2.5.5. Pattern of Communication
Communication patterns can differ significantly depending on culture, and these can be categorized into the more explicit and direct communication style low context and the implicit and contextual high context culture (Hall 1976; de Mooij & Hofstede 2010). Explicit communication declares a speaker’s true intentions which are communicated through verbal messages, in contradiction to indirect communication where the speaker’s true intentions are hidden from the recipient in shared experiences and assumptions transmitted through verbal and non-verbal codes (Hall 1960; 1976). High context communication takes personal needs into consideration and requires more trust and focus on relationships, whilst a low context culture rarely take time out of business dealings to build trust and establish relationships (Hall 1976; de Mooij & Hofstede 2010). Ghauri (2003) argues that in the context of negotiating in an
international setting, the personality of the negotiator can, in some cultures, be more important that the organization he is representing. Collectivistic societies are high context cultures in regard of communication whilst individualistic societies are considered low context who gets to the point quickly (de Mooij & Hofstede 2010).
Negotiator’s communication skills, such as foreign language proficiency, can be used as a tool to close the language gap and mitigate potential mis-understandings. In addition to this, non-verbal communication in the form of body language, gestures, silence and tone of voice is equally, if not more important to take into consideration (Ghauri 2003; Reynolds et al. 2003) Moreover, ways of greeting each other, personal space, handshakes, etc. vary amongst different cultures and are all aspects of communication patterns. A knowledge of these can vastly improve the negotiation process and its effectiveness (Ghauri 2003).
3. Methodology
3.1. Research Approach
The traditional view of qualitative research is that it examines narrative-based data, aims to discover underlying motives and desires by usage data collection methods such as in-depth interviews (Hyde 2000; Kothari 2004). The possibility given by a qualitative approach of doing in-depth interviews is suitable for our research in the manner that it requires thorough and detailed answers regarding our respondent’s view and understanding of his or her negotiation process. By looking back at our purpose: “how and to what extent different business cultures influence professional negotiators’ international negotiation processes.”, it is rather conspicuous that its aspiration is not to produce quantitative data, but rather contextual data. In line with this argument, using a qualitative approach is most appropriate. In addition to this, we consider the selected approach to be the most optimal since our research applies to a majority of Yin’s (2011) five features of qualitative research: studying people under real-world conditions, contribute insights to better understand human behaviour, and represent the views and perspectives of the participants whilst covering the contextual conditions experienced.
The methodological assumption adopted by qualitative approach in this case is post-positivist. This implies that knowledge and reality is socially constructed as well as provisional (Noor 2008; Cooper 1997). This goes hand in hand with our research since it examines subjectivity regarding social phenomena and experiences in the form of how the respondents themselves believe culture to be influential and to what extent they deem it to affect them and their process (Noor 2008).
3.1.1.A Deductive Approach
The study will be conducted with a deductive approach which allows us to draw our themes and codes of the interviews through our theoretical framework (Kondracki et al. 2002). By using this approach, our interview questions can be formed beforehand which allows for a clear and comprehensive subject matter throughout the entire process. This in turn enables us to use a semi-structured interview due to the formation of an interview guide. Additionally, we deem the chosen approach to be more time efficient and less uncertain than the inductive
one since the theoretical concepts will be held in mind during the interview. This means that we did not have to construct relevant questions for the interview as the interview proceeded, but that we could instead focus on being tentative listeners and encourage topics the interviewees themselves encountered. Since our research topic has been studied to quite an extent earlier, extensive knowledge regarding the subject exists, resulting in an inductive approach to have been inefficient to apply (Elo & Kyngäs 2008).
3.2. Data Collection
The chosen method for the primary data collection in this study was in-depth interviews which allowed us to gain solicit and comprehensive insight of the phenomenon (Yin 2011). Our main source of secondary data is obtained through articles published in scientific journals which ensures that the information has been properly tested, collected and acknowledged by other researchers, in other words, it is considered reliable (Kothari 2004). The chosen articles in this study are predominantly peer-reviewed and have also been examined for their reliability and suitability based on the year they were published in order to determine the social and theoretical relevance, as well as the amount of citations they had acquired. To further establish our data as reliable, we use several different articles to support and contradict statements made by researchers in order to confirm the quality of the data.
Some secondary data was extracted from older publications, such as Hall (1976) and Hofstede (1984), but we still deem these to be highly relevant for this thesis as its concepts on cultural differences and cultural related communication helped create a foundation for culture studies. Additionally, their findings are still being used frequently in recent articles (Kumar & Bülow 2011; Manrai & Manrai 2010; Ott 2011) regarding the phenomenon of international business negotiations. In other words, these are concepts by researchers yet to be further developed in present times. In addition to academic articles, well cited and acknowledged books and Statistiska Centralbyrån have been used to collect relevant theories and information.
3.3. In-Depth Interviews
The sampling of respondents in this study was conducted through purposive sampling. This method regards the deliberate choice of participants due to the qualities they possess and was used in order to find suitable participants that could provide the information needed to fulfil the purpose with this study (Etikan et al. 2016). After initial contact with an employee at one of the companies, this internal contact referred us to several potential participants that met the criteria of this study; criteria including extensive experience in international negotiations as well as having an executive role in negotiating in one of the three countries studied. This resulted in five interviews with respondents who have worked with international negotiation at two companies in Sweden, as seen in Table 1, with the concept of information power in mind. Information power implies that the more extensive information each respondent possesses, the lower number of respondents is required, and vice versa (Malterud et al. 2016).
A pilot interview was held with one of the interviewees in order to determine if the interview guide, see Appendix 1, was understandable and generated the types of answers we anticipated. The interviews lasted between 42-75 minutes in order to get a deep understanding, and all interviews were audio-recorded after approval from the respondents. The advantages of sound recording are that it allowed us to focus on the respondents, as well as the contribution of full documentation of the conversation (Denscombe 2014). In addition to this, we sent out the questions of the interview to the respondents a week before the set meeting to enable the respondents to prepare. This ensured that both parties got the most out of the interview.
The interviews were held via telephone and Skype due to logistic reasons; a decision we do not think affects our results neither poorly nor beneficially in comparison to face-to-face interviews. Since we did not do the interviews in person we had to pay even closer attention to the implicit communication, such as tone of voice and pauses performed by our respondents in order to obtain a complete analysis, even though we lost the aspect of analyzing body language (Drew 2009). In furtherance of attaining as much relevant information as possible, and for the respondents to be comfortable, the interviews were primarily held in Swedish. Being aware of the potential pitfalls of conducting the interviews in Swedish, we paid extra attention to the translations of the interviews to ensure that the data would not be compromised.
There have been some discussions regarding the telephone as an interview medium for qualitative research in previous literature, as well as the dispute that the telephone might yield different results than a face-to-face interview (Cachia & Millward 2011; Struges & Hanrahan 2004). To further enhance and justify our choice of interview medium, Miller (1995) conclude that telephone interviews are neither better nor worse than conducting them in person. Moreover, an empirical study by Sturges and Hanrahan (2004) proves that the choice of medium, telephone or face-to-face, didn’t affect the type of answers, the depth nor the length of the transcripts. Furthermore, the researchers found that the telephone added an extra advantage: privacy, something which is also proved in other studies such by Tausig and Freeman (1998) and Greenfield et al. (2000).
3.4. Interview Guide
The choice of interview format became semi-structured due to the fact that we formulated our questions based on our theoretical chapter. Additionally, we wanted to use an interview guide, but at the same time have the opportunity to deviate from it. Furthermore, we wanted to present open questions related to our research questions, where the respondents felt that they were able to speak freely. The format also gave us the opportunity to approach the interviewees differently yet covering the same areas of data and allowing for a two-way interaction (Noor 2008; Yin 2011). Furthermore, we applied a technique called funneling to our semi-structured approach which implies that we started the interview with questions that provided more general answers before proceeding to more specific topics (Smith & Osborn 2003).
Since the interview questions were based on our theoretical framework, we saw it fit to structure our questions chronologically in reference to the three stages presented by Ghauri (2003). This did not only provide us with the benefit of easier usage and analysis of our empirical data, but it also provided a more straightforward line of thought for our respondents. In addition to this, the interview guide was designed to enable the extraction of relevant data and subsequently provide enough insight to answer our research questions. Using the funneling technique, a more general question was introduced to the respondent regarding each of the negotiation stages, and the questions eventually narrowed down until the end of the interview where we offered an opportunity to answer more specific topics if not yet covered in the more opened questions earlier. Confirming our choice of strategy, Yin (2011) emphasizes the importance of the ability of letting the respondents using their own words, as well as open-ended questions arguing that one-word responses is a qualitative researcher’s last wish.
3.5. Analytical Method
Aronson (1995) describes the purpose of thematic analysis as focusing on identifiable patterns and themes of behaviour and/or living. A thematic analysis approach was used in the data analysis process, in which the data collected during the interviews was audio recorded and later made into a transcript. Aronson (1995) argues that ideas that emerges during conversation can be better understood and analyzed with the use of thematic analysis, and subsequently aid
in the process of drawing out conclusions. Due to the interviews being audio recorded, we could focus on the information we needed to extract from the participants rather than having to make notes during the interviews. From the transcribed conversations, patterns and themes were identified and categorized. This was done in order to allow for us to dissect and code the in-depth data, which was then used for the analysis later on. Further, the coding technique was used to help break down data from the transcripts into specific themes, by assigning a code or a specific label for the issues mentioned by the respondents. The codes were based on the research model from the theoretical framework.
3.6. Validity
This study was conducted using a qualitative approach which could cause subjective interpretations of data, making it imperative that the research exhibits credibility (Noble & Smith 2015; Yin 2011). Credibility is referred to as internal validity and depends on the choice of methodology. In order to establish trustworthiness, the aim was to obtain extensive data rather than many answers which would generate restricted data. Additionally, this study has limited generalizability, referred to external validity and can only be considered relevant for supplier companies and the markets included in this research. Furthermore, due to three respondents representing France and only one each representing Singapore and Brazil, we are aware that the data concerning France could be considered more extensive than the latter ones. However, the data collected from the respondents of Singapore and Brazil was extensive enough that we feel that our conclusions will not be compromised due to possible imbalance. We are aware of the fact that basing our study on mainly one model provides a rather biased depiction of reality and how culture impacts a negotiation process. This is due to the fact that the model has limitations and boundaries which cannot include all aspects of a negotiation process. However, we have supplemented and reinforced Ghauri’s (2003) model by supporting and contradicting it through other researchers’ views on the matter to make it more credible. Yin (2011) supports the notion of including rival explanations and perspectives to increase the overall validity of the study. The same issue applied regarding our cultural aspect. Culture is such a wide concept that it is impossible for us in this thesis to take all different aspects of it into consideration. Instead, we handpicked the aspects of culture that we deem to be most relevant to the purpose of the study and that we could conscientiously base a good analysis on.
3.7. Reliability
Reliability in research concerns the fact that a study should present the same results no matter how many times it is replicated. In the case of a qualitative study with interviews, the answers should be the same regardless of who is asking the questions (Eriksson & Wiedersheim-Paul 2014; Yin 2011). In our case, we are not able to fully control the reliability of the data collected, since the answers from the interviews are subjective and based on the subjects’ contextual experiences. Thus, factors such as mood, feelings and environmental changes may influence the respondents outlook and answers. In addition to this, we are aware that we might interpret the data differently based on our own background and experiences.
Taking this into consideration, we are aware that if someone else would conduct the same study, there is a risk that they would not receive the exact same results. This is partly based on the fact that we used semi-structured interviews which allowed us to deviate from our interview guide with questions furthering topics the interviewees reached themselves. Another downside with our approach regarding the reliability context, but more importantly not regarding our interviews, was the strategy’s possibility for us to be informal and not use scripts in order to create a more relaxed and spontaneous atmosphere for the interviewees. Even though there are some downsides to using a semi-structured approach, we would like to emphasize that our results will be easier to replicate and more universal than if we used unstructured interviews.
3.8. Research Ethics and Confidentiality
The respondents we interviewed, as well as the companies they represent, wished to remain anonymous, hence the reason for them not being mentioned by name in this paper. Further, the audio-recordings from the interviews will solely be available to us and used for transcription purposes only. In addition to this, both of us went through a comprehensive security screening upon request by one of the companies. We notified the respondents early on in the interview that we are the only ones with access to the data collected, and that we got cleared by their security screening. We believe that this enabled them to speak more freely without having to worry about what information they were allowed to disclose, and thereby providing us with extensive, honest and relevant answers.
In order to build a trustworthy and credible study, it is important to be as transparent as possible when deciding what data to incorporate into empirics and analysis (Yin 2011). We did encourage our respondents to be honest and free in their speech but due to our professional secrecy to the companies, we will not always be able to incorporate the data exactly as told. The challenge with this included doing our coding of the data as fair as possible whilst still getting the information we need for a good analysis.
As researchers dealing with human respondents and companies with strict security screenings and a demand of anonymity, it is important for us to continuously keep an ethical and respectful approach. We felt that it is crucial to be explicit and to double check what have been said to avoid mis-understandings and to retain a level of professionalism. This has for example been done by asking our respondents if they are okay about us recording the interview as well as declaring how it would be stored and used, first through email when setting a date and time, and a second time in the beginning of our interview. We also made sure that all personal data will be handled in accordance to GDPR guidelines, something we have disclosed to our respondents. To further uphold a good code of ethics in our research, the data extracted from the interviews, and their translations into English, will be sent to the respondents for reviewing to ensure that our empirical data is fair and true. In addition to this, the final draft of our thesis will be sent to the companies for a screening to ensure that we upheld complete anonymity.
4. Empirical Findings
4.1. Business Culture
Respondent 1 highlighted the French’s value of a long-term relationship with their supplier. To facilitate and further this, it was argued to be important to always keep them updated and provide them with the knowledge which allows them to properly defend the decisions made during the process: ”… this will make them feel comfortable with us as suppliers and it gives them the opportunity to feel like smart and capable individuals.”. The respondent also emphasized the fact that it is important to be able to see beyond the culture to the individuals and their characteristics that might be influenced by other things than their respective culture. Respondent 4 added that the French customer had high demands in regard of what the supplier is supposed to be able to accomplish, and respondent 3 described them to be rather complex when discussing solutions to conflicts or disagreements.
Respondent 5 stated that there is a clear and defining prerequisite for even being considered to do business with in Singapore:
In Asia, you won’t get to a position of negotiation until you’ve built the relationship. Relationship is the defining factor of all business. That is the piece that is actually movable because there are no boundaries around the relationship other than the boundaries that are set by the Confucius principles which in the relationships are made.
The respondent continued by saying that the Confucius principle ’family is first’ is extremely important to the Singaporeans which is why it is vital to be able to cross the cultural boundaries to even be a considered business partner. If the boundaries are not crossed, the business opportunity will be given to someone within those boundaries that they have a relationship with. Even though relationships are important to all respondents and their customers, they all stated that an economic gain is required in order to continue the negotiation process.
4.1.1.Cultural Adaptation
When it comes to adapting or not adapting to the culture you are negotiating with, the respondents’ answers were fairly different. Respondent 5 emphasized its importance:
It’s about being able to immerse yourself in the cultures, you know some people say to me ’it’s not about using chopsticks’, but actually, sometimes it is. When you’re starting to engage with cultures, it’s about transitioning seamlessly.
In contrast to this, respondent 4 stated that:
I wouldn’t try to become another culture; my chosen strategy is to rely on the Swedish culture which I represent. I’m not trying to be French when negotiating with the French, I don’t think it would work unless you’ve lived in France for a long period of time.
Respondent 4 still underlined the value of being attentive in regard to the cultural differences in order to not jeopardize the contract, but that the negotiation should work well if both parties respect each other’s cultures. Respondent 3 argued in line with respondent 4 in the sense that ”I never change my way of acting no matter what culture I’m negotiating with. I wouldn’t be able to do it in a good way which is why it’s more about understanding the culture in question.”. When it comes to Brazil, respondent 2 highlighted that a general cultural understanding is important, as well as being aware of a general negligence regarding bribes and distortions, racism and jokes at someone else’s expense.
4.2. Communication
4.2.1.Verbal and Explicit Communication
According to respondent 5, communicating verbally is both of importance and unimportance in Singapore depending on what you are trying to accomplish. When trying to break the barrier of being seen as a foreigner, verbal communication is of use. The primary language of Singapore is English, but with a very heavy and distinct accent. In addition, they also have their own language called Singlish, a mix of English, Mandarin, a Malaysian language and an Indian dialect. When trying to break the barrier, respondent 5 emphasized
that you do not have to learn their language, but rather their accent. Utilizing the accent will result in acceptance and confidence from the Singaporeans; you will be seen as one of them even though you might look different. However, the differences in verbal communication in English are the usage of different words and differing meanings of the common words spoken: ”There’s a critical position in terms of we all speak the same language but we’re saying different things. It’s really bad if you don’t understand each other in negotiations”. Communicating as a Swede in France can create quite the language barrier depending on the French’s ability and confidence to speak English. Respondent 1 further explained: ”The French would have loved to chit-chat and be really tight but the language really impeded it from happening. If I would have been able to speak French, we would have become rather tight immediately.”. In contrast, respondent 2 explained how the negotiations in Brazil got straight down to business and did not beat around the bush; the meetings and conversations were direct and explicit. In addition to this, respondent 2 argued that there was no language barrier in Brazil, because English was considered to be Lingua Franca. Respondent 4 spoke about the opportunity of the language barrier in terms of the French’s appreciation of you knowing just a few phrases in French and having fun it. Respondent 4 continued by stating that you absolutely can speak English with them but only doing it to a point where they do not feel forced or challenged.
4.2.2.Non-Verbal and Implicit Communication
Respondents representing France all mentioned the French’s use of body language, especially hand gestures. Exemplifying this, respondent 1 referred to a negotiation where the French got out of their chair, walked out of the room and slammed the door after screaming and getting upset in a meeting, leaving the Swedish delegation rather baffled and bewildered. But then they came back to the meeting as if nothing happened and the meeting continued on.
In Singapore, implicit communication is vital to grasp as they are never direct in the way that they communicate. Respondent 5 continued by stating:
If you understand and believe the direct you will be in very big trouble, being absolutely in the wrong direction. It’s about understanding the nuances in-between. You can communicate by speaking or even maybe writing, but the biggest cultural language that you have in Asia is body language.
When trying to read in-between the lines and understanding the meaning of the inferred, the respondent highlighted the importance of understanding the Asian culture, especially the Confucius principles which shape the way they think and act.
4.2.3.Communication when Dealing with Conflict
When it comes to communicating during confrontation or conflict, respondent 2 emphasized that the Brazilians would feel utterly unpleasant if the Swedish party were to shed light on a conflict or the fact that opinions differed. Their distress could even be an obstruction for the business deal. Furthermore, the Brazilians themselves would never highlight their distress but that they would rather back out of the contract early when the possibility still existed. Similarly, respondent 5 argued that when someone has lost face in Singapore, which will happen if they feel offended, the relationship will become irrecoverable. They will not be explicit regarding neither their communication style nor their feelings in this situation which the respondent further explains: ”They will continue to smile at you and have meetings for life but your business opportunity is going nowhere”. In France however, respondent 1 explained that the French’s feelings regarding something upsetting would be displayed in a more explicit and verbal manner in the form of screaming: ”... and I mean they really scream, I would never even get the thought of screaming in such a way at someone.”.
4.2.4.How to Prevent Misunderstandings
There are several different strategies to apply when it comes to preventing and handling misunderstandings reading communication styles. Respondent 4 highlighted the significance of bringing in people who are not afraid of conflict when negotiating with France, whilst also being clear in what the Swedish culture values in form of what is acceptable and not before entering a negotiation. Respondent 1 stated that it is important to be prepared for potential
screaming and a hot temper when negotiating with France and that preparations are needed to avoid misunderstandings and potential pitfalls. When negotiating in Brazil, respondent 2 explained how it is important to possess the right communicative skills in sensitive and conflicting situations in order to create a good atmosphere. The respondent demonstrated how this could be done by stating: “I’m letting my colleagues know that I will be the one talking during this part of the meeting and if I want your input on something I’ll provide the opportunity for you to contribute.”. Respondent 5 emphasizes cultural understanding as way of averting these types of clashes: ”You need to have an ability to immerse and just be able to float between cultures without even realizing what you’re doing. It’s about mindfulness.”.
4.3. Hierarchy
4.3.1.Who is the Decision Maker?
When asked about who had the decision-making power in the negotiations, the common consensus amongst the respondents representing France was that the opposing party was slightly more hierarchical in how their negotiators were able to move within their mandate. Respondent 1 mentioned: “In Sweden, the individual has a lot more mandate to take decisions, whereas in France, it’s more hierarchical in the sense that they had to get clearance from management higher up, then come back with a decision.”. In addition, respondent 4 continued to say that the reason why their negotiators had a lot of decision-making power was due to the fact that the counterpart expected the one they were meeting to be the one with the mandate to make decisions. In Brazil however, the decision was ultimately in the hands of the chief executive officer, despite if their negotiators had a mandate to negotiate within. Respondent 2 continued by stating that they could make decisions within their mandate, although, when it concerned large contracts their representative had to consult with the board of directors. Similarly, respondent 5 stated that Singaporeans always had to refer to their boss, and it was subsequently there the decision-making power was.
4.3.2.Who Negotiates?
The majority of the respondents stated that the ones sent to negotiate by the opposing party was similar to theirs. As illustrated by respondent 4 regarding France: “It’s me and my French counterpart, we both can bring representatives we deem relevant depending on what’s on the table and what kind of expertise is needed.”. Similarly, respondent 2 stated that Brazil entered with negotiators at the same level as them. On the other hand, Singapore had a slightly different approach. They could send thirty people because they want to ensure they are able to answer all questions. Respondent 5 further emphasized the Singaporean negotiation approach by stating “From our side it has to be key decision makers because in Asia they want an answer from you immediately even though they could take ten weeks to answer questions.”.
4.3.3.Hierarchical Communication
When asked how the communication differs compared to Sweden, the respondents representing France and Brazil emphasized the importance of understanding the hierarchical setting of the counterpart, how it affects communication and how to adapt to it. The majority of the respondents, especially regarding Brazil and Singapore, mentioned how the Swedish approach generally fails when it comes to understanding and communicating in the respective hierarchical settings. Respondent 2 stated that Brazil has an organizational respect that Sweden do not have, and that more often than not, Swedish negotiators do not care who they talk to which can be detrimental in an international negotiation setting. Respondent 5 highlighted a similar scenario in Singapore: “So from being Swedish and being very direct, it’s a problem that I have here all the time. When I have people coming over from Sweden I just don’t allow them to talk anymore because that’s the safest option.”.
On the topic of how hierarchical communication was demonstrated in each country, respondent 2 stressed the importance of understanding and respecting the way they communicate in Brazil:
An individual further down the organization can be perceived as audacious toward their boss in a meeting if they speak when the boss was expected to. The opposing party can become sceptical and unsure if they can’t recognize how the hierarchical communication is applied.
Further, respondent 1 mentioned how the hierarchical setting influenced how they communicated in France, and that it is extremely important to always start greeting the person with the highest rank. In addition to this, respondent 5 stated that whenever there are senior people in the room in Singapore, people would be quiet due to the fact that they do not want to risk looking stupid in front of their bosses.
4.4. Customer Relations
The majority of the respondents highlighted the importance of informal communication and meetings with their customers, and that it could be a pivotal part of building fruitful customer relationships. Customers in Brazil, Singapore and France tend to utilize email, WhatsApp, and even call personal cell phones to communicate in a more informal manner. As illustrated by respondent 5 in Singapore:
Singapore likes to use WhatsApp for everything, even the governments, but then they’ll send you some emails and then they stop the emails and then they send you a couple of WhatsApp messages, and then all of the sudden they phone you up.
In addition to this, respondent 2 stated how they would receive emails from their Brazilian client that was not business related, they simply wanted to check up on them and see how they were doing. Similarly, respondent 4 highlighted when stating that the French clients use both WhatsApp and the phone to touch upon both informal and formal topics.
When asked about informal physical meetings, all respondents agreed upon the fact that it is imperative to have these informal meetings because it is a part of building a relationship, whilst also allowing you to get a better understanding of the opposing party’s position in the negotiation. Respondent 3 emphasized this by saying that the relationship you build together works as an insurance from both parties, ensuring that both sides are willing to discuss and resolve potential issues in the future. Similarly, respondent 2 mentioned how it was important to socialize and that their Brazilian clients put effort in creating personal relationships and social bonds by inviting them to dinner in the evenings. In addition to this, respondent 5 presented an example where their Singaporean client had a coffee shop right outside the conference room, and that you could
start to understand at what level that discussion was likely to be by the venue they selected. Furthermore, the respondent stressed the importance of these informal meetings in Singapore by stating:
All of these ad hoc meetings mean that you’re breaking the barriers down and you’re closing a relationship, these are all positive fines. Depending on what information they’re giving you, or the questions that they’re asking, can also help you understand your position in the negotiations later on.
However, regarding France, respondent 1 highlighted the importance of taking the issue of bribery into consideration when contemplating inviting clients to dinner or other festivities. As illustrated by respondent 1: “Everyone is scared of all kinds of bribes [...] Now we’re are not allowed to offer them anything as a gift, not even a meal. When visiting them we never got anything, not even a lunch.”.
4.5. The Utilization of Different Approaches 4.5.1.Approaching a Favourable Result
All respondents agreed upon the fact that an approach too strong or tough would be unfavourable in the long haul, since each negotiation is conducted with the aim of a long-term contract that run over several years. Respondent 5 stated that ”you can never use a strong approach when negotiating in Singapore, they don’t like confrontation or repression in any way. They will just close down and that’s it.”. Respondent 2 and 4 highlighted that transparency in regard of what is important to each party before entering the negotiation stage eliminates the need of a stronger approach and allows for a calmer dialogue in both Brazil and France.
The respondents enhanced the importance of compromising and finding solutions that both the customer and the negotiators are comfortable with, whilst also managing to make the customer feel like he’s walking out of the conference room with a win. However, respondent 4 who negotiated in France additionally emphasized the need of utilizing a tougher approach if set boundaries are crossed by the customer.
Generating a so-called win-win solution are something all respondents mentioned being both the negotiators and the customers aim with the negotiation and a prerequisite to be able to work together as equals. However,
the concept of win-win which indicates a compromise where both parties feel like they leave the negotiation with a good deal that favours both, does not apply in Singapore where the meaning differs. Respondent 5 argued that the Singaporean meaning of the concept of a win-win is that one party wins everything.
4.5.2.Mixed Opinions and Expectations
When dealing with mixed opinions and expectations in negotiations, respondent 4 stated:
We don’t always perceive France as particularly interested in our opinions and expectations, so we need to send a clear message of our wants and needs to keep them from being neglected. We might be more accommodating than we want and afford to be.
Respondent 3 regarded the responsibility of highlighting potential conflicts in France as the supplier’s since it is their obligation to try and understand the customer. Similarly, respondent 4 mentioned that when a contract written by France doesn’t pan out as expected, France puts the responsibility of fixing the problem solely on them as suppliers. In situations like these in France, it is important to be as accommodating as possible in trying to understand the customer and to downplay the dramatics surrounding the disagreement in order to find solutions. Respondent 4 further explained the French culture and how to approach it: ”We will never be able to get a French person to admit that he’s wrong, even though both parties know he is. There’s no use in discussing it but the focus should instead only be on creating a solution to establish a win-win.”. Approaching differences in opinions when negotiating in Singapore it is all about finding a balance and not creating a situation where the Singaporean party lose face. Respondent 5 explained that it is all about agreeing, acknowledging and complimenting the thoughts and ideas of both sides in order to give face. When everybody is happy you can suggest looking at the situation from another perspective which everyone will be fine with since they have been given face; ”You just have to balance everything together, that’s what it’s all about, and not losing face.”. Respondent 2 emphasized the act of compromising when faced with a situation of differing opinions in Brazil. This can be done through listing the things you are willing to trade for.
