Negotiation & cross cultural communication - Essay Example

Negotiation & cross cultural communication A key ingredient of the negotiation process is the use of trust building measures by the company. Hence, any attempt to ‘ward off’ the dissatisfied Chinese farmers by simply disregarding their concerns or failing to accept them will not result in any positive outcome. Instead, it would spark off massive questions concerning the reliability and trustworthiness of the company. Also, by solely deploying the company’s Chinese counterparts to deal with the farmers’ concerns and not entertaining their queries itself, the company is doing serious disfavor to itself since it is distancing itself from the people of the land in which it operates. It is noteworthy to mention that the company has successfully fulfilled all “minimum” requirements required by the State. Therefore, to hold the company legally wrong would not be practically possible. The company has a strong case since it has complied with the legal requirements. The question now arises as to the ‘ethical’ obligations of the company in a foreign land- a case that has historically been a complex one. The Chinese negotiator employs a mix of ‘win-win’ and ‘win-lose’ strategies (Fang, 2006). Ultimately, however, the choice of either strategy is dependent of the level of trust prevalent in the situation (Fang, 2006). Therefore, as mentioned earlier, the development of trust between the two parties by the company shall be a deciding factor. In this case, however, it is highly likely that the Chinese farmers shall deploy a competitive negotiation style (as opposed to a co-operative one) due to the presence of foreigners (the British and Germans running Zhengcheng in this case) (Fang, 2006). High-ranking employees must, therefore, be sent to negotiate with the farmers as a sign of respect and regard to their concerns (Faure, 1998). The individuals dealing with the Chinese must demonstrate significant level of patience and power to take decisions. The negotiating team must include a lawyer who’s thoroughly abreast of Chinese law as well as international best practices. This individual shall also strengthen the link between the foreign party and the Chinese farmers. Furthermore, it would be fruitful to include the company’s Chinese counterparts during the discussion as these shall act to enhance the level of trust between the two parties. Given their native Chinese ‘sense’ they shall be able to understand and respond to the underlying Chinese tricks in a better manner compared to the Westerners (Fang, 2006). Considering the fact that the Chinese tend to have a low level of trust for foreign stakes in their land, it would also be useful to include government support for Zhengcheng’s operations during the negotiation process. Towards the end, it is highly desirable to demonstrate to the Chinese that similar contractual agreements have been formerly accepted by other Chinese parties (Fang, 2006). The Chinese are highly risk-averse individuals; hence, by doing so the company would majorly mitigate the risks faced by the Chinese farmers. However, this may not be possible given that it is a first-time situation in this case. The company lawyer, however, may be able to assist in this regard and demonstrate cases of other Western companies reaching similar agreements with the Chinese in the past. The communication process in this case is a complex one since it involves taking into account various cross-cultural dynamics between the parties. The major issue is the ethical concerns by residents of China regarding Zhengcheng Ltd.’s waste disposal mechanisms that have contaminated the production of lychees. It is in the best interests of the company to deploy significant level of culture-specific communication strategies to deal with the concerns of the Chinese farmers. It is imperative that the Western party engages in pre-negotiation discourse with the Chinese farmers rather than directly stepping into a formal dialogue (Blackman, 1997). Informal, social interactions with the Chinese farmers shall go a long way in cultivating trust and personal relationships (Guanxi) between the parties, and therefore, are likely to result in a more positive, fruitful outcome for both. It is highly likely that a successful settlement may not be reached between the two parties in the first meeting. Therefore, it is crucial to maintain the same individuals in all meetings and avoiding any changes in team members when it comes to future meetings with the farmers (Fang, 2006). Furthermore, conflict must be avoided at all times by the company since harmony is one of the key elements of the Chinese culture (Blackman, 1997). The negotiation must, therefore, be a peaceful conflict resolution process that results in a win-win outcome. As mentioned earlier, trust is an essential component for the Chinese that governs their personal as well as professional dealings. Therefore, it is not surprising that, for the Chinese, the professional arena is largely overlapped by personal aspects. Trust (known as “Guanxi” in the Chinese context) and strong personal contacts guarantee strong business dealings as well. So is the case with communication (Fang, 2006). The company should not deploy coercive or harsh communication tactics in this case. Maintaining a ‘you’ attitude is quintessential to the fostering of a healthy communication process. As a trust-building gesture, the company ought to come out in the open and begin interacting to the Chinese farmers itself. This would involve inviting the farmers and engaging in a warm and friendly dialogue with them. It is important to note that the Chinese do not encourage candid straightforward comments (Graham & Lam, 2003). Hence, it is quintessential that during the negotiation process, a direct style of communication is not used. Any concerns or comments by the management of the company must therefore be indirect/passive. Direct eye-to-eye contact is not encouraged and shaking of hands may not be taken as favorable (Graham & Lam, 2003). The Chinese are wary of those who fast communicators who make rush decisions. Therefore, at all times during the communication process, patience and perseverance must be demonstrated. Saving face is another aspect of the Chinese culture. Hence, the Chinese avoid the usage of the word “no” (Fang, 2006). Furthermore, the Chinese farmers are likely to be skeptical about the typical Western philosophy of backing every argument by legal evidence. Law is therefore, often looked upon as a coercive, impersonal way of dealing by the Chinese (Fang, 2006). The Western negotiators must, therefore, keep in view the fact that a ‘personal’ approach is required to deal with the Chinese. References Blackman, C., 1997. Negotiating China: Case Studies and Strategies. St Leonards: Allen & Unwin. Fang, T., 2006. Negotiation: the Chinese style. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 21(1), pp.50-60. Faure, G.O., 1998. Negotiation: the Chinese concept. Negotiation Journal, 14(2), pp.137-48. Graham, J.L. & Lam, N.M., 2003. The Chinese negotiation. Harvard Business Review, 81(10), pp.82-91. Read More