Business Between Arabs and Americans - Essay Example

Discuss some cultural variables that can affect communication between Arabs and Americans when doing Business Introduction According to Belshek (2012) culture can be defined in a number of ways with the expected and normal pattern of behavior followed in a society being the most common definition. Culture of a place defines they way its people think, behave and communicate. In Hall’s (1976) opinion, culture is not inherited and can be learnt. As mentioned above every place has its own culture and values and something accepted and respected in one culture may be offensive in the other (Rohm, 2010). For this reason, in international business understanding the influences and nature of culture has become extremely important (Lenartowicz & Roth, 1999). In international business, culture influences the way negotiations are done and transactions made. As organizations are spreading across borders, communication between different cultures is becoming widespread and has given rise to intercultural communication where intercultural communication defines the interaction among people with different cultural perspectives that are contrasting enough to change the communication event (Samovar et al, 2009). The oil rich Arab countries are considered to be quite attractive and lucrative places to invest by the Westerners especially the Americans. The Arabs too are like the American approach to business and are willing to do business with them. However the culture of the two places are extremely different; the culture of the entire Arab world specifically Saudi Arabia is driven by the religion Islam (Alajmi et al., 2011) whereas America is a “culturally diverse” society (Weaver, 1997). The culture and values of the two countries are reflected in their business behavior as well. Culture of Arabs The religion Islam has a profound effect on the culture of Arab countries and is deeply embedded in every aspect of the life of the Arabs. Arab businessmen strongly believe that everything is Allah’s will and if a business deal did not work out, it was not meant to (Feghali, 1997). Generally the attitude of Arabs towards business is more relaxed; everything is done at a leisurely pace and interruptions are common. They take personal phone calls and interrupt business meetings to offer prayers (Ferraro, 2002). To an average American, this may seem like a non-serious attitude but actually it shows that Arabs have strong religious and family values (Ferraro, 2002). The Arabs are quite formal and address others using a title; they like to be addressed with a title as well such as Sheikh or Sayyid. Whereas an American head of the organization will deal with a representative from other organization, the Arabs deal only with those who are equal to them in ranks (Rohm, 2010). When conducting business, the Arabs are rather cautious and do not trust anyone point blank. The Arabs prefer to establish trust before conducting business with anyone especially a foreigner. They are good at bargaining and if negotiations are not going their way, they lose interest in them. Whereas Americans like to make their own place, the Arabs prefer to do business with someone whom they know or who comes with a good reference (Rohm, 2010). Culture of America The culture of America is characterized by freedom of expression, equal opportunities, individualism, risk taking, materialism and competitiveness (Rohm, 2010; Gorodnichenko & Ronald, 2012). They are informal and friendly and addressing elders and seniors by name is a part of their culture. Time and efficiency are of essence in America and a punctual and efficient person is considered reliable. Americans are individualists and give more importance to their personal achievements (Rohm, 2010). When it comes to conducting business, the Americans on the other hand are more focused, organized and straightforward. Meetings are conducted in an orderly manner with the aim of getting the contract signed. In the words of Salacuse (1998) Americans prefer a written contract whereas Arabs believe in building relationship as a “negotiation goal”. Arab businessmen do not follow a strict schedule but accept others to be punctual. An American businessman can be made to wait for an hour before the meeting with their Arab counterpart takes place (Ferraro, 2002). The meeting can extend beyond the expected time or end abruptly or maybe interrupted; all these behaviors seem to confuse the Americans. The Arabs on the other hand do not like to be rushed into negotiations and decision making (Feghali, 1997). These clashing attitudes may cause a problem; Americans seem in a hurry and that may make an Arab businessman suspicious as he would first like to know the person whom he is dealing with better. Solving Conflicts There are variations in solving conflicts as well; whereas the Arab executives adopt a more avoiding and integrating style in handling conflicts, the American adopt an obliging, compromising and if needed a dominating style (Sayed & Elsayed-EkJiouly, 1996). Communication Styles According to Zaharana (1995), the Arab and American communication style is quite different and can be categorized as indirect and direct. American culture is characterized by direct communication style. This style is clear and demands clarity and precision in return. The American businessmen have “get to the point” attitude and do not believe in wasting time in formalities. They like to make accurate presentations proving their points with facts and figures (Joyce, 2012). Any issue is discussed directly and in a simple language to avoid any misconceptions. The say what is on your mind attitude followed by the Americans is considered rude in Eastern cultures who believe in softening their words so that they may not hurt the other person (Joyce, 2012). The Arabs on the other hand have an indirect or ambiguous communication culture. The use of phrases and metaphors is common in everyday language. Every point is expressed eloquently even when conducting business. Americans find this ambiguity and indirectness frustrating (Zaharana, 1995). Low Context and High Context Cultures Hall (1982) proposed low context and high context cultures and placed America in low context culture and Arabs in high context cultures. In low context cultures the emphasis is more on meaning in the spoken words and very little on the contextual meaning. Because of this the communication is analytic, explicit and clear. In the high context culture of the Arabs, the listener has to filter out the relevant information from contextual clues and the body language of the person (Feghali, 1997; Zaharana, 1995). In high context cultures the speaker expects the listener to decipher what he is implying. Arabs use body language to convey their message; raised eyebrow, non-attentiveness, body postures and tone of voice are frequently used to signal feelings. Arabs tend to repeat themselves or use several words and phrases to describe a single phenomenon; Americans on the other hand view repetition negatively and believe that repetition occurs because the other person either did not take the matter seriously or was not listening carefully (Zaharana, 1995). Eye contact is considered disrespectful in the Arab culture, a sub-ordinate or a person with lower rank does not make an eye contact with his superior; whereas a person who does not make eye contact is considered suspicious by Americans. During business negotiations any junior member can contribute his ideas in America; Arabs do not like the intrusion of junior delegates and prefer to deal and negotiate with high ranked counterparts only (Feghali, 1997; Ferraro, 2002; Rohm, 2010). Written and Oral Contracts Arabs honor their words and oral agreements are considered as good as written agreements. The Americans like to include everything in the contract but the Arabs dislike lengthy contracts and agreements (Feghali, 1997). The Arabs do not come openly with their problems and may cancel the deal at the right moment creating problems (Schoonmaker, 1999). To avoid such situations both parties must be mindful of the cultural differences and must show a flexible and understanding attitude. References Alajmi, S., Dennis, C., & Altayab, Y. (2011). The effect of national culture on service provision within Takaful industry: A comparative study in Kuwait and Egypt. Journal of Islamic Marketing 2 (3): 225 – 245. Belshek, J. A. (2012). The Influence of Culture on the Negotiation Styles of British Students. School of Education, Communication and Language Science, University of Newcastle Upon Tyne, England. Feghali, E. (1997). Arab Cultural Communication Patterns. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 21 (3): 345-378. Ferraro, G. P. (2002). The Cultural Dimension of International Business. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Gorodnichenko, Y. & Roland, G. (2012). Understanding the Individualism-Collectivism Cleavage and its Effects: Lessons from Cultural Psychology. In Aoki, M. T., & G. Roland (ed.). Institutions and Comparative Economic Development. Palgrave McMillan. Hall, E.T. (1982). Context and meaning. In Samovar, L. & R. Porter (eds.). Intercultural communication: A reader. Belmont: Wadsworth. Hall, E.T. (1976). Beyond culture. New York: Doubleday. Joyce, C. (2012). The Impact of Direct and Indirect Communication. Independent Voice, newsletter of the International Ombudsman Association. Available at: [Accessed April 05, 2014] Lenartowicz, T. & Roth, K. (1999). A Framework for Culture Assessment. Journal of International Business Studies 30: 781–798. Rohm, F.W. (2010). American and Arab Cultural Lenses. Inner Resources for Leaders, School of Global Leadership & Entrepreneurship. Regent University, Virginia Beach. Salacuse, J. W. (1998). Ten Ways that Culture Affects Negotiating Style: Some Survey Results. Negotiation Journal 14 (3): 221-240. Samovar, L., Porter, R., & Mc.Daniel, E. (2009). Communication between Cultures. USA: Cengage Learning. Sayed, M., Elsayed-EkJiouly, R. B. (1996). Organizational Conflict: A Comparative Analysis of Conflict Styles Across Cultures. International Journal of Conflict Management 7 (1): 71–81. Schoonmaker, A. (1999). Negotiate to Win. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Weaver, G. R. (1997). American Cultural Values. Kokusai Bunka Kenshu (Intercultural Training) 14 (1997): 14-20. Summary of Two Articles Study I Zaharana (1995) in her study states that cultural differences showed be viewed neutrally and with conscious awareness so that no negative thoughts and ideas occur. The author compared the culture of Arabs and Americans with the aim of creating awareness in order to facilitate the development of a healthy business relationship between the two. The purpose of this study was also to provide media training and the designing of persuasive appeals. The author makes use of various cultural frameworks such as Hall, Levine, Dodd and Kluckhohn and Strodbeck that outline cultural differences and then explains what these differences mean and their role in communications. The author has concluded the study by discussing how the Western public relations professionals can use these cultural differences to create a positive awareness when providing counsel to the Arab businessmen. The author has made a good attempt to bridge the cultural differences between the two cultures but has not mentioned the role of religion in the Arab culture. Religion is strictly followed in most Arab countries and cannot be ignored or overlooked; this is the only limitation of the study. Source: Zaharna, R. S. (1995). Bridging Cultural Differences: American Public Relations Practices & Arab Communication Patterns.  Public Relations Review, 21 (1995): 241-255.  Study II Rohm (2010) in his research used Hall’s Communication and Time Model, Geert Hofstede’s cultural dimensions and Globe Project Cultural Dimension to discuss the differences between the two cultures. The combined result of these three cultural dimensions brought to light the contrasting aspects of the two cultures. Rohm (2010) conducted this study based on the belief that an understanding of one’s own ethnocentric views was necessary before interpreting the culture of other people especially when one has to spend time with them. The author believes that all three Hall, Globe and Hofstede have provided useful dimensions that lead towards a better understanding of cultures. In this study too the author ignored the role of religion; the author also was more focused on Americans understanding the Arab culture better. An analysis from an Arab point of view would have helped to understand how Arabs stereotype Americans and how it can harm business communication. Source: Rohm, F.W. (2010). American and Arab Cultural Lenses. Inner Resources for Leaders, School of Global Leadership & Entrepreneurship. Regent University, Virginia Beach Read More