Cross-Cultural Negotiation and Management - Essay Example

Cross Cultural Negotiation and Management Name Institution Professor Course Date Cross Cultural Negotiation Negotiation is a discussion anticipated to resolve disputes, to make an accord upon courses of action. It is also a deal for individual or group advantage whose outcomes should satisfy diverse interests. It is a principal process of alternative disagreement resolution (Churchman, 1993, p.34). Negotiations usually take different views .one of the views is based on the process, which involves how it will be done, context and tactics to be employed, the sequence of negotiation and the stages to be followed so as to reach the desired goal. The other is behavioral where the negotiator need to look at the relationship among the parties, communication and style to used during the negotiation. Then there is substance which now refers to the subject, agenda, issues, options and agreements to be arrived at in the end (Kopelman, 2006, p.45). It has also another view which focuses on strategy. This aspect is concentrated on top level goals and the final outcome of the negotiations. In this view process and tools in the negotiation focuses on the steps to be followed by the group or individual, the roles to be played during preparations for the negotiations where tasks are divided into small bits. Then there is the tactic bit which is a detailed statement of actions and responses the other parties’ statements. It details persuasion and influence aspects of the negotiation so as to attain the desired interests. One can also employ the bad guy/good guy tactics whre in the first incidence the negotiator uses anger and threat while in the second instance the good guy approach focuses on the interests of all the parties, being considerate and understanding so as to attain the final goal (Fisher, 1991, p.23). All in all while planning for negotiation the teams should think and plan together, do sessions of brainstorming for the purposes of generating more ideas for the negotiations. The team should be able to look at cultural background of the other party such as language, orientation so as to prepare adequately on how to face the challenges of the negotiations (Kopelman, 2006, p.40).In this topic I am looking at four scenes where negotiation skills needed to be applied to achieve the desirable results o the negotiation. In the negotiation on a car purchase, the groups approach to the negotiations does not reflect any form of negotiating skills. The group was not prepared and did not even meet among themselves to plan the strategies to be applied during the negotiation with the other group. They did not have prior knowledge on when the other group will be coming and where they will hold the negotiations. It is clear that the group did not obtain enough information on the product which is the car. This is depicted by the fact that after the other group came and a brief introduction, the group went straight to ask questions about the car details. Our group did not have enough information and the other group may have taken advantage of this during the negotiation. It is also clear that we lacked organization of thoughts and ideas. At this point where the other goes for the price item to be discussed a quick selling price was agreed. This shows that our group may have been intimidated to agreeing to the price during the negotiations due to lack of enough information on the car. This could have been avoided had the group gave it the approach of process, behavior and substance. The process would assist the group to know how to negotiate, understand the context, sequence and stages of the negotiation and even tactics. A behavior approach which focuses on relationships among the parties and communication styles would assist the group to handle the negotiation through efficient communication styles on the car and achieve better results (Churchman, 1993, p.37). Substance approach view gives the negotiator an understanding of the agenda, issues, options and agreements to be reached at during and after the negotiation in the end. Scene two which is on the bestbooks publishing company, the group had broken down the negotiation into smaller items of discussions. However it emerged that our group in although the area of the negotiation had been broken down into sequential tasks the group did not have prior meeting to discuss them together and plan. We did not appreciate the cultural differences in various groups such as values of the group we were to meet. This group was well prepared and had already planned the sequence of events and the approach of the negotiations was team based with specific tasks being assigned to particular individuals. This is seen when we got to the negotiation table, the other group introduced themselves and their titles and roles in the negotiations as opposed to our group which was not prepared and resulted into fixing the situation by just introducing ourselves and giving titles which were not actual. The other group good planning and organization gave them a head start in the negotiations where our group played inferior to them due to lack of planning. However in the end our group secured a deal though with lower returns than anticipated. In this regard it is important for any party in a negotiation to appreciate the difference in thinking and decision making processes of the party. This will help in tackling all issues in a manner beneficial to them. For examples negotiators in the American world and the westerners in general prefer to divide tasks into issues such as prices, delivery, warranty, service contract which should be addressed separately one at a time. The Americans culturally find it difficult in measuring negotiation progress in cultures such Asia where negotiations do not take a particular order (Fisher, 1991, p.23). In scene three the group has taken an Email negotiation. This involves Him and Her Australia (HHA) a fashion store in Australia on the part of the group and Beijing Fashion Manufacturing company (BFM). These two entities brings out the aspect of culture and management in business, where we as the group represent the western culture and BFM represents the Asian culture particularly in China. The managerial values in this call for objectivity were you separate the people from the problem and negotiating the substance and the relationship between the negotiators because you require the relation to continue for the sake of the business venture to flourish. It also calls for competitiveness and equality giving emphasis to the essence of commercial negotiations. These negotiations center on competitive achievements and cooperation n all parties. It does also bring out culture of time valuation. Westerners put more emphasis on time and this is clearly seen when our group requests for additional work during the negotiations then BFM requests on their part to be given more time. HHA gets very angry and mad about the whole deal; however the Asian culture of strategic reversal of time pressure which is applied here tends to cool the tampers when BFM comes up with a better deal than they had proposed earlier during the negotiations. HHA, however in as much as they had been upset by BFM requesting more time and increase in prices the eventually accept the final offer put on the table by BFM. At last a deal is agreed upon a long business relationship is established between the two parties (Churchman, 1993, p.40). Scene four is a joint venture in China between Fernet Brio and Zijan Mining Company. In this venture negotiations our employs modern team based skills so as to optimize the results of our negotiations. The modern skills enlist writing, listening and talking as specific tasks during any negotiation. These techniques which are capacity based reduce mistakes and increases familiarity during the negotiations. This particular negotiation we based it on the theory of schmoozing and helped us create good relationship with our partners. We employed certain negotiation style to be able to get into an agreement. We ensured that during this negotiation when a meeting did not achieve the anticipated results for that day we would sleep on it and in the following day we would have more ideas and get into an agreement. We planned to have several sessions so as to iron out the differences on each item in our schedule of events. We divided the tasks in small bits and assigned small groups to work on each of the specific tasks as divided. In order to make ad hoc consultation during the negotiation we used improvisation techniques such as call a time out of the conference room. When we come back we could come up with new ideas. We also ensured that during this negotiation, we would employ avoiding tactics were we would defer an issue if we could not agree on it (Kopelman, 2006, p.45). This in most cases can be presumed to be diplomatic yet it’s a tactic to make sure that tempers cool at some time and resume later and reach an agreement We made sure that we accommodated our partners as much as possible by being sensitive to the customs of our partners since we had different cultural background. We were collaborative by agreeing to solve all the existing challenges of the venture together through suggesting creative ways. The style of competing could not be over emphasized during our negotiations through presenting key areas of our great interest for the optimization of returns once the venture starts to run. Compromising could not be left out at last since we were eager to seal the deal by doing what is fair and equitable to all of us in the venture. After the thorough preparations, several meetings and consultations among the parties we went through the negotiations smoothly. It was very amazing and wonderful because we did great work in this final negotiation and each one participated and contributed and we seal the deal a satisfied lot of people. This achievement gives prominence to the theory of schmoozing (Fisher, 1991, p.23). The reflection for my group preparation that led to the final group negotiation is that preparation for my group was not very good. Initially they failed to invite me for the first and the second meeting of the group. This could be attributed to the fact that they are from a different country and probably they felt that I would intrude into their affairs. After convincing them that I would be of significant value to the group, they eventually invited me but they cared less about my presence. Quite a number of them were not participating actively in the discussions but instead kept on laughing unnecessarily. This however changed during the final negotiation where the group had commendable preparation. As a reflective perspective of this final negotiation it is clear that whenever you prepare, plan and think together, new ideas always surface. Individual contributions specifically aimed at a certain aspect of a negotiation item always give ideas that may surprise the team members. The two groups depicted proper preparations which made final negotiations smooth and task allocations made it possible for the negotiations to go on as anticipated even without team leaders on both teams. The teams were organized and this could be clearly seen during the negotiations where they listened to each other and gave each team member time to give their contributions on their point of negotiations. They were all composed, no threat were used rather persuasion and influence and extreme expertise prevailed (Churchman, 1993, p.50). In conclusion we admit that negotiation skills are crucial to dealing with real life situations both on an individual capacity and even at the business capacity. These skills enable negotiators to tackle challenges of negotiations in both international spheres and cultural aspects where one should study the other party’s background so as to understand what you need to do in terms of planning. These skills also gives one the confidence to face people from all over the world be able to sit on a table at make business deals effectively and attaining the desired results (Kopelman, 2006, p.45). References Churchman, David. 1993. Negotiation Tactics. Maryland: University Press of America. Pg 13. Kopelman, S., Rosette, A., and Thompson, L. (2006). The three faces of eve: Strategic displays of positive neutral and negative emotions in negotiations. Organization Behavior and Human Decision Processes (OBHDP), 99 (1), 81-101. Roger Fisher, William Ury, and Bruce Patton, Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement without Giving In (New York: Penguin, 1991). Read More