Analysis of Business Etiquette and Manners - Essay Example

? Business Etiquette I.D. Number: Term and Year Business Etiquette Introduction With the incorporation of different regional economic systems into a composite world economy, international production and procurement activities have increased manifold. It is becoming more and more important that an organization’s corporate leadership develops an optimum level of compassion and knowledge preconditioned to cross-cultural communication, understanding, and negotiation (Okoro, 2012). In sum, business etiquette should be defined more clearly and the managers must be trained in this field. The critical decision-making processes like reaching mutual agreement and putting up consensus have taken new dimensions because of differences that exist in business etiquette and ethics. These differences generally manifest during the international dealings (Maddux et al, 2012), but even in a local business, it is not possible today that all the staff members would belong from the same social, political, ethnic, and/or religious backgrounds. Analysis of Business Etiquette Business etiquette has sometimes emerged as an area of misunderstanding and even contention among different cultures through the different periods of history. Recently, Henry Hitchings has written a book Sorry! The English and Their Manners (2013). In the book, Hitchings has tried to explain the antiquity and importance of manners in the different contexts of historic periods and social strata. Pendle (2013) remarks that the book helps the readers to understand how manners, particularly the English manners evolved. Today, the English language has been widely accepted as the medium of global communication. So, it is both important and interesting to know how English manners and codes of conduct evolved in the due course of history. According to Pendle (2013), codifying proper and well-mannered conduct set the standards of the modern concept of etiquette. Of course, with the lapse of time, contradictions have emerged too. For example, in medieval England, if a man helped an aged lady to cross the street, he would be regarded as a well-mannered gentleman. But today, such behavior on the part of a man might be regarded as a sexist behavior. Yet, it is extremely important to note the concept of “small ethics” (Hitchings, 2013, p. 167). This concept was defined right during the reign of Queen Elizabeth of England, which determines the dynamics of general etiquette and its broader evolution. So today, when business etiquette is talked about, one should remember that the concept of etiquette emerged from the code of manners, and this code of manners culminated at small ethics. Consequently, Pendle (2013) helps us to diagnose a direct relationship between manners or etiquette and ethical conduct. The essence of ethical conduct is again an imperative in global business. Likewise, Maddux et al (2012) state that business etiquette can be correlated with business ethics and related fields. Maddux et al (2012) researched on business etiquette with special reference to the practice of apology as seen in different Western and Asian countries. The authors have pointed out that the ideal code of conduct widely varies from country to country and a deep understanding of such variations would help an executive to “make effective use of the apology as a tool for facilitating negotiations, resolving conflicts, and repairing trust.” Controversies Regarding Business Etiquette Maddux et al (2012) have studied cross-cultural variations regarding well-mannered behaviors and acceptable codes of conduct. The team has specifically focused on the term “Sorry” as interpreted in the USA and Japan. According to the research team, to apologize is an idea that has widely accepted and even appreciated in Japan. However, in America, managers must avoid using the words like “sorry”. Unlike Japan, apology is associated to culpability and even incompetence in the USA. Researches conducted by Maddux et al (2012) convey that Japanese students are more comfortable with apologizing as compared with the American students. In a qualitative research survey, Japanese students associated apologizing with reparability while their American counterparts associated apologizing with culpability. However, even the most basic tenets of moral science would suggest that apologizing is a constructive and humanly behavior since it helps one to admit his or her fault (Mill, 1988). So, if a behavior (for example, apologizing) is correct according to moral science, should not it be acceptable in the realm of business ethics too? The obvious answer to this question, at least in the Western context, is “no”. Directly apologizing invites trouble because in the Western cultures, like the one in the USA, apologizing is like accepting the responsibility for doing something wrong. And in such cultures, scope for both business downtime and community accountability becomes narrow. Consequently, Maddux et al (2012) state, “Even after decades of cooperation in business and politics, America and Japan still trip over a seemingly simple concept: the apology.” As modern business organizations are setting out on achieving global competitiveness, effective cross-cultural communication and proper management of cultural disparities, negotiation techniques and decision-making become the most preponderant challenges in the way of complying with basic business ethics. Accomplishment or failure in the sphere of managing a varied or multi-cultural workforce is mainly determined by the capability of managers to effectively communicate with individuals from different nationalities and socio-political backgrounds. Contextually, Okoro (2012) predicts that the success of global business ventures would be affected adversely in case the international managers, who are participating in such ventures, remain unable “to understand appropriate business etiquette, customs, and values needed to conduct business among nations of the world.” (Okoro, 2012, 136-137) Conclusion Manners engage a broad range of community interactions inside cultural standards. Several etiquettes and manners have obscured histories behind them even when they appear to have only diminutive or no purposes. Their justifications as being logical may be just as informative to a social historian as a social custom or a written code of conduct. In this milieu, the etiquettes of doing business are the collection of both written and unwritten systems of management and behavior at the corporate level. Hence, experts like Maddux et al (2012), Okoro (2012), etc. suggest the 21st century business managers remain prepared for the challenges of working inside a highly cross-cultural and diversified workforce. Economic reforms, liberalization, and cross border migration of skilled labor have necessitated today’s executives to know better how they can interact with their foreign or migrant co-workers most amicably. Social interactions inside an organization must run flawlessly even when people from different cultures, religions, geographies, and ethnicities are involved in the workforce or the board of directors. Hence, it is necessary today to study business etiquette from a more independent point of view in the form of a different specialty. References Hitchings, H. (2013). Sorry! The English and Their Manners. London: John Murray. Maddux, W., Kim, P., Okumura, T., & Brett, J. (2012). Why “I’m Sorry” Doesn’t Always Translate - Harvard Business Review. Harvard Business Review Case Studies, Articles, Books, Pamphlets - Harvard Business Review. Retrieved February 10, 2013, from http://hbr.org/2012/06/why-im-sorry-doesnt-always-translate/ar/1 Mills, J. (1988). The Logic of the Moral Sciences. London: Open Court. Okoro, E. (2012). Cross-cultural etiquette and communication in global business: Toward a strategic framework for managing corporate expansion. International Journal of Business and Management, 7, 130-138. Pendle, G. (2013). Apologies necessary - FT.com. World business, finance, and political news from the Financial Times - FT.com. Retrieved February 10, 2013, from http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/c6915f72-63c0-11e2-84d8-00144feab49a.html#axzz2JtzLTplp Read More