Cross-Cultural Communication Theory in Negotiation
Power Dynamics in Cross-Cultural Communication Theory in Negotiation
There are two specific theories that cover how power dynamics show up among cultures in a negotiation. For instance, Gesteland’s Four Pattern of Cross-Cultural Business Behavior includes the deal-focus vs. relationship-focus item, while the Hofstede’s Six Cultural Dimensions Theory explores the power distance index. This paper will examine the similarities and differences between both items and describe how they show up in negotiation in order to address them.
Based on Richard Gestland, people participating in a negotiation solve problems depending on what kind of culture they are in. There are people in a deal-focus culture who focus on doing the work only. The individuals in a relationship-focus culture start by building close ties with their teammates before starting the negotiation. People from a deal-focus culture are considered to be assertive and aggressive. This means that they are likely to be poor negotiators compared to people from relationship-focus culture, who are calm and more flexible. Geert Hofstede, in the power distance index, argues that the success of a negotiation exercise depends on how the less powerful people in a negotiation can question the authority of those in authority. If the regular workers are willing to agree and expect power to be distributed unequally in the business, they will be endorsing their leaders to make decisions on their behalf (Knobloch & Solomon, 2002). The general workers will have a little say in a negotiation process, and their interests might not be put into consideration.
The deal-focus vs. relationship-focus and power distance index are both frameworks of cross-cultural communication that show the effects of a society’s culture on the values of a team, and these values affect behavior. Both items attempt to minimize the impact of organizational culture and national differences when it comes to business negotiation. The power distance index is used to show how people from different cultures perceive power, and this is important in determining how they will behave during negotiation (Hofstede, 2011). The deal-focus vs. relationship-focus illustrates what people from various cultures prioritize when negotiating as well as how they are likely to take the interests of the other parties. They offer suggestions on how to work effectively with people from a range of geographic and cultural backgrounds by eliminating cultural barriers.
Both the deal-focus vs. relationship-focus and power distance index portray the impact of culture on the values of the members in a negotiation process. They use factor analysis to describe the relationship between cultural values and behavior. Both deal-focus vs. relationship-focus and power distance index items conclude that a good relationship between the various members of an organization creates a conducive environment for achieving the objectives of a negotiation.
The deal-focus vs. relationship-focus and power distance index attempt to help managers in understanding and running successfully across the cross-cultural business market by equipping them with knowledge on how different features of a business are viewed across different cultures. Both items try to explain how the relationship between different people in an organization might affect a negotiation process, hence their performance. The deal-focus vs. relationship-focus, for instance, compares people interested in building relationships with those who solely focus on their work without caring about their teammates and how might this affect their performance (Gesteland, 1999). The power distance index illustrates how the relationship between employees of different ranks may have an impact on the outcomes of a negotiation process (Hofstede, 2011). Both deal-focus vs. relationship-focus and power distance index can help negotiators from different cultural backgrounds deal with differences at the international level.
The deal-focus vs. relationship-focus and power distance index emphasize on the importance of cross-cultural communication in the successful development if the different stages of negotiation. If the parties are in a good relationship and calm, they can easily get prepared, understand the interests of the other negotiating parties, and understand the consequences of failure in negotiation. When the general workers are able to challenge the authority of those above them, they can easily convince their leaders to understand their interests in order to come into a long-lasting agreement. Negotiations are likely to fail if regular people are willing to allow their managers to make decisions based on their interests (Liu & Adair, 2017). When some team members are not interested in the welfare of the others like in the case of deal-focus, there is the likelihood of disagreements in negotiations since everyone is only fighting for what he or she considers is important to him or her.
Establishing a good relationship between the parties is important in negotiation. All parties should be flexible and willing to take various possible changes and situations into account. Therefore, if some parties come from a culture that allows the junior workers to challenge the authority of their leaders, culture clashes might occur if the managers are not ready to be challenged. The regular workers will be considered rude, pushy, and aggressive. A similar case will apply if members of relationship-focus are negotiating with people from a deal-focus culture (Merriam et al., 2001). There will be a lot of misunderstanding between the parties, and the negotiation will not be successful.
In the business world, how the parties to a negotiation relate is essential and becomes before all rules. When a culture allows power to be concentrated at the top, the decisions made by juniors do not matter. For example, an organization department may negotiate an agreement, only to have it re-negotiated by the top officials. Similarly, if the members of an organization are divided into groups, some workers may come up with an agreement, only to be disagreed by the other groups (Bitmis & McGuire, 2019). Before reaching an agreement, the parties from different cultures should have prior meetings that will help them so that they create some trust and avoid misunderstandings. People using the power distance index should select a politeness strategy that will ensure that the interests of all parties are put into consideration. This will help in avoiding disputes and disagreements.
When there are difficulties in communication across cultures, it becomes difficult to avoid possible confrontations that might lead to failure of a negotiation. Just as people from a relationship-focus culture care about the feelings of other members since they are interested in maintaining a good relationship, the power distance index should enable parties, regardless of their ranks, to be considerate during negotiations by caring about the interests of each member (Hofstede, 2011). The parties should avoid expressing objection and giving negative feedback. Managers and other leaders should be willing to not only listen to their demands but also ensure that everyone is satisfied with the agreement.
The world is currently witnessing globalization, and this means that several organizations will be operating in different places in the world. With the various cross-cultural negotiations that will be taking place, it will be important to ensure that all parties are allowed to present their views in order to come up with an inclusive agreement (Gesteland, 1999). This can only be possible if all parties are able to respect people from all ranks and are willing to be corrected at any point during the negotiation process. The final decision should not only favor the interests of the top officials, but it should also address the needs of all juniors.
Establishing close ties between all parties, regardless of their ranks, helps in avoiding disagreements that lead to failure of negotiation. It is important to understand the cultural differences of all parties to have an idea of how they are likely to behave during a negotiation. The negotiating members should be flexible and be willing to support suggestions that address the demands of all members. All members should be equal, and their interests should be included in the agreement to avoid disputes in the future.
References
Gesteland, R. R. (1999). Cross-cultural business behavior: Marketing, negotiating and
managing across cultures. Frederiksberg, Copenhagen: Copenhagen Business SchoolPress.
Hofstede, G. (2011). Dimensionalizing cultures: The Hofstede model in context. Online
Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1), 1-26. https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1014
Merriam, S. B., Johnson-Bailey, J., Lee, M. Y., Kee, Y., Ntseane, G., & Muhamad, M. (2001). Power and positionality: Negotiating insider/outsider status within and across cultures. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 20(5), 405-416.
Bitmis, M. G., & McGuire, J. (2019). Developing Effective Cross-Cultural Negotiations. The Belt and Road Initiative: Opportunities and Challenges of a Chinese Economic Ambition, 179.
Liu, L. A., & Adair, W. L. (2017). Intercultural Communication in International Negotiation. The International Encyclopedia of Intercultural Communication, 1-14.
Knobloch, L. K., & Solomon, D. H. (2002). Information seeking beyond initial interaction: Negotiating relational uncertainty within close relationships. Human Communication Research, 28(2), 243-257.