Introduction
Culture is a complex spectrum which consists of ideas, thoughts and feelings on one end and behaviors, values and beliefs on the other. Negotiations globally bring cultures to the forefront because of the impact that cultural relations have on negotiation. U.S negotiators have different ways through which they negotiate. This paper will discuss the differences and the similarities between U.S negotiators and the other cultures which shall be described in this paper.
Question 1
Preparation; here the negotiators are required to complete several key tasks before coming to the table. First and foremost, one has to keenly study the potential partners business. The Japanese negotiation process is highly contextual therefore before an individual get into the negotiation table, he/she is required to review the relevant company profile together with the relevant articles including conducting internet searches before their first meeting. Great care has to be taken while setting the stage for negotiation. The next important thing is the understanding the roles and responsibilities.
Negotiators according to the Japanese are expected to understand and effectively manage the needs and the perceptions of the stakeholders within their organizations. The Japanese highly value the ability to orchestrate consensus within the organization.
Managing status is another important social value which the western negotiators have to take into consideration while negotiating with their Japanese counterparts. This is because it can be selectively deployed as a source of negotiating power. In negotiating with a new Japanese business partner, involving the third party is crucial if the negotiation is to fully achieve its intended objectives. The negotiating person has to acquaint himself/herself with both parties. The person is sometimes referred to as sho-kai-sha.
During the first meeting, rituals together with small talks are performed. The rituals are used to acknowledge the vertical nature of the relationship that exists between the two negotiating parties. On the other hand, when an American thinks of negotiation style, he thinks of competitive negotiation. A merican negotiator is thought of as being aggressive, adversarial and as someone who negotiates by setting up positions unlike the Japanese negotiator.
Therefore for an individual to fully fit into the Japanese negotiation process such person needs to adapt by following some Japanese protocol such as reserved behavior, name cards gifts e.t.c. again one has to provide a lot of information by the Americans standards in order to influence the counterpart’s decision making early. One can also adapt by slowing down his/her usual timetable and making informed interpretations. The negotiating parties can also coordinate their negotiation by developing a joint approach for their discussions.
American vs. Korea
Korea is a collective society with highly contextual culture which is believed to have high levels of power, distance and the uncertainty with relatively high levels of nurturance. Since Korans are collectivists, they are always easier to accept positive offers because of greater propensity to avoid conflict. Korean negotiators are always individualism. For instance, studies done to compare the Japanese and the Korean negotiators, it was found that the Korean negotiators showed strong sense of individualism. Again Korean negotiators can be described as being flexible and adaptable. The Japanese approach to arriving at decision is almost similar to that of the Chinese. For instance, while making decision, they begin from the general point of view as opposed to from specific point of view. They argue that the people who make decision from a specific point of view are narrow minded. Research shows that the Koreans are always faster in reaching at a decision compared to their U.S counterpart. Again, their negotiating team are always smaller compared to the U.S. the decision making process is highly centralized in Korean companies are compared to that in the United States of America where most institutions embrace decentralized decision making.
In Korea, their culture requires them to thoroughly prepare for negotiation through careful preparation so as to avoid certain risks associated with negotiation. Again, preparations do affect the negotiators performance during the process of negotiation. Korean eye contact is always indirect as compared to that of Americans which is direct. In posture, the Korean posture is generally leaning forward with a slight bow. On the other hand, the American posture is straight and upright. Again the facial expression of the Koreans are very low and sometime lack of expression whereas the Americans smile and are more expressive. Koreans also do tend to leave things vague at the end of the conversation. The conversation rarely ends in yes or no answer. On the other hand, the Americans always want to get to the bottom line of the discussion and again always try to bring logic into the discussion.
American vs. French
Despite of the fact that titles are always used in U.S to while addressing a congregation, it is not strongly developed. However, in France, the title issue is strongly developed to an extent that when you don’t address someone using the title that is considered as an insult. Again in France, the gender issue is not very significant as it is in U.S. in France every individual is equal irrespective of the gender. Therefore, individual is judged on the basis of what he stands for as opposed to the gender which he/she belongs.
It is therefore prudent to note that one has to adapt to different cultures so as to fit well in that culture. For instance, the following are some of the recommended behavior for the American who is negotiating with the French counterpart.
He has to employ an agent who is well connected in business and government circle. This agent has to be well acquainted with the French language. The second thing he has to do is to be open to social interaction and to communicate directly and also you have to work efficiently in order to get the job done.
Another thing is to adapt and follow some French protocol such as greetings and leave-takings and also to use formal speech. Demonstrate an awareness of the French culture and the broad business environment. Defend your views generously. Other tactics to employ include speaking in French and approaching negotiation as a debate which involves reasonable argument.
Question 3
U.S Approach to Mediation
In U.S, the approaches to mediation do take certain procedural steps. These steps are considered critical for the success of the mediation process. The steps include:
Opening; here the negotiation process is set and also the rules for communication are also set. The second is the uninterrupted time; here each individual involved in the process is given his/her own uninterrupted time. For instance, as one speaks the other takes notes. The third step is restatement; here one person is selected. This person restates the key messages which have been communicated with another person. Clarification is also very critical in American mediation process. Here the mediator seeks for clarification from the speaker whether what the restated message reflects what the speaker said. Step two and four which include uninterrupted time and the clarification stage is then repeated. During the repetition stage, the speaker and the note taker switches their roles. In the next step, the mediator help the people being mediated upon to identify the central problem for each other together and then help them solve their problems especially those which needs to be resolved for them to reach an agreement. The next stage is brainstorming, the mediator and the people whom she/he is mediating upon suggests potential solutions for resolving their differences. During this stage, the mediator takes notes and stays balanced, impartial while adding suggestions. In the next stage of the mediation process, the mediator helps the two parties reach a mutually beneficial agreement if it is possible. In the last stage, the agreement arrived at is put down in writing.
Sulha Mediation Approach
Here the first step is to select the Jaha; delegation of influential leaders whose role is to petition the offended household on behalf of the aggrieved family in order to seek for reconciliation through Sulha instead of violent revenge. The next stage is where the jaha now persuades the victim’s family to choose Sulha. The role of Sulha is to reconcile the two parties. In the next stage, the family of both the attacker and the victim are brought together where the attacker show remorse and beg for the forgiveness. The closing stage of the conflict resolution process is also known as Sulha; the primary objectives of the conflict resolution which is embodied by Sulha include restoration of honor and granting of forgiveness. The objectives are achieved during the closing ceremony through shaking of hands and sharing a meal together.
After the final decision has been made by the Jaha, invitations are then sent to the family members, wider community and the special guests. The ceremony takes place outdoor in the villages and it marks the final stage of the arbitration process. This is done outdoor in the general public because they believe that the restoration of honor relies on the public view. During this function, both the parties feature here. The aggressor’s family kindly and humbly accepts the wrong doings and then offers compensation on behalf of their family members. On the other hand, the bereaved family respectfully forgives the aggressor’s family as an act of magnanimity and humbleness.
The Ubuntu Approach
The Ubuntu mediation process takes the horizontal mediation where nothing said is lost. Here, both the oral and the written communication are used. The process of mediation is often narrative in structure. The process is not representative, individually, self-determined or confidential. This approach is believed to have been widely used in Africa. That is why it is called the Ubuntu African mediation process. It is believed to have been used by the Bantu people.
Question 4
What are the challenges of complex negotiations?
The multiparty negotiations can be said to add many levels of both the challenges and complexities which are normally less prevalent in a two party negotiation. It is therefore worth noting that many challenges are always encountered during multiparty negotiations. Some of the challenges include.
Off-track and chaotic discussions; negotiations involving different parties especially from different cultures are likely not to agree. This implies that the probability of the discussion going off-track and chaotic is very high unless such negotiation is regulated properly.
A no-agreement situation; it is likely that the people negotiating are not likely to arrive at agreement during the negotiation this is because each and every person involved in the discussion will consider his/her opinion superior to others. Therefore such a no-agreement situation can be solved by adopting an elaborative decision making technique such as the Delphi method or the multiparty voting. Another challenge is different schedules and timelines.
Recommendations for addressing the challenges
Some of the recommendations which I propose to be used in cases where negotiation between the two people negotiating and who are from different cultural origins include: coordinate Adjustment of both the parties; the parties negotiating can develop a joint approach for their negotiation by negotiating the process which negotiation should be taking. The join developed negotiating procedure should contain a blend of the two negotiating parties. This is a great solution if used well.
Involve a mediator; where negotiation between two people of different culture proves to be difficult, they can employ a mediator to help them get through into the mediation process. The mediator may help to bring back the negotiating team to an agreement. Other recommendations include adapting to the other culture, employing an adviser and embracing each other’s culture during negotiation.
Work Cited
Weiss, Stephen. “Negotiating with Foreign Business Persons” U.S.A, 1994. Print.
