Analysis of Cross-Cultural Negotiation Styles: US vs. China

This presentation provides an analysis of cross-cultural negotiation strategies, comparing the approaches of American and Chinese negotiators. The study explores the impact of culture and nationality on negotiation tactics, focusing on ethical considerations. The findings reveal differences in the use of ethically questionable actions, such as attacking an opponent's network, using competitive bargaining, making false promises, and gathering inappropriate information. The research highlights that Americans generally use fewer ethically questionable tactics than Chinese, particularly in intercultural negotiations. However, the study also indicates that Americans may employ more unethical practices when negotiating with Chinese counterparts. The presentation references key theories and researchers in the field of cross-cultural management, such as Fulmer, Ting-Toomey, and Holliday, to explain the influence of culture on negotiation styles. The conclusion emphasizes the significance of nationality and culture in shaping negotiation behaviors, providing valuable insights for business professionals navigating intercultural interactions.

CROSS CULTURAL MANAGEMENT

INTRODUCTION
Culture or nationality has a greater effect on the
negotiation (Ting‐Toomey, 2017). This
presentation will highlight the ways in which
Chinese and American people negotiate. In
Intercultural and Intracultural both Chinese and
American negotiate in a totally different manner.
On different aspects people from both these
nations have different approach to ethics
(Holliday, 2013).

Findings
According to the research:
• Overall Americans use less ethically
questionable actions than Chinese.
• On Intercultural basis Americans use
more such tactics but on intracultural
basis Chinese use more such tactics
(Liu, et. al. 2012).
• On attacking opponent’s network
Americans are equal likely as
Chinese in both intercultural and
intracultural negotiation. While
Chinese use these tactics less when
they do intercultural negotiation and
more in the case of intracultural
negotiation.

Continue
• On traditional competitive bargaining
Americans use less ethically questionable
practices than Chinese.
• On making false promises Americans use
higher ethically questionable practices
while making intercultural negotiation and
are lesser unethical in intracultural
negotiation.
• In terms of misinterpretation Americans
are lower than Chinese (Moriizumi, 2011).
• In inappropriate information gathering
American use more such practices than
Chinese while doing intercultural
negotiation whereas they use such
practices on the lower side while dealing
with American Counterpart.

Discussion
Theorist like Fulmer considers
that both cooperative and
competitive tendencies are
present in relationship (Bülow
and Kumar, 2011). The use of
ethics becomes essential in
negotiation. Chinese are more
concerned about the image of
nationality hence they use less
ethically questionable practices
while doing negotiation (Toomey,
Dorjee and Ting-Toomey, 2013).

Conclusion
Negotiation has a higher impact of nationality.
Theories suggest that culture is the major reason
for it. Americans use less unethical practices
while dealing in intercultural negotiation while
Chinese do the same in intercultural negotiation
when tested on various aspects of negotiation in
business.

References
Ting Toomey, S., 2017. Identity negotiation theory. ‐ The International Encyclopedia of
Intercultural Communication, pp.1-6.
Holliday, A., 2013. Understanding intercultural communication: Negotiating a
grammar of culture. Routledge.
Liu, L.A., Friedman, R., Barry, B., Gelfand, M.J. and Zhang, Z.X., 2012. The dynamics of
consensus building in intracultural and intercultural negotiations. Administrative
Science Quarterly, 57(2), pp.269-304.
Moriizumi, S., 2011. Exploring identity negotiations: An analysis of intercultural
Japanese-US American families living in the United States. Journal of Family
Communication, 11(2), pp.85-104.
Bülow, A.M. and Kumar, R., 2011. Culture and negotiation. International
Negotiation, 16(3), pp.349-359.
Toomey, A., Dorjee, T. and Ting-Toomey, S., 2013. Bicultural identity negotiation,
conflicts, and intergroup communication strategies. Journal of Intercultural
Communication Research, 42(2), pp.112-134.