19-03-2014, 04:14 PM
CROSS-CULTURAL NEGOTIATION AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION
CROSS-CULTURAL.doc (Size: 73.5 KB / Downloads: 61)
Based on my own experience, following the criterion used by Geert Hofstede to understand the dimension of national culture, and other three outside resources, I am going to analyze how cultural differences between the United States of America (United State) and Chile would affect a negotiation or dispute resolution process between individuals from these two countries.
The United States and Chile are two countries from opposite ends of Hofstede`s spectrum of cultural dimension. On one hand, the United States has a weak Uncertainty Avoidance, small Power Distance; it is an Individualism culture and a Doing culture. On the other hand, Chile has a strong Uncertainty Avoidance, large Power Distance; it is a Collectivist culture and a Being culture. Even thought we can classify the different cultures, it is important to mention that there are members of each culture that they do not share the ordinary characteristics of his/her culture (characteristics on which is based the classification.)
Based in the described cultural differences, I can distinguish the following issues that can affect a negotiation or dispute resolution process between individuals from United State and Chile:
Risk Aversion
According to Geert Hofstede, the Chilean culture has a strong Uncertainty Avoidance, which means ambiguous and uncertain situations are threatened. In the same line, the Chilean culture is averse to taking risks, especially loss aversion: avoiding sure losses even if the potential loss from the gamble will be significantly greater than the sure loss. On the other hand, the United States culture has a weak Uncertainty Avoidance, which means they do not feel threatened by uncertain and ambiguous situation. The United States people are more susceptible to taking risks than the Chilean people in order to obtain a future gain. Consequently, this is an important factor which these parties need to be aware of in a negotiation.
It is also important, and can be very beneficial for a third neutral such a mediator, to be aware of this factor in order to influence the parties’ perception of an offer (in private caucuses) by framing alternatives in terms of gains or losses. For example, the mediator must be aware of transmitting particular offers from the United States party to a Chilean party when trying to frame the problem in terms of securing gains from a reference point rather than framing the problem in terms of avoiding losses from a reference point (Cochran, DiPippa & Peters, 1999).
Individualism vs. Collectivism Cultures
Members of individualist cultures tend to view themselves as independent of each other, their personal goals and interests take precedence over group goals and interests. Members of collectivist cultures tend to view themselves as interdependent, group goals and interests take precedence over personal goals and interests (Markus & Kitayama, 1991).
From my perspective, this difference is the one that can most affect negotiation or dispute resolution between individuals from Chile and United States, because Chile is a collectivist culture and United States is an individualist culture.
i) Collectivist pays more attention to how something is said than to what is said, and silence is highly valued. Individualists value specificity and clarity of communication, they rely heavily on what is said, and silence is not valued.
Vertical vs. Horizontal Cultures
According to Harry C. Triandis Chile is a Vertical culture and United States is a horizontal culture. Vertical cultures accept hierarchy as a given; people are different from each other. Horizontal cultures accept equality as a given; people are equal.
In a hypothetical negotiation between business men from a Chilean company and those from a United State company, a subordinate from the Chilean company will never contradict his superior in negotiation. On the other hand, the United State team members are going to through ideas and participating as equals. This mentioned difference can affect a negotiation because the Chilean team will be confused because they are going to have many valid interlocutors from the other team. The United State team will have only one valid interlocutor in the Chilean team who is the person with the highest position in the hierarchy.
Space Proximity
Based on my own experience, North American people do not like to be close when talking, which makes them feel uncomfortable. On the other side of the coin, Chilean people like to be closer when they are talking, touching the other’s shoulder or back when talking, in order to express ideas. Therefore, during a negotiation between United States and Chilean people, space proximity could be an important factor to consider. It could be also important for an arbitrator or mediator to be aware of space proximity during a dispute resolution process between United States and Chilean people in order to obtain the parties’ trust, and to make them feel comfortable.
Multi-Channel Communication Theory
One of the most helpful psychological/communication theories that we can apply to cross-cultural dispute is Multi–Channel Communication. This theory explains blocks in communication, as well as how to overcome a communication block. Karl Albrecht, in his book Understanding people: Models and Concepts, suggests that information between two persons takes place through four separate communication channels which transmit facts, feelings, values and opinions. Since these four channels are often inadvertently mixed, it is very easy to confuse these four channels of communication; therefore, communication can be obstructed. Obstructed communication is one of the principle sources of conflict between parties from different cultures.
Alfred Smith emphasizes the relationship between communication and culture; he writes: “Our perception is a behavior that is learned and share, and it is mediated by symbols. Culture is a code we learn and share, and learning and sharing require communication. And communication requires coding and symbols, which must be learned and share. Communication and culture are inseparable”. Three of the four channels of communication suggested by Karl Albrecht: feelings, values and opinions, are influenced by our culture. Consequently, communication between North American and Chilean people (great “cultural distance”) is susceptible to being blocked.