Cultural Diversity in International Negotiations Essay

Introduction

A professional negotiator must have a set of powerful skills but still constantly improve them and gain new knowledge and competencies. Despite its apparent benefits, creativity can appear dangerous in negotiations as it may produce unintended reactions in discussion counterparts. In the intercultural setting, a negotiator can rely on the combination of Hofstede’s and GLOBE cultural dimensions to develop a sound negotiation strategy, possibly providing an area for creative decisions. Therefore, a negotiator should thoroughly balance creative efforts with cultural knowledge in international negotiations for a productive and meaningful discussion.

Creativity in International Negotiations

People commonly regard creativity as an ultimately advantageous characteristic of professionals, including negotiators. Braslauskas (2021) claimed that its role in producing ideas for problem-solving in intercultural communication is unquestionable. Smolinski and Xiong’s (2020) opinion that creativity is essential in the mutual value-creating process can support this statement. Using this competency allows for harmonizing the interests of both parties or developing new mutually beneficial options (Smolinski & Xiong, 2020). However, a negotiator must have corresponding skills to look at the negotiation process and emerging issues from a partner’s perspective, which poses a disadvantage, especially for those negotiators whose competence is insufficient. Moreover, excessive focus on creativity may suppress a person and deflect from negotiation priorities. Still, it is crucial to remember the cultural differences of discussion counterparts, who can perceive creative endeavors as inadequate and awkward.

Hofstede’s versus GLOBE Cultural Dimensions

Hofstede’s cultural dimensions differ from those of the GLOBE in many stances. Hofstede’s categorization includes masculinity, power distance index, short-term or long-term orientation, uncertainty avoidance, indulgence, and individualism or collectivism (Escandon-Barbosa et al., 2022). GLOBE cultural dimensions have only two domains, namely power distance and uncertainty avoidance, which correspond completely to Hofstede’s conceptualization. The rest include assertiveness, institutional and in-group collectivism, gender egalitarianism, and various kinds of orientation, such as humane, future, and performance (Sochor, 2020). The major implication for negotiators and leaders is the possibility of applying one set of cultural dimensions through the prism of the other. As Escandon-Barbosa et al. (2022) described, it is possible to categorize Hofstede’s dimensions into two groups. Masculinity, power distance, long-term orientation, and uncertainty avoidance go to the GLOBE’s performance orientation domain, while femininity and collectivism can comprise humane orientation (Escandon-Barbosa et al., 2022). This practice may help in comparing the cultural backgrounds of negotiation parties, which will allow for introducing creativity in decision-making. In turn, comparing two specific cultures will help develop the most appropriate strategy, influencing the negotiation counterparts and allowing them to articulate their interests.

Summary of Initial Key Points

Previous key points regarding healthy practices in international negotiations are worth mentioning as they help accumulate knowledge necessary for having meaningful and successful discussions in an intercultural setting. When preparing for negotiations, a negotiator should focus on commonly accepted traits and behaviors, such as openness, readiness to cooperate, and shared values. However, it is necessary to consider the cultural specifics of negotiation counterparts for developing an adequate strategy. One of the crucial elements here is choosing the optimal level of flexibility during the discussion process because there is a need to prepossess partners while being sufficiently assertive regarding own interests. When some conflicts still emerge in the course of negotiation, a negotiator should seek an individual approach instead of applying existing theories and strategies because they may appear irrelevant in practice. At last, considering the Western and Eastern cultural backgrounds of discussion counterparts is essential as it determines the perceptions concerning the conflict resolution process.

Conclusion

Successful and productive negotiation requires balancing between knowledge of cultural differences and creativity. A negotiator should cautiously opt for extraordinary propositions and decisions in intercultural discussion because negotiation partners may misinterpret them. Here, cultural competence and application of both Hofstede’s and GLOBE’s cultural dimensions can be helpful for developing a culturally specific and proper strategy. The present findings still emphasize the crucial role of selecting an individual approach with respect to the cultural background of negotiation parties.

References

Braslauskas, J. (2021). Developing intercultural competences and creativity: The foundation for successful intercultural communication. Creativity Studies, 14(1), 197-217. Web.

Escandon-Barbosa, D., Ramirez, A., & Salas-Paramo, J. (2022). The effect of cultural orientations on country innovation performance: Hofstede cultural dimensions revisited?Sustainability, 14(10), 1-13. Web.

Smolinski, R., & Xiong, Y. (2020). In search of master negotiators: A negotiation competency model. Negotiation Journal, 36(3), 365-388. Web.

Sochor, J. (2020). Comparison of selected attributes in cultural dimensions as defined by Hofstede and the GLOBE Project. Central and Eastern Europe in the Changing Business Environment. Web.