THE INTERNATIONAL NEGOTIATOR’S OTHER CHOICE – RESPONDING TO DIFFERENCES

At the start of this chapter, we noted that when negotiating with Americans you have a strategic choice (as indeed does any negotiator at any time), depending on the situation and your relationship with them. If you accept that there are likely to be differences with your American counterparts, in some or all of the aspects of the negotiation process, you have several alternatives:

• You can ignore these cultural differences completely. You would then make your strategic choice of a “pure bargaining” or “joint problem-solving” approach as you would in any negotiation.
• You can choose to adopt a communication style with which Americans are comfortable, and thus appear to be more cooperative. In other words, you can try to be “more American” based on our description of American preferences and habits.
• You can take an approach based on your “comfort zone”, your preferred style. If that style is one that may make Americans uncomfortable, so be it. That allows you to increase your advantage, although it may hinder co-operation.
• You can choose to negotiate these differences, by introducing them into the negotiation, as subjects to be discussed and agreed.

Let us look at each alternative in turn.

1. Ignore differences completely

There is nothing at all wrong with this. We said in Chapter 2, that differences between groups are important if we believe them to be. If you decide to disregard them, you will be able to focus on the specific people, organizations, and issues involved, without having to worry about interpreting “cultural” behavior. The parties involved, if they are experienced, skilful, and flexible, will establish a mutually compatible way of negotiating.

The danger here is that if negotiations between your side and the American side break down, each may blame the other (which is normal) while at the same time making negative attributions about the other group: “Typical Americans – ignorant, inflexible, demanding . . . can’t trust them.” Or “Typical Italians –argumentative, disorganized, can’t pin them down . . . can’t trust them.” We find that we are protecting ourselves by stereotyping others.

2. Adapt to the American style

If this alternative appears feasible and desirable to you, then perhaps you speak English fluently enough, and are already accustomed to dealing with Americans. Maybe you do this already – consciously or unconsciously – in your international negotiations. Indeed, many experienced negotiators have learned to modify their style to suit the expectations of the other party. Within this framework of a consciously American approach, you can then, of course, vary your tactics to obtain the outcome you seek. If communicating in the “American way” comes naturally, then it may be a suitable strategy for you.

There are some possible drawbacks with this approach, however. The first and most obvious is that it requires sufficient mastery of the English language to execute it.

Secondly, it represents, an initial “concession” on your part in the negotiation. By trying to adopt the American style, you are in effect negotiating on the Americans’ terms, or “playing the game by their rules”.

You will have to weigh those possible drawbacks against the likely benefits of having a better match of negotiating styles.

3. Employ a very different style, closer to your own, to
gain advantage

We have mentioned several times how Americans can feel impatient, frustrated, or anxious when faced with a negotiation style that they cannot “read”. An American negotiator with those feelings may be more likely to make quick, generous offers and concessions in order to get “the deal”.

Therefore, if you wish to upset the Americans, or keep them “off balance”, try these techniques:

• Delay. Take a lot of time before opening discussions or before discussing specifics.
• Start a long discussion of principles, history, and background before getting around to the detailed issues under negotiation.
• Keep saying that you have to “check with your boss” or “get approval from headquarters” before you can accept any such proposal.
• Keep returning to issues previously agreed, and re-open discussion.
• Say as little as possible. Remain silent. Pause for long periods before speaking.
• Retain an impassive expression rather than a friendly or smiling one.
• In team negotiations, pursue a united strategy with a clear goal (or set of objectives) for your side and a single spokesperson.

There are others, which we will leave to your creativity and imagination. Keep in mind that skillful American negotiators will often try these tactics on each other.

This strategy too has some risks to weigh against potential gains.

It will not endear you to the Americans, and as we have said on a number of occasions, they may conclude that they cannot entirely trust you. It also runs the risk of causing the negotiations to break down completely, since every one of these signals (except the last) can be interpreted by an American as, “I do not really want to do business with you.”

4. Acknowledge and discuss possible differences openly

In this way, each party tries to understand more clearly where the other “is coming from”, in the expectation that they will be able to trust and co-operate with each other more easily.

An example of this approach might sound like this, in which a non-American is addressing his American counterpart:

“Peter, I know that you would like to present your offer for technical support to our data centre, but before we get to that, we need to explain to you the development of our company’s IT policy. In that way you can get a better picture of our needs.”

If the speaker were very polite, he could add, “Is that okay with you?”

But, you say, surely that approach will annoy the Americans even more, in their impatience to get down to business.

To that we would reply, “Not really.” As long as you explain clearly and specifically what you wish to talk about, and why, your American counterpart will consider it.

Another example might be:

“The agenda that you e-mailed to us is clear, but to us the issues are all connected, not separate. It will be easier for us in our discussion to consider them together. Then perhaps we can look at them one by one.”

This is more reassuring to an American negotiator.

This strategy, however, is not easy to carry out. It requires first that you know enough about your own negotiating style to be able identify areas where it differs – culturally or individually – from the general American style. In addition, some differences are not really open to “negotiation” in this way. After all, you can’t really say to an American, “The fact that in our culture we don’t like to smile all the time does not mean that we don’t like you. . .”

Nevertheless, this approach can help build trust and greater mutual understanding by admitting differences without concealing them, and recognizing that the other person may prefer another way. Whether these differences are based on culture, as some of them may be, or on organizational norms or individual preferences, making them part of your negotiation can strengthen your relationship.

In that spirit, we leave the choice of strategy for negotiating with Americans to you.

MANY EXCEPTIONS

Throughout our survey of American management, communication, and negotiation styles, we have suggested what American preferences might be, the sorts of expectations they might have, and examples of behavior that you might encounter. Negotiation is yet another of our gray areas, with many exceptions and variations according to individual personality, organizational norms, and situational requirements.

To set ourselves on firmer ground, let us now turn our attention to areas of American business practice in which specific guidelines, or indeed rules, can help you avoid certain problems and resolve others.