Intercultural negotiations Barbara Mazur

Culture classification- G. Hofstede Power distance (PDI) Uncertainty Avoidance (UIA) Individualism-Collectivism Masculinity-Femininity

Power distance Power distance- the degree of inequality among people which the population of a country considers as normal: from relatively equal (small power distance) to extremely unequal (large power distance). The extent to which the less powerful members of organizations and institutions (like the family) accept and expect that power is distributed unequally. This represents inequality (more versus less), but defined from below, not from above. It suggests that a society's level of inequality is endorsed by the followers as much as by the leaders.

Individualism/collectivism the degree to which people in a country prefer to act as individuals rather than as members of groups.  On the individualist side we find societies in which the ties between individuals are loose: everyone is expected to look after him/herself and his/her immediate family. On the collectivist side, we find societies in which people from birth onwards are integrated into strong, cohesive in-groups, often extended families (with uncles, aunts and grandparents) which continue protecting them in exchange for unquestioning loyalty.

Masculinity/ femininity versus its opposite, femininity, refers to the distribution of roles between the genders which is another fundamental issue for any society to which a range of solutions are found. The IBM studies revealed that (a) women's values differ less among societies than men's values; (b) men's values from one country to another contain a dimension from very assertive and competitive and maximally different from women's values on the one side, to modest and caring and similar to women's values on the other.

Masculinity/femininity The assertive pole has been called 'masculine' and the modest, caring pole 'feminine'. The women in feminine countries have the same modest, caring values as the men; in the masculine countries they are somewhat assertive and competitive, but not as much as the men, so that these countries show a gap between men's values and women's values.

Uncertainty Avoidance deals with a society's tolerance for uncertainty and ambiguity; it ultimately refers to man's search for Truth. It indicates to what extent a culture programs its members to feel either uncomfortable or comfortable in unstructured situations. Unstructured situations are novel, unknown, surprising, different from usual. Uncertainty avoiding cultures try to minimize the possibility of such situations by strict laws and rules, safety and security measures, and on the philosophical and religious level by a belief in absolute Truth; 'there can only be one Truth and we have it'.

Uncertainty Avoidance People in uncertainty avoiding countries are also more emotional, and motivated by inner nervous energy. The opposite type, uncertainty accepting cultures, are more tolerant of opinions different from what they are used to; they try to have as few rules as possible, and on the philosophical and religious level they are relativist and allow many currents to flow side by side. People within these cultures are more phlegmatic and contemplative, and not expected by their environment to express emotions

Individualism/ collectivism in negotiations Self interest is a factor that affects the level of joint gains: Because American negotiators are from an individualistic culture, they focus on their self interest more than the collectivistic Japanese who emphasized social obligations.

Individualism/ collectivism in negotiations When negotiators are both from individualistic cultures the self interest focused parties are able to mutually achieve high goals. A negotiator who is driven by self- interest may not be willing to continue the negotiation once their goals have been satisfied, and the negotiation could end too early to accomplish joint gains.

Individualism/ collectivism in negotiations People from individualistic cultures seek to be recognized from others by personal accomplishment, they are drawn to encouraging information and they concentrate on gaining characteristics that establish their uniqueness. This is in contrast to collectivists whose “emphasis on fitting in foster a bias toward negative information and a focus on eliminating negative characteristics that helps one avoid relational discord or group disruption”

Individualism/collectivism in negotiations What this means is that those from individualistic and collectivistic cultures seem to differ in whether they promote approach versus avoidance motivation. Collectivists seem more pessimistic, fearful of failure and have a greater tendency to be self-critical as opposed to individualists.

Individualism/collectivism in negotiations Experiences with individualistic cultures such as the United States and collectivist’s cultures like South Korea and Russia show that in the United States, attainment of positive outcomes is emphasized and valued, whereas in South Korea and Russia, avoiding negative outcome is emphasized and valued. Collectivists tend to be more neurotic, introverted, more afraid of failure, and more anxious socially than are individualists.

Individualism/collectivism in negotiations Collectivists also use more avoidance-based coping strategies than individualists. In the United States, where the cultural value is individualistic, the realization of positive conclusions is stressed and respected. The South Koreans and Russians tend to have a more cautious approach because they do not want to lose.

Individualism/collectivism in negotiations Collectivists are more likely to cooperate in negotiations where they stand to lose. Individualists, like the Americans, are quite happy to leave a negotiation if it does not result in a profitable deal for them.

Individualism/collectivism in negotiations In collectivistic cultures, people value relationships and social networks far greater than in individualistic cultures. People from collectivistic cultures are expected to support group members and help sustain one another. To collectivists, relationships with groups are more long-term, permanent and important than to the individualists In individualistic societies, negotiators are interchangeable because the focus is on competency as opposed to relationship.

Individualism/collectivism in negotiations Based on the above information, it appears that American negotiators should be well prepared to foster informal as well as formal relations with people from collectivistic societies. Knowing that collectivistic cultures thrive in group-win-win situations can lead to positive integrative decisions.

Power distance Hierarchy cultures, from Asia to Africa or the Middle East, respect is demanded by those in senior positions Those higher up on the social ladder are given authority and advantage, whereas those lower on the social scale are duty-bound to submit to social superiors and abide by their request. The high-status members in a hierarchy culture are obligated to look out for the needs of the lower status members. In addition, members of hierarchical society expect to deal with their peers and it is important to “match eagles with eagles”

Power distance Cultures that are more egalitarian do not have the same obligations to their lower status members that high-status members of more hierarchical focused cultures do. This is because, even though there are social status distinctions, the social boundaries of the egalitarian society are fluctuating, making one’s superior status subject to change.

Power distance Conflict between different status groups in hierarchical cultures becomes incompatible to the social structure where the norm is for lower status members not to challenge the directives of social superiors. For this reason, negotiators can assume that conflict between members of different statuses will be less frequent in hierarchical cultures as opposed to egalitarian cultures. In a hierarchal society, if two members of the same social class are at odds, they will defer the conflict to a superior rather than have a direct confrontation. This happens because hierarchical societies count with rules that facilitate interaction among members through the routing of conflict that reaches superiors . “The decision by the high status third party rein forces their authority without necessarily conferring differentiated status on the contestants as would be the case in negotiation in which one party won and the other lost”

Power distance When resolving conflict, egalitarian cultures will encourage direct face-to-face negotiations, mediation, and/or group decision making. Negotiators can assume that social status as a source of power will be more important for those in hierarchical cultures than in egalitarian ones.

Power distance During transactional negotiations, egalitarian cultures rarely use BATNA (best alternative to a negotiated agreement) as a source of power, unless things are not progressing toward an agreement because they would rather concentrate on the issues, priorities and interest relevant to the current negotiations. Cultures that are more hierarchical tend to use all forms of power in negotiation, whether it is status, BATNA, and/or persuasion.

Power distance When interacting socially, egalitarians expect the encounter to be equal whereas those from hierarchical cultures do not. Power is related to ones status in a hierarchical culture and this status is not going to change from one negotiation to another. We can consider power in hierarchical cultures as fixed. Negotiators can assume that social status as a source of power will be more important for those in hierarchical cultures than in egalitarian ones.

Power distance During transactional negotiations, egalitarian cultures rarely use BATNA as a source of power, unless things are not progressing toward an agreement because they would rather concentrate on the issues, priorities and interest relevant to the current negotiations. Cultures that are more hierarchical tend to use all forms of power in negotiation, whether it is status, BATNA, and/or persuasion.

Power distance Americans are more inclined toward egalitarian traits, while Japanese are more hierarchical. The Japanese, more than the Americans, pay more attention to power in regards to their preparation. When they recognize distributive tactics, they followed distributive norms more forcefully than the U.S negotiators. TheJapanese tend to rate role and company as more important factors to negotiation.

Power distance Japanese do not see BATNA as power like the Americans do and this difference may add to a lower level of joint gains for the cross-cultural negotiators. Japanese tend to view BATNA as a point to reach for in negotiations rather than a starting point to begin negotiations .“

Power distance It is suggests that BATNA served as a low anchor for some Japanese negotiating interculturaly, and therefore, contributed to premature closure of discussions of options and the relatively low level of joint gains in the intercultural negotiations as compared with the intra-cultural negotiations”

Conflict solving Competitive: People who tend towards a competitive style take a firm stand, and know what they want. They usually operate from a position of power, drawn from things like position, rank, expertise, or persuasive ability. This style can be useful when there is an emergency and a decision needs to be make fast; when the decision is unpopular; or when defending against someone who is trying to exploit the situation selfishly. However it can leave people feeling bruised, unsatisfied and resentful when used in less urgent situations.

Conflict solving Collaborative: People tending towards a collaborative style try to meet the needs of all people involved. These people can be highly assertive but unlike the competitor, they cooperate effectively and acknowledge that everyone is important. This style is useful when a you need to bring together a variety of viewpoints to get the best solution; when there have been previous conflicts in the group; or when the situation is too important for a simple trade-off.

Conflict solving Compromising: People who prefer a compromising style try to find a solution that will at least partially satisfy everyone. Everyone is expected to give up something, and the compromiser him- or herself also expects to relinquish something. Compromise is useful when the cost of conflict is higher than the cost of losing ground, when equal strength opponents are at a standstill and when there is a deadline looming.

Conflict solving Accommodating: This style indicates a willingness to meet the needs of others at the expense of the person's own needs. The accommodator often knows when to give in to others, but can be persuaded to surrender a position even when it is not warranted. This person is not assertive but is highly cooperative. Accommodation is appropriate when the issues matter more to the other party, when peace is more valuable than winning, or when you want to be in a position to collect on this "favor" you gave. However people may not return favors, and overall this approach is unlikely to give the best outcomes.

Conflict solving Avoiding: People tending towards this style seek to evade the conflict entirely. This style is typified by delegating controversial decisions, accepting default decisions, and not wanting to hurt anyone's feelings. It can be appropriate when victory is impossible, when the controversy is trivial, or when someone else is in a better position to solve the problem. However in many situations this is a weak and ineffective approach to take.

Kodeks Etyki Kodeks Etyki Biznesu Sekcji Serwisowej Zrzeszenia Międzynarodowych Przewoźników Drogowych przeznaczony jest dla użytkowników Programu „Razem w Przyszłość”, partnerów biznesowych oraz pracowników Sekcji Serwisowej i jest potwierdzeniem ogólnych zasad, na których opiera się działalność gospodarcza Sekcji.

Kodeks Etyki Jako Sekcja Serwisowa głęboko wierzymy, że podstawą sukcesu i rozwoju działalności gospodarczej jest zapewnienie relacji opartych na wzajemnym zaufaniu naszych klientów –członków ZMPD i użytkowników programu, partnerów biznesowych – dostawców towarów, pracowników oraz innych stron zaangażowanych w program poprzez uczciwość, profesjonalizm, kompetencje i przestrzeganie zasad gospodarki wolnorynkowej.

Kodeks Etyki Uważamy, że uczciwość, rzetelność, prawość i szczerość są wartościami, na których opierać się powinny kontakty zarówno biznesowe, jak i osobiste. Zależy nam bardzo, aby zachowanie przedstawicieli wszystkich zaangażowanych w nasz program stron odzwierciedlało najwyższe standardy, jakie zostały zawarte w niniejszym kodeksie.

Kodeks Etyki Będąc w ZMPD departamentem o charakterze komercyjnym odpowiadamy przed naszą dyrekcją generalną oraz zarządem zrzeszenia. Dobra opinia o zespole Sekcji Serwisowej jest dla nas najwyższą wartością i musi być zapewniona poprzez etyczne działania i zachowania pracowników. Kryteria podejmowania decyzji biznesowych opierają się na rachunku ekonomicznym z uwzględnieniem długoterminowych korzyści dla firm członkowskich ZMPD, dla ZMPD, dla branży transportowej a także uwzględniają czynniki społeczne i ekologiczne.

Kodeks Etyki Działalność nasza opiera się na przestrzeganiu prawa polskiego oraz regulacji w jurysdykcjach w innych krajach, skąd pochodzą nasi partnerzy biznesowi i klienci. Nie będziemy angażować się w nieuczciwe praktyki gospodarcze ani nieetyczne działania w celu osiągnięcia przewagi monopolistycznej wobec innych podmiotów w branży transportowej.

Kodeks Etyki Charakter naszej działalności umożliwia uczestniczenie w atrakcyjnych wydarzeniach i spotkaniach z udziałem klientów Sekcji Serwisowej, partnerów biznesowych oraz innych podmiotów, gdzie może dojść do wymiany upominków. Mogą to być jednak tylko upominki o niewysokiej wartości i muszą być wręczane lub przyjmowane w zgodzie z prawem i w sposób otwarty oraz nie budzący podejrzeń.

Kodeks Etyki Szczególną uwagę przykładamy do zachowania najwyższych standardów w zakresie poufności informacji gospodarczej w celu ochrony danych klientów Sekcji Serwisowej, pracowników, partnerów biznesowych i innych podmiotów. Nie będziemy w żaden sposób wspierać tych przedsiębiorców, którzy łamią prawo, ukrywają fakt braku płynności finansowej i prowadzą działalność niezgodną z naszą etyką biznesu.

Kodeks Etyki Będziemy prowadzić uzasadnione działania w celu uniknięcia konfliktów interesów wszystkich stron i pracowników zaangażowanych w realizację programu. Będziemy wspierać w Sekcji Serwisowej kulturę współpracy i pracy zespołowej poprzez szacunek wobec przełożonych i pracowników oraz poprzez unikanie wszelkich form dyskryminacji pracowników, klientów, partnerów biznesowych i innych podmiotów.

Kodeks Etyki We wszystkim co robimy będziemy kierować się korzyściami dla naszych klientów, partnerów gospodarczych i dla ZMPD oraz stowarzyszeń regionalnych. Ciągle będziemy poszukiwać sposobów ulepszania naszych usług i ofert w celu jak najwyższego zaspokojenia potrzeb naszych klientów, partnerów biznesowych i potrzeb ZMPD oraz całej branży transportowej.

Kodeks Etyki Klienci Sekcji Serwisowej Firmy członkowskie ZMPD, które zdecydują się skorzystać z programu „Razem w przyszłość” i inni jego użytkownicy będą przestrzegać najwyższych zasad etyki biznesu w stosunku do wszystkich pozostałych podmiotów zaangażowanych w programie. Będą przestrzegać prawo oraz zasad uczciwej konkurencji, rzetelności i profesjonalności wobec odbiorców swoich usług transportowych w kraju i za granicą.

Kodeks Etyki Będą przestrzegać Regulaminu korzystania z programu „Razem w przyszłość”, a w szczególności nie będą próbować osiągać korzyści z bezpośrednich kontaktów z partnerami biznesowymi ZMPD z pominięciem ZMPD, które wynegocjowało dla nich korzystne oferty. W sytuacji problemów z płatnościami klienci wstrzymają się od korzystania z oferty Sekcji Serwisowej do czasu osiągnięcia właściwej płynności finansowej.

Kodeks Etyki Klienci nie będą przekazywać nikomu swoich uprawnień w zakresie możliwości skorzystania z ofert specjalnie dla nich przygotowanych przez Sekcje Serwisową, a w szczególności nie będą odstępować karty członkowsko-serwisowej ZMPD ani danych z nią związanych osobom nieuprawnionym. Klienci będą przestrzegać zasad poufności informacji gospodarczej, do której będą mieli dostęp poprzez oferty otrzymywane od Sekcji Serwisowej oraz informacje poufne zawarte na stronach internetowych portalu Sekcji Serwisowej.

Kodeks Etyki Partnerzy biznesowi Partnerzy biznesowi Sekcji Serwisowej ZMPD uczestniczący w Programie „Razem w przyszłość” będą przestrzegać najwyższych zasad etyki biznesu w stosunku do wszystkich pozostałych podmiotów zaangażowanych w programie. Będą przestrzegać zasad poufności informacji gospodarczej, informacji o klientach Sekcji Serwisowej, które to informacje będą otrzymywać od Sekcji Serwisowej w celu zawarcia transakcji gospodarczych.

Kodeks Etyki Będą przestrzegać zasady uczciwości w zakresie powstrzymana się od przyznania korzystniejszych lub takich samych warunków handlowych podmiotom konkurencyjnym wobec ZMPD. Przyznane warunki handlowe będą odzwierciedlać uczciwe zasady rachunku ekonomicznego i konkurencji w gospodarce wolnorynkowej i będą zmierzały w kierunku rozwoju długofalowej współpracy z ZMPD a nie ograniczały wyłącznie do zdobycia licznej grupy klientów przy pomocy ZMPD.

Kodeks Etyki Będą przestrzegać Regulaminu korzystania z programu „Razem w przyszłość”, a w szczególności nie będą próbować osiągać korzyści z bezpośrednich kontaktów z klientami ZMPD z pominięciem ZMPD, za którego pośrednictwem uzyskali klientów. Razem z ZMPD będą dbali o dobre imię polskiej branży transportowej w kraju jak i na świecie.