Need a dissertation like this one? Get in touch via the email address or order form on our homepage.

Abstract

The present research was carried out with the aim of studying the influence of cultural difference on the business negotiation in the garment trade between the UK and China. There were four specific objectives for the research. To understand the influences of the diverse national values on business negotiation by reviewing and discussing previous research; to investigate how national cultural difference between UK and China affects the business negotiation of Chinese garment companies during trading in UK market; to analyse how the effectiveness of cross-cultural communication may influence the processes of business negotiation between China and UK companies, and to recommend ways of improving Chinese companies’ negotiation cross cultures. The research reviewed a plethora of secondary sources to inform its design and analysis, and it was found that national values, cross-cultural communication effectiveness, and national cultural differences greatly affected the business negotiation processes between these two given countries. The study adopted a qualitative study technique, with interviews as the preferred data collection method. Six managers from three different companies were interviewed and the findings were analysed using content analysis method. From the analysis, it was found that managers felt strongly that communication, national values, and cultural differences were indispensable in the quest for a successful international business deal between any two countries. As such, managers are advised to take precaution in their managerial decisions and ensure that their employees as well as the rest of the management team consider these issues as essential issues in international business management.

Chapter 1 – Introduction

1.1 Background of the research

The contemporary businesses are driven by the heightened need to gain and sustain competitive advantages in an integrated business environment contested with increasing competition, globalization, advancement in technology, and changing management practices (Steers, Sánchez-Runde, and Nardon, 2010). These business influential forces push numerous companies to consider seeking success outside the confinement of domestic or familiar business environment. Fundamentally, Steers, Sánchez-Runde, and Nardon (2010) identify that businesses experience a burgeoning number of transactions characterized by their involvement with international customers, joint ventures, and supplier relationships. To meet business objectives in the more integrated business world, communication at an international level is paramount. Arguably, Huang (2010) posits that a company’s profitability would in part be influenced by its success in business communications strategies and skills, including negotiation skills. As such, cross cultural communications and more specifically, negotiations are inevitable in the daily business transactions.

Negotiations, from a broader perspective are described as all systems of communication, discussions, exchanging of opinions, consultations, and attainment of a formal agreement (Chang, 2006). Literatures identify that there are two types of negotiations: transactional, which relates to the product purchasing and selling, or conflict related negotiations. According to Fox (1994) findings, before pursuing negotiations, parties involved should begin with preparation, which encompasses market surveys, perhaps for the product prices, understanding of the motivations, values and beliefs of the other party. In affirmation, preparation leads to attainment of significant knowledge that offers suitable bargaining powers, which could provide leverage during negotiations.

Chang (2006) identifies that while some researchers are adamant that negotiation behaviour occurs in a predetermined background where cultural backgrounds of the negotiators are irrelevant, others posits that negotiations are fundamentally dissimilar in different countries and take unique forms from country to country. Even so, Seng and Lim (2004) cautions that business negotiations in cross-cultural frameworks is not concerned with achieving a consensus or exploiting a company’s position, but maintaining undue respect for the values (culture) of the negotiating partner and forming continuing amiable business relationships. To underscore the significance of respecting different culture in the field of international negotiations, a great level of sophistication has been recorded in the way organisations approach negotiations internationally (Montana and Charnov, 2008). As such, borrowing from earlier research, whose findings are resonate in the more contemporary research, gaining insights into different cultural norms, values, and beliefs is paramount to prospecting successful negotiations at a global level (Cricillo, Fremantle, and Hamburg, 2000).  

With the proliferation of international garment markets, business executives have increasingly gained knowledge and cognizance of the significance of cross-cultural communication in influencing business success and offering valued competitive advantages (Huang, 2010). However, some top managers in international garment trade sometimes fail to recognise the importance understanding various barriers brought about by cultural differences. Given the common understanding that culture generally varies from one to the other (Huang, 2010), cultural differences are more than likely to influence company decisions such as, modes and strategies of entry in to international markets, decisions to target various markets in foreign environments, decisions to formulate marketing programs, as well as, the power to control operations in foreign markets. Successful negotiations are vital in securing good business deals.

To various extents, diversity in cultural backgrounds culminates into different forms of negotiations. Tse, Francis, and Walls, (1994) found that individuals from diverse cultures utilize significantly unlike negotiation methods. Such negotiation approaches may take the form of communication styles, persuasion strategies, and etiquettes used. Nevertheless, Liu (1996) argues that this relationship is not absolute, but managers involved in negotiations should avoid stereotyping at all costs. Propagating stereotypes leads to distrust between the parties involved in negotiations, not to mention, creation of obstacles that negatively influence the parties such as misunderstandings (Bolewski, 2008).   

In order to comprehend the influence of cross-cultural difference on the business negotiation, cross-cultural studies delineating communications models and theories can appropriately be applied. On the one hand, various national culture models such as Hofstede five dimensions of culture provide suitable contributions to understanding the strengths and weaknesses of different cultures nationally. Moreover understanding why business negotiations fail across culture would lean towards the explanations offered, for instance, by Hofstede five factors, including power distance, masculinity, individualism, long-term orientation, and Uncertainty avoidance index (Hofstede, 2011). Other considerations as articulated in earlier contributions in the field of cross-culture and negotiations include business etiquette, language adeptness, and history (Martin and Larsen, 1999). Generally, as Martin and Larsen (1999) identified, misunderstanding results in communication process failures, whereby, language obstacles are the common contributors.

On the other hand, Edward Hall’s high and low context culture theory is essential in describing the cultural dimensions upon which the research can draw understanding of the cultural factors that influence decision making and negotiation behaviour across cultures. Without disregarding the verbal and nonverbal codes of communication, communication between people from different cultures is affected by the context in which interactants meet. Hall and Hall (1990) asserted that salient features of the context include the physical, perceptual and sociorelational backgrounds, as well as the cultural backgrounds. Salient connections with the Hofstede five-dimension model are observed in the consideration that the cultural context entails features as collectivism and individualism. Based upon Hall’s descriptions, physical environment entails the definite geographical setting, for example, office while perceptual arena describes the attitudes, impetuses, and intellectual temperaments of the interactants. However, the relationship between parties in a negotiation such as, the superior/subordinate relations is relevant sociorelational consideration. Of great importance is that the extent to which parties concentrates on the above contexts while negotiating differs substantially from culture to culture (Hall, 1976). 

From a different research, Peleckis (2013) in his study identified that the context of negotiations at the global level is contested with differences between several cultures. The research centred on Hofstede’s five dimensions of culture but included other relevant factors as follows: context factors, communication such as expressive (emotional) dissimilarities between the negotiating parties, a continuing attitude towards communication.        

1.2 Research rationale

From a theoretical perspective, this research aims to help in adding to the body of knowledge regarding the influences of cultural difference on business negotiations. Previous research has focused on discussing the dimensions of cultural dimensions in businesses across cultures with very little explanations to offer understanding of cultural intelligence and it influences on business negotiations across cultures. As such, this research is relevant and much needed in the current times where globalization is the order of the day.

The consideration of investments in international markets entails preparations in terms of researching for increased knowledge regarding the traditions, variations, and properties that define the prospect global market. In order to facilitate business processes, international businesses seek to amend their operations or practices to fit the particularities of the other party in a partnership, strategic alliance, or joint venture (Peleckis, 2013). This research comes in to assist businesses achieve this objective through the analysis of cultural dimensions with the aim of providing knowledge regarding the incompatibilities of different nations chiefly through the Hofstede’s cultural dimensions. Moreover, international companies will benefit in their conceptualization of global business negotiation processes, given the articulation of different cultural dimensions. The importance of understanding cross-cultural communication with a bias on negotiation is prominent more so due to the possible risks that would befall an international company with poor negotiation skills. Important to note is that a distortion in cross-cultural communication has a high probability of weakening a company’s competitive position in the international arena thereby hindering it from achieving business objectives and eventually leading to company demise (Steers, Sánchez-Runde, and Nardon, 2010).

Moreover, this research emerges as a significant endeavour that should lead to increased understanding of the different cultural communication hindrances to effective business negotiations. Some of these hindrances may include, etiquette (greeting, eye contact), attitudes towards time, negotiation styles (which may be as an influence of culture, for example, ideologies, gift offering customs, and importance of gestures among other factors (Montana and Charnov, 2008).    

The need to understand cultural difference that guide effective operations in international markets is exemplified through some highly popular blunders by international company managers depicting disregard for culture differences. It is therefore significantly imperative that this study seeks to offer the conceptual understanding upon culture intelligence (learning about culture in terms of diversified histories, values, beliefs, and local value for time and responsibilities) can be based.  Greater extents of understanding and engagement in communications between the negotiating parties and with respect to cultural value and beliefs of both parties increase the chances of positive outcome of the negotiations.     

1.3 Research aim and objectives

This research aims to study the impact of cultural difference on international business negotiation and how it can increase the rate of negotiation success by interviewing three different Garment Company including Bosideng and Dayang Group and Youngor Group from China which are doing garment business with different countries including the UK. To achieve this aim, the research is guided by the following research objectives

1. To understanding the influences of the diverse national values on business negotiation by reviewing and discussing previous research
2. To investigate how national cultural difference between UK and China affects the business negotiation of Chinese garment companies during trading in UK market;
3. To analyse how the effectiveness of cross-cultural communication may influence the processes of business negotiation between China and UK companies
4. To recommend ways of improving Chinese companies’ negotiation cross cultures.

1.4 Research questions   

Based on the above research aim and objectives, this research will seek to answer various questions regarding cultural intelligence and its relevance in influencing business negotiations. The following are the questions

1. How do culture and values differ in the UK and China?
2. What are the relevant and most significant considerations for successful business negotiations from a basis of cultural values and beliefs in the UK and China?
3. How to strengthen cross-cultural communication during business negotiation  of the UK and China garment companies

1.5 Research outline

In order to achieve the research objective set earlier, this research includes seven chapters. From the start, the research introduces the concepts of negotiations and cross-cultural differences. This is done through the research background that provides relationship between the cross-cultural difference and business negotiations from the existing theoretical basis. Other relevant parts of the first chapter include, the research rationale describing the significance of the research in the modern day business arena, and the research aim and objectives that provide guidance for this research. Secondly, the research discourses the earlier and more modern literatures with a bias on seeking relevant information from credible sources including peer reviewed journals, books and internets sources of cross cultural differences and negotiations. This chapter will focus on discussions of the cross-cultural communication, national cultural difference, cross-cultural negotiation theory, the influence of national cultural difference on business negotiation, and the improvement of cross-cultural communication competence.

Thirdly, pertinent methodological methods used in the research, as well as the reasons for their choices will be discussed in the third chapter. In the fourth chapter, the research will make the data analysis and get effective research findings. Moreover, the fifth chapter will entail relevant discussions of the research findings. The sixth chapter comes to the final conclusion and put forward recommendations based on the findings. Besides, it also shows research limitations and how future research will be guided. The last chapter is personal reflection.

Chapter 2 – Literature review

2.1 Introduction

Basing on the objectives and perspectives of this research’s theoretical and empirical arms in the quest to better analyse the influences of cross-cultural difference on business negotiation, this chapter will entail past papers that have been done and consider relevant models shade light to different viewpoints taken in regards to the topic. To achieve these credible sources including relevant internet sources, books and past scholarly journals will be considered to give a well analysed review. To better understand the topic under review, theories that are hinged on cross-cultural difference in relation international business front and how they affect business globally will discussed using Hofstede framework and context theory. To add on, this paper will analyse models that affect the cross-cultural engagements and communication from an aspect of language misunderstanding (Hofstede et al., 2002), and pertinent issues of non-language communication conflicts for instance; customs, etiquette, silence, eye contact just to name a few (Liu, 2009). Additionally, cultural diversity that is brought about by national cultural differences and negotiation platforms form a basis of understanding better how the global business community crosses paths to making successes and the flaws that befall internationalisation in the business initiation processes (Pagano, 2007). 

2.2 Cross-cultural negotiation theory

Negotiation is one of the most critical elements in any business interaction (Brett, 2001). In fact negotiation can be described as the process in which a number of parties get together to discuss and evaluate common and conflicting interests. The main aim of such a seating is in the hope that they will reach a common agreement which in turn will benefit both sides (Crump, 2011). The negotiation process in the business realm is generally a very complex process, which is easily influenced by the diverse cultures from which the parties have been socialized, educated or even reinforced (Lee et al, 2011). A good example can be given by the fact that any person’s conduct at a time of negotiation will be determined by their ethnic encounter which is embedded too deep in the cultural background. As a result, behaviour negotiations are normally consistent within cultural boundaries making each culture to have its own distinct negotiation style (Ready and Tessema, 2011).

On this note, when the negotiation involves international business perspectives then it is referred to as inter-cultural or cross-cultural negotiation behaviours (Crump, 2011). At this point, the parties involved come from different countries and do not share the same cultural thinking, feeling or even behaviour (Lombardo, 2009). Such aspects can in turn easily affect the entire negotiation process and its subsequent outcome. However, it’s very crucial to ensure that mutually beneficial outcomes are achieved from cross-cultural negotiations hence the need of using an elaborate and all inclusive negotiation process as outlined in the discussion that follows (Ready and Tessema, 2011).

The negotiation process that normally precedes a cross-cultural business negotiation can easily be divided into two stages: the non task related interaction and the task related interaction (Lee et al, 2011). The non task related interaction will outline the whole process of the members engaging in the negotiation getting to know each other very well (Lewicki et al, 2015). This phase involve the actual face to face meetings whereby the actual business aspects are left out of the meeting. The outcome of such non task related meetings is normally influenced by perspectives such as the distinction of status, formation of impression and the level of interpersonal attraction achieved between the negotiators (Bhagat et al, 2012).

The second phase or stage of negotiation process will involve the actual interaction of the business agreement (Rodrigues, 2009). It normally involves the sharing of the needs, tastes and preferences of the negotiators regarding the business aspect on the table. This stage takes a keen interest on the exchange of information, persuading and bargaining strategies, and finally any making of concessions, which at the end results into the final business agreement (Sycara et al, 2013). Once the agreement has been done, the parties engage in the signage of a contract which legally binds the negotiators to own their distinct side of the agreement (Fells, 2010). This then marks the end of the negotiation process.

Negotiation in the international business front

Negotiation in relation to international business coffers can be described as an agreed interaction of a business nature that involves parties of different nationalities coming from different cultural backgrounds (Liu, 2009). This process is primarily aimed at making a mutual understanding in redefining the mode of associations and interdependencies which will form the need to necessitate the business partnership (Lee, Adair and Seo, 2011). Following the diversity of international cultures, the success of international trade is determined by the skills involved in negotiation amongst the potential trading partners (Groves, Feyerherm and Gu, 2014). This forms a prime interdependence that this paper focuses to unlock the potential and the systems that can aide its success or fail.

2.3 The influence of national cultural difference on cross-cultural business negotiation

2.3.1 National cultural difference

National culture can easily be defined as the values, behaviours, beliefs and norms which are a main characteristic of a certain national group (Dowling, Festing and Engle, 2008). Such forces normally tend to be very distinct in the country’s culture, an aspect which in turn impacts the legal, educational, political, technological and socio-cultural frameworks adopted in the country (Hofstede, 1991). Such are the ones which demarcate and make one country’s culture to be very different from the culture of another nation, hence resulting to national culture differences (Hofstede & Hofstede, 2005). In relation to this, it is fair to state that national culture will therefore provide a big context for business negotiations since it takes place within the confinements of cultural institutions which are governed by the norms and values (Minkov et al, 2012).

National culture highly affects the business negotiation processes and subsequent outcome, making these practices differ from country to country. The national culture in fact will deliver on the negotiation style which the cultural diverse business partners will use during the negotiating process (Leung et al, 2005). It will also define the way these people will perceive or even approach the entire process as they will tend to view issues like power, time, risk, flow of communication or any complexity differently, and as based on their cultural background (Chen, 2006). A good example can be shown by the fact that individualist business negotiators will always tend to be coercive or aggressive during the negotiation process. On the other hand, collectivist business negotiators will be more inclined towards the formulation of solid relationships from the entire process. All these aspects are generally strongly embedded in the national culture which these people come from.

2.3.2 Hofstede’s cultural framework and impact on cross-cultural business negotiations

Hofstede model is the model that had generally look at many of the aspect in cultural problem and also balance the weight of each dimension to create a better view to the whole problem of cultural. Hofstede model of cultural dimension divided into six dimensions which each of them are used to describe and research on different aspect in culture (Hofstede, 2005). The model was widely used by many researchers to explain the effect in business and also communication. Hofstede model of culture dimension is explain by researcher Hofstede & Minkov (2010) as a model which had set up a s a framework to explain in detail about culture dimension which can use to describes the effects of a society’s culture on the values of its members, and how these values relate to behavior, using a structure derived from factor analysis. Hofstede’s cultural framework will be used in this dissertation which is in Appendix 1.  The six Dimension will include the Power distance, Uncertainty Avoidance, Masculine/ Feminine, Individualistic/ Collectivistic, Time Perspective and indulgence/ restraint. The six dimensions will be a very good example that cultural intelligent in six of this dimension can help business to increase success rate in business negotiation (Wittenkamp, 2014).

The five cultural dimensions as supported by Hofstede has shade so much light in the comparative study of the differences in national cultures as perceived by difference countries. They will be analysed in the light of exactly how they affect business negotiation process in regard to the objectives, ways, time and place arrangement, etiquette, communication style, contract agreement of negotiation. The first dimension is the power distance dimension which will have a direct impact on the communication style and etiquette which is used during the negotiation process. Sears & Jacko (2007) researcher in human interaction will explain the term of power distance as the extent to which the less powerful members of organizations and institutions (like the family) accept and expect that power is distributed unequally.” Cultures that endorse low power distance expect and accept power relations that are more consultative or democratic. The organization with less power distance will having more interaction between employee and manager which eventually will be one of the core that will effect negotiation. This is so since the communication style in many cultures is determined by power distribution in the institutions (Hofstede, 1991). In countries with high power distance the negotiators will tend to value the communication style will always tend to be direct and to the point, and the negotiation way to be very formal and adhering to a strict protocol (Hofstede & Hofstede, 2005). In low power distance countries, the negotiation ways will tend to be very respectful, while the communication style dominated with a lot of softness and non-verbal language like gestures (Hofstede & Hofstede, 2005).

Uncertainty avoidance is the second core of culture intelligent which can affect the international level business negotiation. Uncertainty avoidance is the measures if people are comfortable with taking risks, ready to change the way they work or live (low UA) or if people prefer the known systems (high UA). Sears & Jacko (2007) explain the term as reflects the extent to which members of a society attempt to cope with anxiety by minimizing uncertainty. People in cultures with high uncertainty avoidance tend to be more emotional. They try to minimize the occurrence of unknown and unusual circumstances and to proceed with careful changes step by step planning and by implementing rules, laws and regulations. In contrast, low uncertainty avoidance cultures accept and feel comfortable in unstructured situations or changeable environments and try to have as few rules as possible.

The will have a direct impact on the level of risk the negotiators can take, thus impacting on the objectives and contract agreement perspectives of the process. Therefore, business negotiators from national cultures with high uncertainty avoidance will always tend to want to safeguard the future sustainability of the business objectives by pushing for the signing of a contract during the business negotiation process, while those coming from low uncertainty avoidance cultures will be more keen on developing long-term relationships as their level of trust is high and fear for unfamiliar situation low (Minkov et al, 2012). It is very obvious that when a business is going to cooperate with other business to run a program or a business, it is very important to know how much risk will the partner is willing to take as dragging a business into risk will cause business negotiation to fail. Ubobong (2014) in the previous chapter had describe uncertainty avoidance is the first cultural intelligent that must be process in international business. The same result had been found in Zieba (2009) research in cross culture negotiation which Zieba state that there is always risk involved in negotiations. The final outcome is unknown when the negotiations commence. The more creative one of the side is the more risk will it drag the partner of negotiation into and increase the chance of failure in negotiation. Beside that the major problem that will exist when dragging partner into risk is partner will start to question on why should they believe the first party and take on the risk. Both of the researcher had strengthen the possibility of the statement which cultural intelligent in uncertainty avoidance can be helpful in increasing the possible of succession rate in business negotiation in international level business.

The third dimension is the individualism against collectivism perspective. There are people with different set of working culture which some of them prefer to work alone and some of them will like to work in group and believe group can increase effectiveness. In individualistic societies, the stress is put on personal achievements and individual rights. People are expected to stand up for themselves and their immediate family, and to choose their own affiliations. In contrast, in collectivist societies, individuals act predominantly as members of a lifelong and cohesive group or organization. (Sears & Jacko, 2007). This dimension will play a big role in affecting the time and place aspect of the negotiation process. In individualistic cultures the people will tend to be very task-oriented thus choosing very formal places like in-house meeting or board rooms whereby less time can be used in the closing of the negotiations (Peterson, 2007). In collectivists cultures the meetings can be held in informal venues like hotels whereby sufficient time will be used in learning the business partners before the negotiation process is completed, as they are normally relation-ship oriented (Hofstede and Fink, 2007). Besides as research Hofstede, Jonker and Verwaart (2008) had carry on a research of individualistic/ collectivistic in trade state that people with individualistic culture would prefer to cooperate in smaller group when and share the achievement with smaller group of people while in the other hand collectivistic would prefer to make the achievement bigger and share in many.

The third core of culture intelligent which can help business to increases in succession rate in negotiation if negotiator know more about it. Masculine societies have different rules for men and women, less so in feminine cultures. Masculine societies have different rules for men and women, less so in feminine cultures. Sears & Jacko (2007) explain that in masculine cultures, the differences between gender roles are more dramatic and less fluid than in feminine cultures where men and women have the same values emphasizing modesty and caring. The method seem to be not a very big deal in international level business negotiation while Forbes researcher Kirdahy (2008) had make a research and end up with conclusion that men and woman can equally run on the field of business. The assumption also included in business negotiation that woman can be no different than man in business negotiation. However there are actually different set of rule run in masculine societies for man and woman where any break of the rule may be treat as unrespect and cause immediate terminate of business negotiation. The report of Beyer (2001) the reporter of Time Newspaper had state the issues that Muslim country woman cannot be the same as other country where in some country such as in Malaysia man cannot be too close to woman or not it will be counted as molest in sharia law and will cause misunderstanding in both party. In this situation it is hard to denied the importance of Masculine/ Feminine cultural intelligent in international business negotiation.

Beside that it is also very important for a party in negotiation to use the right gender to negotiate in other country. As some of the country hold the culture where they dislike woman to be the representative in negotiation where they will take the action as disrespect in business which will cause the negotiation come out to be negative. One of the example had been made by Alexis & Antoine (2014) in their research on Hofstede in Japan had given the conclusion that feminine societies are more likely to stress on life quality and intuition at the work place than masculine societies. . They state that Japan is a masculine country where it’s very hard for a woman to reach high levels in companies. They also do not prefer woman to be in negotiation which they will likely to treat it as disrespect. So Masculine/ Feminine is also an intelligence which business need to process to gain better outcome in business negotiation. Besides, in cultures dominated with masculinity the communication style during the negotiation process will be very independent and assertive in nature even while arriving at the decision, while in feminist cultures it will group oriented in nature and have decisions arrived through a consensus (Hofstede, 2011).

Lastly, long-term against short term orientation delivers the fourth dimension of this framework. This dimension will also affect the contact agreement perspective of the negotiation, as cultures with short-term orientation will allow strict rules to be followed thus ensure that contracts have been signed during the negotiation process, while long-term oriented cultures will tend to be more relaxed and engaging to form solid relationships during the process (Hofstede and Fink, 2007). The fifth core of culture different that will affect business negotiation is the time perspective in Hofstede model. Time perspective is how a business will intend to time can often be a stumbling block for Western-cultured organizations entering the China market. The length of time it takes to get business deals done in China can be two or three times that of the West. On many occasions, the initial deal takes the longest, allowing the Chinese client to feel that a suitable “courtship,” upon which a mutually beneficial and sustainable relationship can be built. So if a business negotiate initial meeting with a Chinese company does not yield an immediate sale, they do not despair. As time is the Chinese’s greatest ally (Kriss, 2006). This is because most of the business in different country will treat time differently. Example in some country they will like to invest in long term business rather than short term business as they believe long term business can bring more profile to the company in the future. As a long term business and a short term business meet in a negotiation, usually they will not end up with a successful result of negotiation.

2.3.3 Edward Hall (high and low context culture theory) and impact on cross-cultural business negotiations

Hall (1976) illustrated that a very critical dimension aspect of the negotiation process is based on the communication context involved during the process. Furthermore, the same source when ahead to claim that national culture falls in the high to low context when highlighted in relation to communication perspective (Hong, 2013). In low context cultures, the kind of communication used during this process is normally very explicit in nature (Wang, 2009). The communication is normally very formal and mainly verbal in nature. In the high context cultures on the other hand, the communication tends to be relatively less verbal and include other non-verbal expressions like gestures, body language and facial expressions (Westbrook, 2014). Therefore, Hall (1976) further affirms that it is very difficult for one to get into a business negotiation process with high context cultures unless they are completely ‘contexted’, since they will not make sense out of the communication.

2.4 The influence of the difference of national values on business negotiation

According to Lee et al., (2006), interpersonal relationship is defined as a powerful or deep link between two or more individuals that may vary in duration from enduring to brief. Different nations have different interpersonal relationship orientation. In China, for instance, this personal connection is referred to as guanxi (Gold et al., 2002). Chinese and Indian citizens’ places high premium on individual’s social capital within their relatives and friends and close confidants while for Americans, there is a belief in networking, institutions and information (Lustig et al., 2006). Although globalisation is making guanxi to be an out of date value in China, it still affects most business negotiations. Lee et al., (2006), points that in China during negotiation, the man with the most gunaxi wins. In Chinese culture, the gunaxi system advocates a strict reciprocity style where if a friend did you a favour today, the favour must be returned. The Chinese call it “Hui Bao.” However, the reciprocity does not need to be immediate. The national culture of America stresses on immediate reciprocity where if one makes concession in the morning during negotiation, in the afternoon he expects the concession to be returned to him (Brantlinger, 2013).

Besides, traditional value of a country also influences peoples’ behaviours within it. For example, the central principle of the Confucianism theory is harmony, proper behaviour through duty and loyalty and respect, which influences Asian nations especially China as an influential value. According to Warner (2010), Confucian is a hierarchical relationship. These values are expected to be showed to a leader by his subjects (Cheng, 2004). To put it plain the theory advocates for every individual to be cognizance of his/her place in the society.  It gives seniors the benevolence duty over juniors and juniors according to the Confucian theory owe seniors reverence (Cheng, 2004). In this vein, when negotiating more especially with the Chinese, it is not difficult to not the influence the Confucian ideas has on negotiations. The Confucian model has been added to Hofstede (1991)’s four models of cross-cultural communication to differentiate western cultures from Chinese cultures (Rhodes et al., 2005). According to Cheng (2004), the theory of Confucianism and Taoism stresses on patience and survival instincts this affects negotiations involving the East Asians and American since who are individualistic and value time. Negotiations between these two cultures are quite challenging since the Confucian ideas stress on following protocols that democratic nations see as a waste of time.

Furthermore, there is a scanty body of evidence about how business negotiations get affect by religious beliefs (Chang 2003). The study conducted by Tu and Chi (2011) about religious beliefs in three countries China, Taiwan and Hong Kong illustrated that religious of the negotiators influences negotiations to a greater extent. After comparing the negotiating styles of these three nations, Tu and Chi (2011) concluded that region had soaked people from these nations with particular values and attitudes consequently the negotiations in this three countries varies sharply. In the same year, Daneefard and Farazmand (2011) set up a study to investigate the negotiating styles among three nations U.S, Taiwanese and Iranians. There results confirmed Tu and Chi (2011) investigations. Their results revealed that negotiation styles in these three countries vary to a greater extent depending on the religious beliefs of each nation. It is therefore of the essence of business practice to be knowledgeable in terms of communication more importantly during business negotiations. Chang (2003) recent study of the Chinese society indicated that knowledge about the religion of the parties at the negotiating table increases the likelihood of successful deals. Finally, Thompson (2005) suggestions still carries a strong message as it were 13years ago. To him business negotiations should present a win-win situation where a deal struck by the parties at the negotiations covers virtual interests from both sides.

2.5 The influence of the different communication manner caused by national culture and values on business negotiation

2.5.1 Cross cultural communication in business negotiation

Greenfield (2013) argues that cross-cultural communication can be termed as a mode in which the international business finds its way to exchange and use modes of communication to convey messages and information for the sake of enhancing the business itself. Peterson (2004) acknowledges that the cultures are rich in modes of communication and it’s through this intelligence that the international business front is developed. This analogy is supported by Zhu (2008) who points out that the culture of yesteryears has evolved to embrace globalisation and the transformation is remarkably leading the world into homogeneous business platform. On the other hand, cross-cultural communication according to Lombardo (2015) is key to business success for an organisation that has a workforce of divergent origins. This will form a divergent but rich way of working with different cultural backgrounds and experiences.

However some scholars have come to the critic that this arrangement may pose some threats especially when language barrier and values differ in the same organisation (Elsaid, 2012). For instance, the research posed clear implications that were noticed in the pharmaceutical companies in Egypt having workers of the Egyptian origin and some technicians from the US. Cultural and religious believes counted one of the highest discrepancies according to the research. On the other hand international business front and negotiation may be hampered on the same grounds (Neves and Melé, 2013). To curb the misfortunes that come with such discrepancies, there are several theories and models that can be used to help shape fair negotiation to enhance global trade (Kankaras, 2009).

 2.5.2 Cross cultural communication models

To aide a successful communication through a multi-cultural front for the sake of internationalization and business development, players in the industry have adopted several models and theories to break risks that hinder effective global business success (Merkin, 2011). On that note, scholars and business gurus Konya (2006), Dawkins (2006) and Hernandez and Kose (2011) have been analyzing different ways to reduce the hindrances like language, cultural value differences and norms, religious differences among others to a bearable level to effectively initiate and develop businesses across the borders.

Developmental Model of Inter-cultural Sensitivity (DMIS)

According to this model, Hernandez and Kose (2011) points out that in developing intellectual competence that will form a breakthrough in solving risks of international business. Therefore, business partners ought to channel the growth through six major stages of growth with each stage characterised with different viewpoints approaches as shown in figure 1 below (Communicaid, 2015).

Fig. 1. Developmental Model of inter-cultural sensitivity (Bennett, 1993)

The first part called ethnocentric stages that entail the denial, defence and minimisation denotes the times individuals tend to reject engaging with other unfamiliar cultures (Hewer and Roberts, 2012). In addition, the look is subjective viewing others from a superior context whereas, the acceptance adaptation and integration forms what Jin (2012) terms the ethnorelative stages accounts for parties beginning to acknowledge other cultures and may tend to have some curiosity to learn about them. The parties change into accepting and ingest the new cultures with optimistic perceptions (Hewer and Roberts, 2012). In aiding negotiation, its therefore important that this transition takes place well for the business to thrive. In addition, the stages are primary to transiting from a stranger to understanding the other partner from a cultural perspective before engaging in business. Cross-cultural perspective shapes the understanding, perception and possible resultant ways and mode of negotiation best suited for that culture (Ibarra et al., 2001).

Memetic theory the theory of Memetics

This theory critically evaluates cultural values as having attachments to their hosts in that each culture has a way it manifests itself in the believes and values of an individual (Dawkins, 2006). Scholars have studied this tendency and alluded that just like genes are passed through generations, memes according to Aunger (2000) is a transferable unit of the culture that is handed on from one person to the other. Ding (2014) supports the theory in his research that, associates the adaptation of cultural diversity to instilled memes in people. These memes vary from one culture to the other and that is why they form a critical evaluating point in considering international business through a diverse background of memes (Rickards et al., 2008). Juming (2009) elaborates how the memetics theory has transformed the Chinese business models from traditionalist business in the western provinces with a wave of capitalist eastern provinces that were dominating with adopted western world-kind of life. This factor was earlier synthesised by Carney and Williams (1997) as a compound approach onto which international trade rides on.  Additionally, Tracy (2013) portends that association that forms globalisation needs understanding of the parties involved and their cultures. This forms the way they carry out their business and their negotiating mannerisms. Ibarra et al. (2001) say that negotiation is strongly hinged in the cultural values and believes that forms the association and models business negotiation rely on as shown in the figure 2 below.

Fig 2. Lifecycle of memetics and culture (Velikovsky, 2012).

2.5.3 The influence of the manner of cross-cultural communication on business negotiation

Cross-cultural communication can be done in two distinct ways; the language misunderstanding and the non-language communication conflicts like, etiquette, custom issues, actions, voice, time, silence eye contact among others.

Language misunderstanding

Language is the basic manner in which the communication amongst the trade partners will pass the information and the agreements if reached in a business agreement (Lo Bianco, 2005). This means that, language becomes an integral medium of effecting this communication (Morita, 2014). Consequently, with different languages throughout the world business partners and associates should find a way to break this barrier for effective understanding. In the international business front, language barrier is a common impediment with different cultures having different languages (Musolff, 2014). Conversely, Crowcroft (2012) advocates that, in attaining a good negotiated business understanding, countries ought to find ways to take business beyond the cultural front through formulating internationally binding mechanisms to initiate understanding. In absence of that, language misunderstandings dominate following varying backgrounds, thus message is not relayed well. For instance a native Chinese business person will find it hard to trade with a Mexican counterpart on the basis of language barrier. However, as several literatures have put it, internationally recognised languages blend in well with use of translators (when needed) to shape the trade agreements (Fantini, 2001). This also has facilitated learning of commonly recognised international languages to help the rapidly increasing global trade (Lo Bianco, 2005).

Non-language communication conflicts

Several non-language communication conflicts come to play in relation to cultural backgrounds with different perceptions in the globalization and the notions taken with different bodily expressions and other acquired attributes (Tessema and Ready, 2009). Etiquette that involves the dress codes and physical presentation for instance greeting and respect portrayed to fellow business partner is vital. For instance Singapore and many East Asian countries have a tendency of bowing with hands held together as a form of recognition, greeting and respect, a thing that is non-existent in the west where they prefer a handshake (Stromquist, 2014). Such clearly different mannerisms are culturally embedded and determine the way one will close their business agreement. Eye contact is another vital non communication attribute that may make or break a business deal. For instance a person cultured to keep direct eye contact in UK as a mode of exuding confidence and sobriety may be taken as a mode of uncultured norm on the gulf states more especially if it’s a female business associate (Mackiewicz, 2005).

Their influence on cross-cultural business negotiation

According to Griffith (2003) it is a commonly agreeable fact the pivotal role communication plays in international negotiations. Charles (2007) emphasises that for business professionals who work globally and interact daily with clients and professionals from diverse background it is of greater importance to have a grasp of business language that according to Lewis and Gates (2005) is English. Charles (2007) arguments seem to concur with Martin (1999) writings on communication. According to Martin, (1999) limited mastering of negotiation’s language brings misunderstanding and consequently negotiation failure. Martin attributes this difficulty in negotiation of cultural differences. Hofstede (2011) on his part emphasise that communication involving people from different setting more especially on negotiation demands an executive with a keen understanding of cultural diversity.

There is a large body of evidence showing how language can affect business negotiation (Handford, 2010). According to Handford (2010), how language is utilised during negotiations sends strong signals about the person negotiating and the organisation he represents. U.S and Canadians are known to speak directly, stating what they mean and meaning what they say as oppose to Asians (McNamara, 2003). The Asians can consider this culture blunt and rude (Hofstede, 2011). While accepting Harzing and Feely (2008) put it plain that language barrier is just but a tip of the iceberg. He points that various cultures have their own customs for communication more especially in business and social situations and that negotiations generally takes place within a confined period that members may not have the laxity to understand each other well. These are not new ideas as they had been communicated before by Martin (1999) and Hofstede (2011). In situations like that, Harzing and Feely (2008), points that it is difficult to comprehend and explain the choice that a partner from another side of the table is making. Handford (2010) therefore makes his final submission that such situations make it harder for the negotiators to deliver value efficiently due to misunderstanding.

Furthermore, for effective business negotiation, the body of expressions used by the negotiating parties needs to be as clear as possible asserts Plum (2008.). Expression is used here to mean clarity and simplicity in the choice of words more especially during global negotiation involving business executive from different cultural setting and whose first language is not the language of management (English). People who come from cultures that value hierarchy and authority like the Japanese and the Chinese values formal expression during negotiations, while for those western cultures whose values are shaped by democracy uses informal expressions to create friendly link and accelerates negotiations (Lee et at., 2006). In China Plum (2008) continues, informal expression is only allowed in cases where trust and firm relationship has been sealed.

According to Earleyand Mosakowski (2004), the body is a strong communication device. Body parts are used by people around the globe to convey different messages. When someone is anxious, for instance, he may lock his ankle to show it, rubbing hands as also been used by negotiators to show that they are expecting good things, during negotiation, when an individual touches his nose with an index finger this is a sign that he does not like what is being offered. Stress at the negotiating table is shown by clenching a fist (Earleyand and Mosakowski, 2004). While some of the gestures are universal, there are some which are country specific. Americans, for example, uses circle with the thumb and index finger as a symbol of “OK” meaning everything is right. In Brazil, this is a sign of vulgarity; in France, this means “zero” or nothing in Japan the symbol means “money.” While the Chinese show affection by touching a child’s head while this gesture is offensive in Arabic countries.

Differentiated behavioural manner caused by national cultures and values is an important factor that influences business negotiation. Using the time for instance, Wang (2005) believes that American and Europeans in general have view time as unilinear and would, therefore, wish the negotiation be completed very fast for them to do other businesses. To them negotiating activities needs to be scheduled failure to which they get angered. To use Graham and Lam (2003) quote, American and Europeans “budget their time as their money.” They are often restless during negotiations and frequently rush for deals. Graham and Lam (2003) reveals that this behaviour makes them be exploited by the Chinese and Japanese during negotiations. The Chinese behaviours, on the other hand, have been influenced by the Confucian culture. The culture places more value on creating rapport before getting down to business a behaviour considered by Westerners as a waste of time during the negotiation (Cheng, 2004). The Asians negotiation culture is almost similar to that of Russian business executives. Adler and Gundersen (2007) submit that Russians in sharp contrast with the US view time as the cheapest commodity that is an inexhaustible resource. The Russians negotiations skills are influenced by dilatory model and bureaucratic. Businessmen from Russia often do not rush into making deals only if they are in urgent need of what is offered.

2.6 The improvement of cross-cultural communication competence in business negotiation

International executives who are expected to be sharp in cross-cultural communication competence frequently use their meaning to conjure sense of someone else’s reality. These foreign executives as Quappe and Cantatore  (2007) submits lacks cultural competency of their own behavioural rules that can assist them adequately understand others during business negotiations.  Kim and Gudykunst (2003) acknowledge that meaning is hard to be transmitted in an ordinary communication between two or more people chiefly because of ambiguity in the language spoken. This ambiguity according to Quappe & Cantatore (2007) is the source of misunderstanding as well as misinterpretation. The language the international executives speaks or the nonverbal they use, vary depending on the myriad factors some of which have been discussed above. Nevertheless, this language is depended on one’s cultural background notes Rosen et al., (2000). International executive involved most frequently in the negotiations should understand cultural factors in the pursuit of the business success. Improving cross-cultural competency, therefore, lies at the heart of organisation success concur Yamazaki and Kayes (2004). According to McCall and Hollenbeck (2002), intercultural communication competence can be improved through several ways that include;

As Managers one needs to negotiate through a proper cultural perspective that do not prejudice or demean others. For instance, American and Europeans are linked with low-context cultural behaviours (Hall, 1973). This means that the western negotiators would wish to go straight into the business without wasting time delay. These cultures also value merit and expertise and always rush during negotiations. Wang (2005)notes that negotiating in such kind of a context requires the managers to prove their expertise first and gives minute focus to personal rapport. The opposite is true for the case of Eastern Asians nations their high context cultural values stress for building trust and relationship first before sitting down for proper negotiations. Negotiation in East Asia is more of ritualistic (Graham and Lam, 2003).

Another way, through which cross cultural communication competency can be improved, is through opening up to new ideas and appreciating difference cultural diversities (Duffy et al., 2004). However, this requires a manager who is keen at listening and talks less and also shows honesty and trust to the team he is working or negotiating with (Griffith, 2003). Managers can improve on these by attending social functions after work and during weekends, get involved or sponsor cultural awareness within the Organisation. (Hofstede, 2009), concurs with this assertion and emphasise that the social function improves managers cultural comprehension of diverse groups and at the same time engenders respect for one another.

According to McCall & Hollenbeck (2002), the manager could as well decide to improve his communication competency and that of his team through providing educational and training chances. By organizing for groups to attend educational training in foreign languages and provision of rotational programs at work, the manager sends signal that they value diversity and would the extra mile of inculcating it in the Organisation’s Culture  (Yamazaki & Kayes, 2004). This can also be an excellent platform for the international executives to build relationships, spend time, listen and participate in other cultural activities. Consequently, managers enhance their cross-cultural communication competence and that of their teams (Yamazaki and Kayes, 2004).

Cross-cultural communication competency could also be improved through a better understanding of the language of space. As Hall (1973) warns, failure to understand the language of space could lead to cultural shock. Leading other or doing business in a foreign land could be extremely difficult. In Latin America or East Asia international executives are required to execute business in one’s intimate space. While some cultures are comfortable with this, this demesne evokes hostility as well as sexual feeling in US (Hall, 1973).

Chapter 3: Research Methodology

3.1 Introduction

The aim of this research is to study the impact of cross culture intelligent on international business negotiation and how it can contribute to the negotiation success by interviewing three different Garment Company including Bosideng, and Dayang Group and Youngor Group from China. Based on this aim, this section of the research seeks to provide discussions of the chosen research methodologies. Critically discuss the techniques of research such as the research philosophy, approach, strategy, design and resreach instruments. Moreover, the techniques of data collection and analysis are discussed here.  To conclude this chapter three, the methodological limitations as well as strategies to ease such limitations are discussed.

3.2 Research philosophy

Research philosophy describes the way in which researchers use their autonomous opinions in formulating new ideas and knowledge regarding a specific research question (Saunders, Thornhill, and Lewis, 2009). According to Dilley (2004), researchers rely significantly on their choice of the research methods in agreeing to the underlying assumptions of method of research chosen. The relevance of research philosophy is therefore identified in provision of assumptions that guide the formulation of knowledge and provide differing perceptions into various constructs. Academic research in the area of businesses is normally conducted using two main philosophies that include positivism and interpretivism. While positivism is cantered on identification of the causal relationship in a study, interpretivism is relevant in providing descriptions to understand various phenomena from the basic incorporation of personal feelings and independent interpretations (Johnson and Clark, 2006).

Fundamentally, positivism results in attraction of objective perspectives which are supported by the use of mathematical methods of data analysis, thereby inclining a research towards non-biased deductions. Effectively, the researcher in positivism research does not influence the results if the research and neither does the research process influence the researcher in the quest to producing law like and generalisable deductions (Remenyi et al., 2003). However, interpretivism with its reliance on personal experiences, viewpoints, and feelings to explain the research phenomena, results in subjective deductions that are arrived at through qualitative analysis of data. The researcher is an integral part of the research process, hence inseparable to the research, since data collection depends on the ability of the researcher to observe behaviour of research objects, interpret the meaning of the social realities, and form judgements from the object’s experiences (Johnson and Clark, 2006).       

Following the above understanding, this research utilised interpretivism research philosophy. This was underscored by the nature of the research that sought to understand how cultural differences influenced international business negotiation in the UK and China. To gain this understanding, the researcher would rely on the descriptions of the managers’ experiences in business negotiations in UK and China, interpret their viewpoints on negotiations across cultures, and formulate deductions without utilisations of any scientific techniques. Through interpretivism philosophy, the researcher adopted an empathetic position in seeking to analyse the influences of cultural differences and managers’ cultural intelligence of different cultures in business negotiations. As such, through the empathetic position, the researcher increased the probabilities of understanding the different levels of cognizance of different cultures among the managers and subsequent effects on business negotiations in the UK and China. Conversely, interpretivism inclined the research to greater risks of uncertainty due to the reliance on personal experiences, subjective observations, and interpretation of data.

3.3 Research approach

To effectively gain relevant knowledge in academic research, researchers are guided by their choice of the research approach. Saunders, Thornhill, and Lewis (2009) proclaim that the success of the developing knowledge using the research philosophy depends on the correct choice of the research approach which must be synonymous supporting the assumptions of the research philosophy. Inductive and deductive approaches are the commonly utilised approached in academic research.

On the one hand, inductive approach is identified from its emphasis on development of knowledge from the specific considerations and later using the general ideologies (Gill, Johnson, and Clark, 2010). This methodology is commonly but informally referred to as the bottom- up approach, whereby any relevant deductions are consequent of the pattern in research identified with close considerations of the premise in research. On the other hand, deductive approach connotes a kind of reasoning and knowledge development that begins from a broad perspective and narrows down to considerations of the more specific perspectives (Gill, Johnson, and Clark, 2010). Deductive approach uses a logical process in research that necessitates a researcher to develop insights through the top-down approach and utilising scientific premise in explanations (Saunders, Thornhill, and Lewis, 2009). Important to note, is that deductive approach is confined to five main stages that include, deducing hypotheses, operationalizing the hypotheses to provide explanations of the causal relationships, testing hypotheses, examining the results, and altering the results in order to fit if need be (Robinson, 2002).

Figure 3-1 Inductive and deductive processes

Source Burns and Burns (2008)

This research used inductive research approach. This was underscored by the researcher’s need to develop theory and disregarding the need for hypotheses or testing hypotheses. The research objectives did not feature any relationship between independent and dependent variables; hence, there was no need for pursuance to understand any causal relationship.  On the contrary, inductive approach provided suitable chances of understanding the influences of cultural differences in business negotiations from specific issues of managers from the UK and China, as well as the observation of developing patterns in their explanations despite the overriding cultural diversity. Moreover, the inductive approach allowed the researcher to obtain qualitative data that was utilised in explaining the complexities of cultural differences and influences on business negotiations. This was entirely based on the participant’s perspectives and their cultural intelligence.

3.4 Research strategy

According to Remenyi et al. (2008), research strategy refers to the methodical research procedures that guide a research into achieving its objectives. The right choice of the research strategy determines the consistency of the research since the assumptions of the research philosophy have significant influences on the research strategy (Johnson and Clark, 2006). The basic reasons for the emphasis on the right choice of the research strategy relates to the need for the researcher to maintain steady focus on the research objectives throughout the research work and utilising correctly the available resources (Collis and Hussey, 2003). Just to list a few, case study, ethnography, and surveys are the commonly utilised research strategies (Saunders, Thornhill, and Lewis, 2009). Multiple case studies were utilised in this research. This entailed the consideration of three companies; Bosideng and Dayang Group and Youngor Group both from China. Observing relevant support for the use of multiple case studies in past literatures, the researcher identified that multiple cases increased the generalizability of the findings in the aspects of cultural intelligence and business negotiations across cultures. Moreover, the consideration of multiple cases in the research was essential in increasing the compelling ability of the research findings as well as increasing the robustness of the research. However, using multiple cases did not lack its limitations that included increased demand for extensive resources including time and finances.

3.5 Research design

Hanson and Grimmer (2007) identified that the choice of the research instrument is one of the most significant considerations in research processes. The success in collecting data from research participants directly influences the extents to which research offers credible findings. Imperatively, the research utilised semi-structured interviews to garner data from the three companies’ executives. The researcher interviewed a total of six managers from the three companies. Two managers were included in the interviews from every company. The researcher argued that six managers would present a viable account of the cultural experiences in international markets and the manager’s cultural intelligence with respect to how it influenced the success of the negotiations.

However, it was important to why the researcher chose semi-structured interviews. Firstly, the increased ability to probe for more information and clearer answers through semi-structured interviews provided impetus to their use (King, 2004). Secondly, semi-structured interviews reassured the objectivity of the research findings as participants were relaxed and held suitably high freedom that encouraged them to offer appropriate and true responses (Saunders, Thornhill, and Lewis, 2009). In order to increase the efficiency of the semi-structured interviews, the researcher ensured that the interviews were designed with close observation of the relevant procedures that helped in confirming high efficiency. These rule included elimination of ambiguity in the questions whereby each question asked specific details regarding either the cultural intelligence or the influences of cultural diversity on negotiations. Moreover, the researcher ensured that the interviews contained easily comprehensible language and statements. The semi-structured interviews were designed on the basis of cultural and values difference theory and communication theory.    

During interview design, the researcher should first design an interview outline according to the research objectives and research questions before starting the interview. When designing the interview outline, the researcher should pay attention to the following issues: The researcher should design interview questions focusing on the research objectives in order to better address the research objectives and research questions; the interview questions should be controlled within 14 in order to prevent that the respondents may have the sense of resentment or boredom; it had better avoid sensitive words in the interview questions; the interview questions should not involve personal tendency of the researcher, and the researcher is not allowed to lead the respondents to answer the interview questions; the interview questions should be as open as possible, not restrict the respondents’ thinking, and allow the respondents to give a variety of information feedback.

Taking into account the above questions, the researcher has designed a general framework of the interview outline shown in Table 3-1. The specific interview questions can be seen in Appendix 1.

Table 3-1 Framework of the interview outline

Research Objective	Interview Questions
Demographic Data	Qi – Qiv
To analyse the impact of the difference of national culture and values on international garment business negotiation	Q1-Q11
To analyse the impact of cross culture communication styles on international garment business negotiation	Q12-Q13

3.6 Processes of data collection and analysis

The research will emphasize on qualitative data as opposed to quantitative data which is data collected in small amount but have higher quality which can represent a subject in deep method. Qualitative data technically encompasses in-depth discussion and descriptions of the observable events, participants thoughts, experiences and insights (Mujis, 2004). One very important implication of using qualitative data in research is that it results in highly subjective information as seen with the involvement of participant’s thoughts, ideas, experiences, and attitudes.

However, quantitative research relates to the research that demystifies concepts through garnering mathematical data that is then analysed using statistical descriptive means such as, the implementation of Microsoft Excel (Mujis, 2004). Importantly, quantitative data is essential in answering questions that seeks to show how many, how much and how frequent. As such, quantitative research allows researchers to exactly measure variable in a research.

The main reasons leading to the choice of qualitative research included, the complexity of the subject matter (cultural intelligence) which would not have been answered using hypotheses that are centered on yes or no questions (Saunders, Thornhill, and Lewis, 2009). Moreover, the qualitative research was chosen due to the fact that meaningful results would be achieved using the small sample size (Remenyi et al., 2003). Important to note is that qualitative research is not reliant on the sample as opposed to quantitative research. The primary data will be collected by interviewing 6 international garment business managers. As researcher have relative and also friend who work in the research subject industry, researcher can get informed to the manager in the company by friend and also relative. Researcher will send letter to two of the company and the other two will get approval through telephone.

There are a total of six managers that will be interview in total. The sample population will be relationship manger, marketing and supply chain manager in Bosideng (the Chinese subsidiary), Dayang Group, and Youngor Group. The research have rational of choosing the interviewee as relationship manager, marketing manager and supply chain manager as they are the people who will negotiate with other for sales, supply and also relation maintenance between business.

In order to ensure the interview quality, the researcher specifically applied for an unoccupied conference room respectively from four of the company to conduct one to one interview with the interviewees, to avoid being disturbed. In the interview process, the researcher promises that he will not interrupt the interviewees randomly or control the interviewees’ thought when they are answering questions, and the interview will not involve any personal privacy and company secret. Meanwhile, the researcher will also raise some questions related to the research objectives in accordance with the interviewees’ answers in the interview process. When the interviewees are answering questions, the researcher should not only pay attention to listen to them, but also record the interviewees’ answers timely and accurately. In order to record the interview information timely, the researcher can also use shorthand or marked way they can understand. After the interview, the researcher should express thanks to the interviewees promptly. For example, the researcher can give small gifts to the interviewees to express gratitude.

3.7 Data analysis method

Content analysis is a method to decide the existence of fix characters, words, phrases, sentences, concepts, or themes with the range of texts or sets of texts (Griffiths & Stotz, 2008). Therefore, content analysis is adopted in this research to analyse the feedback information collected from the interviewees. In order to make a content analysis on a text, the text should be coded or broken down into manageable classifications on a number of levels – word, word sense, phrase, sentence, or theme (Fisher, 2010). So this research will collate, code and classify all the collected data systematically. For example, all of the manger will be recorded as A, B, C, D, E and F to make the research clear and also increase the efficiency of research. Secondly, each of the interviewees’ answer should be placed under the corresponding questions. Thirdly, the research needs to analyse the main information recorded in the interview and extract the key words or sentences of the main information. Fourthly, the research also needs to make in-depth analysis of the key words or sentences, compare, analyse and summarise all the viewpoints, and finally obtain the research conclusions.

3.8 Research ethics

The research maintained some ethical considerations, which included asking for the general management’s consent to include the respective companies in the research. Furthermore, the participants were contacted through emails to request their acceptance to be involved. After consent was offered from the company general management and the participants, the researcher categorically, reassured the participant that the information garnered in the research would be used for the sole purposes of the academic research. Besides, the researcher made promises that the information would be protected and stored in the university library whereby access would be limited to persons authorised by the research supervisor and the library management staff. This was essential in mitigating the potential risks of exposure to the companies and the participants (Saunders, Thornhill, and Lewis, 2009).

Furthermore, the data that had been use in the research had to be valid to ensure the validity of the research. Therefore, it is fairly importance for researcher to ensure the data use is valid. Besides that, it is necessary for researcher to prove the validity of their research. So data used in the research and data collected for the research need to be reliable. To ensure the hypothesis inducted from theory is usable and valid to the current business and organization. The data used must not be expired (Chik weche & Fletcher, 2012). Researcher will intend to use resources that are in 10 to 15 years maximum to ensure the data is up to date except for theory and explanation of certain theory. To ensure the quality of the primary data that collected in the research, researcher need to go through all the data that collected and choose only answer which can reflect thinking and nature of the subject that been study.

3.9 Limitation of the research

The relevant limitation was the shortage in literatures connected to cultural intelligence. The researcher observed that this shortage was created by the low number of researches done on cultural intelligence and its impacts on business negotiation. In order to combat the limitation, the researcher embarked on readily searching for previous supporting material from credible sources, as well as probing to realise maximum benefits of interviews in the research. Besides, the researcher was limited in term of research resources that included finances and time. To solve this problem, yet assure the success of the research, the researcher implemented various strategies including visitations to the companies via public means and during off pick hours when the fares were low. Moreover, the researcher visited public libraries to access usable materials at low costs.     

Chapter 4: Data Presentation and Analysis

4.1 Introduction

This study selected six managers of well-known international Chinese garment companies in order to carry out in-depth interviews. The managers were selected from three different clothing companies which included Bosideng, Dayang Group and Youngor Group. Two interviewees were selected from each company’s different departments which ranged from relationship manager, marketing manager and supply chain manager. These categories of managers were chosen as it was noted that they were frequently involved in negotiations for sales, supplies and also for maintenance of relation between businesses. Besides, the selected companies were deemed the most appropriate as it was noted that they frequently engaged with business partners from other cultures such as the UK. The selected companies majorly have very strong business ties with the several UK companies.

In undertaking the study, the interview outlines were first distributed to the interviewees via their emails. This enabled the interviewees to become familiar with the interview contents thus making it easier for them to answer the questions during the interview. The results of the one-on-one interviews were kept confidential. Personal info regarding the interviewees is also kept confidential. The table below shows the basic info of the interviewees

Table 1: The Basic info of the interviewees

Interviewee	Age	Gender	Job title	Responsibility
A	36	Male	Relationship Manager	Responsible for leading all business development activities for specific client and/or prospect nation/base.
B	42	Female	Marketing manager	Purposing, orchestrating and driving multi-stakeholder activities within the company brand strategy, along with outlining the direction for global execution.
C	48	Female	Supply chain manager	Negotiate and manage contracts with suppliers
D	29	Male	Relationship Manager	Responsible for maintaining a mutual business relationship with company clients.
E	31	Male	Marketing manager	Enhancing company brand and making know the company’s activities.
F	37	Female	Supply chain manager	Responsible for planning and organising the movement of materials and from suppliers and manufacturers.

4.2 To analyse the influence of national culture and values difference on business negotiation

4.2.1 Analysis based on Hofstede’s cultural framework

(1) Analysis of the influence of Individualism/Collectivism on Business Negotiation

With regard to the question ‘when conducting meetings with your business partners in the UK, do you prefer negotiations during meetings or informal sessions’, different interview results were obtained. Also, as to the role the need to first establish a relationship before a commercial transaction, different results were recorded. Firstly, regarding conducting meetings with business partners in the UK, 2 respondents preferred negotiations during meeting whilst 4 preferred informal sessions.

According to interviewee D preference for informal discussions stems from Chinese’s collectivist culture where each individual ascribes to the concerns and aspirations of a group. Interviewee F added that ‘there prevail strong ties between people and the community in China and this often influences individuals to work better in groups’. Nonetheless interviewee A appeared to disagree to D and F’s opinions by arguing that ‘the meaning of ascribing to group interests has lost its importance and individuals have become more liberal and independent in their engagements. Thusly, there is a preference to negotiations during meetings because of the existence of rules to be adhered to’.

Moreover, with regard to the role the need to first establish a relationship before commercial transaction play, 5 managers stated that establishing a strong relationship with the business partners was very essential in the success of the negotiations. Nonetheless, one manager disagreed stating that establishing a relationship was not important. According to interviewee B ‘collectivist societies highly value relationships with members of their societies. This will also be the case in our undertaking of negotiations. An established relationship eases communication between parties to a negotiation and also leads to exchange of more info’. Interviewee E stated that ‘establishment of relationship before a commercial transaction enhances trust between the parties and thus boosts the attainment of transaction results’. Nonetheless, Interviewee C disagreed by stating that ‘the success of today’s commercial transactions is based on formalities and thus establishment of a relationship before a transaction plays an insignificant role’.

Based on the above arguments, it is evident that majority of the managers preferred informal discussions as compared to formal sessions and most managers desired the need to first establish a relationship before a commercial transaction. Results from these respondents echo the reviewed literature as it was largely noted that establishment of relationships with business partners before/after a commercial transaction eases the transaction process as collectivist societies emphasised on hierarchy and harmony within their groups. These results could highly attributable to Chinese’s highly collectivist culture whereby individuals preferred meeting business partners in informal groups. Also, Chinese’s strongly collectivist culture highly advocates for establishment of relationships with societal members. However, as globalisation takes a centre stage in today’s organisations, contractual relationships that are founded on principles of exchange play a crucial role in carrying out of a successful commercial transaction and thus a number of individuals develop preference for negotiations during meetings.

With regard to how traditional Chinese philosophies such as Confucianism and Taoism impact on business negotiation in terms of aspects such as the need for harmonious relationships, managers offered their different views. To start with, according to interviewee C ‘Confucianism influences business negotiation on a number of aspects which include family orientation, respect for hierarchy and seniority, moral cultivation, importance of interpersonal relationships, the concept of face and quest of harmony and evasion of conflict’. Interviewee E noted that ‘Taoism impacts on business negotiation as it emphasises on the need for harmony with nature and creativity of life. Taoism’s doctrines which are essential to establishing harmonious relationships include its unity of opposites’. According to Interviewee A ‘Confucianism and Taoism make the establishment of a relationship a prerequisite in any business negotiation process. Making relationships prerequisite permit easy formation of harmonious relationships between parties to a negotiation’. Nonetheless, Interviewee B stated that ‘Confucianism and Taoism doctrines did not impact business negotiation as these practices have faded in application. In meeting business counterparts from the UK, application of widely practiced maxims of establishment of formal relationships takes course’. 

From the above responses, it can be stated that traditional Chinese philosophies such as Confucianism and Taoism significantly impact on business negotiation. This was with regard to aspects such as the need for harmonious relationships. Reviewed literature revealed that Taoism, Confucianism and war stratagems remain to be the core value systems from which the Chinese business behaviour stems. The results obtained have revealed that businesses in China is not about doing business with organisations, but rather doing businesses between individuals. The obtained interview results echoed the reviewed literature results as it was noted that the Confucianism and Taoism practices often acknowledged the practice of two types of relationships; warm friendship and impersonal ‘arms-length’ relationships. Arguments by Xiaohua and Miller (2003) had resonated that Chinese negotiators usually sent an inviting signal by calling their newly-met foreign business partners ‘oldfriend’. As China has been noted to be a highly individualistic society, attainment of these results was anticipated.

(2) Analysis of how Time orientation influences business negotiation

The UK and China were noted to be contrastingly dissimilar with regard to time orientation. China rates very highly in long term orientation- LTO (118) as compared to the UK (25). With regard to the question of about the differences noted in concerning willingness of business counterparts in the UK changing their business positions on the spot as opposed to taking time to assess the implications, 5 managers were of the view that the UK  counterparts took their decisions swiftly. Majority of the managers also stated that  and that changing of business decisions was carried out on the spot and very limited time was taken in assessing the implications of a decision to be taken and this was majorly stated to affect the consideration of long-term business relationships. 

According to Interviewee B ‘there exist numerous differences between business counterparts in the UK and China. Business counterparts in the UK made instant decisions regarding a transaction and did not hesitate to introduce any changes to a transaction. Such decisions were termed to significantly affect consideration for long-term relationships. This was largely because countries such as the UK were characterised with adhering to stability of relationships’. Interviewee F noted that ‘expectation of other business partners to live by the same standards fostered the business partner from the UK make swift decisions. UK business partners were more likely to change their business positions on the spot as opposed to taking time to assess the implications’. Moreover, Interviewee A’s argument were similar to those of B, D and F as he was of the view that ‘counterparts from the UK changed their business positions on the spot as opposed to taking time to assess the implications’. Interviewee C added that ‘in spite of the differences in culture the willingness to change business positions on the spot as opposed to taking time to assess the implications does not significantly influence consideration for long-term relationships. This was because over time trust between partners is established and partners are able to accommodate the cultural inclinations of each individual party’.

The study results obtained concurred with the reviewed literature results which showed that cultures that possessed lower LTO values such as the UK valued fulfilment of social obligations. Moreover, cultures that rated lowly on LTO observed steadiness and stability in making their decisions and thus took swift decisions. Obtainment of the above views could hugely be attributed to culture characterisation with regard to time orientation. Cultures such as China in contrast with the UK are characterised with values of persistence, ordering associations by status and adhering to this order. Thusly they won’t be willing to change their business positions on the spot but rather take some time to assess the implications. This aspect greatly influenced the consideration of long-term relationships as the two cultures exhibited dissimilar values with regard to persistence. The Chinese were noted to be more persistent as compared to their business counterparts from the UK. Also, from the data obtained it can be inferred that whether business counterparts in the UK are willing to change their business positions on the spot remains to be a key determinant of establishment of long term relationship. This was majorly because UK counterparts emphasised on observance of rules.

Further, the researcher sought to determine whether interviewee’s companies preferred consulting with the executive level and subordinate staff members before making business decisions with a foreign partner. The interviewees were also questioned on what impact certain levels of autocracy had on rapid decision making. Interviwee F stated that ‘countries such as China which rate highly rated on LTO respect status and authority and thus their companies do not prefer consulting with the executive level and subordinate staff members before making business decisions with a foreign partner. This consequently means that a heightened level of autocracy was maintained in these organisations. The impact his aspect has on rapid decision making is positive as decisions are majorly made at top level by few individuals’. Views from C and D mirror those given by interviewee A who stated that ‘largely, my company does not prefer consulting with the executive level and subordinate staff members because the culture in China favours making of decisions unilaterally. Status and respect for tradition is valued and thus top management make all the decisions regarding vital organisational activities’.

Reviewed literature revealed that the high level of autocracy in cultures with higher LTOs is perpetuated by the dominant hierarchy-based organizational structures where leaders are highly esteemed. It is for this reason that many subordinates or executives in companies which operate in countries such as China do not prefer consulting with the executive level and subordinate staff members before making business decisions with foreign partners. This level of autocracy has often resulted in swifter decision making as fewer individuals are tasked with the process. Also, it is often easier to apportion blame/commendation or responsibility in cultures where decisions are made without consultations. Individuals in the Chinese culture prefer to be directed and thus embrace a heightened level of autocracy. This autocracy works in favour of the company as very limited time is taken in making decisions. The results attained mirrored the reviewed literature as it was noted that cultures that rated highly in LTO accepted a heightened level of autocracy as they preferred ordering relationships by status.

(3) Analysis of how Uncertainty Avoidance (UA) influences business negotiation

There exist slightly notable differences with regard to UA between the Chinese culture and the UK culture. It was established that the UK had scored 35 on the UA index whilst China had a UA index of 40. A higher index meant that a culture was lesser tolerant to ambiguity or uncertainty. In undertaking the study, the researcher first sought to know whether when negotiating with UK business partners the managers would seek adjournments in order to form consensus or prefer early action as preferred by UK managers. Also, the respondents were asked on the role uncertainty played in such a case. Interviewee A and E’s arguments were similar as they stated that seeking adjournments with an aim of forming consensus as compared to an early action fostered the making of informed decisions.

As per Interviewee C’s arguments ‘I would seek adjournments in contrast to early action in order to ensure that the right decision is taken’. Interviewee D differed with most of the respondents stating that ‘in negotiating with UK business partners, early action is preferred as compared to seeking adjournment. This is because of the interests of both parties. UK managers may prefer early action because of their tolerance for ambiguity and Chinese managers may prefer seeking adjournment’. Both interviewee B and F disagreed to interviewee D by arguing that in negotiating with UK business partners, seeking adjournment was more preferable to parties as compared to early action’.

From the study results, it can be argued that though the UK managers preferred early action, their higher tolerance for ambiguity or uncertainty barely comprised the transaction. Since the UK culture tolerates a slightly higher level of uncertainty as compared to China, preference for early action as opposed to taking time would not negatively affect the relationship between parties involved. Uncertainty often makes parties to engage in ways of establishing mechanisms of operation and thus easing transactions. Also, as there can be noted a slight difference in UA scores between the UK and china, both parties may be willing to embrace the same level of uncertainty in forming consensus. For both cultures uncertainty offers more time and flexibility in introducing changes to contracts, renegotiating, or evaluating the best payment method.

Further, the researcher also sought to know whether the differences in preferences for rules over formality emerged during negotiations with UK counterparts and whether this had affected the respondent’s views on trustworthiness of the partners. Majority of the respondents (5) commented that the issue with regard to preference of rules over formality is one of the key aspects of maintaining a trustworthy association. Interviewee B stated that ‘as the UK was noted to rate lowly on the UA scale, UK counterparts felt lesser uncomfortable in unstructured situations’. As per interviewee A’s comments ‘although unstructured/uncertain situations are surprising and novel, as a manager from China I may work toward ensuring uncertainty incidences are avoided and thus would prefer observance or rules in contrast to formal engagements’. From interviewee C and E’s observations it could be said that UA cultures such as China have come up with strict rules and laws which have been instituted to safeguard the interests of parties. The interests having been safeguarded by the strict rules there has been enhanced trust between the parties involved. Besides, Interviewee F observed that ‘there have been differences for preference of formality by the UK counterparts. However, in all transactions carried out, laid down rules have been followed. This is because it was noted that observance of rules and laws ensured that all parties meet their contractual obligations, and this enhanced trustworthiness between partners.

Based on the above views it can argued that the Chinese culture emphasised more on adherence to rules and formalities in order to lessen uncertainty incidences whilst individuals from the UK  were more comfortable in working in informal environments. These factors have often impacted on matters of partner trustworthiness as rules often ensured that contractual obligations are met.

Additionally, in measuring the level and influence of UA, respondents were asked how they would plan to resolve differences in the event of an unforeseen problem with an UK business partner. Responses on whether this has ever affected the business relationship were also sought. Interviewee A stated that ‘litigation was the preferred option in resolving differences as all transactions were governed by strict laws and rules. Nevertheless, this form of resolving differences negatively impacts on the business relationship’. According to interviewee C ‘the best way to resolve conflicts/problems would be through mediation. This is because the UK culture emphasised on formalities’. Interviewee F also stated that ‘mediation was acted out as the best way to resolve problems between warring parties. This was a result of both cultures ambiguity tolerance levels’. From the views of Interviewees B and D it could be argued that mediation was the most preferred problem resolution method. This was because both cultures tolerated some levels of uncertainty. Dissimilar views were offered by interviewee E who stated that ‘litigation appeared to be the best problem resolution method as it entailed observance of strict laws and rules’.

The above findings echo the reviewed literature as it was established that, as mediation entails striking a mutual agreement, it favourably influences business relationships. Moreover, from the UA index it is evident that both the Chinese and UK cultures possess a very slight difference in levels of uncertainty tolerance. Mediation was identified to positively impact on the relationship between parties as it addressed the needs of both partners. Also, even though both cultures ranked lowly on uncertainty avoidance, strict observance of rules favoured the meeting of each counterpart’s obligations. Nonetheless, litigation negatively impacted on relationships between parties as it involved fines and punishments imposed by a court of law.

(4) Analysis of how Power distance (PD) influences business negotiation

The UK and China have been noted to be contrastingly dissimilar with regard to the PD index. China rates highly-80 and the UK rates lowly-35. This is a clear indication that there exist significant differences with regard to PD. In carrying out the study, respondents were asked the extent to which they have received opposing views when putting forward business proposals to UK counterparts and the impact this has on forming business partnerships. From the views of the respondents it was clear that majority (5) of them had received opposing views from their UK business counterparts. As negotiations largely involved input from both parties, similar and dissimilar views were offered by the parties.

Interviewee B stated that ‘in every stage of presenting my business proposal, I received numerous opposing views from UK counterparts. Most of the time these views came as suggestions on other views discussed’ Interviewee A said that ‘opposing views dominated most of the negotiation process I was involved in and this negatively influenced my decisions regarding forming a business partnership’. According to interviewee D’s comments ‘UK partners presented numerous opposing views in the process of putting forward business proposals and this unfavourably impacted formation of partnerships. The opposing views presented included the need to establish rules that would favour further negotiations’. Moreover, as per interviewee A, C and E, UK partners actively participated in negotiations and presented opposing views to their Chinese counterparts. Presentation of opposing views by the UK counterparts proved to negatively influence the formation of business partnerships. Finally, as per Interviewee F ‘majority of the UK partners did not present any opposing views when undertaking negotiations and this has favourably influenced formation of business partnerships’.

Based on the above contributions, a great distinction between the UK and Chinese cultures that is brought about by the difference in PD can be witnessed. These differences can hugely be attributed to UK’s significantly lower PD and China’s considerably higher PD. Thompson (2005) had noted that cultures that exhibited low values of PD were characterised by negotiation ways which are very respectful. The communication style dominated in cultures such as the UK is characterised with a lot of softness and non-verbal language like gestures. Also, as the Chinese culture is largely characterised by centralized authority and autocratic leadership an aspect that means that negotiations are majorly done by top executives and managers and that decisions regarding opposing views are barely welcomed.

Also, in cultures such as china there was an expectation of power differences and inequality. Leader or managers majorly held the notion that power has its privileges and that subordinates should be told what to do. Views from other individuals (subordinates or business counterparts) are often not welcomed as those in power believe that they are the ones to make the ultimate decision regarding the negotiations. The lesser powerful individuals are often termed to be dependent of the powerful people. This form of association majorly results into autocracy whereby leaders barely condone opposing opinions. As a result, managers in the study did not expect any opposing views in the negotiation process. Also, China is highly characterised with a centralised decision-making system and thus vastly contrast with the UK which is characterised with decentralised decision systems. Sycara, Gelfand and Abbe (2013) noted that in centralised decision-making systems, decisions regarding issues such as negotiation are often made with a degree of control. The management or high level people often pay less attention to other people’s suggestions or will have less desire to discuss things and will prefer to decide on only one side without giving chance to discussions. According to Stromquist (2014) situations where no opposing views are presented always favour the formation of business partnerships among the Chinese culture.

On the other hand, the numerous opposing views presented by UK counterparts during negotiations could be attributed UK’s lower PD. Individuals from the UK were often encouraged to take part in discussions and offer better suggestions to the management. Some level of interdependence between less and lore powerful people could be observed in cultures with low PDs.

(5) Analysis of how Masculinity/femininity influences business negotiation

In analysing how this cultural aspect influenced the negotiation process, interviewees were queried on the level of importance they attached to consensus (win-win) during business negotiation as opposed to confrontational negotiations that may lead to win-lose situation. Also, whether this has been the case with the UK business partners, was asked. Interviewee C stated that ‘consensus (win-win) during business negotiation was a major factor in undertaking transactions’. According to interviewee A’s opinions, arriving at a consensus (for both cultures) was instrumental in the process of negotiation’. Opinions of Interviewee D seemed to go hand in hand with Interviewee A’s opinions as he argued that consensus was often noted to be a dominant aspect in negotiations for masculine cultures. This was because consensus was argued to express assertiveness and self-centeredness whereby the needs of both parties in a negotiation are considered. Adoption of confrontational negotiations that may result into a win-lose situation was less effective as it eroded the trust established between parties.

Interviewee E’ stated that ‘I attach a very high level of importance to consensus during negotiations as a result of its acceptance by both parties. This has also been the case for UK partners’. As per interviewee B and F’s views, confrontational negotiations which often led to win-lose situations were dominant in feminine societies which often emphasised on modesty and care. Since both the UK and China exhibited assertiveness and competiveness, arriving at a consensus was regarded highly during negotiations. Also, UK partners have equally embraced consensus and thus this has created a harmonious relationship.  

The above data results mirror the reviewed literature as it was largely argued that cultures that exhibited masculine characteristics emphasised on aspects such as materialism/material success, assertiveness, self-centeredness and individual achievement. Exhibition of these aspects entailed that both culture needed to benefit from the negotiation. Moreover, Attainment of these results evidenced the rates of masculinity in both the UK and China. Competitiveness was noted to be a crucial concern for masculine cultures. Consensus often led to enhancing the competitiveness of each party and thus was deemed more preferable. Besides, the obtained results could be attributed to UK and China’s non-preference for confrontational negotiations which were noted to lead to win-lose situations in negotiations. The same level of masculinity of both cultures make both parties desire to be the ‘winners’ in the negotiation.

Further, respondents were also asked whether business negotiations with UK business partners involving women impacted on the negotiation outcomes. Interviewee A stated that ‘in making negotiations with UK business partners the involvement of women did not in any way influence the negotiation outcomes’. Additionally, as per Interviewee B and C’s views it could be noted that both genders were held equally and played matched roles in impacting on negotiation outcomes. The respondents had no preference for either gender in representation during negotiations. Besides, from Interviewee E and F’s opinions it could be inferred that involving women in negotiations did not influence negotiation outcomes. This could largely be attributed to the Chinese and UK’s competition oriented cultures where each gender is encouraged to compete with each other. As a result of industry competition, both genders are regarded to be equally able in respect to undertaking various organisational activities such as negotiations.

Nonetheless, results from interviewee D differed as he stated that ‘business negotiations with a UK business partners involving women significantly impacted on the negotiation outcomes’. This could be attributed to a level of femininity in a number of individuals. Cultures which were termed to be feminine paid attention to aspects such as caring and modesty and thus considered women to be not suitable for engaging in big negotiations/deals. Tessema and Ready (2009) argued that in feminist cultures, involving women in negotiations would signify disrespect.

Attainment of above results echoed the reviewed literature as it was noted that men and women can equally run on the field of business. Literature also revealed that in business negotiation women can be no different than men in business negotiation. This was attributed to both cultures’ same level of masculinity and femininity. Also, it can be noted that the distribution of negotiation roles between genders in the two cultures is closely similar. Both the UK and China score 66 on the masculinity scale (Hofstede, 1991). This signifies that in both cultures women and men can equally take part in a business negotiation. As a result of the cultural compatibility with regard to masculinity/femininity, there can’t be reported cases of dislike for any gender as a representative in a negotiation process. It was noted that for some countries where cultural incompatibility was noted, the gender assigned to a negotiation process signified the respect/disrespect accorded to that particular transaction.

4.2.2 Analysis of how Context Culture influences business negotiation

With regard to the question ‘Did the UK partners value merit and expertise and rush during negotiations as opposed to first building trust and relationship before sitting down for negotiations and how this impacted on the entire negotiation process, A stated that ‘contrary to what I expected UK partners only focused on important elements of the negotiation’. The Chinese business partners had expected to first build trust and relationships before sitting down for negotiations. B added that ‘UK partners emphasised on merit and expertise throughout the entire negotiation process’. This as per Tu and Chi (2011) could hugely be attributed to UK’s low-context cultural behaviour. UK negotiators were argued to go straight into the business without wasting time or without any delay.

Also, analysis of the findings reveals that whilst the Chinese business partners valued building trust and relationship before sitting down for negotiations, their counterparts from the UK preferred commencing business activities straight away. Commencing negotiations without first establishing relationships was said by F to ‘curtail the efficient communication between parries. This is because when relationships and trust is established, individuals are more able to communicate feely’. This study result could also be attributable to China’s collectivist culture where establishment of relationships with groups or partners is deemed crucial.

4.3 Analysis of how cross-cultural communication difference influences business negotiation

Cross-cultural communication was identified to be integral to business success for any organisation that has a workforce of divergent origins. Cross-cultural communication will often form a divergent but rich way of working with different cultural backgrounds and experiences. First, in evaluating the importance and influence of cross-cultural communication on negotiations, respondents were asked whether they have realised any differences in styles of communication during negotiation with business partners from UK and whether these differences in styles of communication are straight forward or indirect and how they impact on reaching a consensus. As per interviewee A and F’s comments UK business partners were noted to speak directly, stating what they mean and meaning what they say as opposed to Chinese partners. This was termed to favourably influence the process of arriving at a conclusion as the needs of the partners become known and clear. Additionally, as per interviewee B and E’s opinions UK business partners were precise and clear to the point. This was however termed to be blunt and rude by the Chinese and thus derailed the process of arriving at a consensus. Moreover, from interviewee C and D’s arguments it could be stated that various cultures have their own customs for communication more especially in business and social situations and that negotiations occur within a very short period which is often not sufficient for members to comprehend each other well. UK counterparts were said in many instances to be straight forward and this was not a common aspect among the Chinese culture.

From the above arguments it can largely be seen that the evident differences of communication during negotiation with business partners from UK, impacted on reaching at a consensus. UK culture’s straight forwardness was not well regarded by their Chinese partners a factor which negatively influenced both parties’ ability to reach a consensus.

With regard to the question ‘what actions have you undertaken to ensure that differences between the UK and Chinese managers do not result into stalled business negotiations, A answered that ‘selecting the most understandable language by both parties was key. A translator would always be needed in cases where none of the partners understands each other’s language’. Also, B stated that ‘body of expressions used by the negotiating parties needs to be as clear as possible’.

Further analysis of the data collected showed that majority of the respondents (5) have taken a number of actions to ensure that the differences between the UK and Chinese managers do not result into stalled business negotiations. Among the steps which were taken include integrating informal and formal expressions. This step was taken in order to create friendly links and accelerate negotiations. Also, analysis revealed that majority of the individuals had incorporated body language such as rubbing hands (as a sign of expecting good things) and being on time or utilising time effectively in the course of negotiating. As per the reviewed literature expressions between parties to negotiation needed to be clear and simple especially in global negotiations which involved business executives from different cultural settings and whose first language was not the language of management (English).

This chapter carried out a comprehensive analysis of the interview data. The findings of the study are summarised and analysed. These are the evidences of the gaining of the final conclusions and recommendations of this of this study.

Chapter 5: Discussion of the Findings

5.1 To understanding the influences of the diverse national culture and values on business negotiation

The research findings reveal that diverse national values significantly impact on business negotiation. To start with, it was established that majority of the respondents stated that there was a need to establish a relationship before commencing the negotiation. The results showed that forming strong interpersonal relationships was integral in the process of negotiation. Agreeing with the findings by Dowling, Festing and Engle (2008), the research saw that practice of the Confucianism and Taoism by the Chinese for instance noted to influence to impact on the formation of harmonious relationships between partners. This was in contrast to the UK counterparts who felt that establishing a relationship was not important. From the reviewed literature it was argued that Eastern countries such as China highly valued personal connections (guanxi) while individuals from Western countries such as the UK valued networking, institutions and information. Analysed data confirmed the conclusions arrived at by Minkov et al, (2012) as it was established that traditional values of a country influenced peoples’ behaviours within it. Confucianism is based on harmony, proper behaviour through duty and loyalty and respect, a factor which influences Asian nations with regard to negotiations especially China, which was also observed by Leung et al, (2005) and Chen, (2006).

Also, another aspect of diverse national value that significantly influenced negotiations as revealed in the analysed data was the religious beliefs. Also, from the analysed data, most of the respondents stated that to them, business negotiations should present a win-win situation where a deal struck by the parties at the negotiations covers virtual interests from both sides. The reviewed literature backed these finding as it was noted that aspects such as competiveness and consensus heightened the chances of establishing long-lasting relationships (Sears & Jacko, 2007). Besides, it was noted that national values such as preferring consensus as compared to confrontation was attributed to both UK and China’s similar masculinity/femininity levels, and this was in tandem with the findings by Hofstede and Fink (2007).

5.2 To investigate how national cultural difference between UK and China affects the business negotiation of Chinese garment companies during trading in UK market

The differences with regard to Hoftede’s dimensions were noted to be influential in negotiations. Firstly, the analysed data established that as a result of Chinese’s collectivism culture there was preference for informal discussions as compared to formal meetings. These results echoed the reviewed literature as it was argued that collectivist cultures such as China preferred to act predominantly as members of a lifelong and cohesive group or organization. Moreover, the analysed data also revealed that Chinese managers were characterised with values of persistence, ordering associations by status and adhering to this order and as a result were took more time to make decisions. This was largely attributed to Chinese’s higher LT orientation as per (Hofstede and Fink, 2007). Additionally, analysed data concurred with reviewed literature (Hofstede, Jonker and Verwaart, 2008) as it was established that the Chinese culture emphasised more on adherence to rules and formalities in order to lessen uncertainty incidences whilst individuals from the UK were more comfortable in working in informal environments.

Further, significant difference was noted in regard to UK and China’s cultures with regard to power distance. Analysed data showed that respondents were not willing to receive opposing views from their UK counterparts. The higher PD could be attributed to these results as literature results showed that in contrast to UK’s culture, China was largely characterised by centralized authority and autocratic leadership an aspect that means that negotiations were majorly done by top executives and managers and that decisions regarding opposing views are barely welcomed. Also, with regard to masculinity/femininity, both cultures exhibited similar qualities. Similar to the impacts of masculinity and femininity in Japan’s employment habits as researched by Alexis & Antoine (2014), the analysed data showed that involvement of women did not in any way influence the negotiation outcomes. From the reviewed literature, it could be noted that both UK and China regarded the positions held by men and women equally.

Finally, with regard to context culture, the analysed results majorly showed that UK partners valued merit and expertise and rushed during negotiations as opposed to first building trust and relationship. This impacted the entire negotiation process as the Chinese managers were more comfortable with first establishing a relationship before commencing negotiations. These results mirrored more recent research by Hofstede, (2011) who argued that China’s higher context culture favoured other non-verbal expressions like gestures, body language and facial expressions. Reviewed literature showed that the Chinese were focused on a wide range of aspect in a negotiation. In contrast their UK counterparts were majorly concerned about important elements of the negotiation (Hofstede and Fink, 2007).

5.3 To analyse how the effectiveness of cross-cultural communication may influence the processes of business negotiation between China and UK companies.

Cross-cultural communication was noted to be a critical aspect in business negotiations between companies. Analysed data showed that there were noted differences by the managers with regard to styles of communication during negotiation with business partners from UK. Partners from the UK were seen to be straight forward in their communication. To some of the Chinese managers, this did not go well as they termed this to be blunt and rude and thus derailed the process of arriving at a consensus. To other Chinese managers this form of communication was argued to favourably influence the process of arriving at a conclusion as the needs of the partners become known and clear. Comparing the findings with those of Hong, (2013), these results were anticipated as literature revealed that communication concerning people from dissimilar setting more particularly on negotiation demands an executive with a keen understanding of cultural diversity.

Finally, analysed data revealed that different managers took a number of actions in ensuring that negotiations did not result into stalled business negotiations as a result of communication. From the analysed data language choice was the most common element. As is seen here, Lee et al., (2006), also argue that clarity and simplicity in the choice of words more particularly during global negotiation concerning business executive from dissimilar cultural setting and whose first language is not the language of management (English) were essential. Also, integrating informal and formal expressions was noted to be important in easing cross-cultural communication between partners from the UK and China as it aided in creating friendly links and accelerating negotiations. This agrees with findings from earlier research such as those of Hall (1976), and more recent research as seen in the works of (Lustig et al., 2006, Westbrook, 2014).

Chapter 6: Conclusions and Recommendations

6.1 Introduction

As aforementioned this research sought to investigate the influence of cultural differences on the business negotiations in the garment trade between the UK and China. In this chapter, the final conclusions are highlighted in respect of the objectives, the findings and in the light of researches done in this area and recommendations made. Lastly the paper will offer suggestions for future research.

6.2 Conclusions

Using the interview questions that were structured along the Hofstede culture framework, the research found out a link between national diversity and the preferred mode of negotiations. In light of the question on whether the individuals preferred negotiations during a meeting or an informal setup, the study found out that 4 of the 6  respondents preferred informal settings. The notion of negotiating in an informal setting stems from the collectivism culture of the Chinese people. This is due to the fact that they prefer and believe that people work better when in group sets. However, the study findings also indicate that ascribing to cultural values in business negotiations has lost its importance over time and therefore there is still room for negotiating in formal settings.

In addition, the study concludes that the element of establishing a relationship before a formal business negotiation is different between societies. As the findings indicate, collectivist societies advocate for informal business meetings and establishment of relationships before negotiations. Informal settings for negotiations carry their importance; one of them being enhancing the trust between parties and thus facilitating positive results from the transactions. This does not entirely rule out the need for formal setups during negotiations. In fact, in the wake of globalisation, business exchanges are founded on principles of exchanges and thus informal meetings may not have the centre stage they had earlier on. Even if the negotiations would be informal, they would play well in the societies that embrace the implied perspectives. For example, the Chinese collectivism nature influences their negotiations with other societies.

Cultural philosophies also have a role to play in business negotiations. The study findings indicate that Confucianism and Taoism, which are Chinese philosophies, impact on the behaviour of managers during negotiations. With the aforementioned philosophies emphasis on the need for harmonious relationships among other issues, it is consequential that the Chinese culture of doing business stems from this. A good example is the concept that Chinese people’s value of relationships results in the fact that their negotiations are not between businesses but rather between individuals.

The research, using the Hofstede culture framework also sought to find out the impact of time orientation on negotiations in the UK and in China. In the UK, managers exhibit their implicit nature of being instantaneous. This means that decision making among manager in the UK is swifter than their counterparts in China. In China, the hastiness of decision making without full consideration of the long-term implications may not be accorded so much importance. In contrast, in China the strong point of relationship lies in the persistence of the negotiations. The implications of these findings is that time orientation stands as an important factor but as one of the respondents said, it is not entirely the determinant of long term business relationships because in the end the parties that negotiate have learnt to accommodate the interests of each other. Furthermore, different styles in cross-cultural communication were noted to be a critical aspect in business negotiations between companies.

6.3 Recommendations

Based on the findings and analysis of the study, recommendations with regard to how to make business negotiations between Chinese and UK managers become more effective have been presented. To start with, as it was noted that majority respondents preferred informal sessions as a result of their need to establish a relationship with their partners, there should be established a balance between undertaking meetings (which were preferred by UK managers) and holding informal sessions. Sufficient time should be accorded to establishing relationships between partners in order to ease the exchange of relevant info. Additionally, as it was also noted in the analysis that the respondents preferred to have sufficient time to assess the implications of a decision as opposed to taking a decision on the spot, both partners should put in place structures that govern the negotiation process with regard to time. Both parties should be accorded enough time to allow them make informed decisions. Offering sufficient time could be beneficial to both parties as it was noted to favourably impact on long-term business relationship.

Further, the analysis and findings revealed that respondents did not tolerate opposing opinions from their UK partners. In ensuring that both parties are satisfied, input with regard to opinions or resources was vital. There should be established cultural programmes to enlighten each manager about the cultural predispositions of each partner. This would enable the Chinese managers tolerate both dissenting and supporting opinions from business partners from different cultures. Also, with regard to uncertainty incidences, it was noted that Chinese managers were less tolerant to ambiguity as compared to their UK counterparts. To manage this aspect, rules and standards of operation should be set and be agreed by both parties. Observance of these rules should also be enforced by both parties and any review of these rules by either party should be welcomed. 

Additionally, the two cultures (UK and China) were noted to be contrastingly dissimilar with regard to the PD index. In order to create an environment that would favour both parties irrespective of the glaringly wide gap in PD, both parties to the negotiation process should come up with ways of embracing the most effective system of engagement. Since autocracy (which is dominant in China) would lead to non-participation of all parties, democratic or participative forms of engagement should be adopted. Adopting these forms of engagement would ensure that all members of each delegation in the negotiation are accorded an opportunity to present their opinions/concerns.

Moreover, as both cultures were noted to rank similar with regard to masculinity/femininity, the negotiation process should be undertaken with an aim of benefiting both parties (attaining a win-win situation). A win-win situation would enhance the trust between both parties as it was established that competiveness and assertiveness were major concerns for both partners. Finally, as communication was noted to be an integral aspect of determining negotiation success, managers should learn about the use of both verbal and non-verbal forms of communication of different cultures. This would ensure that they use the most appropriate form of communication in order to enhance message delivery.

It is evident from the study the cultural differences, despite various counter-arguments against their importance in the business negotiations, play an essential role in determining the outcomes of a business negotiation. The study, which composed of firms in China and the UK, offers a unique perspective of the need to incorporate cultural diversity in business negotiations. Thusly, recommendations would suffice in light of the findings and conclusions of the study.

Firstly, the study recommends flexibility in matters of business negotiations. This is because, as evidenced by the study, cross cultural difference put different demands on the negotiating parties that may implicitly hard to achieve. Organisations need to enlighten their managers of the importance of understanding culture varieties and the consequential impact when it comes to negotiating business deals. Secondly, the trend of the international arena is that globalisation is converging businesses and thus, in this sense, firms need to foster employee understanding of the nature of business transactions. Majorly, the focus should be on training employees to focus more on the materiality of the negotiations rather than the manner in which the negotiations are done. As part of the findings notes, cultural ascriptions are attenuating in the wake of globalisation. In addition, this study also recommends that the accommodations and possibly integration of cultural diversities as a way of achieving ease in cross-cultural negotiations. In order to achieve this, the human resource managers should adopt criterions that would ensure recruitment of employees with diverse cultural backgrounds into the organisation. This would be handy because, as evidenced by the study, people from the same cultural background understand cultural ‘protocol’ equally and would thus negotiate from the same platform. Lastly, this study would recommend the introduction of middlemen in case there are no alternatives on the manner of negotiations. Middlemen depict the concept of harmonious relations as opposed to confrontations.

Table 6.1: Implementation of the recommendation

Recommendations	Proposed action	Management action	Time required
	Training of managers on the need for flexibility – accommodating cultural diversity in negotiations a way of achieving better negotiations	Top management and the middle management to be trained on cultural diversity issues and how to accommodate them	1 month
	Integration of different employee diversity on the workforce especially of cultures popular in their line of business	Advise the human resource manager and ensuring that recruitment accommodates the desired cultures	In the subsequent recruitments
	Incorporation of middlemen in the negotiating platforms	Hiring middlemen whenever there are business negotiations that are cross-cultural	On a need basis
	To create a team that is not tied by the cultural ascriptions but rather relies on the principles of exchange in negotiating.	Instill an organisation culture that is congruent to the international trends and thusly not tied to local cultural contours	9-12 Months

6.4 Research limitations

As is the case with many other researches, this research was met with a number of research limitations, which might significantly interfere with the reliability and validity of the research. This section attempts to put some of these issues into perspective. Firstly, the researcher was stricken hard with the challenge of financial incapacity. This included the inability to fully finance a proper research that could go into the detail recommended by previous researchers regarding a research study of this calibre. While the researcher tried the most economical ways in which the research could be carried out to reduce costs, it was still impossible to meet all the required costs. For instance, the inability to carry out a research in more orgnaisations due to high costs of commuting to and from the field crippled the possibility of carrying out a much diverse research with a bigger scope. The issues of cost also came in as the researcher was unable to employ even a few people to help with data collection, given that the method used was interviews and this usually takes longer as the participants must be allowed time to fully express themselves. Lastly, the data analysis, editing and presentation also involved some high costs, given the large amounts of time that was used.

Additionally, the time was a major limiting factor both in the perspective of the researcher as well as in the perspective of the respondent. As shown in chapter three, the researcher had to arrange for a room within which the participants would be met. However, given that the participants were all mangers with their tasks awaiting them, the researcher could get only so much time. This prompted the urge to quickly run through the items in the interview form, or risk losing a respondent before finishing with the interviews. The researcher was also limited by time as the research had to be done with a higher consideration for accuracy while running other personal errand as well.

Another important challenge that the researcher faced was the lack of prior experience with such-like tasks. It can be noted here that the researcher was completing only the second research of their academic and professional life, and this was by far the more extensive. As such, while precaution was taken to ensure that all the guidelines as per previous research recommendations are met, it was not unusual to run into erroneous judgements. This might have also interfered with the ability to select which kinds of literature to appraise in relevance to the given research.         

6.5 Future research recommendations

Based on the detailed research report as well as the limitations of the research, this section briefly outlines some of the limitations that the researcher faced, as outlined in the immediate preceding section, and suggesting recommendations for future researchers. Firstly, as it has been mentioned, the research was carried out on the topic ‘The influence of cultural difference on the business negotiation in the garment trade between the UK and China.’ From the research, it was noted that there is some literature regarding the present topic. Nonetheless, the literature was found to contain a lot of disagreements between the authors, thereby putting to question the different conclusions arrived at by different authors. As such, the present study recommends that future research focus more on this area, especially with the aim of further appraising the existing literature to find out which conclusions are valid and useful to the student of business management.

Secondly, based on the findings, it was notable that the research subject was very narrow in scope based on the aforementioned limitations. As such, the researcher urges future researchers should consider expanding their research to more than just one industry. In order to get better results the future studies might attempt to review companies based in different regions in both China and UK. Additionally, the research might consider tackling the question of cultural involvement in more than the garment industry, as the international trade is very extensive and diverse. In so doing, this will give room for other research that can be used to buttress the findings of the present study.   

Chapter 7: Personal Development and Reflection

7.1 Introduction

As per the aims of this research, the objective was to determine the impact of the cultural differences on international business negotiations; further to this, the researcher intended to investigate how the said culture intelligence can contribute to business negotiation. In order to attain these objectives, the researcher carried out interviews encompassing three different Garment companies whose businesses are located in different countries with the UK included. In the course of this study, the researcher gained a lot of skills and accessed information that helped in the personal development and was a source of inspiration too. The aim of this chapter is to enumerate the developmental steps attained by the researcher during this research process; it also shows the inspiration and motivation that the researcher draws from the research process. The usefulness of this inspiration and motivation to the career growth and development of the researcher will also be highlighted, especially with regard to successful negotiations.

7.2 Personal Reflection

As a researcher, this study has proven to be very useful for me especially in the formulation of a research topic and the development of the research process. The study helped me to learn how to evaluate past research studies through analysing their abstracts in order to identify existing research gaps to be addressed. This helped me to formulate a research topic and develop research objectives that would lead to the discovery of new knowledge with regard to the influence of national values and culture on the business negotiation process. The literature review process was an important section that helped me to learn how to decipher the most relevant sections of past studies for my research topic and how to relate this information to my research. I learnt how to filter our empirical evidence from the past studies and determine their relevance and applicability to the current study on the cultural negotiation across various cultures.

The research framework and the research design adopted are very important aspects for a research study, in this particular study, I have learnt how to design and apply a research framework that is relevant to the research objectives at hand. The chosen research design for this study was a case study; interviews were used as the research instrument to acquire the required information. I was able to learn the pros and cons of the various research designs; the study also enlightened me on the steps that are useful during the interview preparation, as well as the process of carrying out the interview process. I acquired useful skills on how to interact with people and also got people interaction skills which enabled me to extract the necessary information from the interviewees. The literature review enlightened me on the cultural dimensions and their effect on business negotiations, of particular importance was the theory on Hofstede’s cultural dimensions and their application in the business negotiation process.

The issue of ethics in research is very critical; in this study, I learnt the various ethical considerations regarding the attainment of the information that was sought from the research study. Interviews present a unique challenge as the researcher might be biased during the interview process and may tend to lead the interviewee to give the desired responses. In this case I learnt how to conduct the research within the ethical principles in order to gain the desired information voluntarily from the interviewees without any form of coercion. The data analysis was useful to me in learning important skills on data analysis from the interview process and interpretation of the trends to give relevant information regarding the study. This study helped me to develop personally in my prospective human resource management career; by analysing the role that culture plays in the business negotiation process, I was able to learn how I can overcome the cultural barrier during the business negotiation process. I have gained invaluable practical skills on how to structure negotiations within the existing cultural framework so as to ensure success. This research has equipped me with both theoretical and practical skills that are applicable not only in the research process, but also in the practical field in the world of business negotiations.

References

Adler, J., and Gundersen, A. (2007) International dimensions of organizational behaviour. Cengage Learning.

Arnould, E. J. and Wallendorf, M. (1994) ‘Market-oriented ethnography: Interpretation building and marketing strategy formulation,’ Journal of Marketing Research, 31, pp. 484-504.

Aunger, R. (2000) Darwinizing culture. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Bhagat, R., Triandis, H. and McDevitt, A. (2012) Managing global organizations. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

Bolewski, W. (2008) ‘Diplomatic Processes and Cultural Variations: The Relevance of Culture in Diplomacy’, Whitehead Journal of Diplomacy & International Relations., 9, pp. 145.

Brantlinger, P. (2013) Crusoe’s footprints: Cultural studies in Britain and America. Routledge.

Brett, J. M. (2001) Negotiating Globally: How to Negotiate Deals, Resolve Disputes, and Make Decisions Across Cultural Boundaries, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Burns, R. B., & Burns, R. A. (2008) Business research methods and statistics using SPSS. Los Angeles: Sage.

Carney, D. and Williams, R. (1997) ‘The memetics of firms, entrepreneurship and the new body politic: the memetics of the marketplace’, Management Decision Journal, 35(6), pp. 447-451.

Chang, C. (2003) ‘An examination of cross-cultural negotiation: Using Hofstede framework’, Journal of American Academy of Business, 2(2), 567-570.

Chang, L. C. (2006) ‘Differences in Business Negotiations between Different Cultures’, The Journal of Human Resource and Adult Learning, pp. 135-140.

Charles, M. (2007) ‘Language Matters in Global Communication Article Based on ORA Lecture, October 2006’, Journal of Business communication, 44(3), pp. 260-282.

Chen, Y. (2006) National culture and groups. Amsterdam: Elsevier JAI.

Cheng, Y. (2004) a theory of Confucian selfhood: Self-cultivation and free will in Confucian philosophy. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Cohen, R. (2007) Negotiating across cultures: International communication in an interdependent world. Washington, D.C: United States Institute of Peace Press.

Collis, J. and Hussey, R. (2003) Business Research: A Practical Guide for Undergraduate and Postgraduate Students. 2^nd edn. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Communicaid, (2015) Cross Cultural Theory: Developmental Model of Intercultural Sensitivity. [online] Communicaid.com. Available at: http://www.communicaid.com/cross-cultural-training/blog/cross-cultural-theory-developmental-model-of-intercultural-sensitivity/#.VLQLQiuacrQ [Accessed 12 Jan. 2015].

Cricillo, R., Fremantle, A., Hamburg, J., (2000) ‘International Negotiations: A Cultural Perspective’,The ABA Guide to International Business Negotiations; A Comparison of Cross Cultural Issues and Successful Approaches pp. 38 (2^nd Edition) Chicago, USA: ABA Publishing.

CROWCROFT, R. (2012) ‘Globalisation and Public Language’, The Political Quarterly, 83(4), pp.786-791.

Crump, L. (2011) ‘Negotiation Process and Negotiation Context’, International Negotiation, 16(2), pp.197-227.

Das Neves, J. and Melé, D. (2013) ‘Managing Ethically Cultural Diversity: Learning from Thomas Aquinas’, Journal of Business Ethics, 116(4), pp.769-780.

Dawkins, R. (2006) The Selfish Gene (30th anniversary edn.; Oxford: Oxford University Press) 1 online resource (xxiii), pp. 360.

Dilley, P. (2004) ‘Interviews and the philosophy of qualitative research’, The Journal of Higher Education, 75(1), pp. 127-132.

Ding, J. (2014) ‘Research on Internet Culture Model Based on Memetics Literacy Translation Construction’, AMR, 971-973, pp. 2697-2700.

Dowling, P. J., Festing, M. and Engle, A. D. (2008) International Human Resource Management, 5ed, London: Thomson Learning.

Duffy, F., Gordon, H., Whelan, G., Cole-Kelly, K., and Frankel, R. (2004) ‘Assessing competence in communication and interpersonal skills: the Kalamazoo II report’, Academic Medicine, 79(6), 495-507.

Earley, P. C., & Mosakowski, E. (2004) ‘Cultural intelligence’, Harvard business review, 82(10), 139-146.

Elsaid, A. (2012) ‘The Effects of Cross Cultural Work Force Diversity on Employee Performance in Egyptian Pharmaceutical Organizations’, BMR, 1(4), pp. 127-221.

Fantini, A. (2001) ‘Translating cultures: an introduction for translators, interpreters and mediators’, International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 25(2), pp. 231-233.

Farazmand FA, Daneefard H (2011) Is Religious Culture A Factor In Negotiation: A Cross-Cultural Comparison Of Iran, Taiwan And The United States? Available at http://www.freepatentsonline.com/article/Journal-InternationalBusiness Research/263035535.html (accessed 12 January 2015).

Fells, R. (2010) Effective negotiation. Cambridge [England]: Cambridge University Press.

Gill, J., Johnson, P., and Clark, M. (2002) Research Methods for Managers. 3^rd  (edn). London: Sage.

Gold, T., Guthrie, D., and Wank, D. (2002) Social connections in China: Institutions, culture, and the changing nature of guanxi. Cambridge University Press.

Graham, L., and Lam, N. M. (2003) ‘The Chinese negotiation’, Harvard business review, 81(10), 82-91.

Greenfield, P. (2013) ‘Sociodemographic Differences Within Countries Produce Variable Cultural Values’, Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 45(1), pp. 37-41.

Griffith, A. (2003) ‘The role of communication competencies in international business relationship development’, Journal of World Business, 37(4), pp. 256-265.

Groves, K., Feyerherm, A. and Gu, M. (2014) ‘Examining Cultural Intelligence and Cross-Cultural Negotiation Effectiveness’, Journal of Management Education, 12(3), pp. 87-120.

Gudykunst, W., and Kim, Y. (2003) Communicating with strangers: An approach to intercultural communication. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.

Hall, E. & Hall, M. (1990) Understanding cultural differences: Germans, French and Americans. Yarmouth: Intercultural Press.

Hall, E. (1976) Beyond culture. New York: Doubleday.

Hall, E. T. (1973) The silent language. Anchor Books Edition. New York: Doubleday.

Hall, E.T. (1976) Beyond Culture, Doubleday, New York, NY.

Handford, M. (2010) The language of business meetings. Cambridge University Press.

Hanson, D. and Grimmer, M. (2007) ‘The mix of qualitative and quantitative research in major marketing journals, 1993-2002”, European Journal of Marketing, 41(1/2), pp.58-70.

Harzing, W., and Feely, J. (2008) ‘The language barrier and its implications for HQ-subsidiary relationships. Cross Cultural Management’, An International Journal, 15(1), 49-61.

Hernandez, F. and Kose, B. (2011) ‘The Developmental Model of Intercultural Sensitivity: A Tool for Understanding Principals’ Cultural Competence’,  Education and Urban Society, 44(4), pp. 512-530.

Hewer, C. and Roberts, R. (2012) ‘History, culture and cognition: Towards a dynamic model of social memory’, Culture & Psychology, 18(2), pp. 167-183.

Hofstede, G. & Hofstede, G. J. (2005) Culture and organizations: Software for the mind. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Hofstede, G. (1991) Culture and organizations: Software of the mind. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Hofstede, G. (1997) Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind, London: McGraw-Hill.

Hofstede, G. (2011) ‘Dimensionalizing Cultures: The Hofstede Model in Context’, Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1), pp 35-78.

Hofstede, G. (2011) ‘Dimensionalizing cultures: The Hofstede model in context’, Online readings in psychology and culture, 2(1), pp. 8.

Hofstede, G. (2011) ‘Dimensionalizing cultures: The Hofstede model in context’, Online readings in psychology and culture, 2(1), pp. 8.

Hofstede, G. and Fink, G. (2007) ‘Culture: organisations, personalities and nations. Gerhard Fink interviews Geert Hofstede’, EJIM, 1(1/2), pp.14.

Hofstede, G., Pedersen, P. and Hofstede, G. (2002) Exploring culture. Yarmouth, Me.: Intercultural Press.

Hong, J. (2013) ‘A study on Korean-to-English news translation strategy: Focusing on high and low context theory by Hall’, Korean Journal of Applied Linguistics, 29(1), pp.307.

Huang, L. (2010) ‘Cross-cultural communication in business negotiations’, International Journal of Economics and finance, 2(2), pp. 196.

Ibarra, H., Kolb, D., Robinson, R., Sebenius, J., Sussman, L., Watkins, M., Wheeler, M., Williams, J. and Wu, G. (2001) Negotiation. Boston: Harvard Business School Pub.

Jin, D. (2012) ‘The new wave of de-convergence: a new business model of the communication industry in the 21st century’, Media, Culture & Society, 34(6), pp. 761-772.

Johnson, P. and Clark, M. (2006) ‘Mapping the terrain: an overview of business and management research methodologies’, in Johnson, P. and Clark, M. (eds) Business and Management Research Methodologies. London: Sage.

Juming, S. (2009) ‘The Magic of Meme –On Memetics and Its Development in China’, Chinese Semiotic Studies, 2(1), pp.12-32.

Kankaras, M. (2009) ‘Implicit theories of creativity: Cross-cultural study’, Psihologija, 42(2), pp.187-202.

King, N. (2004) ‘Using Interviews in Qualitative Research’, in Cassell, C. and Symon, G. (Eds.) Essential Guide to Qualitative Methods in Organizational Research 2^nd  ed. London: Sage, pp.11-22.

Konya, I. (2006) ‘Modeling Cultural Barriers in International Trade’, Review of International Economics, 14(3), pp.494-507.

Lee, K. H., Yang, G., & Graham, J. L. (2006) ‘Tension and trust in international business negotiations: American executives negotiating with Chinese executives’, Journal of International Business Studies, 37(5), 623-641.

Lee, S., Adair, W. and Seo, S. (2011) ‘Cultural Perspective Taking in Cross-Cultural Negotiation’, Group Decis Negot, 22(3), pp.389-405.

Lee, S., Adair, W. and Seo, S. (2011) ‘Cultural Perspective Taking in Cross-Cultural Negotiation’, Group Decis Negot, 22(3), pp.’389-405.

Leung, K., Bhagat, R. S., Buchan, N. R., Erez, M. and Gibson, C. B. (2005) ‘Culture and International Business: Recent Advances and their Implications for Future Research’, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 36, pp. 357-378.

Lewicki, R., Saunders, D. and Barry, B. (2015) Negotiation. New York, N.Y.: McGraw-Hill Education.

Lewis, D., and Gates, M. (2005) Leading across Cultures. Nicholas Brealey.

Liu, M. (2009) ‘The Intrapersonal and Interpersonal Effects of Anger on Negotiation Strategies: A Cross-Cultural Investigation’, Human Communication Research, 35(1), pp. 148-169.

Liu, R. (1996) Negotiating Bible. Taipei, Taiwan: Business Weekly Cultural Publishing Ltd.

Lo Bianco, J. (2005) ‘Globalisation and national communities of communication’, LPLP, 29(2), pp.109-133.

Lombardo, G. (2009) ‘International business negotiation: automobiles and ships’, Cross Cultural Management, 16(1), pp.102-113.

Lombardo, J. (2015) Cross-Cultural Communication: Definition, Strategies & Examples – Video & Lesson Transcript | Education Portal. [online] Education Portal. Available at: http://education-portal.com/academy/lesson/cross-cultural-communication-definition-strategies-examples.html [Accessed 12 Jan. 2015].

Lustig, M. W., Koester, J., and Zhuang, E. (2006) ‘Intercultural competence: Interpersonal communication across cultures’,  Pearson/A and B.

Mackiewicz, J. (2005) ‘Book Review: Guide to Cross-Cultural Communication’, Business Communication Quarterly, 68(3), pp. 374-378.

Martin, B. & Larsen, G. (1999) ‘Taming the tiger: key success factors for trade with China’, Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 17, pp. 391-399

Martin. B, Larsen. G (1999) ‘Taming the tiger: key success factors for trade with China’, journal of Marketing Intelligence & Planning 3 (35), pp. 68-93.

McCall, M. and Hollenbeck, G. (2002) Developing global executives. Boston: Harvard Business

McNamara, R. (2003) ‘The crucial role of research in multicultural and cross-cultural communication’, Journal of Communication Management, 8(3), pp. 322-

Merkin, R. (2011) ‘Middle Eastern Impression-Management Communication’, Cross-Cultural Research, 46(2), pp. 109-132.

Minkov, M., Blagoev, V. and Hofstede, G. (2012) ‘The Boundaries of Culture: Do Questions About Societal Norms Reveal Cultural Differences?’, Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 44(7), pp.1094-1106.

Montana, P. J., & Charnov, B. H. (2008) Management. Hauppauge, NY: Barron’s Educational Series.

Morita, L. (2014) ‘English, language shift and values shift in Japan and Singapore’, Globalisation, Societies and Education, pp. 1-20.

Muijs, D. (2004) Doing Quantitative Research in Education with SPSS. London: Sage

Musolff, A. (2014) ‘Metaphors: Sources for intercultural misunderstanding?’, IJoLC, 1(1), pp.42-59.

Pagano, U. (2007) ‘Cultural globalisation, institutional diversity and the unequal accumulation of intellectual capital’, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 31(5), pp. 649-667.

Peterson, B. (2004) Cultural intelligence. Yarmouth, Me.: Intercultural Press.

Peterson, M. (2007) ‘The Heritage of Cross Cultural Management Research: Implications for the Hofstede Chair in Cultural Diversity’, International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 7(3), pp.359-377.

Peterson, M. and Søndergaard, M. (2008) Foundations of cross cultural management. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Plum, E; (2008) Cultural Intelligence: the art of leading cultural complexity. London: Middlesex University Press

Quappe, T. and Cantatore, G. (2007) Culturosity Article: What is Cultural Awareness. Available at: http://www.culturosity.com/articles/whatisculturalawareness.htm (Accessed 12 January 2015).

Ready, K. and Tessema, M. (2011) ‘Perceptions and strategies in the negotiation process: a cross-cultural examination of USA, Vietnam and Malaysia’, IJBG, 6(2), p.198.

Remenyi, D., Williams, B., Money, A., and Swartz, E. (2003) Doing research in business and management: An introduction to process and method. London: SAGE Publications.

Rhodes D, Emery C, Tian R (2005) ‘A Cross-cultural Comparison of Leader Ethics. Academy of Organizational Culture’, Communications and Conflict, 2(36), pp. 8-15

Rickards, T., Runco, M. and Moger, S. (2008) The Routledge Companion To Creativity. Hoboken: Taylor & Francis.

Robson, C. (2002) Real World Research (2nd edn). Oxford: Blackwell.

Rodrigues, C. (2009) International management. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.

Rosen, R., Digh, P., Singer, M., and Philips, C. (2000) Global literacies: Lessons on business

Rosen, R., Digh, P., Singer, M., and Philips, C. (2000) Global literacies: Lessons on business leadership and national cultures. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Saunders, M, Thornhill, A and Lewis, P. (2009) Research Methods for Business Students Financial. London: Pearson.

School.

Seng, T. and Lim, E. (2004) Strategies for Effective Cross Cultural Negotiation, The F.R.A.M.E. Approach vii. Singapore: McGraw Hill Education.

Steers, R. M., Sánchez-Runde, S. C. J., & Nardon, L. (2010) Management across cultures: Challenges and strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Stromquist, N. (2014) ‘Explaining the expansion of feminist ideas: cultural diffusion or political struggle?’, Globalisation, Societies and Education, pp.1-26.

Sycara, K., Gelfand, M. and Abbe, A. (2013) Models for intercultural collaboration and negotiation. Dordrecht: Springer.

Tessema, M. and Ready, K. (2009) ‘Perceptions and Strategies in the Negotiation Process: A Cross Cultural Examination of U.S. and Malaysia’, International Negotiation, 14(3), pp.493-517.

Thompson, L. (2005) The mind and heart of the negotiator. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson/Prentice Hall.

Tracy, B. (2013) Negotiation. New York: American Management Association.

Tse, D. K., Francis, J., and Walls, J. (1994) ‘Cultural differences in conducting intra-and inter- cultural negotiations: A Sino-Canadian comparison’, Journal of International Business Studies, 25(3), pp. 237 – 555.

Tu, Y. and Chi, C. (2011) ‘An Analysis on Negotiation Styles by Religious Beliefs’, J. Int. Bus. Res., 4(3): 243-253.

Velikovsky, J. (2012) Lifecycle of a meme. [online] StoryAlity. Available at: http://storyality.wordpress.com/2012/12/22/storyality-45-on-movie-memes-and-memetics-and-how-memes-work/lifecycle-of-a-meme/#main [Accessed 12 Jan. 2015].

Wang, H. (2005) The Business Negotiation. Beijing: The Capital Economy and Commence University Press

Wang, J. (2009) ‘A Cross-cultural Study of Daily Communication between Chinese and American– From the Perspective of High Context and Low Context’, ASS, 4(10), pp 89-120.

Warner, M. (2010) ‘In search of Confucian HRM: theory and practice in Greater China and beyond’, The international journal of human resource management, 21(12), pp. 2053-2078.

Westbrook, T. (2014) ‘Global Contexts for Learning: Exploring the Relationship Between Low-Context Online Learning and High-Context Learners’, Christian Higher Education, 13(4), pp.281-294.

Yamazaki, Y. and Kayes, D. (2004) ‘An experiential approach to cross-cultural learning: A review and Integration of competencies for successful expatriate adaption’, Academy of Management Learning & Education, 3(4), pp. 362-379.

Yunxia Zhu, (2008) ‘From cultural adaptation to cross-cultural discursive competence’, Discourse & Communication, 2(2), pp. 185-204.

Appendix I Interview

Interview protocol

Part A Basic information

Company:

Position:

Gender:

Age:

Part B To analyse cultural and values differences and their impact on international business negotiation: UK vs China

Individualism/Collectivism

1. When conducting meetings with your business partners in the UK, do you prefer negotiations during meetings or informal sessions?What role does the need to first establish a relationship before commercial transaction play in such as case?

2. How does traditional Chinese philosophies such as Confucianism and Taoism impact on your business negotiation in terms of aspects such as the need for harmonious relationships?

Time orientation

3. What differences have you noted in willingness of your business counterparts in the UK to change their business positions on the spot as opposed to taking time to assess the implications? Has this affected your consideration of long-term business relationships?

4. Does your company prefer consulting with the executive level and subordinate staff members before making business decisions with a foreign partner? What impact does the level of autocracy have on rapid decision making?

Uncertainty avoidance

5. When negotiating with your UK business partners would you seek adjournments in order to form consensus or prefer early action as preferred by UK managers? What role does uncertainty play in such a case?

6. Have differences in preferences for rules and formality emerged during your negotiation with your British counterparts? Has this impacted on your view on trustworthiness of these partners?

7. In the event of an unforeseen problem with an UK business partner how do you plan to resolve the differences: mediation or litigation? Has this affected your business relationships?

Power distance

8. When putting forward business proposals to your UK partners to what extent have you received opposing views and what impact has it had on forming business partnerships?

Masculinity/femininity

9. What level of importance do you attach to consensus (win-win) during business negotiation as opposed to confrontational negotiations that may lead to win-lose situation? Has this also been the case with the UK business partners?

10. Would business negotiations with a UK business partners involving women impact on the negotiation outcomes or do you prefer to engage with top level managers?

Context Culture

11. Did the UK partners value merit and expertise and rush during negotiations as opposed to first building trust and relationship before sitting down for negotiations? How did this impact on the entire negotiation process?

Part C Communication

12. Have you realised differences in styles of communication during negotiation with business partners from UK, are they straight forward or indirect and how has this impact on reaching consensus?

13. What actions have you undertaken to ensure that differences between the UK and Chinese managers do not result into stalled business negotiations?

Appendix II Interview records

Part A Basic information

Company:

A- Bosideng

B- Bosideng

C- Dayang Group

D- Dayang Group

E- Youngor Group

F-Youngor Group

Position:

A-Relationship Manager

B-Marketing manager

C-Supply chain manager

D-Relationship Manager

E-Marketing manager

F-Supply chain manager

Gender:

A-Male

B-Female

C-Female

D-Male

E-Male

F-Female

Age:

A-36

B-42

C-48

D-29

E-31

F-37

Part B To analyse cultural and values differences and their impact on international business negotiation: UK vs China

Individualism/Collectivism

1. When conducting meetings with your business partners in the UK, do you prefer negotiations during meetings or informal sessions? What role does the need to first establish a relationship before commercial transaction play in such as case?

A- I prefer negotiation during informal sessions. It brings trust between the negotiating parties.

B- I prefer negotiations during informal sessions. We values relationship therefore, through negotiation we can strengthen the bond between me and the other business partner

Interviewee C: I consider Negotiations during the meeting because the success of today’s commercial transactions is based on formalities and thus establishment of a relationship before a transaction plays an insignificant role for the success of negotiation.

Interviewee D: I prefer informal discussion. This is because informal discussion fosters relationship that eases communication between individuals from a collectivist point of view. I also think that the informal session generates more information through interaction.

E- I prefer negotiations during informal sessions because the mood is more relaxed and facilitates successful negotiations. Establishing a relationship enables information sharing and enhances chances of successful negotiations. Establishment of relationship before a commercial transaction also enhances trust between the parties and thus boosts the attainment of transaction results.

F- I prefer negotiations during meetings. The formal setting that is presented in meetings enables the negotiators to reach agreements more easily. Establishing a relationship enables the negotiators to interact freely and close out deals easily.

2. How does traditional Chinese philosophies such as Confucianism and Taoism impact on your business negotiation in terms of aspects such as the need for harmonious relationships?

A- From these two philosophies is where I draw my moral for negotiation. Confucian philosophy for instance teaches one to be respectful for and tolerate another person’s view. The two philosophies make the establishment of a relationship a prerequisite in any business negotiation process. I was born in a rural area in china and had this philosophies so much imparted in me by my parents they have saved me a bunch during negotiation. I just wonder how other groups negotiate without using Confucian and Taoism philosophies may be they have there but I think Confucian and Taoism remains to be the best. They teach one to be calm and respectful during the negotiation process.

B- I do not think if the two philosophies have any impact in my business negotiations skills, if anything the intense globalisation has made them to be irrelevant. They were only good during those time we use to value the collectivism theory nowadays people get to know the advantage of thinking independently an on your feet. I personally learned in the UK where such a theory is not practice. That notwithstanding, the influence of modern management has influenced every aspect of my negotiation skills. I think you are getting me right.

Interviewee C: I think confucianism influences business negotiation on a number of aspects which include family orientation, respect for hierarchy and seniority, moral cultivation, importance of interpersonal relationships, the concept of face and quest of harmony and evasion of conflict.

Interviewee D: In my own view, traditional Chinese philosophies such as confucianism and Taoism establish a relationship which is a prerequisite in any business negotiation. I consider this view because establishing relationships permit easy formation of harmonious relationships between parties to a negotiation’

E- Traditional Chinese philosophies impact the business negotiations differently based on their set of principles. These philosophies lay a basis upon which the business negotiations can be structured and the likely outcomes are determined. Taoism impacts on business negotiation as it emphasises on the need for harmony with nature and creativity of life. Taoism’s doctrines which are essential to establishing harmonious relationships include its unity of opposites.

F- Traditional Chinese Culture plays a key role in business negotiations and the likely outcomes. There prevail strong ties between people and the community in China and this often influences individuals to work better in groups; this creates harmony and advocates for unity during the discussions. Taoism and Confucianism lay the groundwork for people to work in groups which is a key factor for success during business negotiations.

Time orientation

3. What differences have you noted in willingness of your business counterparts in the UK to change their business positions on the spot as opposed to taking time to assess the implications? Has this affected your consideration of long-term business relationships?

A- I notice several differences for example, my counterparts in the UK made instant decisions regarding transactions and do not hesitate to introduce any changes to a transaction. According to me such decisions have greater ramifications and has negative my affected my long-term relationship with the UK executives because for us we tend to be so rigid and follow protocols and believes that a deal once signed, there should be no change of mind.

B – My counterparts in the UK could easily change and make radical changes whenever plans are not going their way they do not hesitate. May be they are cultured that way but I think such habits are annoying. This has really affected my long term business relationship with them since they are unpredictable one never realizes when they will change. You see, for us Chinese contracts must always be obeyed and there should be no change of mind during the negotiation time.

Interviewee C: I am for the view that, in spite of the differences in culture, the willingness to change business positions on the spot as opposed to taking time to assess the implications does not significantly influence consideration for long-term relationships. This is because over time trust between partners is established and partners are able to accommodate the cultural inclinations of each individual party.

Interviewee D: I think that counterparts from the UK changed their business positions on the spot as opposed to taking time to assess the implications.

E- On the basis of the time taken to assess and make business positions, there is no significant difference between the business partners in China and the UK. The lack of a distinct difference in the time taken to make decisions therefore means that this issue does not have a significant impact on my consideration of long-term business relationships in the China and the UK. This therefore does not affect my decision on whether to base my business operations in China or the UK as there are no evident significant differences.

F- The time taken to assess the implications of business positions taken varies between the business partners in the UK and China. This has implications on the long-term considerations for the business relationships. Expectation of other business partners to live by the same standards fostered the business partner from the UK make swift decisions. UK business partners are more likely to change their business positions on the spot as opposed to taking time to assess the implications

4. Does your company prefer consulting with the executive level and subordinate staff members before making business decisions with a foreign partner? What impact does the level of autocracy have on rapid decision making?

A- I think that is not necessary and at worst bad manners, I mean, how can you consult your junior. The philosophies of Taoism and Confucianism do not allow us to do such a mistake moreover I think I normally make the wisest decisions for the company. In China, you just have to respect authority there is no doubt about that. The Chinese managers are well mannered they do not need to consult juniors, however, juniors are supposed to console. Autocratic decision making is good because it takes shorter time on making decision on how to counter a situation rather than in the democratic organisation where everyone else must be consulted before decisions are made.

B- No the company do not prefer consultation at all about such sensitive decisions. You see even if we wanted to apply democratic decision making, our employee have been acculturated to think that managers are always very superior. Remember the Confucian culture also do not recommend for the junior to consult senior. Personally I think unilateral and autocratic decision making is the genesis of all our problems in this organisation. It does not mean that if I am a manager, I must be all knowing no that is not the case. Sometimes we need to consult juniors to know what they think about decision we are about to make.

Interviewee C: Largely, my company does not prefer consulting with the executive level and subordinate staff members because the culture in China favours making of decisions unilaterally. Status and respect for tradition is valued and thus top management make all the decisions regarding vital organisational activities. The Chinese culture is characterised with autocratic form of decision making and this favours the decision making to be rapid.

Interviewee D: Largely, my company does not prefer consulting with the executive level and subordinate staff members because the culture in China favours making of decisions unilaterally. Status and respect for tradition is valued and thus top management make all the decisions regarding vital organisational activities. Individuals in the Chinese culture prefer to be directed and thus embrace a heightened level of autocracy. This autocracy works in favour of the company as very limited time is taken in making decisions

E- There is a high level of mutual respect for the executive leadership in my organisation. As a result of this, therefore, the subordinate staffs expect the business leaders to make decisions on behalf of the organisations. The subordinates take it that the decisions made are for the good of the organisation. With high levels of autocracy, the decisions can be made fast as the number of people involved in the decision making process are few and the hierarchy involved in this process is reduced. This therefore, enhances the decision making process in organisations.

F- Countries such as China rate highly on LTO with respect status and authority and thus their companies do not prefer consulting with the executive level and subordinate staff members before making business decisions with a foreign partner. This consequently means that a heightened level of autocracy was maintained in these organisations. The impact that this aspect has on rapid decision making is positive. This is because the business decisions are majorly made at the top level by few individuals.

Uncertainty avoidance

5. When negotiating with your UK business partners would you seek adjournments in order to form consensus or prefer early action as preferred by UK managers? What role does uncertainty play in such a case?

A- I prefer seeking adjournment in order for me to go do enquiry and form a consensus around the matter of discussion. I seek adjournment because us Chinese we do not change easily once an agreement is reach. Therefore, before I understand the deal, I must seek clarification from different quotas this make me have a sound opinion as well as an informed decision about the choice I make. I prefer adjournment since you cannot trust the future. As much as possible I do not engage in tossing dye since I will always not get the eve number. Adjournment and seeking further clarification help me have a better chance and avoid risk.

B- I prefer adjournment to early actions when hammering deal with my UK counterpart. There is nothing early actions can help me with at all. My counterparts from the UK are always people in hurry they seem not to be disturbed by uncertainty I do not know how they operate their businesses with such a mind-set. Personally, in instance where I have sought for adjournment, I have gotten good deals with fewer ramifications.

Interviewee C: When negotiating with the UK business partners I would seek adjournments in contrast to early action in order to ensure that the right decision is taken. 

Interviewee D: When negotiating with UK business partners, I would prefer early action than seeking adjournment. This is because of the interests of both parties.

E- Seeking adjournment during negotiation with the UK partners is a key part of the decision making process. This process allows for time and consideration in a forum that is more informal and helps the negotiators to be able to make informed decisions. This action is a useful one and could play a key role in making useful business decisions for both the UK and Chinese managers. In cases of uncertainty, an adjournment could prove to the most useful aspect as it will enable managers to think over their decisions enhancing the chances of reaching a common decision that is based on consensus.

F- Early action during negotiations defeats the purpose of dialogue. In cases where the level of uncertainty during negotiations is high, it would be preferable to adjourn the negotiations and allow the parties’ time to ponder over their decisions. This would ideally be in line with the Chinese culture that calls for group action and is in line with the expectations of the managers regarding the building of consensus during the decision making process in a negotiation process.

6. Have differences in preferences for rules and formality emerged during your negotiation with your British counterparts? Has this impacted on your view on trustworthiness of these partners?

A- Yes and in so many instances. My counterparts from UK are very rough I do not know whether that is what is called civilization. In such instances, I always avoid physical engagement and just follow protocols of the discussion. The UK counterparts are always adamant insist on what they say. I tend to believe that they are not always right. These make me doubt them always.

B- that is normal. I cannot escape that. China and UK have totality difference culture. However, I have started trusting them because these guys are not bad at all. They have only be acculturated to be stubborn and informal something that most of Chinese executives are not used to.

Interviewee C: During the negotiation with the British counterparts, differences in preferences for rules and formality have emerged. In this regard, UA cultures such as China have come up with strict rules and laws which have been instituted to safeguard the interests of parties. Due to the aspect of safeguarding the interests by the strict rules, there has been enhanced trust between the parties involved.

Interviewee D: According to my observation, there have been differences for preference of formality by the UK counterparts. This contradicts the fact that all transactions carried out, laid down rules have been strictly followed. This however has impacted on trustworthiness because observing rules and laws ensures that all parties meet their contractual obligations, and this enhances trustworthiness between partners.

E- Differences have emerged; however, these are addressed within the set rules. The Chinese culture had been instituted to deal with the issue of Uncertainty Avoidance (UA), during the negotiation process. In order to address this issue, strict rules and regulations are put in place to guide the negotiation process. Following this, therefore, it is only natural that the negotiation parties have a high level of respect for the set down rules and this helps to create a high level of trust among the negotiating parties.

F- Differences do emerge; the rules and formalities set out for engagement during the negotiation process play a key role in enhancing the success of the negotiations. There have been differences for preference of formality by the UK counterparts. However, in all transactions carried out, laid down rules have been followed. This is because it was noted that observance of rules and laws ensured that all parties meet their contractual obligations, and this enhanced trustworthiness between partners.

7. In the event of an unforeseen problem with an UK business partner how do you plan to resolve the differences: mediation or litigation? Has this affected your business relationships?

A- that is simple, courts are wide open I will solve our problem through litigation. All our transactions are governed by law not traditions I will prefer court to other places. Yea, once or twice it has affected because for most of the time I win and my counterpart losses in the process part with a lot of money.

B- I prefer mediation since mediation makes us to be bonded again. We have to be living in harmony with our friends, family and business partner let us not forget the Confucian philosophy harmony is better than money. It has never affected my business relationship.

Interviewee C: In the event of an unforeseen problem with an UK partner, I think the best way to resolve conflicts/problems would be through mediation. This is because the UK culture emphasised on formalities

Interviewee D: I think I would prefer mediation method in problem resolution. This is because both cultures tolerate some levels of uncertainty.

E- Problems always occur and this serves to affect the business relationships. It would be good to resolve such differences within the legal framework. In this regard therefore, I would be in favour of litigation. Litigation appears to be the best problem resolution method as it entails observance of strict laws and rules.

F- In case unforeseen problems occur with UK business partners, I would seek mediation as the dispute resolution mechanism. This is because such an approach would not adversely affect the business relations as opposed to the use of litigation to resolve such problems. Mediation was acted out as the best way to resolve problems between warring parties. This was a result of both cultures ambiguity with regard to tolerance levels.

Power distance

8. When putting forward business proposals to your UK partners to what extent have you received opposing views and what impact has it had on forming business partnerships?

A- I have received opposition to a greater extent. Most of them are so demeaning and undermining I think personally forming partnership with such people are still a mirage. I can make that poor decision.

B- I receive opposing view every time I present my business proposal. I consider the view a plus to my business proposal since they are always positive ideas of how I can improve my proposal. Their views have assisted me so much so that I feel free whenever my UK counterpart wants us to form a business partnership.

Interviewee C: When putting forward our business proposals, UK partners actively participate in negotiations and present opposing views to the Chinese counterparts. As such, presentation of opposing views by the UK counterparts proves to negatively influence the formation of business partnerships.

Interviewee D: When putting forward our business proposals, I have observed that the UK partners present numerous opposing views in the process of putting forward business proposals. Consequently, this unfavourably impacts on the overall formation of partnerships. The opposing view include the need to establish rules that would favour further negotiations’

E- The UK partners are actively involved during the presentation of business proposals. This has often resulted to conflicting views with those of the Chinese partners. The opposition in views slowed down the building of consensus and this affected the formation of business partnerships negatively.

F- I have rarely received opposing views when presenting business proposals; majority of the UK partners did not present any opposing views when undertaking negotiations and this has favourably influenced formation of business partnerships

Masculinity/femininity

9. What level of importance do you attach to consensus (win-win) during business negotiation as opposed to confrontational negotiations that may lead to win-lose situation? Has this also been the case with the UK business partners?

A- Hammering a deal through consensus is the best for me since my national values prefers respectful as oppose to confrontational negotiation. UK partners are always very good they will always go for consensus first before confrontational. I think it is there democratic nature that as taught them that way.

B- I always favours consensus to confrontational negotiations. In the consensus you do not feel cheated will confrontational always create a win loss situation which is very bad for future relationships. My UK counterparts prefers confrontational since they are always in race for time. This hurry sometimes makes them violent if the discussion is taking longer than expected

Interviewee C: I think that the consensus (win-win) during business negotiation in UK       business partners is a major factor in undertaking transactions

Interviewee D: In my view, consensus is often noted to be a dominant aspect in negotiations for masculine cultures. This is because consensus expresses assertiveness and self-centeredness whereby the needs of both parties in a negotiation are considered. Additionally, adoption of confrontational negotiations that may result into a win-lose situation is less effective as it erodes the trust established between parties.

E- For me a win-win situation is the most ideal situation for the involved parties. I attach a very high level of importance to consensus during negotiations as a result of its acceptance by both parties. This has also been the case for UK partners

F- I prefer consensus during the negotiation process with the UK business partners. Confrontational negotiations are the basis upon which the win-lose situations result. These are dominant in feminine societies which often emphasise on modesty and care.

10. Would business negotiations with a UK business partners involving women impact on the negotiation outcomes or do you prefer to engage with top level managers?

A- Personally, I do not like engaging with women in negotiation but always hold the view that there inclusion on to the negotiation table has no influence whatsoever on the outcome of the negotiation. Nevertheless, if I were to choose between top level managers and women, I will always prefer the top level male managers. 

B- Not at all. Women cannot influence the direction of the negotiations they are just like anybody else. Whenever I go for negotiating table I am not interested on checking whether the negotiator is a woman or a man what I look for is to negotiate with the right person who is responsible over the matter on the table I do not start wool gathering on people.

Interviewee C: I think both genders are held equally and play matched roles in impacting on negotiation outcomes. I don’t prefer either gender in representation during negotiations.

Interviewee D: I think business negotiations with a UK business partners involving women significantly impact on the negotiation outcomes. This is because cultures which are termed to be feminine pay attention to aspects such as caring and modesty and thus consider women to be not suitable for engaging in big negotiations/deals.

E- The involvement of women in the negotiations does not have any significant influence on the outcomes. This is because, in both China and the UK the culture allows for equal representation and participation of both men and women and thus they make equal contribution as their male counterparts during the negotiation process.

F- I have no problem engaging with women during the negotiation process. I would not have an issue with the top level managers being women because to me, the business interests represented by both men and women in an organisation whether in China or the UK are both  geared toward attaining what is best for their respective organisations.

Context Culture

11. Did the UK partners value merit and expertise and rush during negotiations as opposed to first building trust and relationship before sitting down for negotiations? How did this impact on the entire negotiation process?

A- My UK counterparts are very informal by the way; they can great greet you as if they were with you 1 hour before the negotiations. They always rush and go for the important elements in the negotiations and avoid unnecessary protocols. These always get me off guard since I always think that the negotiations should be started by building rapport and establishing friendship surprisingly that is the Chinese way not the UK way. This always makes me feel the UK counterpart is unhospitable. They relentlessly stress for competency. 

B- Yea, merits and expertise are their catch phrase words. These guys are always in a rush you would think that the world is coming to an end before the negotiation.

Interviewee C: According to my observation, UK partners value merit and expertise and rush during negotiations as opposed to first building trust and relationship before sitting down for negotiations because they find it necessary to first build trust and relationships before sitting down for negotiations.

Interviewee D: I think that UK partners emphases on merit and expertise and rush during negotiations as opposed to first building trust and relationship before sitting down for negotiations because. This is because according to my view, this is could hugely be attributed to UK’s low-context cultural behaviour whereby UK’s partners go straight into the business without wasting time or without any delay

E- This was one of the surprising elements while dealing with the UK managers, most of them just did the mere formalities of simple introduction and got straight away into business discussions. This was in stark contrast to the Chinese culture that advocates for an understanding and knowing each other before negotiations commence. This might ultimately impact the outcomes of the negotiations depending on the first impression opinion formed by each party.

F- There was no enough time given to the building of consensus before commencement of negotiations. This curtailed the efficiency of communication between parries. This is because when relationships and trust is established, individuals are more able to communicate feely.

Communication

12. Have you realised differences in styles of communication during negotiation with business partners from UK, are they straight forward or indirect and how has this impact on reaching consensus?

A – Yea, they speak while looking at your face directly. I am not use to that. They always say what they mean and mean what they say. It makes me feel timid during the negotiation processes and at times I end up accepting what I would decline. I also think at times this communication style influences the process of arriving at a conclusion as the need of the partners gets to be unclear.

B- They are straight forward. I think this positively fasten the negotiation since they are very clear and exact into the point. 

Interviewee C: I have realised that various cultures have their own customs for communication more especially in business and social situations and that negotiations occur within a very short period which is often not sufficient for members to comprehend each other well. In many occasions, UK counterparts are straight forward and foster the aspect of reaching consensus among the UK’s cultures.

Interviewee D: I would say that various cultures have their own customs for communication during negotiation with business partners from UK. The UK’s styles of communication during negotiation are straight forward leading to facilitation of consensus.

E- There are differences in communication because the UK business partners are concise and to the point during negotiations. While this may hasten the decision making process, it may also slow down the attainment of consensus as they may appear to be rude and not willing to reach a compromise.

F- In stark contrast to the Chinese, the UK business partners speak directly and say what they mean without mincing their words. In most cases, this proves to hasten the decision making process during the negotiations. This is because their intentions are clear right from the word go, and the decisions are thus hastened.

13. What actions have you undertaken to ensure that differences between the UK and Chinese managers do not result into stalled business negotiations?

A- I have started attending evening classes on cross culture management to get to understand my counterparts well. I have also ensured that my organisation is culturally diversified to make me start learning cross cultural management from within.

B- No I doubt if there is any necessary action I need to take. Furthermore, solving cross cultural difference are very hard may be they will just change.

Interviewee C: As a manager, I have managed to select the most understandable language by both parties is the key to ensure that the differences between the UK and Chinese managers do not result into stalled business negotiations. Additionally, a translator would always be needed in cases where none of the partners understands each other’s language’.

Interviewee B: I advocate for the body of expressions used by the negotiating parties needs to be as clear as possible in order to ensure  that differences between the UK and Chinese mangers do not result into stalled business negotiation.

E- I have set upon ensuring effective time utilisation during negotiations as I have realised we give different definitions and importance to the time allocated for negotiations in the UK and Chinese cultures. I have also adopted actions related to body language which indicate that I am expecting a positive outcome from the negotiation process.

F- The cultural differences could result in stalled negotiations, as a result of this; I have undertaken to ensure that the expressions we use during the business negotiations are clear and comprehensible to both parties. I have also put in efforts to understand the English language to enhance chances of successful negotiation with the UK business managers.