Vidoemart - Grade: B PDF

Preview

Summary

There are a number of essays uploaded. Hope all will be evaluated properly. Thank you. ...

Description

“NEGOTIATION”

1

What Went Wrong? Regardless of the prevalence of clear pathways, in favor of mutual business progress, parties’ interactions can lead to eventual dispute only because of simple misunderstanding. Business conflict can result from the lack of understanding on one or more parties’ part despite there is always the chance of thoughtful solution through the negotiation. From any of the parties, key individuals can determine whether they need to go for negotiation by means of minimizing or ignoring the issue. The issue can be removed or overlooked as long as it is properly identified and is considered to have no inevitable impact on the subsequent business situation. The Videomart and Osatech, being two leading companies in the pertinent industries, based in respectively the U.S.A. and Japan, have finally decided to perform a meeting to commence a business agreement after a nearly six month long wait, but no affirmative communicative approach has been seen when the meeting was in progress. For example, the Videomart neither employed any translator on their part nor did request the translator of Osatech to deeply interpret the meanings of several words uttered in the meeting. Videomart representatives were quite certain about the fact that the other party surely did not comprehend one word! Furthermore, Videomart was quite sensitive against Osatech’s inspection as they asked for viewing the blueprint even before signing any terms of contract. There was a perceivable lack of smooth communication and the business relationship did not tend to start with respectful intensions as some of Osatech’s representative continued to nod and smile during the meeting, while the Videomart people had noticed it. A true business relationship needs reciprocal respects and should manifest the need for concise understanding. From Videomart’s perspective, Osatech could make the blueprint testing as their second choice, and could complete the agreement first. On the other hand, Osatech was disappointed as their first request had been declined. At this point, culturally driven communicative approaches of both parties went wrong. Both parties missed the standard

“NEGOTIATION”

2

business communication which could be based on extensive cooperation and mutual understanding; and they conducted the meeting the way as if they would not need to appear at the same place in future again. CEO’s Role in Negotiation: Negotiation should be made before the issue takes diverse forms. Negotiation is a procedure in which parties carry their objectives to a bargaining place, systematically share information, seek for alternatives, which are reciprocally convenient (Robinson & Volkov 1998). The process of negotiation involves managing stuffs between two parties so as to allow the negotiator not only to avail what he expects but also gain what he expects in the most preferred way (Forsyth 2009). The Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the U.S. Co. has been assigned to handle the conflict taken place between the Videomart and the Osatech during the agreement meeting, and now it is his task to consummately bring as much fortune for Videomart as possible in terms of signing up contract with Osatech by negotiating the solid dispute, which resulted simply from a misunderstanding rooted in improper crosscultural communication. The intention of the following negotiation, which would be specified through the current paper, includes the depiction of the use of initial planning and preparation, climate setting, and framing the negotiation by means of utilizing interests and priorities and available constraints and resources- therefore both companies will find mutual harmony in positively communicating each other and the business will begin with the meaningful enthusiasm. Planning and Preparation: Since the company people of Videomart are anxious about losing the chance of agreement with Osatech, and there is apparently no opportunity to reschedule the meeting in a few forthcoming days, the company considers it as imperative to initiate relevant attempts and interactions in favor of negotiation, which requires deliberate and decent planning and

“NEGOTIATION”

3

preparation. The CEO will strive for repairing the spot where the actual dispute has begun from. The CEO has realized that there was no efficient cross-cultural communication in between the two companies where the active part could be played by the Videomart itself. The hurdles involved in many negotiations may not be too high, therefore need marginal planning and preparation, however in others, like some business-to-business based negotiations, hurdles are at times, high (Mintu-Wimsatt & Calantone 1991), wherever carefully considered planning and preparation is seemingly an imperative (Ghauri & Usunier 2003). Nevertheless, the pre-negotiation preparation and planning has still not been randomly studied by interested scholars (Peterson & Shepherd 2010) and little empirical evidence can be mentioned regarding the impact of carefully considered preparation and planning on the negotiation procedure (Lewicki, Barry, & Saunders 2010). According to Peterson & Lucas (2001), four phases are involved in the framework of Pre-Negotiation that are Intelligence assembling, Formulation, Development of Strategy, and Preparation. The CEO of the U.S. Co. will specifically look for gathering, processing, scrutinizing, and assessing available information concerning the firm, Osatech, pertinent environmental factors, and the scenarios that can result from those factors. Again, the company will develop goals and specific short and long term objectives, and will set the parameters for every shortcoming to be negotiated. Strategy building is required, since it is a part of plan, which integrates the company’s objectives and accomplishment sequences into a meaningful cohesive whole. And finally, the CEO will apply mechanisms and actions in relation with rehearsing various verbal communication generating support materials, and paying attention to logistical concerns. Climate Setting: The impact of culture on global business ventures has been multifaceted (Audeber 2004). The factoring of the diversity of cultures into the procedure of negotiation to prop up

“NEGOTIATION”

4

the frequency of success has still been a crucial issue in overseas business operations (Cellich & Jain 2012). Blundering and ingenuousness with regards to numerous cultural patterns can result in expensive flaws. While some cultural differences seem to be instantaneously inevitable, others can be subtle and can lead to puzzling circumstances. The conference between Osatech and Videomart has been taken place in Japan where Videomart had encountered overseas environment and confronted cultural differences in multiple situations. The real meaning of nodding and smiling to each other could be a generic piece of ritual for Japanese people, but the U.S. strangers could have considered it as an example of underestimation because of being alien to this unique cultural situation. As an intelligent company’s decision maker, the CEO has understood that such scenarios must not affect the business decisions although the cultural difference maters. The CEO will look for setting of climate in favor of Videomart and will strive for making the environment associative to his company in order to eliminate the subject matter of the core disagreement. Osatech wanted to see the blueprint of Videomart, and the CEO will employ a good translator to explain things in Japanese language that it is very unlikely for a U.S. company to expose its blueprint to any acquaintance company before signing the terms of contract. It is because, the Osatech representatives may not be very good in English (As they have already assigned a translator) to comprehensively understand what the Videomart people have tried to mean. In a friendly situation, the CEO will further try to make them realize this matter so that they might come up with signing the terms of contract first. The CEO will try to arrange the setting of the negotiation in the U.S.A. or in a third country so that both parties will encounter foreign situations. As Osatech will definitely benefit from the contract, they will be interested in reaching the negotiation, which will provide mutual benefits for both parties; and of course, won’t cause them to sacrifice their treasures by any reasonable means. This re-approaching

“NEGOTIATION”

5

by the CEO will further heighten the Osatech as they will have the opportunity to get prioritized when the CEO of a leading U.S. company summons them for negotiation. It is also possible that the Osatech administration is also interested in negotiation for its own company purposes, which is why; it would not go completely in vein if the U.S. Co. is attempting to propose for negotiation for the mutual benefits of both companies. The CEO advises using the Japanese language that a non-adversarial win-win negotiation would better work than the businesslike approach rooted in cut-and-dried style. He will closely listen to their interests and will explain that both parties’ interests are not pretty different as the Videomart is expecting to have a license to sell software to Osatech for their video developers. According to Avruch (2004), there are four cultural aspects that seem especially to be significant in precise negotiation process: spoken language, attitude toward time, body language, and attitude toward contracts. In Japan, a similar spoken word may have 3 different interpretations and dulled refusals can be considered as impolite (Cellich & Jain 2012). Again, U.S. people may not know the fact that Japanese feel pressured when they audibly suck air using their teeth (Cellich & Jain 2012). It means that different body languages can make a massive difference when people of different cultures interact. The CEO will carefully avoid taking any lawyer along with him since, according to Cellich & Jain (2012), the Japanese feels humiliated once a person invites a layer to negotiations. Framing the Negotiation: A significant precondition of successful negotiation is obviously the reciprocal reliance of the parties on each other (Cellich & Jain 2012). Negotiation cannot take place where such interdependence does not exist. The extent of dependence postulates the comparative bargaining capacity of each side. The CEO’s strategy and style should depend on his bargaining capacity. Videomart has the likelihood of being more aggressive than the Osatech if it has greater bargaining power- therefore, the CEO must adapt the bargaining

“NEGOTIATION”

6

capacity as compared to the personnel of Osatech who is likely to participate in the negotiation process. As Osatech can make the most of this agreement by continuing their prolificacy in video creation, when Videomart will start selling their top rated software to them, it will help the Videomart to frame the negation apart from considering any other factors. The CEO will also offer alternatives while framing the negotiation because it is possible for Osatech to gain potential facilities in taking up an alternative. Since both Videomart and Osatech are two leading firms in the global marketplace, both may have numerous alternatives that might be accepted after the negotiation. Because of two powerful and reputed companies, both parties have strong bargaining capacities. All the CEO will need to make both parties realize is that they will find mutual conveniences as soon as they come up with completing the agreement through this negotiation. Weiss (1994) describes that culturally responsive negotiation strategies should be sorted out based on: negotiator’s level of awareness with the culture of his counterpart, the counterpart’s acquaintance with negotiator’s culture, and the probability for exclusive coordinating approaches. Hence, individual who is responsible for handling the negotiation should be capable of understanding pertinent circumstances in different cultural setting, and has to understand counterpart’s linguistic and ideological approaches well as part of framing the negotiation. Interests & Priorities: The interests and priorities for the explicit negotiation is same to both parties in the sense that both parties would benefit from the contract and both firms will make use of their own reputation before and during the contract that would result in massive revenues for them all. Videomart will benefit from increasing its software sales, while Osatech will get the most out of increasing its productivity. While Osatech prioritizes viewing Videomart’s blueprint,

“NEGOTIATION”

7

on the other hand, Videomart prioritizes signing the terms of contract first before allowing it to be viewed. Knowing own BATNA (Best Alternative to Negotiated Alternative) is very crucial for companies who are interested in negotiation. In this case, no company has shown its BATNA as they all turned into get reluctant in reaching the agreement after their initial discomforts in conversations. According to Thompson (2001), when a opponent exposes its BATNA at the negotiation tract, negotiators basically opt for less demanding offers, expose truthful and heartiest information, and can settle for reduced benefit than when the other party resists not to expose its BATNA. Resources & Constraints: A number of resources inspire the CEO of the U.S. Co. to go for bringing the negotiation between Osatech and Videomart through a further attempt. Videomart’s reputation, software quality, and global business ability seem to be their core resources for setting of climate for the negotiation. Again, the CEO has found the cultural difference to be the core hindrance against the mutual business decision making; therefore, he is well prepared to handle the issue again by taking cultural difference and ideological difference based on different nationality strongly into account. Lutz, Venter, & Dean (2007) state that, revealing higher aspiration is a symptomatic trait of a strategic negotiator. There are a few constraints in this negotiation process such as, time, language, geographical location, environment, different business needs, cultural diversity, and people who were assigned to manage the deal. Time constraint was due to the limitation of time because the entire negotiation process would take place under a particular time period. The meeting was taken place after a six month long wait; a further scheduling will also take long time which will affect the business. Therefore, the CEO has to be mindful regarding handling the negotiation taking time constraint into consideration. Language constraint is a big issue

“NEGOTIATION”

8

because Japanese Osatech representatives themselves do not fully understand U.S. English and they employed a translator who cannot naturally interpret all meanings of words that are said. On the other hand, Videomart people do not know Japanese and they are unable to endure the linguistic difference at a certain moment. Geographical location constraint is also severe because, last meeting was held in Osaka, Japan, causing the Videomart executives to fly to Japan which is an alien tract for them to encounter. Cultural difference makes a big difference because, last time executives of Videomart was wondering what the meaning of “nodding and smiling” of Osatech people during the meeting. Cultural distinctions also determine which task should come first; for example, Osatech thought they would be able to see the blueprint of the Videomart first before signing the terms of contract, while the Videomart took it otherwise. The individuals who were assigned to handle the deal were inefficient at last time as they took everything personally. Therefore, right individual should be sent and assign to patiently confront every situation in favor of brining the result home. Concluding Words: From the above depiction, it is clear that negotiation requires pertinent parties to be respectful to different culture and mindful in the communicative approaches. Even if the negotiation takes place between parties of an indifferent culture, both parties need to remain understanding and enduring to that particular culture. Communication is the only means by which people transfer their thoughts. Therefore, while making business communication, gifted individual needs to take cultural diversity into account and keep the dealing process indifferent regardless of the difference in culture, language, environment, location, time, and other resources, constraints, and dynamics. People of the world, especially the businesspeople are getting increasingly aware of the difference of culture whenever they are to communicate overseas with regards to significant business deals.

“NEGOTIATION”

9

References:

1. Audeber, P. 2004. Bien Négocier. Paris: Editions d’Organisation. 2. Avruch, Kevin. 2004. "Culture And Negotiation Pedagogy". Negotiation Journal 16 (4): 339-346. doi:10.1111/j.1571-9979.2000.tb00762.x. 3. Cellich, Claude, and Subhash C. Jain. 2012. Practical Solutions To Global Business Negotiations. [New York, N.Y.]: Business Expert Press. 4. Forsyth, Patrick. 2009. Negotiation Skills For Rookies. Singapore City: SGP: Marshall Cavendish. 5. Ghauri, Pervez N, and Jean‐Claude Usunier. 2003. International Business Negotiations. 2nd ed. London, UK.: Elsevier Ltd. 6. Lutz, H.G., D.P. Venter, and V Dean. 2007. Farmers' Organisations' Guide To Contract Negotiations In Southern Africa.. Zimbabwe: Swedish Cooperative Centre. 7. Mintu-Wimsatt, Alma, and Roger J. Calantone. 1991. "Intra- And Inter-Cultural Negotiations: A Chinese Buyer’S Perspective". Journal Of Marketing Theory And Practice 3 (3): 88-98. doi:10.1080/10696679.1995.11501698. 8. Peterson, Robert M., and C. David Shepherd. 2010. "Preparing To Negotiate: An Exploratory Analysis Of The Activities Comprising The Pre-Negotiation Process In A Buyer-Seller Interaction". Marketing Management Journal. 9. Peterson, Robert M., and George H. Lucas. 2001. "Expanding The Antecedent Component Of The Traditional Business Negotiation Model: Pre-Negotiation Literature Review And Planning-Preparation Propositions". Journal Of Marketing Theory And Practice 9 (4): 37-49. doi:10.1080/10696679.2001.11501902.

“NEGOTIATION”

10

10. Robinson, William N., and Vecheslav Volkov. 1998. "Supporting The Negotiation Life Cycle". Communications Of The ACM 41 (5): 95-102. doi:10.1145/274946.274962. 11. Saunders, David M., Roy J. Lewicki, and Bruce Barry. 2010. "Essentials Of Negotiation". Mcgraw-Hill Education. 12. Thompson, Leigh L. 2001. The Mind And Heart Of The Negotiator. 2nd ed. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall. 13. Weiss, S.E. 1994. Negotiation With Romans. Sloan Management Review, Winter....