Investigation of Mexican and Chinese Negotiations Essay Example

style="text-align: justify">
Mexican deal-makers usually build on relationships and tend to be cautious while avoiding unnecessary risks (Volkema, 1998; Salacuse, 1998; Metcalf, Bird, Shankarmahesh, 2006). Due to their general distrust towards individuals and the government (Hackley, Waters, ; Woodside, 2006), having a pre-existing relationship reduces their tendency to utilize questionable strategies in negotiations (Elahee ; Brooks, 2004).

Yet, they were inclined to progress prudently and aim to foster connections with their opposing negotiators rather than banking on strategies for acquiring a superior negotiation stance (Ritchie, 1997; Volkema, 1998). Both Mexican and Chinese negotiators view trust highly, although their handling of this value differs. The Chinese favor the use of cunning plans to deceive those they lack trust in, whereas Mexicans choose to cultivate relationships which aid in ongoing and upcoming negotiations.

Mexican negotiators are typically open to ending negotiations with a better relationship, even if it means not signing a contract or successfully completing negotiations (Salacuse, 1998; Graham ; Lam, 2003). On the other hand, Chinese negotiators have a tendency to leverage pressure on their counterparts, in the belief that a rushed decision may lead to overlooked issues. This strategy is often targeted towards securing a more advantageous deal for themselves (Ghauri ; Fang, 2001; Miles, 2003; Adair, Brett, Lempereur, 2004). Speaking of trust and relationships, Chinese relationships are influenced by an idea known as guanxi. Guanxi is best defined as an early version of a social network (Hammond ; Glenn, 2004).

Hammond ; Glenn propose that Guanxi instructs an individual to discern a competitor from a partner and presents norms on how to interact with each type of person (P. 26). The

notion of guanxi highlights the importance Chinese people place on relationships, signaling to foreigners the need to build trust and connections for favorable interactions with their Chinese associates (Graham ; Lam, 2003; Miles, 2003; Hammond ; Glenn, 2004). As Hammond ; Glenn stated in their 2004 study, “Guanxi shares several surface-level attributes with social networks."

The concept of Guanxi is dynamic and allows for connections to pass from one person to another. For instance, if A is acquainted with B and C, there is an ingrained social responsibility among B and C simply because they share a common contact in A. Hence, Guanxi signifies an individual's tie to the broader society, acting as a micro link to a macro societal structure." (P. 25) In this belief system, the Chinese distinguish friends into two categories. The first type are new friends which typically includes their foreign negotiating counterparts while the second type are old friends which often consist of immediate family and long-established acquaintances (Miles, 2003; Hammond ; Glenn, 2004).

Hammond and Glenn highlight in their above quotation that it can be feasible for a recently formed companion to receive the treatment of a longstanding friend through a simple acquaintance. Hence, it's advantageous if the non-Chinese collaborator of the Chinese negotiator sets the groundwork for the initial relationship through a mutual old friend (Miles, 2003; Graham & Lam, 2003). The Chinese might bargain employing cunning tactics with the aim to secure the most advantageous agreement, or they might employ the principles of Confucianism, which is relatively more beneficial for their fellow interlocutor. But this "Confucian gentlemen" tact is solely used when dealing with longstanding

friends (Fang, 2006).

The Mexican culture assigns a great deal of importance to the establishment of trust and the construction of relationships. However, their approach in building trust and relationships is significantly different when it comes to negotiation context. In Mexican negotiations, there is typically a give-and-take dynamic, with the negotiators aiming to secure a deal that can be perceived as beneficial to both parties (Volkema, 1998; Metcalf, Bird, Shankarmahesh, 2006). For Mexicans involved in negotiations, being trusted and building a robust relationship holds more emphasis, fostering confidence in trusting their negotiation counterparts (Salacuse, 1998; Metcalf, Bird, Shankarmahesh, 2006).

The sense of importance Mexicans place on trust, according to analysts, hinges on repeated deceits they've encountered from both outsiders and their own administration (Salacuse, 1998; Elahee ; Brooks, 2004). This has lead to a general skepticism towards negotiation counsel offered by scholars or foreigners considering their past experiences teach them that building trust is crucial (Hackley, Waters, ; Woodside, 2006).

Conversely, Chinese representatives usually involve the government in major business dealings, and their actions often reflect the best interests of the entire People's Republic of China (PRC) (Ghauri & Fang, 2001; Miles, 2003; Hammond & Glenn, 2004). China and Mexico are characterized as high context cultures where communication extends beyond just spoken or written words (Ritchie, 1997; Volkema, 1998; Adair, Brett & Lempereur, 2004). In daily interactions, Mexicans regularly employ non-verbal communication methods such as body movement, physical touch, and tonal variation.

The communication styles used by certain countries can sometimes be confusing to their foreign counterparts in negotiation, potentially causing a hindrance in advancing the negotiation process or relationship (Ritchie,

1997). Cultural Expectations Both Chinese and Mexican cultures hold the leadership within their organizations in high regard (Graham, 2003; Elahee & Brooks, 2006). Owing to the importance they assign to power within the organization, negotiators from these countries anticipate equal representation during negotiations.

Mexican and Chinese negotiators might take offense and hinder the progress of negotiations, if they perceive their counterpart negotiators do not wield enough decision-making power within their respective organizations (Graham & Lam, 2003; Elahee & Brooks, 2006; Fang, 2006). Both Mexico and China score highly on Geert Hofstede's "power distance index" (Graham ; Lam, 2003; Elahee ; Brooks, 2006), hence the significance they attribute to leadership roles within organizations.

The Chinese generally associate youth with a lack of authority in business settings. Therefore, when dealing with young-looking negotiation teams, it becomes essential to affirm their status to Chinese stakeholders (Fang, 2006). Similarly, Mexican negotiators exhibit caution, but they typically invest time in relationship building to confirm the credibility and ranking of their counterparts before prematurely dismissing a negotiation (Elahee ; Brooks, 2006).

In their 2001 piece, Fang and Ghauri observe that Chinese negotiators typically exert pressure on their peers to make a decision. They even employ arguably shifty strategies to arrive at a consensus: "One technique that I am convinced the Chinese utilize is...they fix the deadline for a particular week and schedule a banquet well prior to the actual readiness of the contract. They asserted that all must be prepared by Saturday for the mayor's arrival at the banquet. Through this, the Chinese induced us into reaching a concord.

It was a recurring event... At first, you

were mildly distressed when you encountered such circumstances. However, over time, when you observed the same pattern repeating elsewhere, you realized it was a strategic maneuver." (p. 317). On the other hand, Mexican negotiators frequently feel at ease leaving the negotiation table without a finalized contract (Salacuse, 1998; Metcalf, Bird ; Shankarmahesh, 2006). Those on the opposite side of the negotiating table from Mexicans often speculated that Mexicans intentionally kept negotiations pending to provide themselves an escape route from agreed terms.

However, this wasn't consistently the situation. Foreign negotiators frequently didn't understand that their Mexican colleagues were not intentionally violating agreements, instead they were often unable to fulfill the conditions of the agreement due to unexpected variables arising from their less secure business, political, and economic circumstances (Elahee ; Brooks, 2004). Uncertainties were often the source of repeated breakdowns in agreements by Mexican firms, as noted by Elahee and Brooks. One individual who was interviewed remarked, "The business environment in Mexico is considerably more unpredictable than what can be found in the USA, Europe, or Japan.

In a growing, underdeveloped country with less industrialization like Mexico, various factors such as electrical outages, vehicular accidents, rail system disruptions, currency downfall, over 100 percent annual inflation, industrial destruction, and interference from customs and tax authorities can impact delivery schedules, deadlines and resource availability. In addition to this, the Mexican economic environment is immensely unstable. The demand for products and services can unpredictably surge and drop. Consequently, to mitigate potential financial setbacks caused by this instability, it is a standard procedure for Mexican companies to accept more work orders than they can typically fulfill on time.

(P. 403).

Mexican negotiators comprehend their business environment and manage it in a manner that could aid in maintaining their businesses (Volkema, 1998). Mexicans' comfortability with leaving a negotiation without a finalized deal can be attributed to two main factors. Primarily, they place a higher emphasis on relationships, and additionally, they function in a culture that is adapted to polychromatic time, where punctuality isn't necessarily a prime concern (Volkema, 1998; Elahee & Brooks, 2004).

Chinese negotiators utilize a polychromatic time system to their benefit during dealings. Recognizing their counterparts' adherence to a time schedule is viewed as an exploitable piece of information in negotiations (Miles, 2003). This stands as an example among many that indicate a deep-seated propensity among Chinese negotiators to employ stratagems. Given their cultural inclination toward a polychromatic time perspective, both Chinese and Mexican negotiators often engage in disorderly negotiations, deviating from adhering to a consistent sequence (Elahee & Brooks, 2004; Fang, 2006).

Though non-linear negotiation seemed unconventional to numerous negotiators, Mexican and Chinese negotiators were not attempting to deceive their counterparts, instead their approach stemmed from a basic cultural peculiarity (Salacuse, 1998; Miles, 2003). To conclude, while the cultural values of Mexico and China are quite similar--such as a greater emphasis on power distance, trust and relationships, high context communication, and typical usage of polychromatic time--the impact of these values on their negotiation styles is substantially different.

Chinese negotiation styles are largely shaped by their dependence on the 36 antics chronicled in Sun-Tzu' The Art of War, which is a key aspect of their culture (Ghauri & Fang, 2001; Miles, 2003). Their goal is to outwit the

people they're dealing with to secure the best possible agreement. In contrast, Mexican negotiators place a significant emphasis on fostering enduring relationships which pave the way for potential future business deals with their negotiation counterparts.

When dealing with unfamiliar foreign parties, Mexican negotiators often prioritize establishing relationships and trustworthiness over reaching a speedy resolution. They typically draw from their cultural norms to foster trust and relationship building. Conversely, Chinese negotiators have a tendency to leverage their cultural norms to secure the most beneficial negotiation terms. Further studies could explore how these two distinct cultures interact directly with each other. The dominant cultural norms in negotiations between these parties should be a key focus for researchers.