Assignment
Comparative table on negotiation style
Submitted to
Tahmina Khanam
Associate Professor
Department of Management
Submitted by- Group-5
Name
ID
Md. Akbar Hossain
307
Md. Tarik Enam
359
Syed Baijed Bostami
386
Shafaeat Hossain
393
Introduction:
Negotiation has been an inevitable part of life from ancient age. In this modern competitive world
the value of negotiation has been on the rise as it is proving more necessary than any time.
Managers have particular need of negotiation in their business life or organisational life. Style of
negotiations vary across country to country and even individual to individual also. Western
countries have certain different negotiation style than asian countries. Overall approach of
negotiation certainly varies among different countries. Countries follow different their own
negotiation style in order to be successful in any kind of negotiations. Below there is a table
showing comparative negotiations style of USA, Malaysia and Vietnam.
USA
Malaysia
Vietnam
View negotiations as a
competitive process of offers
and counteroffers.
Established Trust, power and
influence, mutually acceptable
solution.
Gain long-term relationships
Negotiators tend to favour
distributive negotiation.
Politeness and indirect
communication, relationship
building, patience and long term
thinking.
Cooperative, relationshipfocused
Negotiators prefer less formal
sessions.
Personal connection and
relationship building, dress code
and grooming, gift and giving,
dining etiquette
Polite, respectful, indirect
communication
Culture values, informality and
equality.
Indirect and polite. Respectful.
High-context, nonconfrontational, use of
nonverbal cues
A low-context culture with an
emphasis on the clarity and
explicitness.
Tight deadline, quick result,
maintaining positive
relationship.
Flexible, emphasis on building
trust over strict deadlines
Tends to view time as
monochronic, sequential and
absolute.
Group-oriented culture,
collective decision-making, face
to face meeting prefer.
Group-oriented, collective
decision-making
Tends to have an individualistic
culture.
Risk taking
Cultural
differences, language barriers,
legal requirement, political
instability.
Cautious approach, preference
for stable outcomes Mutual
Drafting of a formal agreement.
(Like MOU,HOA)
Detailed, consensus-driven,
emphasis on written contracts
Tends to be more risk taking.
Agreements are formalised and
“the contract is seen as final and
lengthy binding, and not open to
renegotiatiation.
Tends to select negotiators on
the basis of ability and
experience.
Emotionalism Warm,
maintaining strong emotions
Specific skills and knowledge,
personal connection and
relations.
Reserved, maintaining harmony
and saving face
Seniority and experience valued,
importance of relationships
Conclusion:
From the table it can be seen that there is an existence of different negotiation style among different
countries. They actually follow different approach while negotiating with others. Western
countries seem to have more individualistic approach while asian countries follow more of a
collectivistic approach. Emotional values are more of a negligible one in western negotiations style
and it is the opposite in the asian style. Though both style values absoluteness but timelines is more
of a western style rather than asian style of negotiation.
References:
Ready, K. J., & Tessema, M. T. (2011). Perceptions and strategies in the negotiation process: a
cross-cultural examination of USA, Vietnam and Malaysia. International Journal of Business and
Globalisation, 6(2), 198-216.
Tessema, M., & Ready, K. (2009). Perceptions and strategies in the negotiation process: a cross
cultural examination of US and Malaysia. International Negotiation, 14(3), 493-517.
Mohd Hashim, H. (2010). International negotiation styles: A perspective of Malaysian diplomats
(Doctoral dissertation, Auckland University of Technology).
Othman, U., Ibrahim, A., & Kadir, B. (2022). Negotiation Styles and Culture: A Brief Overview
of Existing Works on the Malaysian Negotiation Style. Global Business & Management Research,
14.