Sogang IIAS Research Series on International Affairs Vol. 2
83
Cross-cultural Studies on the Negotiation
Cultures in the Northeast Asian Countries
and Western Countries : Focusing on
Japan and China
Se-Young Ahn
Graduate School of International Studies
Sogang University
I. Introduction
Around the world, people negotiate: the concerned parties can be
government to government, company to company or government to
company. Generally, negotiations between two governments such as
the 1997 Korea-US automotive trade negotiations are called
'International Trade Negotiation', and in the case when the concerned
parties are companies, it is called 'International Business Negotiation'.
International negotiation, as explained above, can be different from
domestic negotiation in many aspects; however, the biggest difference
above all is that it is a cross-cultural negotiation. International
negotiation is a negotiation between two parties whose cultural
backgrounds are different each other.
A good number of inter-cultural literatures suggest that negotiators
behave differently when they are with members of their own culture
84
SE - YOUNG AHN
from when with members of foreign culture. Zartman1 point out that
"international negotiation exhibits both universal patterns determined
by the finite possibilities of its nature and local variations
determined by cultural practices and differences among its
practitioners". Culture may have a great impact on international
negotiation in a number of ways. Sawyer and Guetzkow were among
the first to posit that negotiators' behaviors and outcomes can be
influenced
by
situational
constraints,
such
as
inter-cultural
negotiations versus intra-cultural negotiations: "The face-to-face
conduct
of
negotiations
may
be
influenced
by
behavioral
discrepancies when persons of different cultural backgrounds are
brought together".2 Evans also stated that intra-cultural negotiators
can be more attractive to partners and achieve higher negotiation
outcomes than inter-cultural negotiator.3
Nowadays, there are many kinds of culture circles existing, but the
culture that has the most distinguished characteristics as a crosscultural negotiation in the aspect of international negotiation strategy
are the negotiation culture of Northeast Asian countries that mainly
includes Korea, China and Japan, and the Western negotiation culture
mainly constituted of US and European Countries.
This paper, by focusing on these two contrasting cultures, will
conduct a comparative study between the Northeast Asian Countries
negotiation culture and the Western negotiation culture. In the
1
2
3
Berton, P., Kimura, P. and Zartman, I. W.(ed.), "International Negotiation : Actors,
Structure/Process, Values", St. Martin's Press, 1999. p.1.
Sawyer, J., & Guetzkow, H. "Bargaining and Negotiation in International Relations",
in Kelman, International Behaviour: A social - Psychological Analasis, p.502.
Berton, P., Kimura, P. and Zartman, I. W.(ed.), "International Negotiation :
Actors, Structure/Process, Values", St. Martin's Press, 1999. p.135.
Cross-cultural Studies on the Negotiation Cultures in the Northeast …
85
concluding part, we will try to draw some strategic implications for
Koreans in negotiating with the Japanese and the Chinese.
II. Literature on Cross-cultural
Negotiations and communications
Edouard Herriot, a French writer, has defined culture as what
remains when one has forgotten everything. 4 This paradoxical
proposition captures one of the most salient properties of culture: the
fact that it is not a matter of substance but a way of thinking and
acting. To be more specific and focused on our topic of international
negotiation, culture could be defined as "a set of shared and enduring
meanings, value chains, behavior, communication pattern, and beliefs
that characterize negotiators".
There are a good number of researches on cultural issues in
international negotiation such as; Hofstede(1980), Zartman and
Berman(1984), and Faure(1995). These researches on international
negotiation focusing on cultural variables or integrating cultural
components in its models have developed only recently and are still
largely in the making.5 Systematic comparisons between cultures are
not easier than it appears to be, because behind similar words there
can be very different realities. However, in this paper, we will
compare and analyze the Northeast Asian negotiation culture with the
Western negotiation culture according to the two distinguished
theoretical framework of cross-cultural negotiation ; monochronic and
4
5
Berton, P., Kimura, P. and Zartman, I. W.(ed.), "International Negotiation : Actors,
Structure/Process, Values", St. Martin's Press, 1999. p.4.
Berton, P., Kimura, P. and Zartman, I. W.(ed.), "International Negotiation : Actors,
Structure/Process, Values", St. Martin's Press, 1999. p. 17.
86
SE - YOUNG AHN
polychronic time people theory6 and the high and low context culture
theory.
Mishler stated that "The greater the cultural differences, the more
likely barriers to communication and misunderstandings become".7
Its prime example is the low-context culture and the high-context
culture postulated by Edward Hall.8 A high-context culture uses highcontext communication patterns in which most of the information is
either in the physical context or internalized in the person, while very
little is in the coded, explicit, transmitted part of the message. On the
other hand, a low-context culture employs low-context communication
patterns - most of the information is contained in explicit codes, such
as words.
On the other hand, there is another framework: monochronic-time
and
polychronic-time
people
theory.
The
monochronic-time
negotiation culture indicates the negotiation culture of the Western
countries which is basically correspondent to the low-context
communication pattern. A negotiator who has this kind of negotiation
culture can be usually called the M-time negotiator. The polychronic
negotiation culture indicates the negotiation culture of non-Western
countries such as Asia, and Latin Americas which basically
corresponds to the high-context communication pattern. A negotiator
who has this kind of negotiation culture can be usually called the Ptime negotiator.
6
7
8
Geoffrey Hilton, "Business Communication", Helsinki School of Economics And
Business Administration, Oct. 1999.
Mishler, A. L., "Personal Contact in International Exchanges", in Kelman,
International Behavior: A Social -Psychological Analysis (pp.550-561), New York:
Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1965.
Hall, E. T., "Beyond Culture", New York, Anchor Press, 1976, p.79.
Cross-cultural Studies on the Negotiation Cultures in the Northeast …
87
III. Comparative Studies on the Negotiation
Cultures in the Northeast Asian Countries and
the Western Countries
The differences between the North-East Asian Countries negotiation
culture and the Western negotiation culture are summarized in table
1.
1. Differences in the modes of communication
The biggest difference between these two negotiation cultures is
revealed in the mode of communication. First of all, while the
communication method of the North-East Asian Countries negotiation
culture tends to be "implicit", "indirect", "ambiguous", and is in a
"monologue form", the communication mode of the Western
negotiation culture is "explicit", "direct", "clear", and is in a "dialogue
form". In the Northeast Asian countries that have Confucian culture
such as China, Korea, and Japan, people tend to convey their
messages in an implicit and indirect way. Expressing one's thoughts
too clearly and explicitly can be accepted as indecent and can also
be seen as rude to the other person.9
9
For example, in case of visiting someone at dinnertime, when the host asks the
visitor "Did you have dinner yet?", the visitor is supposed to say that "Oh, I'm
okay" even though he did not eat his dinner yet, in the Asian P-time negotiation
culture. At this moment, if the host is one of those P-time people, he knows that the
visitor is saving his face and usually he asks again and again to have him share the
dinner table. But the problem occurs when the host is a M-time person. In his view,
when he asked Did you have dinner yet, the visitor answered It's OK. This is neither
a yes nor a no and it becomes ambiguous whether the visitor has had his dinner. In
this case, if the Western M-time person interprets It's OK as a yes, the Asian visitor
will be watching the host family having their dinner with an empty stomach.
88
SE - YOUNG AHN
[Table 1] Differences between North-East Asian Countries negotiation
culture (p-time people) and Western negotiation culture (mtime people)
North-East Asian Countries negotiation
Western negotiation culture
culture
(M-time People)
(P-time People)
China, Korea, Japan, Southeast Asian
USA, Europe
countries, Mideast coutries
Region
communication
- implicit
- indirect
- One-sided communication
(monologue, lecture form)
- explicit
- direct
- Two-way communication
(dialogue, discussion form)
non-verbal
behaviour
- ambiguity
- silence, bowing rather than eye contact
- control of emotional expressions, gestures
Value chain of
negotiator
- relation orientated
- saving-face is important
- entertaining is important
- inter-dependent
Timecommitment
- Flexible time plans according to situation
Planning
- Plans easily changed if needed
Communication - listening mode
method
- respect rather than compliments
- clearness
- natural eye-contact is
important
- free emotional expressions,
gestures
- output orientated
(separates relationships and
outputs)
- economical rationality is
important
- independent culture
- Time plans in accordance
with the schedule
- Tries not to change the
original plans if possible
- speaking mode
- full of compliments
The second characteristic of the North-East Asian Countries
negotiation culture is that their communication mode is 'nonconfrontational', whereas the Western one is 'confrontational'. It means
that the North-East Asian Countries negotiators are not really inclined
to directly say something which might hurt the other parties. The
biggest mistake that a Western negotiator makes in negotiating with
the
Japanese
mostly
comes
from
the
differences
of
this
communication modes. For example, when a Western negotiator
demands for something in the negotiation with the Japanese
government, the Japanese rarely say No or even use a negative
expression. He would only say an indirect and implicit message such
Cross-cultural Studies on the Negotiation Cultures in the Northeast …
89
as "We will consider it" or "We will deliver it to the related ministry".
How the Western negotiator will understand the Japanese expression
is the problem. Western negotiators who have lots of experience in
negotiating with the Japanese know that these expressions of the
Japanese negotiators are close to a indirect refusal. This is also true in
negotiating with Chinese and Koreans, although there could be some
differences in its extent.
According to the study of D. Tannen, the biggest difference between
the Japanese communication mode and the American one is the
meaning of 'Yes'. Generally the Japanese people say 'yes' when they
understand while American people say yes when they agree.
The next vivid difference in communication modes is the
conversation method at the negotiation table. Western M-Time people
use dialogue which is a mutual kind of communication, meanwhile the
North-East Asian P-Time people use monologue which is like a onesided lecture. Westerners clearly assert their intentions (sometimes
even aggressively) and exchange opinions and ideas by blanketing the
other parties with language and questions. Usually they tend to ask a
lot of questions, react quickly and analyze their thoughts aloud. On the
contrary, the North-East Asian negotiators have a strong tendency to
lecture on the subject based on the prepared data, and then wait for the
other persons response afterwards. This is because in Korea, China
and Japan, the Confucian culture they share was not open for
discussions. Especially, if one seriously disputes on other person's
opinions, people tend to think that it is offensive and that the other
person has lost face. They try to understand what is needed without
asking. Also, they think that leaving the other parties in peace and
90
SE - YOUNG AHN
giving them time is very important for a successful negotiation. For
example, it is quite common for the Japanese audience to not ask
questions, in case that the presenter or the counterpart may not be able
to answer in public.10
Japanese, Korean, and Chinese negotiators think that listening to
the partners' opinions is very important. They are in a listening mode.
They think that keenly listening to the partners story and letting him
have a chance to think is the best way for everyone. In contradiction,
the Western M-time people think that accurately conveying the
message is very important. They are in a speaking mode. They
energetically speak for their thoughts and only after then listen to what
the other person has to say.
The Western negotiator is generous with compliments. They always
say excellent or wonderful after a statement or opinion, but it should
not be understood as an agreement. Northeast Asian negotiator takes
indirectly shown respect as more important than the actual language of
compliments. They feel that a light bow or offering the top seat is
more respectful.
The problem here occurs when the Western M-time person, doing
negotiation with the Northeast Asian negotiators, who is used to the
complimenting culture, compliments a certain individual in the
opposite team.
When it comes to the language capability of the North-East Asian
negotiators, Japanese and Korean are the negotiators that suffer the
10
If Japanese audiences have any questions during a conference, they usually ask
about it after the conference in private.
Cross-cultural Studies on the Negotiation Cultures in the Northeast …
91
most in international negotiation tables with language problems. This
aggravates the difficulty of cross-cultural communication in the
international negotiation table with Westerners.11
2. Non-verbal behavior
The next important difference is non-verbal behavior at the
international negotiation table.
12
Non-verbal behavior includes
emotional expression, smile, gesture, hug, jiggling feet, silence, eye
contact, and so on. Argentines and Russians express trust and strong
negotiation volition by tightly hugging each other at the beginning of
the negotiation. Western M-time people are used to naturally revealing
their feelings or using gestures. They tend to use strong gestures such
as waving hands or leaning back.
However, the North-East Asian P-Time negotiators rarely reveal
their feelings or use big gestures like waving. They think that it is
unrefined manners, and also that these kinds of actions will not play a
positive role for them as it will disclose some kind of information.
It is very interesting that for North-East Asian negotiators, particularly the Chinese - silence plays an important part in
negotiation as a non-verbal behavior, while Westerners are not
accustomed to such kind of tactics. As a rule, there are two reasons for
the North-East Asian negotiators to become suddenly silent. The first
11
12
Interpreters are used to minimize these negotiation language problems, but it is not
easy to express their intentions because of the limitations of using an interpreter
itself. When you are not good at the language in international negotiation, it is
better to use an interpreter. An interpreter can let you closely observe the opponent
with time to spare at the negotiation table.
Many North-East Asian negotiators feel psychologically trapped by the problem of
negotiation language and tend to neglect or be not accustomed to non-verbal
behaviors. However, in the real international negotiation table, the effective use of
the non-verbal behaviors greatly influences the success of the negotiation.
92
SE - YOUNG AHN
is when he is thinking about his strategies, and the second is when he
is intentionally using silence as a negotiation tactic. According to the
study results, even expert negotiators feel anxious when the
counterpart suddenly becomes silent. This is especially true in cases
where he is negotiating in a disadvantageous position; most
negotiators become garrulous and talkative . If the facing negotiator
becomes more talkative because of anxiety, he is bound to expose
some of the confidential information of his side and is more likely to
become the loser in the negotiation.
Experienced negotiators should capture the meanings of these nonverbal behaviors and capitalize on his advantages. If the negotiating
opponent shows an unusual non-verbal behavior, it should be seen as
a sending-message, which is very crucial in capturing the real
intention or strategy of the counterpart. For example, if a negotiator
suddenly smiles, jiggles his legs, or has an unnatural eye contact amid
the negotiation, it is a kind of sending-message that he has lost his
composure and feels anxious.
An interesting non-verbal behavior is the form of eye contact.
Western M-time people think 'natural eye contact' is very important
not only at the negotiation table, but also in everyday life. If the other
negotiator avoids eye contact in a negotiation, they will think of it as
playing dirty tricks or that the counterpart has no intentions of a
serious negotiation. But for the North-East Asian negotiators, eye
contact is of little concern. They even think that it is rude to stare at
the other person's eyes.13
13
They would rather convey their messages through appropriate silence and bowing.
Even though they are the same Northeast Asian countries, the Chinese do not bow
whereas Koreans and Japanese do.
Cross-cultural Studies on the Negotiation Cultures in the Northeast …
93
3. Value-chains of the Negotiator
According to professor Fisher and Ury at Harvard University, the
most important thing in a negotiation is separating the problem from
the people.14 The most important value-chain for the Western M-time
negotiator is the pending problem of the immediate outcome and the
economic
rationale
at the
negotiation. Therefore,
the
long
acquaintance or relationship with the other opposing negotiator should
not affect the development of the negotiation; they separate
relationship from negotiation. Actually, the American negotiators do
want to maintain good relationships with the Korean or the Japanese
negotiators; however, once they sit at the negotiation table, they
disregard the existing personal relationships and downright pursue
economic outcomes in a rational way.
On the contrary, the Asian P-time negotiator, no matter how
pending the subject of negotiation is, regards the relationship and
saving faces as highly important. Whether it is a political negotiation
or a business negotiation, they think that maintaining a good
relationship on the long term with the other person is a benefit for all
of them at the table. For example, when a buyer who had a long-term
business relationship asks for a transaction that has no economical
profits, the North-East Asian negotiators will accept the transaction if
it is needed to maintain the good relationship with him. Also, if a
negotiation partner who worked with him for a long time asks for an
implicit favor saying 'please save my face this time', he will, in most
of cases, say yes. This consent is based on the implicit agreement of 'If
I save your face this time, you will save mine some other day, in the
14
Fisher, R. and Ury W., "Getting to Yes : Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In",
Penguin Book, 1991.(1991) mentioned above, p.11.
94
SE - YOUNG AHN
Northeast Asian negotiation culture.
For these reasons, international negotiations with Asian P-time
negotiator is a kind of gradual process of building credibility or good
relationship. So, initial meetings are mainly focused on getting to
know each other and building credibility between partners. When
doing negotiation with the Japanese or the Chinese people, there is
almost always a dinner party. It is important to note that in the broad
sense, all this is part of the negotiation to show trust and to get a good
relationship. For the Western negotiators, who separate the
relationship from the negotiation output, this entertainment culture is
of little concern and meaning. In some sense, it seems unproductive
and inefficient. Meals can be done at the negotiation table with a
sandwich, but the pending issue must be closely examined and
discussed. Even if a relationship forms between the Western
negotiators and Northeast Asian negotiators through dinners or drinks,
the American and European negotiators will think it as a different
thing from the negotiation issue.
Many Northeast Asian negotiators who do negotiation with
American negotiators invite the Americans to a dinner with a P-time
way of thinking, believe that they may have formed a relationship,
expect a soft negotiation table the next day, of course, which will not
be, and are disappointed. In doing negotiations with the Chinese or the
Japanese, the dinner carries almost the same level of importance as the
negotiation itself. In most cases, the official negotiation itself may not
make a lot of progress in the beginning, and only after forming a
credible relationship through dinners the poor progress will suddenly
become rapid.
The last difference in the negotiators value chain is whether he is
Cross-cultural Studies on the Negotiation Cultures in the Northeast …
95
"inter-dependent" or "independent". the Western M-time negotiator
says what "I" think under independent thinking. But, the Asian P-time
negotiator, who has an inter-dependent way of thinking, says what
"we" think. To smoothly develop the negotiation with Northeast Asian
countries, it is needed to persuade the whole negotiation team and not
just the certain negotiator in front of him.
4. Time commitment, Job concentration and planning
Western M-time people work in accordance with the given schedule
and are very punctual. They have a clear sense of working hours and
tend to concentrate on the negotiation at the negotiation table. Also
they do not like changing the plans of the beginning. However, the Ptime people give weight to the situation of each minute and are
relatively flexible in planning. Therefore, they easily change the
original negotiation date, place, and specific plans if it is needed. Also,
the negotiation can be done not only at the official negotiation table,
but also during dinner or playing golf.
These differences among the negotiation cultures can easily bring
about misunderstandings between the Asian P-time negotiator and
Western M-time negotiator. First of all, in the Westerners eyes, the
Asian negotiators who don't seem to concentrate on their ongoing job,
can be interpreted as not being serious and can seem to be
disorientated. But, as explained above, the Asian P-time negotiators do
not seriously stick to the job in a highly concentrated like the
Westerners. The next problem occurs when the Northeast Asian
negotiators delay the planned date several times. The Asian P-time
negotiator who do not take punctuality seriously tend to think delaying
the date once or twice is not that serious. But in the Westerners point
96
SE - YOUNG AHN
of view, the partner's delay is seen as either delaying the date out of
real change in circumstances or playing a dirty trick, and can
sometimes bring about misunderstandings of the situation.
IV. Remarks and Implications on the negotiation
strategy of Korea with Japan and China
This article tried to trace the differences between the Western Mtime and the North Eastern P-time negotiation cultures. From our
research we uncovered the existence of important differences between
these two kind of negotiation cultures. If the biggest obstacle in
international negotiation is the difference between the negotiation
culture as examined above, Korea, belonging to the P-time negotiation
culture, has the advantageous position to the Western countries when
dealing with Japan and China. However, it is interesting to note that,
even if these three countries are in the same negotiation culture
boundary, Japan, China and Korea have similarities and differences in
the negotiation culture amongst themselves. In this view, the policy
issues that we should consider in negotiating with Japan and China,
whether it is an international trade negotiation or an international
business negotiation, are as follows.
Firstly, of the several issues laid out above, the Korean negotiation
culture is similar to that of Japan in some ways, and similar to that of
China in some other ways. For example, in the part of entertaining
culture, the Korean negotiation culture is more similar to that of China
than Japan, and in the aspects of time commitment and planning, the
Korean culture is more similar to that of Japan than China. Therefore,
Korea should closely analyze the differences in the negotiation culture
of Korea, Japan and China and devise an efficient negotiation strategy.
Cross-cultural Studies on the Negotiation Cultures in the Northeast …
97
Secondly, an interesting thing is that the notion of P-time people
and M-time people is only relatively true in the three countries of
Northeast Asia. That is to say, in the aspect of job concentration, the
Japanese are M-time people against the Chinese. In the Chinese
negotiator's eyes, the Japanese people act as Westerners when the
Japanese stress punctuality or show high job concentration . In the
more individual sense, Korean negotiators have a more M-time
tendency than the Japanese, because they express their opinions more
freely.15 The Chinese people have even more M-time tendency than
the Japanese who are very cautious in speaking. Therefore, when we
negotiate with the Chinese or the Japanese, we should reflect these
relativity in the negotiation culture and use a more flexible negotiation
strategy.
Thirdly, in negotiating with Chinese or Japanese who are typical Ptime negotiators, a formation of a good relationship is very important.
This does not only indicate the relationship between the countries, but
also the personal relationships between the concerned negotiators. The
Chinese negotiators especially are sensitive in relationships, the so
called "Kwangshi". The Japanese are more Westernized than the
Chinese, but they also think that relationships are important compared
to the Western M-time people. Korea should not use the Western type
sandwich negotiation strategy when dealing with China or Japan.
Korea should focus on building the friendship with the Chinese or the
Japanese over a long period. In addition, Korean negotiators should
not forget that in negotiating with them, a large part of the result can
15
It has been empirically found that in the negotiations between the Korean
government and the Japanese government, the Japanese negotiators have more
strong sense of order than Korea negotiators, which refrains the former from freely
expressing their own opinion, especially in front of their supervisors or their team.
98
SE - YOUNG AHN
come from the evening entertainment rather than the stiff daytime
negotiation. The negotiation will develop slowly compared to that of
the Western M-time people, but the progress will be done faster once
the trust is built. To prepare for this, the government should train
many negotiators who have formed a good relationship with the two
countries through various bilateral activities such as 'the Korea-China
and Korea-Japan Business Councils', and etc.
Last of all, considering that Korea's bargaining power is influential
to the each and every international negotiation, what is Korea's
international negotiation power like versus to that of China and Japan?
This is not an easy question to answer.
Normally, a country's bargaining power is determined by that
country's national strength and the bilateral relationship between the
related two countries. A good example is the US government pressing
hard on Korea with higher national bargaining power based on the
Super 301 trade regulation in Korea-America trade negotiations. In
this sense of view, considering the dominance of Japanese economy in
comparison with Korea, it can be said that Korea's bargaining power is
lower than that of Japan. However, the differences in the bargaining
power is greatly lower than that compared with America, where we
are tightly connected with the US in terms of national security.
For China, nothing can be said flatly. In scattered business
negotiations, we can have substantial bargaining power over China,
because Korean companies are likely to have advanced technology
and marketing power. But we should not fail to notice that China has
already started to grow into one of the global economic powers. Its
prime example is 'the 2000 Korea-China Garlic Trade Dispute'.
Confronted by China's fierce reaction, the Korean government had to
Cross-cultural Studies on the Negotiation Cultures in the Northeast …
99
hold back her trade restriction aimed at imported Chinese garlic. It
clearly showed the fragile bargaining power of Korean government
over the Chinese government.
However, it is very interesting to note that differently from other
South East Asian countries such as Singapore or Malaysia, Korea is
almost the only country that does not belong to any economic block
dominating Asian economy such as the Japanese Economic Block and
Greater Chinese Economic Block. If we can utilize this geopolitical
feature as a leverage, we will be able to raise our country bargaining
power in the negotiation tables versus China and Japan surrounding us.
100
SE - YOUNG
AHN
REFERENCES
Acuff F., "How to Negotiate Anything with Anyone, Anywhere around
the World", AMACOM/American Management Association, 1997.
Bartlett, C. A. and Ghoshal Sumantra, " Managing Across Borders :
The Transnational Solution", Harvad Business School Press, 1998.
Bazerman, M. H. and Neale, M. A., "Negotiating Rationally", N.Y.,
The Free Press, 1992.
Berton, P., Kimura, P. and Zartman, I. W.(ed.), "International
Negotiation : Actors, Structure/Process, Values", St. Martin's Press,
1999.
Fisher, R. and Ury W., "Getting to Yes : Negotiating Agreement
Without Giving In", Penguin Book, 1991.
George Wu, "Exercises in Negotiation Analysis", Harvard Business
School, Aug., 1996.
Geoffrey Hilton, "Business Communication", Helsinki School of
Economics
And Business Administration, Oct. 1999.
Hall, E. T., "Beyond Culture", New York, Anchor Press, 1976, p.79.
Harris P. R. and Moran, R. T., "Managing Cultural Differences :
Leadership Strategies for a New World of Business", Houston,
Gulf Publishing Company, 1996.
Lewicki, R. J., Saunders, D. M. and Minton, J. W., "Negotiation",
Irwin McGraw Hill, 1999.
Lewicki, R. J., Hiam, A. and Olander K. W., "Think Before You
Speak : Complete Guide to Strategic Negotiation", New York, John
Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1996.
Mishler, A. L., "Personal Contact in International Exchanges", in
Kelman, International Behavior: A Social -Psychological Analysis
(pp.550-561), New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1965.
Morrison, T., Conaway, W.A., and Borden, G. A., "Kiss, Bow, or
Cross-cultural Studies on the Negotiation Cultures in the Northeast …
101
Shake Hands : How to Do Business in Sixty Countries",
Massachusetts, Adams Media Corporation, 1994.
Sawyer, J., & Guetzkow, H. "Bargaining and Negotiation in
International Relations", in Kelman, International Behaviour: A
social - Psychological Analasis.
Stark,
P.,
"It's
Negotiable",
Amsterdam·Oxford,
Pfeiffer
&
Company,1994.
www.hbsp.harvard.edu/hbsp/search_asp
Odell, J.S., "Negotiating the World Economy", Cornell University
Press, 2000.
Ury W., "Getting Past No : Negotiating Your Way from Confrontation
to Cooperation", New York, Bantam Books, 1993.
장대환, "국제기업negotiation", 학현사, 1998.