A comparative study of negotiation styles: Afghanistan, Iran and Syria.INTRODUCTION
Culture and it's role in international negotiations have been the focus of many studies. The absence of cultural awareness can slow down or stop communication between a group of negotiators from different cultures and could result in failing to reach agreements. Culture includes many elements, among them nationality nationality, in political theory, the quality of belonging to a nation, in the sense of a group united by various strong ties. Among the usual ties are membership in the same general community, common customs, culture, tradition, history, and language. and religion. Previous studies have shown that people with different religious affiliations employ different negotiation styles. The purpose of this study is to examine the impact of national culture on negotiation styles of people with the same religious affiliation. The negotiation styles of three groups of Muslim university students from Afghanistan, Iran and Syria have been compared. Exploratory comparative and explanatory ex·plan·a·to·ry
Serving or intended to explain: an explanatory paragraph.
ex·plan correlational designs have been employed.
Global economic integration in the 21st century has necessitated dialogue among public officials and private citizens of the world. However, objectives, attitudes, approaches, beliefs, values, norms and customs of negotiators vary around the negotiation table at the global level. Differences in a set of values and beliefs that characterize the behavior of negotiators from different nationality and ethnicity ethnicity Vox populi Racial status–ie, African American, Asian, Caucasian, Hispanic reflect their cultural differences (Faure & Sjostedt, 1993; Craig & Douglas, 2006; Adapa, 2008). Culture has been defined as a pattern of shared basic assumptions that a group learns as it successfully resolves its problem of external adaptation and internal integration, and is therefore taught to new members as the appropriate means to perceive, think, feel and behave in relation to those problems (Schein, 1997; Simintiras & Thomas, 1998). Barbash and Taylor (1997) indicate that culture includes religion, gender, language, class, ethnicity, and sexual orientation sexual orientation
The direction of one's sexual interest toward members of the same, opposite, or both sexes, especially a direction seen to be dictated by physiologic rather than sociologic forces. .
Lack of cross cultural knowledge and understanding could be obstacle to successful inter country negotiations. Negotiation is the iterative it·er·a·tive
1. Characterized by or involving repetition, recurrence, reiteration, or repetitiousness.
2. Grammar Frequentative.
Noun 1. process of communication among two or more parties that have different objectives or interests in order to reach an agreement that is satisfactory to all the parties involved (Gulbro & Herbig, 1994; Foroughi, 1998; Fraser & Zarkada-Fraser, 2002; Manning & Robertson, 2003; Wheeler, 2004a). However, the cultural background influences the way of thinking and communication of each party, as well as their values, norms, behaviors and negotiation styles (Simintiras & Thomas, 1998; Hung, 1998; Woo & Pru'homme, 1999; Chang, 2003).
Gulbro and Herbig (1994) stated that different cultures are associated with different styles of negotiation. These differences in style are the product of differences in means of communication, protocols, strategies of persuasion PERSUASION. The act of influencing by expostulation or request. While the persuasion is confined within those limits which leave the mind free, it may be used to induce another to make his will, or even to make it in his own favor; but if such persuasion should so far operate on the mind , and personal characteristics including accommodation, determination, flexibility and adaptation (Hung, 1998). Those who specialize spe·cial·ize
1. To limit one's profession to a particular specialty or subject area for study, research, or treatment.
2. To adapt to a particular function or environment. in negotiation must learn to understand the styles of negotiation of foreigners by studying their cultural beliefs and norms (Chang, 2003). In order to succeed in any process of negotiation, it is therefore necessary to fully comprehend the cultural values and assumptions of all the parties involved. In addition, negotiators must view the process from the perspective of the other party in order to understand their goals as fully as possible (Fisher, 1980). Wheeler (2004b) suggested that negotiation can be fruitless fruit·less
1. Producing no fruit.
2. Unproductive of success: a fruitless search. See Synonyms at futile. if the parties have no shared notion of the objectives of the process. Janosik (1987) added that an approach informed by shared values is the method most frequently used in the process of negotiation.
Cross-cultural negotiations are made more complicated as a result of a range of factors involved, such as those relating to relating to relate prep → concernant
relating to relate prep → bezüglich +gen, mit Bezug auf +acc environment, language, ideology and customs (Mintu-Wimsatt & Gassenheimer, 2000; Hoffmann, 2001). Gulbro and Herbig (1995) stated that "when negotiating internationally, this translates into anticipating culturally related ideas that are most likely to be understood by a person of a given culture" (p.3). A number of authors have demonstrated that culture is one of the most important factors involved in cross-cultural negotiation (Gulbro & Hrbig, 1994; Schein, 1997; Hofstede, 1980; Salacuse, 2005). However, when conducting business in a cross-cultural setting, negotiation is a great deal more complex. Because of the level of sophistication so·phis·ti·cate
v. so·phis·ti·cat·ed, so·phis·ti·cat·ing, so·phis·ti·cates
1. To cause to become less natural, especially to make less naive and more worldly.
2. of the knowledge that is required to conduct these exchanges, many negotiators are unsuccessful in reaching agreements as a result of the challenges involved in overcoming cultural differences, as opposed to any economic or legal problems (Gulbro & Herbig, 1995).
With the goal of helping individuals to distinguish between the cultures of different countries, Hofstede (1980, 1994) formulated the theory of cultural dimensions Cultural dimensions are the mostly psychological dimensions, or value constructs, which can be used to describe a specific culture. These are often used in Intercultural communication-/Cross-cultural communication-based research.
See also: Edward T. . This theory identifies the major variables of cultural difference, which consist of power distance, uncertainty avoidance, characteristics of individualism/collectivism, and masculinity/femininity. Hofstede proposes that cultural differences influence conduct, decision making and communication in business, and that collectivist col·lec·tiv·ism
The principles or system of ownership and control of the means of production and distribution by the people collectively, usually under the supervision of a government. and individualist in·di·vid·u·al·ist
1. One that asserts individuality by independence of thought and action.
2. An advocate of individualism.
in values play a prominent role in the important areas of cross-cultural psychology The references in this article would be clearer with a different and/or consistent style of citation, footnoting or external linking.
Cross-cultural psychology , international management and religion (Hofstede, 1993; Kim et al., 1994; Triandis, 1995). Of Hofstede's four cultural dimensions, it is the individualism/collectivism contrast that is most often employed in cross-cultural studies Cross-cultural comparisons take several forms. One is comparison of case studies, another is controlled comparison among variants of a common derivation, and a third is comparison within a sample of cases. of negotiation (Bazerman et al., 2000).
Casse and Deol (1985) discuss four styles of negotiation as Factual, Intuitive, Normative nor·ma·tive
Of, relating to, or prescribing a norm or standard: normative grammar.
nor and Analytical Styles. They define each negotiation style as follows:
FA or Factual Style: people using the factual style are cool, collected, patient, down-to-earth, present-oriented, precise, realistic, able to document their statement, sticking to the facts that speak for themselves. IN or Intuitive style: this style is characterized by a charismatic tone, a holistic approach holistic approach A term used in alternative health for a philosophical approach to health care, in which the entire Pt is evaluated and treated. See Alternative medicine, Holistic medicine. a strong imagination, a tendency to jump from one subject to another, a lot of ups and downs ups and downs
Alternating periods of good and bad fortune or spirits.
ups and downs
alternating periods of good and bad luck or high and low spirits , a fast pace, a deductive de·duc·tive
1. Of or based on deduction.
2. Involving or using deduction in reasoning.
de·duc way to approach problems as well as a future orientation. NR or Normative Style: For those who use this style negotiating is basically bargaining. They judge, assess and evaluate the facts according to according to
1. As stated or indicated by; on the authority of: according to historians.
2. In keeping with: according to instructions.
3. a set of personal values. They appeal to feelings, offer bargains, propose rewards and incentives. They look for compromises. AN or Analytical Style: The basic assumption that underlies this style is that "logic leads to the right conclusions". These people from reasons, analyze each situation in terms of cause and effect, put things into a logic order weight pros and cons, and use a sort of linear reasoning. They are unemotional and focus upon the relationship of parts (Casse & Deol, 1985, p. 77-78).
Farazmand, Tu and Danaeefard (2010) discuss the impact of religion on negotiation styles of Iranians, Taiwanese and Americans. They use a sample of university students from Iran, Taiwan and the United States of America UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. The name of this country. The United States, now thirty-one in number, are Alabama, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, New Hampshire, and compare the negotiation styles of Muslim, Buddhist and Christian students. Their findings reflect significant relationship between the negotiation styles and religious beliefs of Muslim, Buddhist and Christian students. However, the study does not discuss the impact of national culture on negotiation styles of people with the same religious affiliation. The current study attempts to examine the impact of national culture on negotiation styles of Muslims. A sample of undergraduate and graduate Muslim students from Iran, Syria and Afghanistan has been surveyed and the impact of nationality on negotiation styles has been investigated.
SAMPLE AND METHODOLOGY
The present study was conducted with a sample of 150 undergraduate and graduate university students studying in Iran. The sample consisted of 50 Iranian, 50 Syrian and 50 Afghan students. The Afghan and Syrian students had a residency A duration of stay required by state and local laws that entitles a person to the legal protection and benefits provided by applicable statutes.
States have required state residency for a variety of rights, including the right to vote, the right to run for public office, the of 2-8 years In Iran. The students were enrolled in Tehran University, Ghazvin University, Tarbiat Modares University Colleges
Tarbiat Modares University (TMU) is a fully Accredited Graduate University and a prestigious center for higher education in Iran. TMU has 7 colleges: Arts, Engineering, Agriculture, Basic Sciences, Humanities, Natural Resources, Marine Sciences and Medical Sciences. , Ferdosi University and Shahid Beheshti University As of 2006, the university offers 57 Masters and 29 PhD degrees. Its main campus is located in Evin, a suburb of northern Tehran. Shahid Beheshti University was primarily a private university until 1979, a year after the Islamic Revolution. . All the participants could read and write in Farsi (Persian) and survey was conducted in Farsi.
This research is a comparative exploratory and correlational explanatory study, and intended to examine, the impact of national culture on negotiation styles of Iranians, Syrians and Afghans. The objective of this study is to explore and compare the negotiation styles of the three groups of Muslim students from three different national backgrounds. Farazmand et al. (2010) show the impact of religion on negotiation styles of Muslim Iranians, Buddhist Taiwanese and Christian Americans. However, as the authors point out the results of their study does not necessarily apply to all Muslims, Buddhist or Christians. As a matter of fact the negotiation styles might vary among people with the same religious affiliation but different national or ethnicity culture. The aim of this study is to investigate the impact of national culture represented by nationality and collectivist attitude on negotiation styles of Muslim students.
A three-part questionnaire was adopted from Farazmand, Tu and Danaeefard (2010) to measure variables related to socio-demographic characteristics, collectivist attitude and negotiation styles. The first part of the questionnaire is the Socio-Demographic Profile. The second part addresses Collectivism collectivism
Any of several types of social organization that ascribe central importance to the groups to which individuals belong (e.g., state, nation, ethnic group, or social class). It may be contrasted with individualism. and the third part addresses negotiation styles. The sociodemographic characteristic part included nationality, religion, educational level, gender, age and work experience, as additional explanatory predictors. For the data collection of demographic variables, the participants provided self-reported responses. These socio-demographic questions and the coding schemes included Religion: 1= Muslim, 2=Non-Muslim; Nationality: Syrian=1, Afghan=2, Iranian=3; education level: 1= Associate's degree, 2= bachelor degree, 3: Graduate degree program; Gender: 1=Males, 2=Females; Age: 1= under 18, 2= 18-28, 3= over 28; Work experience: 1= 0, 2= 1-3, 3= more than 3.
The second part of the questionnaire has been based on Hofstede's model. Hofstede (1980) noted that one unique negotiation style is to share disparate cultural values, such as Collectivism-Individualism characteristics. Among Hofstede's cultural dimensions, Collectivism-Individualism characteristics are most frequently applied in the study of cross-cultural negotiation (Bazerman et al., 2000).
The collectivist characteristic reflecting cultural differences is one of the independent variables of our research model. Second part of the questionnaire with eight questions is designed to measure the Collectivist attitude of the participants. For the second part of the questionnaire also a five-point Likert scale Likert scale A subjective scoring system that allows a person being surveyed to quantify likes and preferences on a 5-point scale, with 1 being the least important, relevant, interesting, most ho-hum, or other, and 5 being most excellent, yeehah important, etc was utilized with 5 = "Always" (100% of the time); 4 = "Often" (75% of the time); 3 = "Occasionally" (50% of the time); 2. ="Seldom" (25% of the time); and 1 = "Never" (0% of the time).
The third part of the questionnaire consists of twenty four questions and based on Casse and Deol (1985) model. Each of the four different negotiation styles (factual, intuitive, normative, and analytical) were measure with six questions on the five-point Likert scale. There were five options for each question: 5 "Always" (around 100% of the time); 4 "Often" (around 75% of the time); 3 "Occasionally" (around 50% of the time); 2 "Seldom" (around 25% of the time); and 1 "Never" (around 0% of the time). In total, there were 24 questions for the four negotiation styles.
The internal consistency In statistics and research, internal consistency is a measure based on the correlations between different items on the same test (or the same subscale on a larger test). It measures whether several items that propose to measure the same general construct produce similar scores. reliability of the collectivist characteristics and four negotiation styles questionnaires have been reported as: 1) collectivist characteristics (8 items); Cranach's alpha =0.81; 2) analytical negotiation styles (6 items): Cronbach's alpha Cronbach's (alpha) has an important use as a measure of the reliability of a psychometric instrument. It was first named as alpha by Cronbach (1951), as he had intended to continue with further instruments. =0.87; 3) normative negotiation styles (6 items): Cronbach's alpha =0.83; 4) factual negotiation styles (6 items): Cranach's alpha =0.85; and 5) intuitive negotiation styles (6 items): Cronbach's alpha =0.82 (Farazmand et al., 2010).
The negotiation styles for three groups of Iranian, Syrian and Afghan students were measured and compared. The differences between negotiation styles of the three groups analyzed an·a·lyze
tr.v. an·a·lyzed, an·a·lyz·ing, an·a·lyz·es
1. To examine methodically by separating into parts and studying their interrelations.
2. Chemistry To make a chemical analysis of.
3. with p [less than or equal to] 0.05 as indicating statistical significance. Further, regression analysis In statistics, a mathematical method of modeling the relationships among three or more variables. It is used to predict the value of one variable given the values of the others. For example, a model might estimate sales based on age and gender. with p [less than or equal to] 0.05 significant level was also employed to test the correlation between negotiation styles and cultural backgrounds measured by nationalities and collectivism among the Muslim students.
RESEARCH QUESTION AND HYPOTHESIS
Farazmand et al. (2010) examined the impact of religious beliefs, collectivist characteristics, and socio-demographic characteristics on the negotiation styles between people from Iran, Taiwan and the United States United States, officially United States of America, republic (2005 est. pop. 295,734,000), 3,539,227 sq mi (9,166,598 sq km), North America. The United States is the world's third largest country in population and the fourth largest country in area. . The authors show that the negotiation styles of Muslim students were significantly different from Buddhist Taiwanese and Christian American and found religion significantly affecting the negotiation styles. However, the authors address the need for further investigation to examine the differences in negotiation styles of Muslims from different cultural backgrounds. The current research focuses on the impact of national culture on negotiation styles of Muslims from three different countries. The research aims to provide an answer to the following questions: Are there differences in negotiation styles of Iranian, Syrian and Afghan Muslims? Do cultural characteristics represented by nationality and individualistic-collectivist attitude of Iranian, Syrian and Afghan Muslims affect their negotiation styles? Therefore, the current research hypothesizes that the negotiation styles employed by Iranian, Syrian and Afghan Muslims are significantly different. Second, nationality and collectivist characteristics of Iranian, Syrian and Afghan Muslim have significant effects on negotiation styles employed. Third, demographic characteristics, level of education, age, gender and years of work experience of Iranian, Syrian and Afghan Muslims have significant effects on their negotiation styles.
Hundred fifty university students completed the anonymous three part questionnaire. Of the 150 students 50 (33.33%) were Syrian, 50 (33.33%) Afghan and 50 (33.33%) were Iranian. Of the 50 Syrian students 78% were Muslim, 52% graduate students and all were male, of 50 Afghan students all 50 were Muslim, 52% graduate students and 90% male, and of 50 Iranian students 96% were Muslim, 64% graduate students and 94% were male. Of 150 participants 91.3% were Muslim, 56% graduate students and94.67% were male as shown in Table 1.
Looking at how nationality affected the Muslim participants' collectivist attitudes, responses of the Muslim Syrian, Afghan and Iranian students for the six items of collectivism questionnaire reveal no significant differences (p< 0.05). As it is shown in Table 2, for Collectivism (IC) the mean difference of the three countries are not significantly different. This might indicate the cultural similarities regarding individualism/collectivism characteristic of Muslim students in this sample. Regarding the religious nature of Iranian Islamic Republic An Islamic republic, in its modern context, has come to mean several different things, some contradictory to others. Theoretically, to many religious leaders, it is a state under a particular theocratic form of government advocated by some Muslim religious leaders in the Middle government and the possibility of religious Syrian, Afghan and Iranian students of this sample, culture is not a significant factor in affecting the collectivist attitudes of the participants. However, this result might be generalized gen·er·al·ized
1. Involving an entire organ, as when an epileptic seizure involves all parts of the brain.
2. Not specifically adapted to a particular environment or function; not specialized.
3. to religious and devoted Muslims, but not to all Muslims or Muslim countries.
Table 3 shows the comparison results regarding Muslim students' responses to 24 questions of the negotiation styles questionnaire. The results indicate no significant differences between the Analytical, Normative and Factual negotiation styles Syrian, Afghan and Iranian students. The results for the Intuitive negotiation style show significant differences between the three groups of students. However, the Post Hoc post hoc
adv. & adj.
In or of the form of an argument in which one event is asserted to be the cause of a later event simply by virtue of having happened earlier: analysis for intuitive negotiation styles of Syrian, Afghan and Iranian students (Table 2) shows that only Syrian and Afghan students Intuitive negotiation style are significantly different at p < .05.
This last result might indicate that Syrian are slightly more flexible than Afghan in negotiations. But, the overall results regarding the three groups of Muslim students from Syria, Afghanistan and Iran did not show significant differences between their negotiation styles. In other words Adv. 1. in other words - otherwise stated; "in other words, we are broke"
put differently , the results of this study reject the hypotheses that:1) the negotiation styles employed by Iranian, Syrian and Afghan Muslims are significantly different, 2) nationality and collectivist characteristics of Iranian, Syrian and Afghan Muslims have significant effects on their negotiation styles employed.
Farazmand et al. (2010) found a significant relationship between negotiation styles and religious belief and significance differences between negotiation styles of Christian Americans, Buddhist Taiwanese and Muslim Iranians. The results of the current study show that there are no significance differences between negotiation styles of Muslim students with three different national cultural backgrounds. One might conclude that the strong religious or ideological beliefs of negotiators might be a determining factor in forming their negotiation styles.
Regarding gender, age, education level and experience of the participants, the mean scores of the 139 Muslim students' responses to the 24 negotiation styles questionnaires were significantly different only for the gender. In Table 4 and 5, the results of comparing the mean scores of male and female responses to the negotiation styles questionnaire shows that male Muslim students' means for the normative, factual and intuitive negotiation styles are significantly different from females' Muslim students. The higher mean scores for the male students might indicate that male Muslim students employ normative, factual and intuitive negotiation styles more than Muslim female students. However, considering the unequal proportion of 8 females to 131 males in this sample lowers the validity of the gender effects on negotiation styles for this sample and requires a more equally gender oriented o·ri·ent
1. Orient The countries of Asia, especially of eastern Asia.
a. The luster characteristic of a pearl of high quality.
b. A pearl having exceptional luster.
3. sample. The comparison of mean scores of the analytical negotiation styles of the two groups did not show a significant difference.
The regression analysis was also conducted to test the affects of nationality orientation, collectivism attitude, gender, age, education and experience on four negotiation styles of 139 Muslim students of this sample. The results of the regression analysis did not show a significant relationship between the nationality and the negotiation styles of the Muslim students as shown in Table 6. This supports the prior research results (Farazmand et al., 2010) that religious belief is a significant variable affecting the negotiation styles. This research found that the negotiation styles of graduate and undergraduate Muslim students are not significantly affected by their different nationalities.
The regression results in Table 6 also found collectivism as a significant variable affecting normative and intuitive negotiation styles of Muslim students. The results also showed gender variables significantly affecting the normative and factual negotiation styles of Muslim students. Finally, the regression results showed a significant relationship between the educational level measured by undergraduate and graduate level and Intuitive negotiation style of Muslim students.
The impact of culture on negotiation styles have been supported by different studies. However culture includes many factors such as environment, language, ideology, beliefs, customs, power distance, uncertainty avoidance, characteristics of individualism/collectivism, and masculinity/femininity. Farazmand et al. (2010) found that religious beliefs of negotiators affect their negotiation styles. This paper examined the negotiation styles of a sample of university students with the same religion but from three different countries and different national cultural background. The study found no significant difference between negotiation styles of 139 Muslim university students from Syria, Afghanistan and Iran. Furthermore, the study found that the nationality factor has no significant affect on negotiation styles of Muslim students.
The findings were limited to Muslim university students from Afghanistan, Iran and Syria, and it adopted only a quantitative research Quantitative research
Use of advanced econometric and mathematical valuation models to identify the firms with the best possible prospectives. Antithesis of qualitative research. method and employed a self-reporting questionnaire. Furthermore, although Hofstede's model of cultural dimensions has been widely used to examine cultural issues, only one factor was examined here. The sampling plan could be expanded to a broader population and cultural dimensions in the future.
Adapa, S. (2008). Adoption of internet shopping: Cultural considerations in India and Australia. Journal of Internet Banking and Commerce, 13 (2), 1-17.
Barbash, I. & L. Taylor (1997). Cross-cultural filmmaking film·mak·ing
The making of movies. . Berkeley and Los Angels, California: University of California Press "UC Press" redirects here, but this is also an abbreviation for University of Chicago Press
University of California Press, also known as UC Press, is a publishing house associated with the University of California that engages in academic publishing. .
Bazerman, M. H., R. J. Curhan, D. A. Moore, & L. K. Valley (2000). Negotiation. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 279-314.
Casse, P. and S. Deol (1985). Managing intercultural negotiations: Guidelines guidelines,
n.pl a set of standards, criteria, or specifications to be used or followed in the performance of certain tasks. for trainers and negotiators. International Society for Intercultural Educa.
Chang, L. C. (2003). An examination of cross-cultural negotiation: Using Hofstede framework. Journal of American Academy of Business, 2 (2), 567-570.
Craig, C. S. & P. S. Douglas (2006). Beyond national culture: implications of cultural dynamics for consumer research. International Marketing Review, 26 (3), 322-342.
Farazmand, F., T. J. Tu, & H. Danaeefard (2010). Is Religious Culture a Factor in Negotiation: A Cross-Cultural Comparison of Iran, Taiwan and United States. Journal of International Business Research (JIBR), 10 (1), 27-44.
Faure, G. O., & G. Sjostedt (1993). Culture and negotiation: An introduction. Newbury Park: Sage Publications This article or section needs sources or references that appear in reliable, third-party publications. Alone, primary sources and sources affiliated with the subject of this article are not sufficient for an accurate encyclopedia article. .
Fisher, G. 1983. International negotiation: Cross-cultural perception. The Humanist hu·man·ist
1. A believer in the principles of humanism.
2. One who is concerned with the interests and welfare of humans.
a. A classical scholar.
b. A student of the liberal arts. , 43 (11), 14-18.
Foroughi, A. (1998). Minimizing negotiation process losses with computerized negotiation support systems. Journal of Applied Business Research, 14 (4), 15-27.
Fraser, C. & A. Zarkada-Fraser (2002). An exploratory investigation into cultural awareness and approach to negotiation of Greek, Russian and British managers. European Business Review, 14 (2), 111-128.
Gulbro, R. D. & P. Herbig (1994). The effect of external influences in the cross-cultural negotiation process. Journal of Strategic Change, 3, 329-340.
Gulbro, R. D. and P. Herbig (1995). International negotiating behavior of small firms. Journal of Business and Entrepreneurship, 7 (2), 85-91.
Hoffmann, G. (2001). When scientists or engineers negotiate. Research Technology Management, 44 (6), 13-16.
Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture's consequences: international differences in work-related values. Beverly Hill: CA Sage Publications.
Hofstede, G. (1994). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind: intercultural cooperation and its importance for survival. London: Harper Collins.
Hofstede, G. (1993). Cultural constraints in management theories. Academy of Management Executive 7 (1), 81-94.
Hung, C. L. (1998). Canadian business Canadian Business is the longest-publishing business magazine in Canada. It was founded in 1928 as The Commerce of the Nation, the organ of the Canadian Chamber of Commerce. The magazine was renamed Canadian Business in 1933. pursuits in the PRC, Hong Kong Hong Kong (hŏng kŏng), Mandarin Xianggang, special administrative region of China, formerly a British crown colony (2005 est. pop. 6,899,000), land area 422 sq mi (1,092 sq km), adjacent to Guangdong prov. and Taiwan, and Chinese perception of Canadians as business partners. Multinational Business Review, 6 (1), 73-83.
Janosik, R. J. (1987). Rethinking the culture-negotiation link. Negotiation Journal, 3, 385-395.
Kim, U., C. H. Triandis, C. Kagitcibasi, C. S. Choi, & G. Yoon (eds) (1994). Individualism individualism
Political and social philosophy that emphasizes individual freedom. Modern individualism emerged in Britain with the ideas of Adam Smith and Jeremy Bentham, and the concept was described by Alexis de Tocqueville as fundamental to the American temper. and collectivism: theory, method, and applications. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Manning, T. & B. Robertson (2003). Influencing and negotiating skills: some research and reflections--Part I: Influencing strategies and styles. Industrial and Commercial Training, 35 (1), 11-16.
Mintu-Wimsatt, A. & B. J. Gassenheimer (2000). The moderating effects of cultural context in buyer-seller negotiation. The Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management Sales Management Role and Goal
Importance of sales management is critical for any commercial organization. Expanding business in not possible without increasing sales volumes, and effective sales management goal is to organize sales team work in such a manner that ensures a , 20 (1), 1-9.
Salacuse, J. W. (2005). Negotiating: the top ten ways that culture can affect your negotiation. Ivey Business Journal Online, 1-6.
Schein, E. H. (1997). Organizational culture and leadership. CA: Jossey-Bass Inc.
Simintiras, A. C. & H. A. Thomas (1998). Cross-cultural sales negotiations: A literature review and research propositions. International Marketing Review, 15 (1), 10-36.
Triandis H.C. (1995). Individualism and collectivism. Boulder, CO: Westview.
Wheeler, M. (2004a). Anxious moments: openings in negotiation. Negotiation Journal, 20 (2), 153-170.
Wheeler, M. (2004b). Awareness and action in critical moments. Negotiation Journal, 20 (2), 349-365.
Woo, H. S. & C. Prud'homme (1999). Cultural characteristics prevalent in the Chinese negotiation process. European Business Review, 99 (5), 313-315.
Farideh A. Farazmand, Lynn University This article or section is written like an .
Please help [ rewrite this article] from a neutral point of view.
Mark blatant advertising for , using .
Yu-Te Tu, Chungyu Institute of Technology
Hasan Danaeefard, Tarbiat Modares University
Table 1. Frequency Distribution of Socio-demographic Characteristics Syrian Afghan Iranian participants 50 50 50 students students students Muslim participants 78% 100% 96% Graduate students 52% 52% 64% Male participants 100% 90% 94% Table 2. Comparison Results between Collectivism and Negotiation Styles of Syrian, Afghan and Iranian Muslim Students Sum of df Mean F Sig. Squares Square IC Between Groups .102 2 .051 .331 .719 Within Groups 20.446 133 .154 Total 20.547 135 Analytical Between Groups .305 2 .152 .591 .555 Within Groups 34.543 134 .258 Total 34.848 136 Table 2. Comparison Results between Collectivism and Negotiation Styles of Syrian, Afghan and Iranian Muslim Students Sum of Mean Squares df Square F Sig. Normative Between Groups .588 2 .294 1.239 .293 Within Groups 31.801 134 .237 Total 32.389 136 Factual Between Groups .419 2 .210 1.109 .333 Within Groups 25.315 134 .189 Total 25.734 136 Intuitive Between Groups 1.751 2 .876 3.698 .027 Within Groups 31.731 134 .237 Total 33.482 136 Note: p<0.05 indicate significance differences. Table 3. Post Hoc Analysis for Intuitive Negotiation Styles of Syrian, Afghan and Iranian Muslim Students Dependent (I) (J) Mean Std. Sig. Variable nationality nationality Difference Error (I-J) Intuitive Syrian Afghan .27718 * .10396 .031 Iranian .20246 .10490 .159 Afghan Syrian -.27718 * .10396 .031 Iranian -.07472 .09833 .750 Iranian Syrian -.20246 .10490 .159 Afghan .07472 .09833 .750 * The mean difference is significant at the .05 level. Table 4. Comparison Results between Female and Male Muslim Students Gender N Mean Std. Deviation Analytical Male 129 2.2196 .49695 Female 8 1.9792 .63269 Normative Male 129 2.1318 .48711 Female 8 1.6667 .23570 Factual Male 129 2.0517 .42635 Female 8 1.6875 .45806 Intuitive Male 129 2.3385 .49561 Female 8 1.9375 .34431 Table 5. Independent Sample T-test for Gender Levene's Test t-test for Equality for Equality of Means of Variances F Sig. t df Sig. (2- tailed) Analytical Equal .405 .526 1.307 135 .193 variances assumed Equal 1.055 7.545 .324 variances not assumed Normative Equal 4.454 .037 2.674 135 .008 variances assumed Equal 4.963 11.156 .000 variances not assumed Factual Equal .076 .783 2.335 135 .021 variances assumed Equal 2.191 7.771 .061 variances not assumed Intuitive Equal 1.750 .188 2.251 135 .026 variances assumed Equal 3.101 8.906 .013 variances not assumed Table 6. Multiple Regression Results of Negotiation Styles Dependent [alpha] [beta] Std. Std. Variable Er. [beta] Analytical (Constant) 2.147 gender -.239 .191 -.111 education -.027 .089 -.026 age -.101 .111 -.086 experience .009 .061 .014 nationality .073 .056 .115 IC .182 .114 .140 Normative (Constant) 2.101 gender -.421 .176 -.203 education -.127 .082 -.129 age -.054 .102 -.048 experience .026 .056 .041 nationality .063 .052 .103 IC .298 .104 .237 Factual (Constant) 2.574 gender -.328 .160 -.178 education -.135 .075 -.154 age .106 .093 .105 experience -.070 .051 -.123 nationality -.052 .047 -.095 IC .061 .095 .055 Intuitive (Constant) 2.108 gender -.261 .174 -.125 education -.169 .081 -.169 age .106 .101 .092 experience .027 .056 .042 nationality -.090 .051 -.145 IC .339 .104 .267 Dependent t Sig. Variable Analytical (Constant) gender -1.254 .212 education -.300 .765 age -.912 .363 experience .148 .882 nationality 1.297 .197 IC 1.602 .112 Normative (Constant) gender -2.398 .018 * education -1.554 .123 age -.533 .595 experience .462 .645 nationality 1.222 .224 IC 2.849 .005 ** Factual (Constant) gender -2.047 .043 * education -1.809 .073 age 1.143 .255 experience -1.361 .176 nationality -1.097 .275 IC .642 .522 Intuitive (Constant) gender -1.498 .137 education -2.079 .040 * age 1.051 .295 experience .483 .630 nationality -1.749 .083 IC 3.268 .001 ** * p = <.05; ** p = < .01; *** p = < .001