Negotiation & cross cultural communication Essay

Negotiation & cross cultural communication - Essay Example It is noteworthy to mention that the company has successfully fulfilled all â€Å"minimum† requirements required by the State. Therefore, to hold the company legally wrong would not be practically possible. The company has a strong case since it has complied with the legal requirements. The question now arises as to the ‘ethical’ obligations of the company in a foreign land- a case that has historically been a complex one. The Chinese negotiator employs a mix of ‘win-win’ and ‘win-lose’ strategies (Fang, 2006). Ultimately, however, the choice of either strategy is dependent of the level of trust prevalent in the situation (Fang, 2006). Therefore, as mentioned earlier, the development of trust between the two parties by the company shall be a deciding factor. In this case, however, it is highly likely that the Chinese farmers shall deploy a competitive negotiation style (as opposed to a co-operative one) due to the presence of foreigners ( the British and Germans running Zhengcheng in this case) (Fang, 2006). High-ranking employees must, therefore, be sent to negotiate with the farmers as a sign of respect and regard to their concerns (Faure, 1998). The individuals dealing with the Chinese must demonstrate significant level of patience and power to take decisions. The negotiating team must include a lawyer who’s thoroughly abreast of Chinese law as well as international best practices. This individual shall also strengthen the link between the foreign party and the Chinese farmers. Furthermore, it would be fruitful to include the company’s Chinese counterparts during the discussion as these shall act to enhance the level of trust between the two parties. Given their native Chinese ‘sense’ they shall be able to understand and respond to the underlying Chinese tricks in a better manner compared to the Westerners (Fang, 2006). Considering the fact that the Chinese tend to have a low level of tr ust for foreign stakes in their land, it would also be useful to include government support for Zhengcheng’s operations during the negotiation process. Towards the end, it is highly desirable to demonstrate to the Chinese that similar contractual agreements have been formerly accepted by other Chinese parties (Fang, 2006). The Chinese are highly risk-averse individuals; hence, by doing so the company would majorly mitigate the risks faced by the Chinese farmers. However, this may not be possible given that it is a first-time situation in this case. The company lawyer, however, may be able to assist in this regard and demonstrate cases of other Western companies reaching similar agreements with the Chinese in the past. The communication process in this case is a complex one since it involves taking into account various cross-cultural dynamics between the parties. The major issue is the ethical concerns by residents of China regarding Zhengcheng Ltd.’s waste disposal mec hanisms that have contaminated the production of lychees. It is in the best interests of the company to deploy significant level of culture-specific communication strategies to deal with the concerns of the Chinese farmers. It is imperative that the Western party engages in pre-negotiation discourse with the Chinese farmer