Defence Forces Review 2010

How do Cultural Dimensions Impact on Negotiation in a Military Context?Behaviour, artefactsand institutionsValues, beliefsand normsAssumptionsFigure 1: Culture as an Iceberg 18These cultural dimensions influence the way negotiators perceive and understand a givensituation and advise the negotiator about appropriate behaviour. “The analytical issue is thusnot whether culture is at play but the degree to which it affects negotiation.” 19 The issuefor this essay is what dimensions of culture impact on negotiation and how they do so in amilitary context.Cultural DimensionsIn order to comprehend why people behave the way they do in a given context or situation, itis necessary to identify the cultural dimensions at play. These are the bedrock of consequentialsocietal norms and behaviours. They provide the frame of reference to answer the mostfundamental questions of self identity for each individual. 20Individualism-collectivism refers to the broad value tendencies of a culture in emphasisingthe relative importance of the individual or the community. “Individualism promotes selfefficiency,individual responsibility and personal autonomy. Collectivism promotes relationalinterdependence, ingroup harmony and ingroup collaborative spirit.” 21 This has a varietyof implications for the conduct of negotiation. People from individualistic cultures valueinfluence and control over their world and others. Consequently they are motivated to usetactics that increase their bargaining power and enable them to exert their influence. Peoplefrom collectivistic traditions tend to engage in more cooperative behaviour and this willdirectly impact on their approach to negotiation. 22 Those who are from individualistic culturesare more likely to suffer from a fixed-pie bias 23 than those from collectivistic traditions. 24In a hierarchical culture, great respect and deference is paid to status. Social status impliessocial power. Social inferiors are expected to defer to social superiors, who in return,18 This diagram was adapted by Schneider (1997) from the original used by Schein (1985).19 Faure, G.O. and Sjöstedt, G. (1993) ‘Culture and Negotiation: An Introduction’ in Faure, G.O and Rubin, J.Z (eds), Culture and Negotiation, California,Sage Publications, pp. 1-13.20 Ting-Toomey, S. and Chung, L.C. (2005) Understanding Intercultural Communication, California, Roxbury Publishing Company.21 Ibid, pp. 59-60.22 Cox, T.H., Lobel, S.A. and McLeod, P.L. (1991) ‘Ethics of ethnic group cultural differences in cooperative and competitive behaviour on a group task’,Academy of Management Journal, 34, pp. 827-847.23 Fisher and Ury (1981) developed the idea of inventing options for mutual gain as opposed to the assumption that there must be a winner and loser in anegotiation. This will ensure that all parties’ interests are met and a larger pie is created which can be divided between the parties.24 Gelfand, M.J. and Christakopolou, S. (1999) ‘Culture and negotiator cognition: Judgment accuracy and processes in individualistic and collectivisticcultures’, Organisational Behaviour and Human Decision Process, 79:3, pp. 248-269.75