How to Negotiate Across Cultures

Question 1: the Reactions From Each Side and Their Influence 

Business culture varies from one region to another. The way people conduct themselves in the Western world is not the way negotiations are done in Latin America or Asian countries. Therefore, conflicts are bound to happen if negotiations are done without conducting research or appreciating the difference among countries. In this case, the American culture is one based on technical details and contractual information during meetings but different in the Mexican culture as people focus on personal information. For example, the American company mainly talked about technical details and explanations on how they would implement the project once selected. Upon completion of the presentation, the minister asked why the presenters did not talk about the firm history but only dealt with the main presentation on technical details. 

One of the major differences between the American business culture and the Mexican one revolves around time and how much it is respected. For instances, when a meeting is scheduled to start at 2.pm, the American culture stipulates that everyone will have arrived at the time and the meeting will just start. However, the Mexicans believe that there should always be an allowance of a few minutes to cater for the time lost and shows why the ministry officials came in late and they started talking amongst themselves instead of settling down. The issue of hierarchy and power dynamics in the Mexican business culture is different from that in the USA. As evidenced by the case study, the ministry officials cast an authoritative figure upon the Americans and were surprised when the Americans asked the meeting to start. It should have been vice versa where the Americans ought to have waited for a signal from their Mexican counterparts. When the minister himself arrived, he ordered the presentation to start again, which shows the hierarchical nature of the Mexican business culture. The ministry officials did not comment when the presentation was over as a sign of having an authoritative figure in the room that should make all the decisions. 

The first meeting in some communities such as the Mexican community is meant to build personal friendship and communication. They are ‘know you better’ kind of meetings and should not focus on detailed information about the proposal. Therefore, the Americans followed what is constantly the norm in the USA where formal meetings are entirely supposed to focus on contractual information. The casual type of communication between the minister and the other officials evidences this. 

Question 2: Suggestions on How Both Sides Could Respond Better 

With the desire to enhance the progress and no ill feeling between the Americans and Mexicans, both sides should have appreciated the difference between them in regards to business culture. The Americans should have understood that the Mexican society has a hierarchical organizational structure and for this reason should be ready to receive orders from the ministry officials. On the same note, the American representatives should have played along with the signs given by the Mexicans. For example, when they indicated that they were not ready for the meeting to start, the Americans should not have reacted the way they did. It indicated the adoption of a commanding approach, which means the Mexicans, did not feel free to ask any questions when the presentation was over. Americans should have adapted to the time management aspects of the Mexican culture and worked with the time given without showing any frustration. 

Consequently, the Mexicans too had a role to play in accommodating the Americans and their business culture. The Mexicans should have realized that the room was arranged formally and should have proceeded to take seats as arranged. Apologizing after being late was another thing that the Mexicans should have done to ease the frustration among the American presenters. The minister should have allowed the presentation to continue and then ask questions or any clarification towards the end after apologizing for being late. The Americans too should have accepted the informal gesture portrayed by the ministry officials as it is an integral part of the Mexican business culture. 

Question 3: How Each Side Has Been Better Prepared 

Preparation for cross-cultural negotiations requires a bit of research and brainstorming about the specific culture. As evidenced by the case study, the two cultures differ in the way they manage meetings. Conducting research would have prepared the Americans on how to face the frustration of working with people who are not punctual and who may start talking amongst themselves within the presentation. Research by the Americans would have provided a glimpse of what to expect when it comes to arrival and starting time of the meeting. On the same note, the Americans would have also avoided many details in the first meeting and focused on achieving personal relationship. Evidently, the ministry officials were not ready for any formal meeting with much technical information because they did not look at the information that the Americans provided. Moreover, the Americans would have replied in writing to the ministry with information about the company and presenting team in Mexico. The ministry took its time to write to the American company’s representatives informing them of the team that would be part of the negotiations. 

The Mexicans too would have understood about the punctual nature of the Americans and, therefore, ensure they were on time. Moreover, research would have revealed the formal nature of meetings in the American business culture. By understanding this, the ministry officials led by the minister would have lowered their expectations on having an informal meeting and getting to know the Americans in person. Such lessons would have ensured progress in the negotiations without any misunderstanding whatsoever. Research by the Americans would have also provided an idea about the decision-making nature of the Mexican society. They seek pride in ‘groups,’ which means writing to them would not have born any fruits about getting information. 

Question 4: What the Parties Could Have Done to Minimize the Impact 

The two parties should have kept the problems to a minimum and reduce the problems. For instance, the Mexicans would have given an apology for being late, and in particular, the minister should have politely requested the presenters to start the presentation again. The Mexicans should have also waited until the presentation was over before they could start talking amongst themselves in the middle of the presentation. Upon being asked why they did not talk about the organization's history, the American representatives should have taken the opportunity presented during lunchtime to talk about the history of the company and themselves. It could have built some level of rapport with the Mexicans, which would have led to better results in the negotiation process. From the onset, the Mexicans expected the Americans to engage them in an informal meeting. To salvage the situation, the Americans should not have cast an isolated figure with the Mexicans both before the meeting started and during lunch. As pointed earlier, the Mexicans take pride in groups and that the Americans should have interacted with them well. This would have made them open up and ask those questions they felt necessary at the time.