Dramatizing cross- cultural negotiations: what do students learn?

1. Dramatizing cross- cultural negotiations: what do students learn? Anne Eriksen, Department of Music, Dance and Drama Gro Alteren, School of Business and Economics

2. Purpose • Investigatethe students’ perspective: what do theylearn from roleplaysdesigned to addressculturedifferences? • Business context • Communicationstrategydiffersacrosscultures (e.g., Adair et al., 2004; Adair & Brett, 2005) • Cross-culturalrole play simulations • Assumed to teach students culturalunderstanding and adaptingcommunication style • Limited research: what do students learn? • (Krain and Lantis, 2006; Lewis, 2005) • Other studies?

3. Transformative learning theory • Transformative learning: • Changing frames of reference through critical reflection on assumptions that our interpretations, beliefs and habits of mind or points of view are based (Mezirow, 2000)

4. Theatre and Transformation • Theatre methods for learning purposes. • «Imaginationis central to understandingtheunknown; it is thewayweexamine alternative interpretationsofourexperience by “tryingon” another’spointofview.» (Mezirow, 2000) • Theatre for Change (Boal 1995) • Empowerment (Freire 1974)

5. Role play simulations • Program onNegotiations, Harvard Law School • MedLee • Joint venturenegotiations, sales office in Thailand • Thai and American • Multisumma • 30 years Joint partnership • American, France, Italy and Japan

6. MedLee • Thai familiycompany, 30 employees: High contextculture • Distributes and sellsmedicaldevices (lowtech) in Thailand • American company, 30.000 employees: Lowcontextculture • Manufactureshightechmedicaldevices, exports 20 % • Four issues: 1. Decision-making, 2. Staffing, 3. Profit distribution, and 4. Conflict resolution mechanism

7. Forming a Joint Venture between a Thai and an American partner Thai approach: Time aspect: Do not push to establish an agreement, trustbuildingtakes time Emphasise relationships, business organizedaroundrelations Formal, emphasisepositions Formulatemessagesindirectly American approach: Time aspect:Keep to time schedules, time is money Emphasiserules and merits, business organizedaroundrules Informal in interactionswithothers Saywhattheymean

8. Course: Internationalization and negotiations • 19 students, 11 nationalities (autumn 2013) • Low context: • Norway (6) • France (1) • Germany (1) • Finland (1) • High context: • Pakistan (2) • Italy (1) • Russia (2) • Zimbabwe (2) • China (1) • Nepal (1) • Gagauz (1)

9. Multisumma • 30 years joint partnership, design, manufacture and sales of a newgenerationengine (airlines) • Four partners: Airborne (American)=2, SERSI (France)=1, Novo (Italy)=1, Kiatsu (Japan)=1 • Rolesappointed to the students • Four issues: • 1. Payment of fees; 2. Sharing of technical information; 3. Coordination of orders with Airframers; 4. Marketing of the venture to airlines

10. Multisumma • Negotiator from Novo (Italy): Confidentialinformation: • Company saying: «Don’t let anyone push you». Youpointyour fist to make a pointifnecessary. Rolecard: • Youwilluseyouremotions as a strategy to convinceyour partners thatyou have good arguments, especiallywhen it comes to issuesthatareofgreatimportance to Novo. Youmaygesticulate, make facialexpressions, show anger, laugther, irritation, frustration, and so on. • As a way to convinceyour partners youcould ask questions like whethertheother party lack trust in your arguments.

11. Hardballtactics • Intimidation: Force theother to agree by meansofemotionalploy, anger, fear, irritation • S. Iannella (Italy): Did it work to usetheemotions to influencetheotherparies? • Showing anger, irritation, facialexpressions, etc. • How didtheothersrespond? • Strategy: Time-out, discusswith team-membershow to respond, or ignore

13. Dramatizingtheroleplays • Greatercredibility • Strengthentheroleidentification • MedLee: • Party preparation • Preparerelationshipbuilding • MedLee and Multisumma • Prepare arguments

14. Data: Reflection note (3-5 pages) • 1. Give a description of the results attained in a selected role play, offer an analysis of the negotiation process leading to this result • 2. Offer hers/his point of view: how the two role plays have advanced the understanding of cultures’ influence on the negotiation process? • Identify key themes regarding what students learn • Focus on part 2 • Asked the students for permission • Not yet analyzed (MAXQDA11, Nvivo, Phan et al. 2005) • Collect more data

15. Whatdidthe students learn? Someexamples : Negotiationbehaviours • How to useemotions and strategicthinking • To moderate theuseofhardballtactics • People responddifferently to acts as intimidations or agressivebehaviour Understanding • Try to understand eachother • How different cultureswork – whataretheir «weapons» • Important to have solid understandingofanyculturaldifferencesbeforestarting a negotiation, bothregardingcultureof country and companyculture Relations • To buildrelationshipbeforenegotiating • Party preparations - importantto establishgoodrelations • Trust!

16. Expectedoutcomes • New knowledgeregardinghow to design and carrythroughroleplaysthatfacilitatelearning • Challenges thatmayoccur in cross-cultural settings • Activate transformative learning • Understanding and awarenessofothers’ pointofview • Establishedassumptionsaboutthemselves and othersarechallenged • To whatextentthelearning is transformedinto a different attitude and behaviour is not answered in thisstudy

17. «..thesuccessofnegotiationalsodependsonpersonalityof a negotiator, …howtheyreact to other’sparty’sproposal and theirsensitivitytowardsother’sparty’sinterest»

18. Somereflections • Different sourcesofinformation • Reflection note: How to addressthequestion? • Avoidanswersreflectingthe questions • Observations? • Debriefing • Reversetheroles: highvslowcontext • Personal characteristics • The bargaining style oftheindividual student (Shell, 2001) • Dual concernsmodel, Thomas-KilmannConflict Mode Instrument (avoiding, compromising, competing, collaborating, and accommodating) • Previousresearchonthetopic?