Dramatizing cross- cultural
negotiations: what do students learn?
Anne Eriksen, Department of Music, Dance and Drama
Gro Alteren, School of Business and Economics
Purpose
•
Investigate the students’ perspective: what do they learn from role
plays designed to address culture differences?
– Business context
•
Communication strategy differs across cultures (e.g., Adair et al.,
2004; Adair & Brett, 2005)
•
Cross-cultural role play simulations
– Assumed to teach students cultural understanding and adapting
communication style
– Limited research: what do students learn?
– (Krain and Lantis, 2006; Lewis, 2005)
– Other studies?
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)
Theatre and Transformation
• Theatre methods for learning purposes.
• «Imagination is central to understanding the unknown; it is the
way we examine alternative interpretations of our experience
by “trying on” another’s point of view.» (Mezirow, 2000)
• Theatre for Change (Boal 1995)
• Empowerment (Freire 1974)
Role play simulations
• Program on Negotiations, Harvard Law School
– MedLee
• Joint venture negotiations, sales office in Thailand
• Thai and American
– Multisumma
• 30 years Joint partnership
• American, France, Italy and Japan
MedLee
– Thai familiy company, 30 employees: High context culture
• Distributes and sells medical devices (low tech) in
Thailand
– American company, 30.000 employees: Low context culture
• Manufactures high tech medical devices, exports 20 %
– Four issues: 1. Decision-making, 2. Staffing, 3. Profit
distribution, and 4. Conflict resolution mechanism
Forming a Joint Venture between a Thai and
an American partner
Thai approach:
Time aspect: Do not push to establish
an agreement, trustbuilding takes time
American approach:
Time aspect: Keep to time schedules,
time is money
Emphasise relationships, business
organized around relations
Emphasise rules and merits, business
organized around rules
Formal, emphasise positions
Informal in interactions with others
Formulate messages indirectly
Say what they mean
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)
Multisumma
•
30 years joint partnership, design, manufacture and sales of a new
generation engine (airlines)
•
Four partners: Airborne (American)=2, SERSI (France)=1, Novo (Italy)=1,
Kiatsu (Japan)=1
•
Roles appointed 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
Multisumma
•
Negotiator from Novo (Italy):
Confidential information:
• Company saying: «Don’t let anyone push you». You point your fist to
make a point if necessary.
Rolecard:
• You will use your emotions as a strategy to convince your partners that
you have good arguments, especially when it comes to issues that are of
great importance to Novo. You may gesticulate, make facial
expressions, show anger, laugther, irritation, frustration, and so on.
• As a way to convince your partners you could ask questions like whether
the other party lack trust in your arguments.
Hardball tactics
• Intimidation: Force the other to agree by means of emotional
ploy, anger, fear, irritation
• S. Iannella (Italy): Did it work to use the emotions to
influence the other paries?
– Showing anger, irritation, facial expressions, etc.
• How did the others respond?
• Strategy: Time-out, discuss with team-members how to
respond, or ignore
Dramatizing the role plays
• Greater credibility
• Strengthen the role identification
– MedLee:
• Party preparation
• Prepare relationship building
– MedLee and Multisumma
• Prepare arguments
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
What did the students learn?
Some examples :
Negotiation behaviours
• How to use emotions and strategic thinking
• To moderate the use of hardball tactics
• People respond differently to acts as intimidations or agressive behaviour
Understanding
• Try to understand each other
• How different cultures work – what are their «weapons»
• Important to have solid understanding of any cultural differences before
starting a negotiation, both regarding culture of country and company culture
Relations
• To build relationship before negotiating
• Party preparations - important to establish good relations
• Trust!
Expected outcomes
•
New knowledge regarding how to design and carry through role plays
that facilitate learning
– Challenges that may occur in cross-cultural settings
•
Activate transformative learning
– Understanding and awareness of others’ point of view
– Established assumptions about themselves and others are
challenged
•
To what extent the learning is transformed into a different attitude and
behaviour is not answered in this study
«..the success of negotiation also
depends on personality of a
negotiator, …how they react to
other’s party’s proposal and their
sensitivity towards other’s party’s
interest»
Some reflections
• Different sources of information
– Reflection note: How to address the question?
• Avoid answers reflecting the questions
–
–
–
–
Observations?
Debriefing
Reverse the roles: high vs low context
Personal characteristics
• The bargaining style of the individual student (Shell, 2001)
– Dual concerns model, Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode
Instrument (avoiding, compromising, competing,
collaborating, and accommodating)
– Previous research on the topic?