Catherine Lee - The New Rules of International Negotiation - Building Relationships, Earning Trust, and Creating Influence Around The World (2007)

“Catherine Lee’s The New Rules for International Negotiation is a
must-read for anyone who desires to become more effective in the

global marketplace. This is neither a simplistic how-to book nor a
long list of do’s and don’ts. Lee provides you with basic principles
and models to will help you prepare and think through cross-cultural
negotiations. The result will be more productive and successful long-
term relationships.”
—Ken G Kabira, Executive vice president, Lipman Hearne,
former chief marketing officer, McDonald’s, Japan
“I have personally witnessed Catherine Lee’s practical wisdom and

insight as she helped Motorola University prepare professionals for
joint ventures in the global marketplace. This book is a compendium of
invaluable advice for anyone embarking on a trans-cultural journey.”
—Bill Wiggenhorn, principal, Main Captiva,
LLC and founding president, Motorola University
“Do you travel overseas in business? Does your company have part-
ners in other countries? Do you feel sometimes confused about how to
negotiate with people from other cultures? Do you teach international
business? If your answer to any of these questions is yes, this book is a
must for you! Comprehensive approach, firsthand experience, solid
theoretical base, practical suggestions—everyone will find something
valuable here.”
—Dr. Krzysztof Gluc, vice president, Wyzsza Szkola Biznesu, Poland
“Carrying her multicultural experience, intuitiveness, and keen

analysis, Lee successfully delivers innovative applicable techniques
and practical behavior adjustments that lead to negotiation enhance-
ment in a corporate and personal setting. The Rules for International
Negotiation delivers the message loud and clear: build trust, earn the
right to influence, and negotiate successfully!”
—Hedy M. Ratner, president, Women’s Business Development Center
“The New Rules for International Negotiation is an important read
for anyone who desires a better understanding of the critical role that
culture plays in negotiating internationally. Catherine Lee has hands-
on experiences and personal successes in using this process in a variety
of organizations and is a strong testimony for the complexity of not
only the face-to-face negotiation process, but the intangible cultural
aspects as well.”
—Tom Menzel, business owner/investor and consultant
“This book is bound to work for people who work in an environ-

ment of diversity of cultures. It provides wisdom that can benefit people
who work with people from other countries. It is helpful to read from
time to time.”
—Charles Wang, a business consultant in China
The New Rules
of
International
Negotiation
Building Rel
Relaationships, Earning TTrust,
rust,
and C rea
Crea ting Influenc
reating Influencee
Around the World
C atherine Lee
Franklin Lakes, NJ
Copyright© 2007 by Catherine Lee
All rights reserved under the Pan-American and International Copyright

Conventions. This book may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, in any form or by
any means electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any
information storage and retrieval system now known or hereafter invented, without
written permission from the publisher, The Career Press.
THE NEW RULES OF INTERNATIONAL NEGOTIATION

EDITED BY KATE HENCHES
TYPESET BY MICHAEL FITZGIBBON
Cover design by The Design Work Group
Printed in the U.S.A. by Book-mart Press
To order this title, please call toll-free 1-800-CAREER-1 (NJ and Canada: 201-
848-0310) to order using VISA or MasterCard, or for further information on books
from Career Press.
The Career Press, Inc., 3 Tice Road, PO Box 687,

Franklin Lakes, NJ 07417
www.careerpress.com
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Lee, Catherine, 1941-
The New rules of international negotiation : building relationships, earning trust
and creating influence around the world / by Catherine Lee.
p. cm.
Includes index.
ISBN-13: 978-1-56414-973-2
ISBN-10: 1-56414-973-0
1. Negotiation in business. 2. Cultural awareness. 3. Business etiquette. 4.
International business enterprises—Management. I. Title.
HD58.6.L43 2007
658.4’052—dc22
2007029046
Dedic
Dedicaation
This book is dedicated to my dear husband, Timothy, and to my
children Stephen, Andrea, Cassie, and Moira.
To Timothy for consistently giving a positive response to my every

doubt or fear, and to my children for supporting every effort of mine as
if it already was a success. And to Quin, John, Cortney, and Andy for
being there with confidence in my work when I questioned its purpose.
Without the caring of each of them, my contribution would be shallow
and meaningless.
Acknowledgments
To Alicia Karapetian for her editing and support through the unknown.
For their contribution to the snapshots of various countries, I’d like to
thank: Dr. Sharon Badenhop, consultant and professor, Rochester
Institute of Technology; Camilo Escobar, senior manager, BP, Bogota,
Colombia; Dr. Krysztof Gluc, vice director, Wyzsza Szkola Biznesu
[WSB], the business university in Novy Sacz and Krakow, Poland;
Gary Jamison, principal, Jamison Group and affiliate, Japan Intercultural
Consulting; Rasheed Ahmed, vice president, EXENSYS, India in the
United States, Ramonda Talkie, colleague in development of the nego-
tiation process, John Willig, a literary agent who reflects the best in
the negotiating style, and Chang Lu Wang, business consultant, Beijing,
China.
This page intentionally left blank
Contents
Foreword 9
Introduction 13
Part I: The Cowboy in a New Frontier
Chapter 1: Crossing the Cultural Divide 25
Close-Up of Asia
Snap-shot of China
Chapter 2: Competition is King…and Queen 39
Snapshot of Japan
Chapter 3: The Gated Community:
Corporate America Lives Here 49
Close-Up of Eastern Europe
Snapshot of Russia
Chapter 4: Superiority Complex:
Sophomores of the Global Campus 73
Snapshot of the United States
Chapter 5: Values: A Matter of Priorities 85
Snapshot of Poland
Chapter 6: Build a Trustworthy Relationship:
The Trust Model 103
Snapshot of Hong Kong
Chapter 7: The Business of Good Actions:
Four Strategic Virtues 119
Snapshot of India
Chapter 8: The Charismatic Multi-national:
Lending a Hand to Neighbors vs. Managing
a Business Arrangement 139
Close-Up of Latin America
Snapshot of Colombia
Part II: Negotiating to Shi
Chapter 9: Crossing the Cultural Divide 157
Chapter 10: Recognizing the Needs of the Other Side:
The Fastest Route to Getting What You Need 163
Snapshot of Argentina
Chapter 11: The Mandate: A Blueprint of the Dance Floor 173
Snapshot of Chile
Chapter 12: Common Ground: Cultural and Contextual 187
Snapshot of Venezuela
Chapter 13: Building Trust: Vulnerability and Consistency 205
Chapter 14: A Nation of Superiority: Ask and Listen 219
Chapter 15: John Wayne is Dead:
The Most Difficult Negotiators—From Two Perspectives
(Ours and Theirs) 231
Chapter 16: Verbal Behaviors:
What You Say and How You Say It 239
Snapshot of Brazil
Chapter 17: Getting Ahead
of the Cultural Changes 259
Index 267
About the Author 272
Foreword
Foreword
Globalization is no longer a concept. It is a reality that speaks to

the interdependence of countries through an increasing number of cross-
border transactions, capital flows, and diffusion of technology. Busi-
ness today is global and encompasses every corner of the world—from
advanced economies to emerging markets.
Executives working in this environment have to be nimble, knowl-
edgeable, and open-minded. Business professionals may wake up one
morning in New York and the next morning in New Delhi. The diversity
of work and growth of cross-border business means that executives
must be prepared to negotiate complex deals with different cultures
whose priorities and perspectives differ greatly from their own.
Markets in the United States may pulse to the beat of “time is
money,” but other cultures, such as the Chinese, prefer to take time—
a lot of time—to consider a deal and finalize it. More importantly, the
Chinese want to take time to understand the people with whom they
are negotiating and learn the motivations that are driving the team on
the other side of the table. In such a culture, negotiations are about
something more long-lasting than the signing of a contract. They are
about relationships and respect.
9
The New Rules of International Negotiation
Too often people focus on the deal that is currently being negoti-
ated and fail to realize that if they get the relationship right, there will
be multiple deals down the road.
Establishing respect among different cultures is essential, particu-
larly in emerging markets. In the end, people buy from other people,
and they usually buy from people they trust.
A confident swagger and self-promotion may score points in the
United States, but, in many parts of the world, humility is the greatest
virtue. These cultural differences necessitate that business profession-
als adapt their approach and show sensitivity to the people with whom
they are negotiating and who they are hoping to call partners.
Today, Motorola generates the majority of its revenues outside the
U.S. While this is a recent phenomenon, it demonstrates that the com-
pany is becoming increasingly dependant on foreign markets and di-
verse cultures for its growth and future.
Global companies, such as Motorola, have an obligation to adapt to
foreign markets and operate, when possible, as a local business that
relies on local managers for results. Organizational design in different
countries cannot be conceived in a vacuum, and consideration must be
given to the wants, needs, and culture of a particular market.
Increasingly, the world is focused on two dominant emerging mar-
kets: China and India. With each country claiming more than a billion
people and annual economic growth of close to 10 percent, China and
India have truly become the new business frontier. For established North
American companies in search of new ventures, these two countries
offer big markets, big opportunities, and big risks.
Although China and India are advancing at rates not seen since the
industrial revolution, they are each struggling with developing financial
markets, legal systems, and corporate governance regulations. In these
countries, the best way to achieve business objectives is to understand
Chinese and Indo cultures, and build long-term relationships.
It is also important for executives to understand that the North
American way of conducting business does not always translate well in
these cultures. The straight-talking, shoot-from-the-hip approach to
10
Foreword
negotiations that is valued in Chicago or Dallas may come across as
arrogant and defeatist in the boardrooms of Shanghai or Bombay.
This brings me to this excellent book by Catherine Lee, The Rules
of International Negotiation: Building Relationships, Earning Trust, and
Creating Influence Around the World.
A top management consultant and negotiations expert who has pro-
vided senior counsel to global companies such as General Motors,
Milwaukee Insurance, BP (Amoco), and Korea Telecom, Ms. Lee’s
book correctly focuses on the need for business executives to bring
cultural sensitivity and understanding to the negotiating table.
This book, which grew out of a series of presentations Ms. Lee gave
to Motorola’s World Wide Management Group, is timely and relevant
given the increasingly global business environment in which people work.
Having been fortunate enough to participate in Ms. Lee’s presenta-
tions and to have read this book, I can say that Ms. Lee injects some
much needed empathy, insight, and thoughtfulness into the realm of
Corporate America. Using a series of anecdotes that are familiar and
relatable, Ms. Lee makes a compelling case for business professionals
to look at the wants and needs of the customer before their own, and to
see people with whom they’re negotiating as human beings rather then
adversaries.
The book looks long and hard at business practices and cultural
priorities around the world including China, where Ms. Lee has spent
much of her professional career and where many U.S. executives in-
creasingly find themselves conducting business. The examination of
China draws comparisons to U.S. business practices and negotiating
techniques, and offers some valuable lessons.
They key learnings I took away from this book are the importance
of respecting customers enough to learn about their country, customs,
and culture, and to focus on relationships that will lead to long-term
success rather than a one-shot deal. In fact, without a solid relationship
even a one-shot deal has a minimal chance of success.
I strongly recommend this book, and encourage each of you to keep
an open mind and learn from Ms. Lee’s experience and wisdom. Apart
11
from its business teachings, the book contains a great deal of humor,
charm, and practical advice.
As the world becomes more connected and the interdependence of
countries grows, cultural sensitivities will become as valued as a focus
on the bottom line. Globalization will continue to define the world in
which we live and business will become increasingly international. In
this environment, we each have an obligation to understand the people
we work with and rely on for our success.
By Michael Hortie
President of Motorola, Canada
12
Introduction
Introduction
Negotiation is an ever-present aspect of business. Being elected and

serving on the Board of Education for a consolidated school district in
the Chicago suburbs was my introduction into business, politics, and
diversity. The district encompassed 14 municipalities; the Barrington
area, an affluent community; Hoffman Estates, also a most comfort-
able community for young people starting out, educated and skilled
immigrants, and academic professionals; and Carpentersville, a blue-
collar community with a growing, hard-working Hispanic population.
Learning to work with the varied municipalities and with each elected
ego, with the public while being public, and hearing the vastly different
perspectives, made me uncomfortable with the enormous differences
that had to be served or at least answered to. I wanted everything to be
simpler and more categorized, not so threatening as with all those un-
known and nonunderstood differences. If everyone’s need was the same,
it would have been simpler and easier. Sameness seemed comforting
and doable.
Circumstances pushed me back into the paid workforce after a
20-year absence. My husband’s (mentor) advice was, “Whatever they
ask you to do, say you can feel comfortable with that, and then come
home and figure out how.” Motorola became my first contract—a three-
day training program for their first level managers. In 1990, after a year
13
and a half of work with Motorola, I was asked if I would go to Beijing,

China, to help set up some training. Once again, I thought I could feel
comfortable with that. I knew they must have asked everyone else be-
fore me, but I had the freedom of little work. From that first trip in
November of 1990 my education began, and I ultimately earned an on-
the-job degree through experience in organizational development, train-
ing, and an MBA. My formal background was in the romance
languages—a masters in the arts from the University of Michigan—and
Ph.D. course work followed in medieval literatures at Wayne State Uni-
versity. All my practical education had come from the political arena.
For the past 19 years, in international training and management de-
velopment, I have been able to observe behaviors of businesspeople
from different business cultures and different national cultures. I facili-
tated many executive team meetings and worked with numerous post-joint
venture teams in negotiations and in on-the-job team building—
multi-national team building. My purpose was and is to help U.S.
businesspersons and others of Western culture work more effectively
and more respectfully with the diversity of cultures. This goal kept me
to an intensity of focus and was reinforced by the perspective of a
westerner who values and understands the paradoxical mix of her
country’s business style. Just as a member of a family feels they may
criticize their own family but no one outside it can, I also feel, as a U.S.
citizen and business person, that—I may critique my country but no
one else better do it. Not all United States businesspeople fit into this
description—it’s more a reflection of the accepted (not necessarily ap-
propriate) behaviors of our business culture in general.
Traveling to different countries and continents to work, I have had
many lonely hours, especially on weekends, to observe, to listen, and to
interpret. Every airport, hotel lobby, train station, open-air market,
restaurant, and conference room became my laboratory. Occasional
hotel tour buses would affirm the extremes for me. A person’s words,
tone, and expression would either influence the other side to respond,
to listen more, or to graciously retreat—or not so graciously shut down.
For 11 years, I observed, noted, and documented. Motorola had trained
me as a behavior analyst, so I had a framework for my data. My partner
14
Introduction
trained me in assessments and their intended results. It was the best
experience that anyone could have to formalize their learning—first-
hand observation and an opportunity to elicit immediate feedback.
In November 1990, I left for Hong Kong. I was petrified by the
thought of standing in front of businessmen from every different coun-
try in the Pacific Rim and instructing them in leadership and manage-
ment skills. I worried about whether they would understand me, or my
off-center sense of humor. I didn’t know if my woman-ness would af-
front them, or if their cultural bias would offend me. I wanted to be
knowledgeable in every aspect of their culture. I almost couldn’t talk
the first day because my mouth had the dryness of fear, of ignorance,
and of inexperience. Now, I have that same feeling when I have to fa-
cilitate a group of white Americans from the corporate culture. With
the diverse groups, I have the vast lenience of every other culture.
The participants in many of the sessions, if asked respectfully, would
tell me the agenda of a typical workday in their country. Many times in
the cross-cultural groups we would use an agenda from a different country
each day. It kept change a respectable force in our sessions.
The unexpected benefit was often seeing more clearly the values of
a new and different culture. I worked several times with a group of
software developers in Turin, Italy. I once mentioned I would love to
see the Shroud of Turin. It’s put on display for the public only every 25
years. The year was 2000! A couple of the engineers decided to take me.
By the time word got out, about 27 of them went with me. Afterward,
we all went to a restaurant to eat, drink, and discuss the validity of the
shroud as that of Jesus Christ, or of any other man of 2,000 years ago.
I realized later that evening that I was at the end of my fifties and no
one in the group was older than 35 years old.
The engineers had always included me in dinners after work, their
regular Wednesday night parties, and at lunch. I began to see the dif-
ferences in a culture’s values and their priority. Age wore a softer face
in Turin, Italy, and young people searched out an older person’s opin-
ion, judgment, and support. Later, I discovered firsthand that age is
honored and loved in China. In China, I was more deserving of their
respect because I was older.
15
My interest in another’s culture, religion, and people was the genesis

of new relationships. Their interest in me expanded our understanding
of each other and promoted the relationship. The artificial restrictions
were not there—such as, no expression of feeling, of belief, or of hu-
maneness. It was good to talk about spirituality and art and family. It
was freeing for me, who was used to working in a U.S. business culture,
where everything personal is regarded as not professional except for
competition, aggression, and absolute confidence. A perceived offen-
sive attitude of superiority and arrogance often accompanies a United
States businessperson into the cross-cultural meetings.
My job introduced me to the continents and to numerous islands,
and my schedule allowed me time to contemplate and understand bet-
ter the people. In training sessions such as Motorola’s Manager of Man-
agers, a five-day work session, I had the opportunity to know better the
men and their cultures. They were always eager to help me get better
acquainted with their motherland. The unknown and the mystical of a
culture can be alluring and influential in developing an interest into a
fuller understanding of custom and tradition.
As a grandchild of Russian/ Poilish immigrants I feel close to all
ethnicities, from any non-English speaking country. There is instant,
recognizable, common-ground of feeling and of placement or displace-
ment. I always felt I was the protector of my mother, my grandmother,
or my grandfather. I had to tell people their accent or the way they
dressed didn’t mean they were bad or stupid, just different. I knew
“different” was not always acceptable or respected. It gave good enough
reason to exclude someone. This was my original impetus for writing
the book—to bring back a dignity, respect, and value of difference to
my ethnic heritage. From a professional perspective, working in Asia,
South America, Europe, Canada, and Mexico during the past 17 years
identified an urgent business need of my clients—how to be able to lead
in this global market through a negotiating style.
Working with a diversity of cultures introduced me to a myriad of
customs, traditions, and foods. Interacting with the individuals con-
vinced me that recognizing these differences is not what would support
building a relationship. A knowledge and appreciation of these differences
16
Introduction
was the beginning, yet the establishment of trust, the basis for a long
term relationship required some behavioral modifications to the United
States style for doing business.
Negotiation is inherent to doing business globally. Today working
side by side with four or five cultures has become the norm—in the
United States and across the world. This study brought me back to a
simple understanding that you can’t change someone else’s behavior.
Being married for 40 years, dedicating every effort to change my spouse,
should have chiseled this in my brain and my heart much earlier. One
can only change one’s own behavior, and we do it many times in a day
depending on who walks in the room or which child in the family we’re
reprimanding.
This book develops within an objective to make you aware enough
to want to change your behaviors as a businessperson, so that you will
be able to negotiate and influence in a veritable global marketplace. It’s
not stating that other cultures don’t have their hang ups in the way they
behave—it’s stating we can’t change their behavior, but we can cer-
tainly influence them by changing some of the ways we work with other
cultures, including our own.
This is not primarily a do-and-don’t book taking you through a va-
riety of cultures. Although snapshots of regions and several countries
they house are included, the emphasis is on how to work and negotiate
well with all cultures. The background and cultural considerations of
emerging markets serve as an introduction to the country and its cus-
toms. Most important, it is a guideline for how to work within different
cultures, using a universal base for building trust and earning the right
to influence. It doesn’t negate the value of the “do’s and don’ts,” yet it
emphasizes the skills and behaviors that will convince someone to lis-
ten to you. It then includes stories and examples of what will show
another culture that you value their traditions enough to clumsily and
awkwardly bow or read their business card. It’s the “clumsy and the
awkward” that are important. This book identifies ways to modify the
accepted U.S. business style to a more universally and respectfully ac-
cepted style in order to better negotiate and influence in other more
mature cultures.
17
The book is structured into two main parts. The first half describes
a business style through examples and stories, which matured out of a
culture of free enterprise, and a capitalistic, competitive society fo-
cused on business and sports—both recognized by the money involved.
Many of the aggressive behaviors that are appealing and acceptable to
organizations are not appropriate when working across cultures. In fact,
these behaviors are also rude in this culture, but have evolved into be-
ing acceptable.
The second part of the book focuses on negotiation processes and
the Behavioral Approach Model that targets successful outcomes and
agreements. This model illustrates how a person’s expectations of an
individual create responding behaviors from that individual. Our ex-
pectations are set by our attitudes, beliefs, and values. Four Strategic
Virtues: Consideration, Acceptance, Respect, and Empathy are devel-
oped within practical applications. Voltaire, the 18th-century philoso-
pher, in his Philosophical Dictionary (1764) wrote, “Virtue between
men is a commerce of good actions….” These Virtues become the
processes for assuring success in the practice of the Virtues. Seven
Influencing Verbal Behaviors are highlighted demonstrating how they
build a better style for ensuring the consistent use of the Strategic Vir-
tues. The behaviors reflect one’s expectation of another, and these in-
fluencing behaviors move one toward “confident expectations” or trust,
as defined in this book.
The emphasis then shifts to “how to modify one’s behaviors” to
work more effectively with other cultures, build trust, and, ultimately,
maintain long-term relationships. A Trans-cultural Alignment Model is
introduced. The Four Strategic Virtues: Consideration, Acceptance,
Respect, and Empathy are developed within practical applications. The
practice of these Virtues becomes the processes for assuring success in
working across the cultural diversities of the continents.
The Seven Influencing Verbal Behaviors are highlighted in the
Influencing Behaviors Model, delineating the behaviors by definition,
example, and then interpersonal impact and business impact. These be-
haviors become action items you may put into use immediately and see
the positive results of your behavior modification. The model introduces
18
Introduction
you, the reader, to the most specific and smallest action to work on. The
impact of these small behaviors on the other person is grand. This recog-
nition of behavior and impact gives you something to do now, to generate
change and to influence the other side to move toward solution. Trying
to change your attitude or belief takes a lifetime, whereas changing your
own behavior or expectation of another can be immediate and could even-
tually have a positive effect on your attitude or belief.
The New Rules of International Negotiation focuses on the behavioral
aspect of negotiating. Behaviors include both the planning and the strate-
gic parts of negotiating. Behaviors are a strong part of strategy; in fact
they often determine the effect of your strategy. In essence, asking, sum-
marizing, and building become the rules for successfully negotiating. These
influencing behaviors also solidify a style for working well in most busi-
ness and social interactions. There are two standard rules that are con-
stant and determine your level of success. The first rule is a consistent
practice of the Strategic Virtues—“commerce of good actions,” which
design the framework for trust. The second rule is to use the Influencing
Behaviors, the specific, small verbal behaviors become a strategy for
maintaining trust and building relationships.
Close-Ups and Snapshots of the

Highlighted Countries
The following regions have been targeted to highlight in the book.
The countries were selected because of emerging markets in those ar-
eas. They are:
B Asia
China
India
Korea
Japan
Hong Kong
B Eastern Europe
Poland
Russia
19
B South America
Colombia
Venezuela
Brazil
Chile
Argentina
B United States
I have worked around the world and I have observed many richly
different cultures. It has taken me 17 years to note well the classical
norms of principles and values, and the exclusivity of cultural traditions
and customs. It is difficult to isolate and recognize every country’s dis-
tinctions in culture, just as it is for me—a born citizen of the United
States. The north, south, east, and west regions each have distinguishing,
cultural characteristics. If I described one area as common for all areas,
I would probably be wrong 75 percent of the time. Whatever I present
about the countries, it is only a small piece of who they are, gleaned from
my experiences, which further influences, one way or the other, the gen-
eral statement of culture. It was easier for me to find the commonalities
(such as common ground in a negotiation), get comfortable with what we
shared, and then move together to an understanding of our differences.
Once we got on the same side of the multicultural table, I could pursue
the differences, discover their distinct values, and then together choose
the best solution for the issue being negotiated. The benefits of the pro-
cess were worth far more than the initial investment—peak in productiv-
ity, better relationships, and more long-term business.
Every country has a culture exclusively its own—a culture rich in
traditions and customs, that, when understood, can show different val-
ues, strengths, and purposes. To work in a collaborative effort requires
an understanding of and appreciation for these cultural differences. It
also requires the flexibility to use the others’ strengths when the situa-
tion is conducive and appropriate (or when the situation is low risk and
perhaps not the best, but is worth forfeiting the best for adequate to
show a willingness to do it “their way” to fortify the relationship).
20
Introduction
Many of the suggestions that are given for how to work better with
those in one country are appropriate and effective when working with
many countries, including the United States. These suggestions are given
on the assumption of sincerity. For example, one of the suggestions
given for Colombia, South America: citizens are proud of their coun-
try, so compliment it. That would work for most countries. If you com-
pliment a country for its natural beauty and substantiate it with a specific
accolade, such as, “Bogota’s mountains and flora make it appealing
year round” or, “Your weather keeps one motivated year round.” Your
sincerity is felt. If you tell them, “Great country you have” or, “Nice
country, seems to work well with so many different people” could be
considered as patronizing. “Your accent is much easier to understand
than many I’ve heard before”—ouch!! Sincerity stops you from being
or from sounding patronizing. When you want to appear appreciative
or accepting, it is easy to fall into sounding patronizing. Avoiding gen-
eral statements and repetition of statements could prevent a perceived
insincerity.
Though I single out certain expectations of one country, the same
expectations could easily apply to other countries. Having it become
part of your demeanor could benefit you across the globe. The premise
of this book is that the Influencing Behaviors, which are delineated and
defined in Chapter XVI, are strategically effective across all continents.
Recently, I was delivering a presentation to the Council of Supply Chain
Management Conference and I took them through these behaviors and
related how they affect the different cultures. Why a summary and a
paraphrase are appreciated by audiences of different languages. One of
the attendees then asked, “I understand how these behaviors would
help those whose first language is not English, now which behaviors
would work in the United States?” I then realized I had not fully ex-
plained the values or the affects of the behaviors. The behaviors influ-
ence human beings no matter the culture in which they lived. The
behaviors uphold Respect, Consideration, Acceptance, and Empathy in
all countries, and are not exclusive to any culture. The Four Strategic
Virtues transcend all cultures and the Seven Influencing Behaviors sup-
port the virtues.
21
The cultural considerations I present in the book, introducing cer-

tain chapters, are my observations. I formed opinions based on what I
frequently observed, on what others (including natives of their respec-
tive countries) related to me, and on everything I read prior to going to
work in any of these countries. The considerations do not describe ev-
eryone in that country, just as the John Wayne style does not describe
everyone in the United States.
I interviewed individuals who live, and some who worked and lived,
in the respective countries as a resource for my information. I also
used two main resources for confirmation of what I observed and vali-
dation of those observations. They were:
z University Alliance, Superior Online Learning
z Executive Planet.com—“Let’s Make a Deal”
z Kiss, Bow, or Shake Hands: Latin America, by Terri
Morrison and Wayne A. Conaway, 2007
z Kiss, Bow, or Shake Hands: Europe, by Terri Morrison
and Wayne A. Conaway, 2007
NOTE:
When commenting on a specific global area or country, it is usually
in generalizations—general comments, not personal absolutes. Please
keep in mind that situations, individual social styles, circumstances,
and interpersonal dynamics influence every exchange socially or in busi-
ness. There is no category of behavior that describes everyone.
22
Foreword
Part I:
The C owbo
owboyy in a New
Cowbo
Frontier
23
Crossing the Cultural Divide
CHAPTER 1:
Crossing the
C ultur
ultur al Divide
tural
“It’s an outlook, an attitude.”

—John Wayne
Agenda
A. Small social courtesies with large business impacts.
B. Barriers that prohibit relationships.
C. Image—whose image is the right one? Mine or Theirs?
Two waist-high, cloisonné Chinese vases filled with fresh flowers

welcome guests into the meeting room. Inside, sculptured works of art
are positioned proudly on enormous pillars on either side of the break-
fast tables.
Woven silk art lines the floor. Chinese rugs in magnificent colors
exhibiting a history of traditional beauty and in a legacy of workman-
ship cover the floor on which I dare walk. Deep reds and burgundies,
accented with varied shades of blue in a centered circle, burst into an-
cient designs to a border of twisting leaves—a work of carpet art. The
expectation of the regal ambiance is one of respectful decorum. It has
an air of importance that only Hong Kong could posture without words.
25
Thirty-two businessmen from all over Asia gather in this large con-
ference room, seated at round tables, waiting for the morning’s session
to begin. An assortment of sweets and savories fill gilded gold and red
trays in complex and appealing geometric design, perfect in spacing
and color. Angular and round pastries stuffed with varied sweet bean
pastes are outlined by sprigs of violet and pastel pink orchids. It is so
exquisitely presented that I am, at once, confident the taste will match
the perfection of the display. Meat-filled pastries and skewered beef
pieces extend an aromatic welcome with a mystifying arrangement. The
scent alone pulls everyone to the table.
Both the room and the food make the participants of this American
Corporate Leadership Seminar feel valued. It is an environment invit-
ing conversation and camaraderie. The men talk about family, current
events, and business. As the program begins, attendees exhibit a fo-
cused attention, astute listening, and a somewhat guarded willingness
to participate. Small group breakouts help illicit more contributions
and the interactions become productive in outcome.
By midday the men are feeling comfortable with each other and
accomplished in their involvement. I turn to face them to begin the last
activity before lunch. As I look out into the group, I notice three men
boldly picking their noses. In fact, they are making a dedicated effort
to the capture. They sit militarily, straight-backed in their chairs, at
attention, heads held level and high, looking straight at me with their
fingers industriously digging. Their attitude seems professional in all
other regards, and even a bit defiant. Our eyes meet, and they don’t
even flinch. They continue. I can’t watch. I look away embarrassed.
They continue. I can’t guess what they ultimately did with their “find.”
These men manage multi-million dollar operations. They are atten-
tive and focused. They are targeted to succeed. They are well educated,
smart, and considerate. They are nose-pickers. No one else seems both-
ered by this activity. Perhaps the others could not see them.
I set my line of sight on the Chinese vases in the back of the room. I
am disgusted, embarrassed, and arrogant. How gross for an adult man! I
consider it insulting. I begin to look at those three men with a different
26
feeling. Where is their breeding? The remainder of the day, I can hardly
talk with those men. It is the beginning of an almost two-year resistance
to learning about the Chinese culture and valuing its historic differences.
Why? I never left my own cultural frame of reference.
It’s shameful to mention that nose picking could influence me into
a destructive bias. To judge a person’s value on an American custom of
“polite” contradicts every value—and business instinct—I have.
Almost two years after the first of several incidents, a Chinese col-
league of mine explained to me that the Chinese do not believe picking
your nose is polite or impolite. It has never been a consideration of
theirs. No Chinese child ever heard, “Don’t pick your nose” or, “Go
get a tissue.” The Chinese do not share a code of behavior or manners
that compliment our proprietary system. It’s not part of their culture.
It’s not even considered.
Social rules such as: “Don’t pick your teeth at the table,” do not
apply. In China, a hand covering your mouth while the other hand cleans
the teeth with a toothpick is most acceptable. In the United States,
meals are dished out with serving utensils, but in China food rotates on
a lazy Susan and each person uses his or her chop sticks to pick up
pieces from the main serving platter. It’s nothing in China to clear your
throat or nose at the table. It might happen stateside, but it’s certainly
not appropriate.
The Chinese find it rude and intimidating when someone consis-
tently looks them in the eye, whereas, we, here in the United States, do
not trust someone who doesn’t look us in the eye. We consider them
“shifty,” dishonest, and insincere. Also, a person in China must refuse
an invitation to pay for dinner several times before accepting it, but in
the States it varies.
One perceived misbehavior becomes a barrier to building a good
relationship for doing business. Many times, I judged another’s compe-
tency based on American etiquette standards and not on his perfor-
mance or idea. I questioned a person’s expertise based on his style of
picking his nose. He certainly could not be as “smart” as someone who
didn’t pick his nose in public. I often thought that a nose-picker could
27
not be good in sales because he’s insensitive to others needs. He would

be offensive and, thus, destroy potential coalitions. I questioned his
ability to manage, much less lead: Leaders do not pick their noses.
The impact of this bias, bigotry, and ignorance costs an organiza-
tion. An individual, annoyed or irritated by another’s behavior, builds a
barrier that is difficult—sometimes impossible—to work around. We,
as humans, make judgments based on our idea of what “civilized” means.
Our judgments and perceptions toward “uncivilized” behavior gener-
ate disrespect, close-mindedness, and distrust. We begin to act as if the
“offending” individual is incompetent or unreliable. These expectations
impact productivity, outcome, quality, time, deadlines, and, eventually,
the entire workplace environment. Decisions based on missed misun-
derstandings come at a high cost to an organization and generate a lack
of commitment. With respect pushed aside, assumptions begin to de-
termine assignments, and production slows.
For that period of time, I was the judge. I only considered my own
perspective. I determined that Chinese businessmen are strange be-
cause they had unexpected habits. I scrutinized their actions, but I also
thought of my way as the norm. I thought, perhaps, they were being
quiet while they were looking at me—the stranger—because they wanted
to be like me.
I never left my own cultural frame of reference.
After working with the Chinese from 1990 to 1992, however, I fi-
nally came to a realization: I was the outsider, the stranger—strange in
looks, carriage, clothing, and language. They sat in the judge’s seat and
my behaviors were being assessed by the Chinese standards.
Define Culture
According to Webster’s Unabridged Dictionary, the definition of
culture is “the behaviors and beliefs characteristic of a particular so-
cial, ethnic, or age group.” Culture embodies the rules that regulate
basic patterns of behavior. They are the “shoulds” and the “should nots”
of any group living in the same country, practicing the same religion, or
of the same nationality. These “rules” create parameters or natural bound-
aries that make the people living within that culture feel comfortable.
28
One of the outcomes of these rules and regulations is inclusion or ex-
clusion. Culture could be developed through neighborhood, religion,
ethnicity, profession, or common interest.
A business culture is much the same. Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate
Dictionary says a business culture is “the set of shared attitudes, val-
ues, goals, and practices that characterizes a company or corporation.”
Group behavior and beliefs are key components of a business culture.
These “shared” attitudes become visible indicators of the “shoulds”
and “should nots” of that work environment. For example, walking into
corporate headquarters of a company usually reflects a more formal
and cautious attitude versus a branch that is out in the field where it
could be seen as more friendly and inviting. From the way a reception-
ist greets you to whether an executive offers you a cup of coffee, you
can determine revealing parts of the work culture. Countries are the
same. What can make you feel foreign?
Be the Foreigner
On a November morning in 1992, I was in the railway station in
Beijing. I had just finished giving a seminar and had to be in TianJin, in
the industrial zone, to give another workshop the next day. There was
an unexpected snowstorm and I couldn’t get to my destination by car.
My driver took me to the train station and instructed me to get a re-
served seat, and then he drove off, leaving me alone with a million other
people.
Colossal and bleak, the station was a cement palace. It was packed
with more than a million people, but the silence was deafening. People
rippled 15 abreast subtly and smoothly through the corridors, as if their
feet didn’t even touch the floor. They systematically filled every inch of
space, and the undetected order was disturbing.
I began to look for a familiar face, yet I knew I would recognize no
one. I tried to make eye contact with someone—anyone—but their eyes
looked past me. I desperately wanted to make eye contact so perhaps
someone could help me find the ticket office. No one would look at me,
but I could feel their stares when my eyes shifted.
29
I was the only westerner in the station. Standing 5 feet 7 inches tall,
with dishwater blonde hair, my arms full of bags and pulling a suitcase,
I was neither subtle nor quiet. The wheels of my suitcase rolled heavily,
clanking across the cement floor like a tank moving in to attack. Feel-
ing more and more like the “other,” I walked faster, but the sounds of
the wheels became even more intense, almost symphonic. The heat of
embarrassment rose within me, but not a head turned. As I looked for
an information area, I realized I could see across the entire mass of
standing people. It was as if I was standing in the middle of a classroom
of young children and by size alone, I was the designated teacher. My
usually confident carriage was being challenged by my confusion, frus-
tration, and fear of missing my seminar.
My appreciation of China made me forget that I looked any differ-
ent than they do. I did not think about my ever-changing yellow hair or
my square-jawed, first-generation Russian face. I had large feet, con-
spicuous hands, and an impatient habit of crossing and uncrossing my
legs while moving my hands in uncontrollable repetition to smooth my
wrinkled raincoat. The entire process made me look like a nervous horse
circling and waiting for the race to start. I looked at the people in front
of me and on the side of me: delicate and small, dark hair, wrinkle-
free skin, gently moving with a noncombative presence. I became aware
of their fascination with my appearance and, of course, with my very
presence—my very foreign presence.
Examine Exclusion
Feeling foreign damaged my confidence. My exterior excluded me
from the group of one million. No word was exchanged, no thought or
idea expressed. I just didn’t belong. I began to lumber rather than walk
with purpose, my posture caved into the pressure of certain stares, and
my confidence fell reflecting the discomfort of being different.
This change in a person’s attitude and actions happens in the work
place when an employee is made to feel strange or different and just
doesn’t fit in. The exclusion reduces his confidence and promotes a
feeling of inferiority. The individual is less likely to extend his efforts.
Productivity and quality are directly impacted by this perceived loss of
30
value and integrity. One’s skin, clothes, accent, and mannerisms can
each exclude an individual from a conversation, a meeting, or even busi-
ness negotiations all together. The exclusion from a business culture
limits an employee from reaching his full potential, and therefore limits
the resource for the organization.
There is no universal standard for the superficial, yet there is for
the depth of a person. They are foreign to us and we are foreign to
them. My perception of myself was just that—a presumptuous percep-
tion. Corporate, capitalistic arrogance convinced me that our way was
the only way, the right way, and the best way. It led me into thinking
that everyone would want to be us, look like us, and live like us. This
attitude of superiority sets up a barrier that tells others that any differ-
ent way of doing or acting is inferior to our way of doing or acting.
Without asking or without exploring, we decide who fits and who does
not. We judge based on our criteria and then try to make up for it with
respectable excuses: “She’s so difficult to understand. I don’t want to
embarrass her,” or, “He gets so emotional. He shouldn’t present at this
meeting.” More common is the remark, “He has to get more aggressive
if he wants to be heard.”
The United States has often been called a melting pot, but we want
everyone to jump into that pot and come out looking American. The
definition of barrier is based on exclusion versus inclusion. A barrier
limits access to information, to being together, to a facility, to a meet-
ing. Outward appearance often limits access and social habits. These
barriers can create confusion, misunderstandings, distrust, and a break-
down of communication. Understanding the barriers can afford oppor-
tunities for working together while focused on reaching the targeted
outcomes and negotiating the best solution for both sides.
Our ultimate goal is to build strong relationships that are grounded
in trust. Identifying barriers, understanding the differences, and, ulti-
mately, valuing a different way of doing, results in an influence of
strength. Picking a nose or seeing only from my perspective, limits my
access to the best of solutions and to quality and timely implementation
of those solutions.
31
Arriving at a strong awareness of differences creates a discomfort

that often produces a willingness to change the situation. These initial
chapters help build that discomfort of “what is,” and then the later
chapters will address “how to” change in order to have better working
relationships and “how to” negotiate effectively with the new global cus-
tomers and partners. As an assertive American businesswoman, I often
speak in the absolute. The Chinese frequently begin to respond to a
question with “it depends.” The premises and conclusions asserted in
the next several chapters should each begin with “It depends”: It de-
pends on the circumstances; it depends on the situation; it depends
on the traditions; and, most importantly, it depends on each, distinct
individual.
Close-Up of Asia
In the June 28, 2006 issue of Working Knowledge for Business Leaders
(a weekly newsletter for business executives put out by the Harvard
Business School) an article titled, “What the New Asia Means for
Multinationals,” stated that “[I]n the Asian competitive environment
of tomorrow, it won’t be enough for the managers of Western multina-
tionals to be able to think global, act local. The reason is that being an
expert at taking a global business formula and adapting it to a local
market largely ignores the opportunity to take learning from a local
Asian market and apply it to reshaping the company’s strategy across
Asia (or for that matter, the world).”
This excerpt from a Harvard Business School article pinpoints the
essence of succeeding in Asia—recognize and learn from the excep-
tional business practices of local businesses so that you can use them
across your global market. This strategy will keep you competitive with
the rest of local Asian businesses who will capture the best practices of
other locals. This was written in 2006, and that “tomorrow” is now.
This centers on the controversial discussion of whether it is a trend or
not. Will the way of doing business remain the Western way of doing
business?
Asia is an enormous continent that includes major markets—China,
Hong Kong, Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and India. Unlike North or South
32
America, Asia hosts a wide variety of languages, races, religions, and
distinct cultures. Though the countries hold some commonalities in
values, they have very distinct business styles and individual customs,
traditions, and behaviors—from passive to assertive.
Chindia: How China and India

Are Revolutionizing Global Business
Edited by Pete Engardio Senior Writer, Business Week
China’s growth and manufacturing dominance are two of the big-
gest global trends of the last 10 years. India’s technology, service, and
outsourcing industries make it a valued partner, as well as a formidable
competitor. The stunning rise of China and India makes it clear: to
survive and thrive in the new global market, you have to engage with
China and India.
All of Asia places relationships as their top priority in doing busi-
ness. In fact, in most Asian countries, trust is more important than the
quality and durability of the product. The relationship is more important
than the final agreement. The countries share this same value, yet they
do not share it with the same degree or intensity of trustworthiness.
Generally, Asian countries consider meetings as an opportunity to
get to know you and better understand who you are and what your
organization represents. Many times the real negotiations begin after
the agreement is reached or the contract is signed. Trust is established
and the relationship initiated—a good assurance of beneficial outcomes.
Harmony, which essentially is the objective of negotiation, is the goal
of every Asian country and “saving face”’ is the guideline. So it appears
appropriate to continue to negotiate after you have reached the agree-
ment. Working within this goal of harmony, Asians will often acknowl-
edge with a “Yes” or a nod of approval, without meaning “I agree,” but
only meaning “I see.” This cultural consideration reinforces planning
effective, Open and Innovative or Experience-based questions and not
the Closed questions that require a yes or a no.
When negotiating with your Asian clients, it is best to use the initial
meetings to get to know them. There are three major guidelines to follow:
33
Ask them first—ask background questions, both personal and business,

come over-prepared with support data, and observe and listen with a
focused intensity to words and actions. Know who will be attending by
name and authority. Patience and “saving face” should set the tone for
the exchange. Knowing your Asian clients and their products, as well as
them knowing you, is the beginning of a long, beneficial relationship.
Snapshot of China
China is a major player in today’s global market. Believed to be the
oldest civilization, its prehistory dates back 12,000 years (the Neolithic
Age). China’s population is now close to 1.5 billion, and the predomi-
nant language is Mandarin. Today the Communist Party governs China
from Beijing, the capital, but, the communist constitution does allow
freedom of religion. The majority of people in China follow the Analects
of Confucius, which is more of a philosophy as opposed to a religion.
Confucius spent his life dedicated to learning—learning how to be-
come a benevolent, virtuous man. A small portion of the Chinese popu-
lation (about 20 percent), follows the teachings of Buddha. In fact,
some Chinese only follow Buddha’s teachings as a safeguard, just in
case the Buddhists are right.
China also has a long history of dynasties and emperors—beginning
with the Xia Dynasty about 1994 B.C.E. and ending with the Manchu or
Qing Dynasty, which ruled from A.D. 1644 to 1912. As the dates indi-
cate, the dynasties historically endured. Chairman Mao Zedong brought
communism to China in the late 1940s.
China is a collectivist culture valuing relationships, the group, and
its members, and counters the individualist thinking of a democracy.
The following list is not an absolute statement of good or bad, right or
wrong, or effective or offensive. It does not describe every person in
China who embodies all of these characteristics. Instead, the list de-
scribes “what is.” The businessperson who determines how best to work
within a different culture is the one who will be effective and efficient,
building the relationships needed for long-term success.
34
DO DON’T
Ask open questions. Order or insist.
Give specific guidelines. Criticize.
Expect reliability and

“Tell” (ask instead).
competency.
Compliment sincerely and

Copy a superior in e-mails.
specifically.
Clarify/Summarize/Ask. Ask, “Do you understand?”
Include socially and Exclude from lunch, information,

professionally. and so on.
Include early in problem-finding Think of a nod as a sign of

and decision-making processes. agreement or understanding.
Read business card immediately Project attitude of superiority.

and make comments.
Show interest in their history, art,

Only be aggressive.
and way of doing business.
Mentor. Assume.
Disregard how you

Affirm/acknowledge their input.
say something.
Express an interest in their

Constantly look them in the eye.
family.
Show a recognition of their

Give casual feedback.
background.
Start a meeting, conference call,
Begin work sessions with inter-
or discussion with “time” as the
personal exchanges.
key issue.
35
Cultural Considerations
Relationships are the foundation of the Chinese culture. Relation-
ships, either within one culture or across cultures, involve many as-
pects of a person. The Chinese person is there to support others. It is
easier to build trust from the beginning than to try to undo what’s
been done before. If you establish an ineffective relationship—or one
of necessity—it is even more difficult to change it into a trusting one. It
is better to start building trust from the first encounter.
Decision-Making
B Collective decision-making takes more time and is recog-
nized. Decisive could be considered deliberative in China.
B Decisions are weighed as strongly by feelings as by data,
much like the Latin American cultures.
B In hierarchical tradition, the decision-maker generally will
not speak directly to the project manager of the other side,
nor will all of the decision-makers meet at the same time.
B The top-ranking authority will take time to hear all the in-
put of those working on or impacted by the negotiation.
B Chinese colleagues who have not developed a good relation-
ship may intentionally not cooperate at work. This becomes
an issue of respect and trust.
Building Relationships
B Saving Face is fundamental to the Chinese.
B Challenge and/or confrontation are avoided at all costs for
the sake of harmony.
B Time taken to gradually build a relationship with managers
is well invested.
B Generally, the Chinese prefer to not touch.
B Know the background, education, and experience of the
managers.
B Strong, aggressive behavior is often seen as disrespect.
36
B The Chinese will shut down or retreat and take their time.
B The Chinese highly value humility—no self-praise; it must
come from others.
B Interest in Chinese art, history, and land builds and main-
tains strong relationships.
B It is appropriate to give gifts to an organization and, at times,
to an individual. Red and gold signify good fortune and long
life.
B Age is honored and highly respected.
B Once a relationship is established, you may ask almost any-
thing of your colleague.
B Loyalty is a guarantee.
These cultural considerations and those on the previous pages were
collected from interviews, questionnaires, and focus groups. The
Chinese participants were businesspeople who have worked in Chinese
and U.S. companies/corporations. This information took 11 years to
compile.
Chinese Companies/Business
B Managers become managers because of years of service or
because of the relationship with their supervisors.The Chinese
are very sensitive to titles and status.
B The majority of Chinese companies are still government-
owned. Individuals have no sense of ownership.
B Time is not a priority in the Chinese culture.
B Skill and knowledge alone are not reasons for promotion.
B A common Chinese perspective is “work well and speak less.”
B The Chinese have little training in customer care, manage-
ment skills, and processes or efficiency.
B The top priority of Chinese companies is “good relation-
ships.” Second is solving technical problems, followed by
training.
37
B Managers value communication, even when there is no busi-

ness issue to address. They value face-to-face discussions
on a regular and frequent basis.
B Find the Chinese manager who has the most experience work-
ing with the United States and ask for assistance.
B Chinese companies still operate under China’s “planned
economy” culture, not “free enterprise.” Their management
sense is deeply rooted in the past.
B The Chinese do not have a sense of Western management
style or process. They do appreciate Western processes.
B Motivation for a Chinese professional is job recognition and
advancement/promotion.
B The Chinese do not yet understand the concept of ownership—
the growth of the company helps them progress—because
their income is not yet high and training is limited.
B Americans focus on the bottom line. The Chinese focus on
keeping people employed.
B To build a relationship takes time, but while you’re building
it there are many benefits. Once it is established, it is a long-
term commitment and is valuable to any organization.
38
Competition Is King...and Queen
CHAPTER 2:
Competition Is King...
and Queen
“We must scrunch or be scrunched.”

—Charles Dickens, Our Mutual Friend, 1865
Agenda
A. A society led by business and sports
B. Vulnerability and empathy put “competitive” in
jeopardy.
Round up time—corral those creatures and brand them the U.S.

brand. Don’t stop until you get them all.
Mountains, oceans, and rivers are natural barriers that often create
boundaries and distinguish different cultures. These cultural borders are
easily identified and offer concrete options for working across borders.
When a customary way of doing business is introduced, the accepted
style and attitude can also put up a barrier to building a trusting relation-
ship. The John Wayne style—to conquer, to win, to defeat—often influ-
ences Western business interactions. It is a cowboys-and-Indians attitude,
and the cowboys must always win. To compete becomes: to win or to
39
lose, to rule or to serve. The idea of a winner or a loser often is the

established platform for a global exchange. We compete for jobs or for
advancement in sports and in possessions. The winner gets to make the
rules. With U.S. companies in China it becomes, “Do it our way.” The
business culture presides and dictates the way to do business.
Capitalism validates our competitive posture, but it also keeps us
from being vulnerable in needed relationships with foreign partners.
We feed our aggressions so that we can lead. Being competitive and
aggressive is good—these characteristics help us secure the customer.
Yet a respectful balance of competition with collaboration, leading by
serving, will help us retain our customers. A pow-wow with peace pipes
could be introduced in the negotiation sessions, supporting a peaceful
agreement. Every negotiation builds the steps to the next negotiation
and the next agreement, with the same players. Keeping the process
open and receptive produces an excellent environment for problem-
solving. When a negotiation is more competitive in tone and coercive in
strategy, it takes more time to implement the agreement. This posture
also limits your opportunity for a long-term relationship because, for
our foreign partners, trust is questioned.
In a successful family business, you cannot easily get rid of the im-
mediate family—each member works from a personal sense of honor.
Besides, they’re family. The members are vulnerable and trust that one
another will not take advantage of their vulnerability. This trust facili-
tates working with the external customer in an effective, efficient, and
productive manner. In this type of business, the family views every cus-
tomer as earned. When his or her needs are well-served, it creates a
loyal and long-lasting customer. While this case is both familial and
professional, the commitment supports the organization and, in turn,
the organization freely rewards its relatives.
In 1991, I was giving a five-day work session for production-plant
managers, primarily in the Pacific Rim. These manufacturing facilities
excelled in quality, cycle time, and customer satisfaction. There were
31 participants, 30 men, and only one woman, S.K. Her factory ranked
the best overall. The participants knew her plant performed the best
and this knowledge created a guarded atmosphere in the work session—
40
a bit formal and stiff. S.K. and I knew each other from previous profes-
sional workshops. On the third day I posed the question, “In one sen-
tence tell us, in your opinion, the major reason for your plant’s superior
rating.” We went around the room and everyone gave the question seri-
ous thought and the answers were building a good foundation for the
next discussion. S.K. was last and she said, “I treat everyone in my
factory as if they were my family, and they protect me as if I was their
mother.” Her humble, familial statement unified the group in focus and
in spirit. The analogy could be carried easily to every aspect of their
business and it made S.K. an approachable woman colleague whose pri-
ority of values, as a woman and mother, were in the correct cultural
ranking. S.K. did not place business success before her role, as woman
and mother.
Compete and Collaborate

As business people, we are looking for ways to simplify the process
of working across borders. Together we have to work hard in an orga-
nization, as a family, while competing as if in a race. Similar to any
other relationship, at some point, we must decide if we’re going to get
serious—partnering ideas, solutions, and plans.
Being both competitive and collaborative, which is accepted in the
United States, is counter to most cultures abroad. If you choose to go
from one approach to the other, with frequency, trust will likely be
eroded in your foreign partner. The best and most consistent approach
would be to be collaborative in relationships and competitive in prod-
uct and service. The balance will support the bottom line and long-term
business relationships.
Competition is healthy for the community, and for doing business
and staying in business. It’s what stops one organization from taking
advantage of its customers and it forces every organization to continu-
ally improve, so it won’t be squeezed out of the marketplace. But at the
same time, it reinforces aggressive behaviors and often undermines
partnering, internally or externally, with a customer. If the focus was
problem-solving within a negotiation, however, then a competitive spirit
could enhance the solutions.
41
Be Open to Gain Trust

The problem is competition can easily keep one in an adversarial
posture, without vulnerability and, therefore, without trust. To Americans,
divulging a weakness lessens any competitive advantage—making vul-
nerability counter-competitive. But to divulge such a weakness is a vul-
nerable declaration of trust. Essentially, you believe that the other party
will not use it against you.
At the beginning of my marriage, it took us three years to expose all
of our warts—physical and intellectual—trusting the other would still
love. When one party is willing to say, “It appears we lose time using
the current system,” in negotiations, people move into problem-solving
mode. I have witnessed it. This simple statement says, “I trust you can
and will help me.” It also implies that you will not use this against me.
To think of long-term relationships and results, one has to balance
the competitive personality with the benevolent confidence of a strong
partner. It requires astute strategic planning and a commitment in poli-
cies to a long-term plan. The organization’s support gives credence to
the values reflected in the plan, and an employee can then confidently
and strategically reveal a need. A relentless competitive posture often
comes across as ruthless and arrogant. similar to any sport, it is a race
to win. Lily Tomlin said it best when she declared, “The trouble with
the rat race is that even if you win, you’re still a rat.”
It’s difficult to partner at your partner’s expense and without trust.
Negotiating with other cultures adds another dimension, which often
requires a consideration of difference in approach and in exchange. To
begin the negotiation with a strong command of need and of require-
ment could push the other side to retreat or to resist—either of which
results in wasting valuable time.
Ego-centered, cutthroat, self-seeking, guarded, superior—hang some
of these adjectives on varied members of a group and the result is ri-
valry at best and war at worst. It blocks creativity, listening, and ob-
serving. In the global market, these attitudes restrict the use of cultural
differences to the advantage of each side. We must discover the right
way to do business and negotiate in a specific culture, and how to support
42
a long-term plan, rather than doing everything possible to be certain
the negotiation is done “our way.”
Competitive posture is part of how we do business. But it is more
important that we remain aggressively competitive in product develop-
ment, and to seek out new business in a principled and collaborative
manner. It is similar to the thinking of politicians who state, “I am
fiscally conservative, and socially more moderate.” Keep competition
to the product and collaboration to the relationship. How we do busi-
ness across cultural barriers requires more of a family-owned-business
process in order to develop the long-term relationships needed to con-
tinue to compete.
Within the global client arena, businesswomen appear, at times, to
be more effective. Many cultures, including the United States, breed
women to develop and maintain relationships. Maintaining relationships
is one of the determinants of business success as we know it. It will
determine the difference between satisfaction and retention of our glo-
bal customers. When negotiating, often one party suggests that he or
she has more value to offer and more money than the other party,
thereby suggesting that he or she has more power. There is a distinc-
tion between a competitive posture and a confident presence: one pro-
motes the self and the other promotes ideas and solutions.
But the guidelines for how we do business are standard for all cul-
tures, because they’re dependent on Four Strategic Virtues: Respect,
Acceptance, Open-mindedness, and Empathy. Our research showed that
these virtues are universally valued, and, in fact, are essential to every
good relationship. A Chinese businessperson might admire a shrewd
American businessman if he is, at the same time, principled in his crite-
ria for doing business—in essence, building a strong foundation for
trust. If you bow just the right way or hand your business card with
both hands you’ll be invited into the house. If you show the respect for
their time, their opinion, and their arts, you’ll be asked to stay for the
first of many meals.
In 1998, I had been working with a joint venture of a large American
corporation and a Chinese partner. The joint venture was conceived in
1989, and the facility was not yet built. Chinese regulations, at the time,
43
required foreign business to include a Chinese joint venture partner that

was invested at least 20 percent. I worked with the joint venture team
representative of both partners. The American group felt they held all
the power because they had the most money invested. By extension, the
Americans thought their opinions, plan, and suggestions for implemen-
tation were more important than all others—80-percent more important.
Respect was a commodity they owned, because of all the money
they invested. The venture was nine years old, and the factory was not
yet built. I tried to convince the American vice-president that the Chinese
partners could help facilitate the process because they were politically
well connected with the government and the town council. The politics
were very important because the town’s mayor decided if the zoning
board would allow the project. Eventually, the Americans learned that
one of the Chinese executives on the joint-venture team was related to
the mayor. The American team leader had been too focused on saving
money and time.
He could not understand that in China, roles and relationships are
a top priority and link directly to the bottom line. For the American, he
assumed playing hardball would meet the success it had so many times
before this. Leadership changed several times in the nine years and
each new manager brought with him or her, an arrogant ignorance that
pushed the negotiations back further. It was 10 years before the joint
venture contract and implementation was completed—one year shorter
than the average Western and China joint venture at the time.
Talk. Don’t Tell.

Every time the leader of the U.S. contingency told the others what
had to be done and by what date, the Chinese felt the disrespect of his
edict. As one of the Chinese managers told me, “They give us orders
and then expect us to obey.” Whenever the U.S. group said they were
wasting time—and dollars—they disrespectfully ignored the Chinese
priority of value.
Telling them versus asking them what their approach would be de-
layed the purchase of land for several months. The Americans criti-
cized the slow, deliberate, and confusing ways of the Chinese instead of
44
looking into their culture to understand the reasons for their way of
doing things.
It’s difficult to have a partnership within a joint venture without
respect. The competitive attitude, because of its intensity here in the
United States, seems to permeate every business issue and activity.
Partnering is key to a successful joint venture and its base is respect,
not winning at your partner’s expense.
Competition, aggression, and politics are three powerful resources that,
if appropriately employed, will bear a well-synchronized organization. In
team sports, individual players and their talents are key to winning the
game, but winning isn’t possible without teamwork. Many times business
opportunities are missed because they have to be negotiated with contribu-
tions from the other side, the other culture. Aggression is valued more
than compliance, and the short-term bottom line more than the long-term,
valuable relationships. If the negotiation process encourages the relation-
ship, long-term results become part of the process. If negotiation behav-
iors reinforce the value of a diverse point of view or build on the suggestions
of the others, both sides can implement a better agreement.
Practicing the Four Strategic Virtues results in a modification of
behavior that assures long-term success and personal development. The
competitive posture, many times, leads to a bearing of superiority, be-
cause you must be better or best to win, while a competitive talent or
product can bring attention and notice to a beneficial solution.
Snapshot of Japan
Japan is a small island of great strength that protects its culture from
the strong influence of foreign cultures. Generally a more reserved cul-
ture, Japan’s position in the Pacific Ocean has allowed it to remain aloof
when it comes to other cultures. Its language is Japanese and is spoken
only in Japan. The country’s form of government is a parliamentarian
democracy with a prime minister who serves as the ruling officer.
With the Japanese you must build credibility during a very long
time—perhaps two to three years. As your credibility increases, it may
bring you into the inner circle—a private culture.
45
Team is an inherent part of the Japanese culture. I was in Hong

Kong working with a group of men from Beijing. We were in a commer-
cial building, waiting for an elevator. The small elevator reached the
main floor and seven or eight of us got on the elevator. It began to
buzz, signifying too much weight. So one gentleman stepped out and it
stopped buzzing. The three others stepped out and joined the first man.
The elevator doors closed, the elevator continued going up, and my
Chinese colleague turned to me and said, “Japanese,” meaning they
stay together.
B The less senior person bows lower and then often shakes
hands. Try to do a comparable bow.
B It is very important to affirm the pride of the Japanese in
their culture. Learn as much as you can about their culture.
B The Japanese prefer to eat only Japanese food.
B Relationships are key, along with team considerations be-
fore individual considerations.
B The Japanese have “sharp antennae” because they have de-
veloped their intuitive skills.
Business Considerations
B Find someone to make an introduction or referral.
B Meet in the office and later for dinner to build a social rela-
tionship, so that they can get to know more about you.
B Dinner out, but drinks at a different establishment. For some
reason they don’t drink in the same place.
B If you don’t wish to join them for drinks after dinner, you could
excuse yourself by telling them you are tired from the travel.
B When conducting an introduction with a business card, take
your card out with both hands. Take their card, look at it, but
do not comment or put it away into your case or coat pocket.
B Be patient. We are seen as an impatient culture with a cow-
boy attitude. This can be a bit of an advantage, however,
46
because the Japanese see the United States as a “take ac-
tion” society. The Japanese business community does have
to have every contingency possible drawn up when planning.
B When they “agree to consider your idea,” this does not mean
they agree with you. Instead, it means they will consider it
and more than likely disagree with you.
B The Japanese are consistently thinking long term.
B It takes a long time to build credibility with the Japanese.
You must never mislead and always be forthright even though
the Japanese are not always forthright with you. You may
slowly build layers of credibility with consistent honesty.
B Language is also a matter of pride or losing face. They pre-
fer everything to be written in Japanese, and they often work
with translators. The Japanese have a need for perfection
and often can be self-conscious about their English. Also,
they often use a translator so they have time to think of
their answers, even if they speak English. Use the simplest,
most direct terms, especially with a translator. Do not use
slang, colloquialisms, or acronyms.
B The Japanese businessperson is more reserved, proactive,
and very persistent. They are also aggressive, but don’t want
to appear aggressive.
B Saving face is an important social and professional consid-
eration. It is also the subordinates’ responsibility to find a
way to save face for the hierarchy. Feedback should and will
not be given in front of anyone or a group.
Negotiations
B The Japanese do not like surprises and try to avoid confron-
tations. In order to save face and respect authority, they
frequently have the meeting before the meeting, nema washi.
Many times the CEO, president, and another officer of the
company will meet before a scheduled board meeting to re-
solve any contentious issues and reach consensus.
47
B To assure zero surprises, the Japanese prefer information in

writing, in advance. They like as much information as possible—
the more, the better. Including an executive summary would
be considerate of those on the team who are not Japanese and
possibly irritated with too much data.
B The Japanese strategy, sitting opposite a shoot-now-talk-
later Westerner is silence, and it usually does work to their
advantage.
B The Japanese are consensus-builders, so they take every
opportunity to interact with their customers. They seek more
and more information, before they reach consensus.
B During the negotiation process the most senior person will
seek input from the other Japanese on the team. When he
has talked with all relevant people and consensus is reached,
he will give a collective message—the final authority. The
Japanese can be brutal in their demands and reprimands.
48
The Gated Community
CHAPTER 3:
The Gated C
Gated ommunit
Communit y:
ommunity:
C orpor
orporaate Americ
Americaa Lives Here
“Mothers are the only race of people that speak the same tongue.”
—Will Rogers (satirist of the 1930s).
Agenda
A. China—an inviting market/an elusive culture.
B. Literacy that escapes reason.
C. Buzzwords and acronyms tripping our common sense.
There are guarded gates, identically designed row houses, consis-

tent landscaping, a community house, and a name such as “Sanctuary”
to indicate its secure peacefulness. This is a gated community—one in
my town. You pay a monthly assessment and everything outdoors is
taken care of—from landscaping to snow removal. If an outside visitor
is coming to see a resident, the guard must know in advance. The resi-
dents usually drive similar cars, wear the same level of designer clothes,
and drink similar wines. There is no question that everyone living there
can afford the same luxuries. Many of these communities also include a
golf course, a club house, and a community house for gatherings. Hav-
ing no yard work, snow removal, or safety concerns is advantageous:
49
You may lock the door and leave for weeks at a time and you only
worry that no one mistakes your door for their door.
When someone tells you they live in one of these communities, it
takes the guess-work out of calculating their net worth. You can more
easily categorize and then decide on your next social move. Although it
is an attitude based on insecurity, it has become part of our culture—a
way to include or exclude.
We, in the business community, often carry this attitude to other
countries. We exclude or include. Other cultures, with their distinct
traditions and customs, often make us feel like outsiders. Within our
search for security, fearing the differences, we often appear aloof,
arrogant, and selective despite the fact we, too, crave inclusion. We
prefer the comfort, familiarity, and sameness to the threat of the un-
known. In a negotiation, recognizing something as minute as the clothes
the other side wears, understanding the language and the customs, and
seeing a smiling face, gives us a sense of security. We take it for granted
when this occurs in our own gated country, but in its absence, we feel ill
at ease. When you live in a gated community you expect that the resi-
dents can all afford the house or condo, that they are at about the same
social or financial level, and that they will have similar interests. The
same is for one’s country or culture—it gives a sense of security and a
comfort with the familiar. When you are outside in the global community,
business or social, you feel too vulnerable and often ignorant of the
other side’s expectations or needs.
How does this fit into negotiations? What difference does it make?
The analogy reveals the same when an American is faced with negotiat-
ing across known, comfortable borders into areas of unknowns, differ-
ences, and cultural barriers. The discomfort of the foreign unknown is
still less painful than the discovery process of what might work better.
As individualists we still prefer the security of the known and the ex-
pected. When dealing across varied cultures, we often don’t know what
to expect or what their expectations are. We don’t know the rules of
the game because they have to be translated and culturally adapted for
us, and also for them, to be understood. This is only the initial step into
understanding, valuing, and collaborating with other cultures. Look for
50
The Gated Community
interpersonal, behavioral common ground—an overlap of thinking, feel-
ing, and traditional experiences—then use it to explore the priorities of
their needs. It is the commonalities of individuals within the cultures
that becomes the basis for seeing the value in the differences and using
the differences. I discovered this phenomenon and its long-term ben-
efits when I presented at a worldwide women’s conference.
In 1995 I was given the opportunity to present at the Fourth World
Women’s Conference in Huairo, China. “Getting Women Elected: A
Grass Roots Effort” was the topic of my presentation. More than 400
women from 39 different countries participated in my presentation, and
we had about two hours to work together and decide whether the process
for a grass roots campaign, which I was introducing, would work in their
respective countries. I didn’t want to appear as a know-it-all American.
Instead, I wanted to reach a community of principles by using a common
experience and purpose—all within a relatively short period of time—15
minutes of introductory time and then a couple of hours of teamwork.
I was preparing the speech in August, at the beach in Michigan near
Grand Rapids, where I grew up. My Augusts in Michigan were spent at
my grandfather’s peach orchards. Every summer, at the end of the peach
season, my entire family, grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins would all
go to the orchard to pick the remaining ripe peaches for canning. I
loved the excitement of getting ready for the winter by picking peaches
to be canned. Working hard, anticipating our needs, like the tortoise
and the hare, having our food ready for the cold. I also liked playing in
the orchard with my cousins.
At the end of the day the women would go down to my grandma’s
cellar and they would peel the peaches. I was six years old and I had
begged since I was age four to go down to the cellar to peel the peaches.
Every woman I knew and loved went down, including my older sister. It
was a secret women-only meeting, and I wanted to be there. That sum-
mer my mom finally said, “Catherine, you’re old enough to come down
and peel the peaches.” Eureka! A six-year-old woman. I walked with all
the confidence of one—a woman that is.
When I descended into the cellar, with its dirt floor, low ceiling,
light bulbs hanging, and only one large open space, it was an intimidating
51
setting for my first venture into Niewiadomski family womanhood. The

walls were lined with shelves still stocked with the remaining canned
foods from the past year. Next to the shelves on the floor were pickles
and cabbage that my grandma was crocking for the winter. Burlap sacks
of onions and potatoes leaned against the wall of the fruit cellar. I had
made it. I was a mature, competent six-year-old!
The women sat in their housedresses, cotton floral print, and aprons
crocheted around the edges with skirts pulled up, legs wrapped around the
bushel of ripe peaches, exposing the nylons rolled to the knees and secured
by covered rubber bands. They talked and they talked, while pulling the
skin away from the pulp of the ripe peach. After they peeled, they pitted
and then put the peach quarters into an enameled pot. As they chatted,
they talked about good things people did—who took care of their mother
who was ill, who worked three jobs to help their family back in Poland, and
the sacrifices Mrs. Lewandowski made for her children. From these con-
versations I learned an awareness of the innate good of people.
Then the women would turn to the things that were not so appro-
priate. They spoke of a cousin who was left in Poland, by her spouse
who came to America to find work so he could get a place ready for
her, and eventually bring her to the United States. It took him seven
years because he was enjoying his newfound freedom a bit too much.
When he went to meet her in New York, she got off the boat holding
the hand of her 2-year-old son. He made her give up the son. I then
learned the painful complexities of human action and a deep accep-
tance of human weakness and of life’s innuendo. The night ended with
conversations of which immigrants now moved into the neighborhood.
It went from the Italians to the Lithuanians, from the Russian Orthodox
to the Jews, and from the whites to a few blacks. Because they ad-
dressed it individual to individual, I learned a broad appreciation for
differences, starting, of course, with food.
Peeling the peaches molded my character and my sense of honor. It
taught me that the process is as critical as the end result—how we got
there was as important as the destination. It still influences every deci-
sion I make because it delineated the priority of my principles: family,
relationships, and learning. At the conference, every woman from every
52
The Gated Community
country could identify—be it washing clothes, cooking together, walking,
or working together. Peeling the peaches became our secret code word.
Even the reporters wanted to know what it had to do with politics.
Common roles, experiences, and emotions erupt spontaneously into
clear understanding. A matching look in an eye can relate the over-
whelming feeling of mutual experience. It’s instant! This story was trans-
lated as I spoke, yet it wasn’t the words that gave us a common purpose
and understanding, it was the feelings of the experience and the value
of the outcome that made us unite. Inclusion overwhelmed the cultural
exclusivity and partnering was the result.
Inclusion and exclusion have become buzzwords in many corpora-
tions as they struggle with diversity issues. It’s a difficult concept to put
into action, because cultures are established for that very reason: to
include and exclude. This story brought everyone’s focus to the same
purpose: getting women elected across the continents. The cause and
solution became the emphasis, not the discomfort of differences—just
as an objective with a respectful approach should be emphasized in
business. Peeling the peaches gave us a bond of understanding, of pur-
pose, of character, and of sameness. This sameness of feeling and pur-
pose united our efforts and assured a high-quality outcome. When
hearing everyone else’s stories, we each began to see the added value of
our differences. The story was the vehicle for understanding the com-
mon needs for the political woman, just as the expected results should
fortify the mutuality of goals for the businessperson.
Just as a common purpose and feeling often unites different cul-
tures and peoples, buzz words and acronyms also include those in the
know, and they strategically can exclude those new or foreign members
of a business culture. Buzzwords and acronyms are used for speed,
time-saving mechanisms, and for quick understanding, yet they can also
confuse and frustrate.
When I reentered the paid workforce after an almost 20-year ab-
sence I was apprehensive—petrified of what I didn’t yet know. I had
never worked in the business arena; then I secured my first contract
with Motorola. Within a few weeks, I realized there were buzzwords
that I was hearing for the first time. They made me feel uncomfortably
53
out of place—worse, not part of the group. After better than a year, I
learned: best in class, biggest bang for your buck, TQM (Total Quality
Management), six sigma, empowerment, think outside the box…and on
and on. Once I felt I was aware of most buzzwords, I felt confident
enough—just knowing the words—to not use them. Buzzwords, along
with slang, do not work well across the cultures, just as with me, until
they are easily recognized.
The “acronym” is another favorite tool of the business place, espe-
cially with the hi-tech companies. Negotiating across cultures while us-
ing a fair amount of acronyms can be divisive, however. It is both a way
to exclude and a way to make someone feel inferior. Two years ago, I
was facilitating a technical software group in a problem identification
process. When they contracted with me I asked them to e-mail me the
background information on the group, what they had done thus far,
and what their objectives were. They sent me nine pages with about 98
acronyms. Because I had worked with the company for a few years, I
knew some of them, so I sent back a request along with the list of acro-
nyms asking them to put the words along side the acronyms so I could
feel more confident. Eventually with the input of the entire 16-member
team they sent me back the list. They could only reach consensus on
the letter interpretation of less than half of them. This being true, how
must someone from a different business and national culture feel when
they are restricted by the exclusivity of acronyms?
I have worked with some technical groups with the use of only a few
verbs, a couple of conjunctions, and hundreds of acronyms. It’s like
siphoning the liquid out of a can of soda and being left only with the
container, or worse, extracting the fluids from a person and being left
with the exacting biological frame.
Inclusion and exclusion became mild buzzwords in the business world,
especially with reference to diversity. But buzzwords and acronyms ex-
clude anyone outside the business culture of an organization. We are a
country known for its individualism: individual freedom, individual
opportunity, and a clear focus on the individual. Yet we, similar to other
cultures, thrive on being included. No one wants to be an outsider or
rejected for membership. We want to be liked. Inclusion implies liking
54
The Gated Community
the individual, or at least accepting the individual. Excluding someone
for shallow reasons—skin color, eye shape, or where they live—are
common criteria used by many.
Verbal exclusion is not restricted to the business arena. It’s every-
where. It’s the insecurity or fear of not knowing, which, in turn, makes
us restrict membership into our understanding. Academics or teachers
often get hung up in the use of a “better word” or a more intellectual
use. So they try topping each other with another explanation of the
same, but the words used are far more erudite. In the end, they lose the
message and the understanding because their first objective is to show
everyone how much smarter they are. It makes it that much more diffi-
cult for the recipient to understand, which should be the primary con-
cern of the speaker—his orher audience.
My daughter is a stage actress. She once told me that actors must
learn to feel and believe whatever it is they’re delivering for their inter-
pretation to be understood and felt by the audience. Their sincerity is
critical to their portrayal. She told me of a practice developed by Sanford
Meisner called “the Meisner Technique” where the actors are so
wrapped in the feelings of the character that the audience is in tears
because they believe, even when the words themselves seem irrelevant
or unrelated, such as reading from a Cheerios box, but they’re deliv-
ered with a convincing sincerity of feeling. The actor owns the words
and understands their depth. It’s like Shakespeare, depending on the
clarity of understanding of the actor and the depth of their feelings, I
can comprehend every word of the Old English and feel every emotion
toward the character/actor.
The same is true for lawyers. They usually don’t want other lawyers
to serve on their jury because they fear the lawyers might understand too
easily what their “words” are really trying to do. Every profession has its
own “language.” Whenever they get nervous that you’re getting too close
to being enlightened they use bigger and more professional terms. They
would like you to be intimidated into silence. Some insecure physicians
do the same—anatomical terms, chemical ingredients, and relative reac-
tions keep you, the patient, at a good distance from their insecurity.
55
As multi-national businesspeople, we sometimes forget our primary

goal is to generate, establish, and retain relationships, or to plan, dis-
cuss, and secure a good agreement. We don’t want the exclusivity of a
club; we want the inclusion of a marriage. We want to be seasoned
international business people, not international travelers. Those who
know you pack a pair of black and beige pants and beige, a jacket that
goes with both, and three shirts or blouses that enhance, because your
ultimate objective, as far as what you wear, is to make the other person
respectfully comfortable. We want to feel comfortable and confident in
the diversities of face, of colors, of habit, of arts, of clothes, of food,
and of language, and, most importantly, we want the other side of the
negotiating table to feel invited and welcome as a colleague.
When U.S. business people meet or work in other cultures, they are
informal ambassadors. Their behavior and their language reflect the
values of each of us as Americans. Often times, their words and actions
resemble a common attitude of residents of a gated community, a popular
concept in today’s larger cities. Friends of ours bought a condo in a
gated community in the suburbs. There was no apparent safety threat;
they just wanted to not have to take care of the outside of a house, and
to feel comfortable. Comfort to them was sameness: relatively similar
townhouses, all within a certain price range, the same types of luxury
cars, professional neighbors, and so on. Curiosity to understand differ-
ences was too much of a risk. They preferred blandness. In some ways,
it is a legal form of prejudice or bigotry. The gated community deter-
mined who could get in. It excluded by socio-economic level, by lan-
guage, by profession, and by shallow image of taste and of appeal.
Corporate America is a formidable gated business community, when
working across cultural borders. Most drive to work, dress casually,
don’t take real time for lunch, work late, know the rules, and protect
their interests. The employees-in-the know are aggressive, decisive, take-
charge individuals. As westerners, they shoot from the hip and an “us-
versus-them” attitude prevails when negotiating. As one of our leaders
said following 9/11, “You’re either for us or agin’ us…” We know who
fits in to our business community by the way they talk, by the way they
dress, and by which side of the street they live on. When we sit, face-to-face,
56
The Gated Community
on the other side of the table of someone from Russia or Poland, do we
feel a confidence reinforced by the known, or an apprehension camou-
flaged by arrogance? They can only judge us by what we say and do and,
often we don’t say what we mean and our motive is positive.
Close the gate, keep a 24-hour guard posted, and don’t let anyone in
without an invitation from one of the residents—this is our Gated Nation.
Tough talk and hard ball are a preferred style because we are superior
to the rest of the world. We have the power because we’re richer and
we’re smarter and we’re just plain better. Making someone feel inferior
is not a move forward in building a relationship. It is an affront that a
person remembers for a long time and it makes a negotiation very diffi-
cult, often resulting with an agreement that is short term—if you reach
an agreement at all.
Language as an Excluder
“The great enemy of clear language is insincerity. When there is a
gap between one’s real and one’s declared aims, one turns as it were
instinctively to long words and exhausted idioms, like a cuttlefish squirt-
ing out ink.”
— George Orwell, Politics and the English Language, Shooting an
Elephant (1950)
What we say and how we say it includes or excludes the listener from
understanding or from being a part of the exchange. Language can be a
formidable barrier, but it can also be a means for building a stronger
relationship. Interest in the other person’s country, history, music, or art
may offer a communication of appreciation or of recognition. Judging
another’s difference from our standard, however, devalues both.
A foreign language or an accent can generate exclusion. Everyone
is more comfortable if they know and easily understand the people and
the place in which they live. When someone is difficult to understand,
the other side often fears misunderstanding, and that fear can reveal
itself as arrogance or resistance in a negotiation. Language is principles;
language is respect; language is thought and feeling. Language is the
best tool we have to build the relationships that sustain organizations.
The difficulty is the diversity of languages often creates barriers of criti-
cal impact. Even when someone can speak your language, the inflections
57
and melody differently accent your language and often generate a dis-
comfort and sometimes a shut down.
It seems analogies of relationship pull us back to the family. Are
accents, for example, even acceptable here in the United States? Grow-
ing up in Grand Rapids, Michigan, in the 1940s and 1950s, much of my
family spoke with an accent, and by the time I was seven years old, I
already knew I never wanted the family that I would eventually have to
speak with an accent. My children would never have to be embarrassed
like I was when people met my grandma. I could tell by my friends’ reac-
tions that something was wrong—the way they tried not to roll their eyes
because they knew that wasn’t polite; the looks they gave each other and
the comments they would make, such as, “What country is she from?
What language do they speak there? How long has she lived here? Twenty
years?” (It was said incredulously with a “why haven’t you learned bet-
ter?”) It didn’t matter that my grandma spoke several languages, what
mattered was she didn’t perfect her English. Plus, it was part of her re-
bellion against all the people who made her feel inferior. To pretend not
to understand or to speak perfect English versus perfect Polish or Rus-
sian was a political statement for my grandma. The same is true in the
business world: Language can become a strategy in negotiating. The Japa-
nese can pretend their English is insufficient and they prefer a Japanese
translation to be read—just as much out of national pride as out of stra-
tegic movement. Also, the frustration of a U.S. businessperson because
of the accents can be used as a strategy to provoke and lead in issue.
I have been with groups of American businessmen who are actually
angry that a Chinese businessman doesn’t speak English better, espe-
cially because it is an American company for which he works—even
though the meeting is in China, and not one American has made an
attempt to speak Mandarin. How could all these Chinese people make it
so difficult for us to understand them? Even if it is their country, English
is the universal language for doing business. An accent seems to imply
the person is less intelligent and sometimes rude. Here in the United
States, French accents have become a bit more acceptable. Spanish,
not yet, and certainly not Asian.
58
The Gated Community
In November 2001 I was admitted to the local hospital emergency
unit. There was an older woman in the bed next to mine with her hus-
band. She had fallen and the doctor was questioning her as to what had
happened. She spoke with a Baltic accent, with an English vocabulary
meant for the written word, far superior to the best native speaker—a
smart, very literate woman. The young doctor struggled with the accent
which, in reality, wasn’t that pronounced. The curtain between our beds
was pulled at this time so I couldn’t see anyone, I could only hear them.
After a series of questions, the doctor summarized what the woman
had said, using a pretend accent: “I see, no fooda, no carro, walk to
store, ice on sidewalker, Sophia go boom!”
The shameful embarrassment of it wasn’t that he tried to speak with
an accent. She might not have even recognized the accent. It was that he
spoke to her without literate structure to his statement and in a vocabu-
lary not suited for a toddler. Sophia shut down. Her husband took over
the exchange. The doctor never noticed. If it’s difficult to value a diver-
sity of language, something so concrete and worthwhile, how does one
begin to value a difference of belief or of lifestyle? Within a negotiation,
respecting competency and intelligence, is a rule of engagement. Main-
taining an ambiance of open exchange is a critical introduction to the
relationship. Asking the same question in a different way can bring clar-
ity to a statement that you didn’t understand. Asking for the other per-
son to repeat the original statement several times affronts their intelligence
and becomes insulting.
In a competitive business arena, it is more common to exclude for a
number of reasons—fear, self-advancement, or lack of trust. Some-
times cultural barriers, such as language, create a discomfort and a fear
of not understanding. This mutual identity with “sameness” is not the
ultimate goal; it is the first step to reaching a value of the “difference”
that will bring a negotiation to solid agreement.
In January 2000, I served on a panel for a NAWBO International
Committee event. One of my colleagues, who had worked globally for
at least 20 years and racked up many impressive credentials, was the
vice president of international affairs for one of the major banks in
Chicago. In his presentation he said he is often asked by academics,
59
“Which foreign languages do you recommend our students learn to work

better in the global market?” My colleague’s answer was, “I tell those
professors to teach them better English because that’s just about the
universal language, and they do a lousy job at writing and speaking En-
glish.” I agreed that many today should improve their skills in the struc-
ture and use of English, but the excluding statement of responsibility for
expansive learning resting with the non-English speaking population was
a parochial attitude versus the global attitude his position required. He
didn’t even recognize the value of showing respect to other cultures and
their languages, nor did he see how learning another language helps not
only internationally, but also with one’s own native tongue. The most
frightening fact was that he could remain so pompously insular when the
objective of his career was to work well with other cultures. Equally as
frightening was that the system could hide his prejudicial attitude for so
long up the corporate ladder.
I graduated with majors in French and Spanish, and went on to
study the literatures of medieval French and Spanish. My grandparents
and parents spoke Russian and Polish at home, and my sisters and I
went to a Roman Catholic school where Polish was taught. I took Chinese
when people didn’t even want to talk to anyone in Chinese. I have lived
in Bogotá, Colombia, and for the past 11 years I have worked inten-
sively in China, Hong Kong, Singapore, Korea, India, Thailand, South
America, Europe, Canada, and Mexico.
I am confident that language is only understood through the eyes of
each individual. Emerson said in his work, The Conduct of Life in 1860,
“A cheerful, intelligent face is the end of culture.” When positive ex-
pressions are comfortably read by individuals the barriers of a culture
begin to disappear. Some western faces are expressions of pain, when
they are forced to listen to someone with an accent in another country.
For me, language is a way to communicate through terms or words—
spoken or read. Generally each culture or country has their own lan-
guage or at the least their own dialect full of colloquialisms. For us in
the United States the language would be English, yet there are languages
associated with certain professions or trades. Baseball, the movies, or
lawyers—there are common terms meaning the same thing to people
60
The Gated Community
within those professions. “The bottom line” is a business term now

used in other areas of work or study. Each of us is responsible for our
own words. Many times you hear, “I didn’t mean that….” yet others
judge us on what we say and also on what we do. In a negotiation you
are dependent on what is said. Having the ability to remove the barrier
of a foreign language, an accent, acronyms, or a social style is essential
to the progress of a negotiation.
There are so many aspects that influence the understanding of those
words: tone of voice, clarity of tone, pace or speed, even the expression
on one’s face. Some in our country are quick to say the accent. Who is
saying it can often change its meaning? If the CEO is telling you that
the first quarter revenues could have a strong impact on your bonus…it
means more than if your associate says it. If you’re saying something
about the competition’s quality, it can carry an ethical interpretation
and could undermine your credibility. Harsh and neutral tones can de-
termine the outcome of understanding. To rave about a feature of prod-
uct or service in a neutral tone could leave the listener neutral in
appreciation. Sincerity is critical in tone of voice; it commands a con-
sistency in what you say and how you say it. Based on this premise,
what you say and what you do is a key component to who you are. If
you act arrogant often enough or state the same values often enough—
that’s who you are.
Music can change the pronunciation of the words and can affect the
emphasis of those terms. The tones in music seem to be understood by
everyone…most certainly felt by each of us. When I was at the Fourth
World Women’s Conference in Beijing, each night they would have a
different country responsible for the entertainment. We listened to an
orchestra from Sweden and a band from Bolivia and watched dancers
from China. Each night it got better, because we, the audience, got to
know each other through the music and felt more comfortable with
each other and more at ease in expressing ourselves to each other. The
same was true if a group from a certain country was walking down one
of the paths of the conference grounds with a wide banner with unrec-
ognizable words on it, chanting their cause. As they passed each area of
concentrated participants more would join in the march—without an
61
understanding of exactly what they were marching for. I would inevita-

bly join forces and begin to chant without knowing spelling or meaning.
There must be a way in business that we can capture this esprit de
corps, this solidarity of cause, of focus. Language was circumvented by
expression, by sound, by song, and by manner. Perhaps it is in the face.
Another time, my husband and I were visiting one of our daughters,
Cassie, who was teaching near Quito, Ecuador. She was living with
Carlos, a veterinarian, and his wife Tamara, an artist and teacher. They
invited us for an Easter celebration on Holy Saturday along with their
cousin and his wife. My husband was the only one who could speak no
Spanish and Carlos, her host father, was the only one who could speak
no English. They nodded and smiled at each other a great deal. We
would translate for them when we remembered, but most of the time
we would get so caught up in the conversation we forgot about them.
From the stereo speakers we hear Twilight Time followed by The Great
Pretender both by the Platters. Carlos had remembered Cassie telling him
they were her dad’s favorites. All of sudden, they understood each other
and each tried to express their thoughts, but ultimately it was the music
that made it possible. Carlos wanted to please my husband. My husband
wanted to show his appreciation for Carlos’ hospitality. The dynamic
spoke! It was a dynamic generated by music and promoted by a valuing
of the other. It ended with Carlos giving my husband his favorite Masons
coffee mug, because they both loved coffee. Is this too social and too
common for business relationships? It shouldn’t be. It is still a way of
identifying needs within two different business and social cultures.
When I was working on a project in Macao, a joint venture to build
a chemical plant, we were negotiating the site and we wanted and needed
to work together, because we knew we could only secure a permit to
start building through the governing body. Time was of the essence and
the Chinese joint venture partner could help us. When we listened and
responded to the other’s needs, we accommodated him, and the results
were of higher quality. That’s what commerce is about—needing each
other, customer or client, wanting to find a more efficient and effective
way with a focus on the results we both need. If that’s the case, what
holds us back? Why are so many negotiations hostile?
62
The Gated Community
Language is an obstacle that often holds us back. Our attitudes to-
ward other languages easily obscures our ability to hear. We don’t like
the inconvenience of listening harder and the time it takes to clarify or
repeat. Very few Americans speak several languages. Our public educa-
tion system reflects our lack of concern or interest, so elementary schools
seldom teach another language. Colleges no longer require a foreign lan-
guage as a prerequisite for liberal arts majors. We threw away the disci-
pline when we wanted more creativity for our children in the 1960s. Now
this attitude has grown like an indestructible fungus that grew on us out
of our arrogance of a sense of economic superiority.
According to many Americans, English should be the universal spo-
ken language. It’s an affront when the other party doesn’t speak English,
or just as bad if he or she speaks English with an accent. It’s as if they
think the person, with a thick accent, is doing it to annoy or to create
misunderstandings. Didn’t anyone else ever have a bouczia, or grandma,
whom they loved, who spoke with an accent? Not often have I heard an
executive from the U.S. visiting Beijing or Tianjin compliment a Chinese
executive on his English. Even if English is the language of business, it is
not the most widely spoken in Asia, and your client might give you the
business because you had the interest in his spoken language. Most busi-
ness people in China speak English. It is now a requirement in the schools,
starting in first grade, to learn English.
I remember staying in the Movenpick Hotel in Beijing near the air-
port. We had training sessions for a week at a time during a three-year
period. It was a western European hotel and they conveniently housed
shops of varied Chinese artistries, such as, silk carpets, crystal balls with
the ancient reversed painting, water colors on rice paper—so many beau-
tiful works of art reflecting hours and months of labor. Everything was
there for the businessman’s convenience; his training, lodging, food, and
shopping. That arrangement is what helps to undermine an appreciation
of other cultures. A resident of the hotel often judges the country relative
to an airport hotel or a Westernized hotel, and what you can buy to bring
home. The isolation prevents one from meeting or being introduced to
their community. He or she doesn’t have to venture out into the streets
or into different local restaurants or family-owned booths or shops. It’s
63
like suburbia in the United States; the houses are being built with every-
thing including a workout room, swimming pools, recreation rooms with
arcade games, flower hot houses, and anything else you would need when
you’re not at work. Gated communities or condominiums paradoxically
are more insular. You have every amenity yet no real community. Resi-
dents either both work, or have retired. There’s a community pool, but
never a majority of the community in it. There’s a community house,
but it’s generally used by a resident for family and friends outside the
condominium community. It appears to minimize involvement and con-
cern and eventually dissolves “community” within the gated community.
During the three years of work in the Movenpick Hotel, I did a great
deal of bartering/negotiating for the residents in the hotel with the bou-
tiques in the hotel, especially for the carpets. The visiting residents,
almost exclusively male, spoke Italian, French, Spanish, and German,
among other languages. They didn’t speak English, or at least not well
enough to negotiate with the shopkeeper whose English was limited.
The shop was a typical hotel size boutique—larger than the tobacco
shop yet smaller than a clothing store. A floor to ceiling glass window
facing the lobby displayed a beautiful sample of Chinese silk art woven
into a magnificent carpet. It hung with imperial splendor. A husband
and wife owned the business, both curious and most gracious.
One evening I was sitting in the hotel restaurant eating dinner alone.
Three men sitting at the table next to me were speaking in French about
a woman who worked with Motorola and purchased a carpet for one of
the managers for an excellent price. The gentlemen were trying to find
out from the hotel which person she was. I didn’t say a word. The next
evening they were a table removed from mine and still chatting about
how to barter for a carpet for their wives, because time was pressing. It
was Thursday and they were returning to Europe on Saturday. The maitre d’
came over and asked if he could introduce me, if I didn’t mind the
intrusion on my time. That was the beginning.
I spoke French and Spanish well enough for those two languages to
be the common languages for us—proficient enough to do their shop-
ping. So in the evenings someone would find me with a request for a
certain carpet: defined size, color, material, and quality. I would plan my
64
The Gated Community
negotiation with the buyer from price to size and they were never disap-
pointed with my choice…and neither were their wives. I loved the car-
pets and enjoyed learning about China from the couple who owned the
shop. We usually came to “mutually beneficial” prices for them and for
the men. I would ask the businessman in French what his target price
was, which colors he preferred, for whom it was. I would warn him that it
would take some time. I enjoyed having tea and getting to know the own-
ers and their son. Sometimes a traveler would catch me on the way to the
airport—I would then explain to the owners the need to accelerate the
process. Later they would express their appreciation for the “fast-urgent”
sale, and we would sit and have tea after the sale—long-term in perspec-
tive. They would always offer me a special discount on any carpet I chose,
but the prices were high and I had two children at universities.
For those three years, I admired the carpet that hung in the front
glass on the lobby side. The asking price was beyond my hope. In the
beginning of the third year, I returned in the fall to give a training work-
shop and they asked me to sit down with them and have tea and a sweet.
When I arrived at the shop, I immediately noticed my carpet was no
longer hanging in the window. I was happy they sold it and sad it wasn’t
mine. We sat drinking the tea and catching up with happenings of our
families, with the trip, and the leadership program I was to deliver. They
expressed their opinion as to what was universal in leadership and what
the qualities of leaders centuries ago were. As we chatted their nephew
appeared with a square package about 3 feet by 3 feet and put it at my
feet. They told me they had to take the carpet out of the window and
asked if I would like to make an offer and we could all negotiate. I told
them I couldn’t insult them because their asking price was $16,000 U.S
and it was a very fair price. So they started the process with an opening of
$1,000 U.S and I had trained them “to aspire high.” I was stunned—they
wanted a counter and I couldn’t so they included the shipping. A year
later Marshall Fields offered me $33,000. Now that’s partnering! And it
all started with a poor attempt at speaking another language. I will never
sell the carpet, I believe my husband might. It stands for too much. The
relationship took three years to establish and another three to become a
lifetime commitment. It wasn’t even an issue of speaking Chinese; it was
65
more an issue of the unspoken—the look, the nod, and the appreciation
of their way, their art, and their country’s culture. The carpet represents
respect, personal honor, and a shared culture.
I recall this story not because I made money, but because of the
barriers—language, customs, and traditions. It wasn’t as important to
the Chinese shop owners that I could speak French or Spanish or un-
derstand Italian. It was that I valued talking with them not only about
business, but about ideas, philosophy, and, eventually, values. I also
bartered for many of the American businessmen because they didn’t
have the patience to go through all that to buy something. The differ-
ence was they thought of it as a singular business transaction—short-term—
and not as a cultural exchange—a way to better understand China and
its people, a new way to do business. At the very least, I thought of it as
a social happening. It was my chance to ask some questions of how and
why things were done in a certain way in China. I wanted to know how
long it took an individual to make one of the carpets and how long it
takes to get to work from their home. What is a typical work week?
How can I understand them if I know nothing about them? And then
how can I value what I don’t know? More importantly, how can I an-
swer any of their needs if I don’t even know what they need, much less
the priority of those needs. It was building a relationship.
I have often wondered how someone who is deaf and mute can get
their message across with the passion and conviction needed with the
spoken word, especially in an argument with someone you love. Now I
know it’s not the word that’s so important—it’s the listening—and
that includes words not said. Whenever I meet someone who is or-
nery and growling, I begin to cower and my colleague says to me:
“Don’t worry his bark is bigger than his bite, underneath all that he
really is a nice person.” If he consistently barks and doesn’t say much
that’s nice or kind, he IS an ornery, mean person. That’s all I have to
judge him on—his consistency of word and action. The patterns he sets
by this consistency outline his human profile, and he begins to look like
a Chow Chow to me not a Saint Bernard.
Together, words, languages, and expressions can help bridge differ-
ences and create a partnership for negotiation and for doing business.
66
The Gated Community
They are powers to bring to the negotiation table. They can either build
a sound agreement, doable by both sides, or they can slowly undermine
the transaction. Words can solidify a relationship in trust or they can
create a tension too severe for successful negotiations. Strategically
placed silence can reinforce your listening skills and the words previ-
ously spoken. Your responsibility is to make it easy for the other side
to listen, to understand, and to question. The words you choose are
your power. They construct a facility for collaboration. To appropri-
ately use words and to simplify their meanings is to show consideration
and respect. Sincerity must be the back drop for what you say.
“The true word leads: the untrue misleads.”
—Franz Kafka in Gustav Janouch’s, Conversations with Kafka
To express an appreciation for a difference in language is a per-
ceived invitation to take time, to sit, and to listen. It is the difference
between meeting with your superior to discuss an issue in the corridor
on the way to his or her office to save time, or in the office with a cup of
coffee and the door closed. It is a statement of valuing his or her input
no matter which language is spoken, and time is not the priority.
Language and its words serve as both inclusive and exclusive instru-
ments. Growing up in an ethnic household, my parents frequently would
speak Polish to each other so we the children would not know what
they were saying. It excluded us and I remember well the feeling of not
being a part of the conversation and the frustration associated with
assuming what they were saying. The same is true in business, for both
sides, to feel excluded because language often results in inaccurate as-
sumptions and inappropriate follow-up behavior.
It seems simple—words as the problem. It is. To use the right words
in the right situation becomes more complex. We are often seen as a
gated community or nation. Our language is English, and to further
exclude we frequently employ acronyms, slang, and buzzwords. The
other side’s quest to understand these idiomatic expressions keeps them
relatively uncomfortable, yet our purpose during the meeting is to keep
them comfortable for a productive exchange. We have to invite them in
and keep the gates open—delineate the acronyms, avoid slang, and use
the buzzwords only when their meanings are obvious. When we don’t
67
understand what the other party has said, because of an accent or a

word, we have to ask for clarification using different words, not, “Could
you repeat that?” or, “Say it again.” We must guard their integrity.
Use the power. Choose your words well; build a relationship; earn
trust; and your business will grow and you will retain your valued client.
Your success rests in successfully managing your verbal behaviors—all
is within your control.
Close-Up of Eastern Europe

“The collapse of the communist system in the late 1980s gave the
Central Eastern European Countries (CEECs) the opportunity to move
from centrally planned economies to market-oriented economies, and
ultimately to join and gain access to the European Union. This process
is unique and has no historical precedent.”
—How the West Goes East: Doing Business in Eastern Europe, Natalie
H. Fabry and Sylvain H. Zeghni
I first worked in Poland for Motorola in the mid-to-late 90s. There,
I had a Polish mentor, Mirka Wojnar, who was born and raised in Krakow
and had worked in both Poland and Russia. One evening we went to a
well-known and successful restaurant in Krakow.
The restaurant was dark with monastic-like décor. When we en-
tered at ground level, it was as if we were walking down into a cave.
Life-sized, wood-carved monks guarded the entrance, and the lighting
was fitting to a church after dusk. Nevertheless, the ambiance was in-
viting and warm. The wood booth we sat in was protective in its curved
backs and comforting in its softness.
The hors d’oeuvres began with a speckled grey mound served in a
chalice-like pottery vessel. Because my heritage is part Polish and I at-
tended an elementary school that taught the language, Mirka asked me
to identify what she ordered when it arrived. I took a knife’s worth of the
spread and placed it on a wonderful dense bread. After biting and chew-
ing, I looked at Mirka and questioned, “Pan drippings?” The owner knew
what his customers liked and worked to serve and satisfy his customer.
Mirka explained to me that this restaurateur was successful because he
understood customer service better than other entrepreneurs, and had a
68
The Gated Community
growth-based business plan. He had discovered that customers preferred
foods they enjoyed at home, and his menu reflected that knowledge.
This was new to the Polish frame of thinking, and so was being
competitive. Mirka said many Poles missed the security of communism
and some even missed having the communist government as a scapegoat—
something about which to complain, argue, and debate.
Eastern Europe needed to be exposed to capitalism, needed to un-
derstand the fundamentals of owning a business, and needed to change
the way they did business. The new entrepreneurs and business people
have to understand and feel the distinction between owning and work-
ing, competitive and collective, and growing and sustaining (or main-
taining) a business. It is a new way of thinking and acting that affects
the person and the culture—a change that is difficult to manage.
Without competition or incentives, Eastern European employees
lacked a sense of ownership or personal growth. Neither the national or
business cultures supported individual responsibility or self-initiated
new processes or organizational structures. A business culture focused
on customer satisfaction was foreign. Instead, the attitude was, “what
is, is—take it or leave it.”
Nevertheless, Eastern Europeans have a strong work ethic, which
includes a focused commitment to the purpose of their work, and an
innate sense of personal honor. Individuals still need motivation, how-
ever, to learn new skills and to take advantage of new technological
opportunities—better ways to work and live. Learning, accompanied
by small successes, will support their change and give Eastern Europeans
the confidence to move forward.
Snapshot of Russia
Russia is a country of passion, flamboyance, and generosity—once
you get to know its citizens. The Federation of Russia has more than
150 million people and, geographically, it is larger than any other coun-
try in the world. The official language is Russian, and the nation enjoys
an almost 100-percent literacy rate.
69
Moving from a Communist to capitalist society has been difficult for

Russia’s citizens. The change included going from atheism to practicing
a religion—anything from Russian orthodoxy to Islam and or Jewish.
Because Russia is so large and diverse, it is next to impossible to gener-
alize about its people and the culture. Akin to so many other countries,
Russia houses many attitudes, especially those who lived during Commu-
nism and those who live with the dissatisfaction of today’s Russia—its pov-
erty and unemployment.
“One thing I love about the Russians is that they are passionate about
their cultural heritage. Once when I was there, I picked up a magazine in
the city of Rostov, which [is home to] about a million people. The maga-
zine had asked each of the city’s business leaders to talk about their
favorite poet, their favorite composer, their favorite novelist. All of
them had thoughtful answers. Can you imagine if top business owners
in the United States were asked those questions? Maybe one of them
could name a poet for whom he had a deep appreciation.”(Negotiating
with Commissars. Bartering for payment. Surviving the crash of the ruble.
How I Did It. By Howard Dahl, President & CEO Amity Technology,
Fargo, North Dakota [Article in INC Magazine, April, 2007].)
This observation clearly reflects the values within the Russian culture—
placing a high priority on the arts and literature in their society.
B Greet a Russian by shaking hands and saying their name.
As you get to know them, extend it to a kiss on each cheek
and an embrace.
B Russians do not immediately believe outside information to
be true. They process it subjectively and experientially.
B There is a cultural insecurity since the fall of Communism, so
stability is often found in religion and within their families.
B Similar to many Latin American countries, Russians let feel-
ings guide their decision-making processes.
B Darker skinned citizens are not trusted.
B Women are still discriminated against, and sexual harass-
ment is quite high in business and in government.
70
The Gated Community
B Use a Russian’s professional title or Mr. and Ms. with their
surname, until invited to use their diminutive. After they ex-
tend the courtesy, you may do the same with your first name.
B Business dress is conservative and includes well-cut European
designs. The quality of your clothing reflects your profession-
alism and work.
B Receiving feedback in Russia is most difficult. Hierarchy
is avoided.
B Be punctual and patient—never cancel an appointment.
B In decision-making, Russians are still collectivists. Often, the
senior manager will delegate the authority to the entire group.
B When hosting a meeting, provide many refreshments—the Rus-
sians do the same and expect it from you. (Being of Russian
heritage, my mother would prepare food for a celebration to
serve 25 people, and then if the eight of us didn’t eat it all, she
would say, “So, you didn’t like it?”)
B It is an honor to be invited to their homes. Ludmilla, a
teacher and friend of ours, and her husband, Valerie, pre-
pared a dinner for us to enjoy the different foods. The cost
of the foods for the meal had to equal a month’s salary. This
is common in consideration of their hospitality.
B Dinner usually is at 7 p.m. or later. Use military time. Restau-
rants have become more customer-focused in the past 10
years, so service is good.
B Russians prefer to negotiate when you are drunk!
B Toasts are standard—“Na zdorovye!”
B Presents that depict or reflect your home town, high-quality
books, and electronics are acceptable gifts.
B When invited for dinner, flowers, liquor, or gourmet foods
are appropriate.
Negotiation
Howard Dahl, president and CEO of Amity Tecnology, Fargo,
North Dakota, said in the INC-Magazine article, “Negotiating With
71
Commissars: Bartering for Payment, Surviving the Crash of the Ruble,”

that “[t]o receive payment for some early sales, we bartered with the
Russians. They would trade rapeseed, which you use to make vegetable
oil, for machinery. We would then sell the seeds to a German agribusiness
in a back-to-back transaction. Once, a customer offered us 30,000 po-
lar fox pelts for a machine. It didn’t feel right, so I turned him down. I
found out later what the value of those pelts would have been if I had
resold them to a furrier in Europe. I should have done that deal.”
B Russians consider compromise a weakness. They will out sit
the other side. They are often called the “sitters.”
B Have many options and concessions identified before going
into the negotiation.
B Final offers are never final. Something better could happen
later. Leave it on the table.
B Because of the tax system, Russians may require payments
to be made to them directly and in cash, often times in U.S.
dollars.
B Russian regulations are constantly changing, so it can cre-
ate frustration and chaos in an agreement.
B Business cards are essential today.
B While the Japanese have a tendency to say yes to every-
thing, the Russians have a tendency to say no to everything,
even when they don’t mean it.
B Present a cohesive team profile: well prepared, united on all
critical issues, documented with offerings/options.
B Be factual and detailed, especially on technical matters.
B Russians are known for their emotional outbursts, threats,
and other delay tactics. Today, they are better at managing
their confrontational ways. The best reaction is no reaction.
B Russians will sometimes ask for a “protocol” of the meet-
ing. It is similar to our “minutes” of a meeting. It is read,
agreed upon, and signed to its accuracy.
72
Superiority Complex
CHAPTER 4:
Superiorit
Superiorityy C omplex:
Complex:
Sophmores of the Global Campus
“Superiority and inferiority are individual, not racial or national.”

— Philip Wylie, Generation of Vipers, 1942.
Agenda
A. Asking vs. Telling Culture.
B. Loud vs. listening.
C. Prescribing vs. relating.
We sometimes suffer from a national superiority complex, even

though it is the individual who delivers its blow. Many Western busi-
ness people, as individuals, feel far superior to their “third-world, de-
veloping sister countries.” The label itself indicates our level of
superiority—developing.
“There is nothing noble in being superior to someone else. The true
nobility is in being superior to your previous self.” —Hindu saying
We often feel we have to tell someone how powerful we are, just in
case they missed it in our title, or our expensive dress, or perhaps the
fancy hotel in which we are staying. In many countries, all three surface
73
observations indicate your success and are respected. It is the telling

that diminishes the respect. This attitude tends to inhibit sensitivity to
another and subverts, with an air of condescension, an open, produc-
tive exchange. Within our friendly, outgoing manner we tend to tell too
much—some in accomplishment and some in directives. This manner
can push the other side to sit back and listen more intensely and strategize
more knowledgably. Our strategy should, instead, be to ask more and
learn more. The benefit is clear: coming to an agreement that is more
easily implemented by both sides. After all, we want the other party to
move toward us and work with us in resolving issues.
In order to succeed through competition, it stands to reason that
one must be superior to all other cultures—or at least believe one is.
Out of the intensity of competition, superiority is often born. As a young
girl in the 1950s, I remember the chants of the boys sports teams: “We
are the greatest…we are the best.” It’s natural. Competition’s first child
is “superiority,” and it often matures into “arrogance” or “put down.”
Making someone feel inferior is the number-1 capitalistic sin. Usually
it is neither forgivable nor forgettable. Distinguishing between the
“haves” and the “have-nots” is different than telling someone how much
you have compared with how little they have.
Level the Playing Field

Superiority, with or without reason, is a major barrier for the U.S.
businessperson. It sets him apart from—and above—his counterparts.
When two parties are not on equal footing—real or perceived—relating
is difficult. Without the same level of respect and of integrity, you can
neither hear nor see the other’s needs. If you don’t exhibit knowledge
of the other’s need or a sincere concern for his or her need, you will not
be able to influence him or her to move in your direction. This dynamic
results in a slow-growing contempt because it denies his or her inherent
value and worth. It makes him or her feel defensive, intimidated, or
angry, and, at the very least, annoyed. And remember, this is your cus-
tomer or your needed supplier.
Recently, I was part of a delegation of women in business from the
United States to China. We were meeting with various groups of Chinese
74
Superiority Complex
businesswomen/entrepreneurs, attorneys, physicians, and educators in
an attempt to partner with our Chinese colleagues. The leader of the
group was inexperienced in travel and working internationally. She didn’t
understand Chinese life nor did she seem to want to understand it.
Before we left for China, this woman was quoted in a local American
newspaper. When asked to identify the value in the trip, she responded,
“I’m certain I’ll be humbled…by how much I have in comparison to
how little they have.”
Her absolute, culpable lack of awareness of, much less familiarity
with, this ancient culture created a patronizing condescendence—subtle,
but with a very powerful affect. Her posture was one of superiority, not
one of partnership or even curiosity.
So few business people look first for worth in what is strangely dif-
ferent to them. They are too busy competing against, rather than pro-
moting together.
To know why the Chinese diaper their infants leaving the crotch
open, for example, stops you from calling them ridiculous. The typical
young Chinese couple with a new baby live in a 400-foot apartment with
a 4-foot * 8-foot balcony outside the kitchen. The laundry is hung on
the balcony, and sometimes, due to the weather, it takes days for it to
dry. It’s far easier to wipe the wood or cement floor with a cloth and
herb mixture than to launder dozens of diapers. Because China is now
industrialized, disposables are available, but very few can afford or would
want to buy them.
Emerson said: “Culture opens the sense of beauty.” (The Conduct
of Life, 1860). Getting to know a person introduces you to their cul-
ture, and it’s the best way to realize the qualities of a culture. It’s easy
to indict an entire race or culture, yet you are much more uncomfort-
able doing so when you meet its integrity face to face. We are quick to
judge because we know everything: the best solution, the only answer,
and the greatest idea. It is part of our flamboyant Western personality.
Also, our attitude of buy more, buy bigger, buy newer and buy better,
keeps us convinced that we are what we own. A person’s value is at-
tached to his or her ability to purchase.
75
Prioritize Values
Some cultures, such as the Chinese, are not seasoned consumers.
Instead of spending weekends shopping, they go to a museum, a gar-
den, or perhaps a park for a music or dance festival. The Chinese find
value elsewhere. One of the first female Chinese millionaires expanded
her apartment by taking over the one above her, making her home about
900 square feet. When I visited her newly remodeled home, I noticed it
was still sparse. She added two more chairs and an extra lamp. Knowing
how much I enjoy primitive Chinese art, she gave me a regional black
porcelain vase. Sharing the same affinity for art, I asked her if she would
buy some now that she had the means. She said, “No, I enjoy looking at
art in a special setting, the museum, and I enjoy it more when I share it
with family and friends.” Some believe that what one owns is one’s great-
est burden in life—a strong belief of the Dalai Lama. This is a chasm of
difference in priority of values.
Many business people have told me that we all have the same val-
ues: family, education, money, success, professional growth, safety, free-
dom. Yes, those values seem universal. Placing those values one in front
of the other makes an enormous impact on how we approach doing
business with our transcultural partners. In the United States, as a com-
petitive, capitalistic society, our number-1 value is money, followed
closely by time. We say we value family, yet they are forced to step
aside when it comes to career, money, or time. In fact, businessmen
usually say that they work long hours and take new positions hundreds
of miles away from the established home because they are “doing it for
the family.” This priority of values directs and sometimes manipulates
the moves made by our leaders—political, business, or community.
Everyone speaks of “family values” politically, but when it comes to
voting for the Family Leave Act they vote “no” because no one wants
higher taxes. Back to the number-1 priority: money.
When we’re doing business in another country we have to discover
their priority of values. When we initiate a new relationship here in the
United States, we try to find out what someone’s needs and wants are
so that we can better service them (and they, us). It’s the same when we
76
Superiority Complex
are abroad. Our perceived superiority complex can be diffused if we
show a concern for others’ needs. It’s a beginning, with a balance of
exchange or dialogue. If you’re working in China, telling someone you
will save time is not appealing. Time is not a top priority in China. The
country has a 7,000-year-old history. Telling them how much money
they will make also won’t mean much, unless you include how many
people you will employ and the benefits you will offer them while work-
ing in the company—especially education opportunities.
A few years ago, I was traveling from Beijing to TianJin by car with
a Chinese business colleague of mine. He had been involved with set-
ting up software for air traffic controllers at the Beijing airport. We
were stopped by a heavy snowfall and had to turn back. There were
several older women sweeping the road with large, fluffy brooms. I
turned to my friend and said, “Well, now that you’re going hi-tech in so
many areas, when do you think you’ll bring in snow plows?” He re-
sponded, “When we find jobs for the women.” Their priority, be it out
of necessity or tradition, is still people and keeping them employed.
Put Up or Shut Up
As business people, we reek of the competitive and it often keeps us
from being investigative or responsive. We think we must have the an-
swer, the solution, or the idea. Is it the economic superiority? Or is it
our obsession with competitive sports? Our immaturity as a young coun-
try could add to our sophomoric approach to resolution. Similar to so
many corporations, perhaps the United States has fallen into the trap
of believing our own marketing. In 1998, according to its President Chris
Galvin, Motorola had gotten too arrogant. Newspapers of time say that
happened with IBM and the auto industry. Our national arrogance has
stunted our learning. Our exclusive approach to knowledge and learn-
ing, to idea, and to language has limited our long-term partnerships.
I was in London with a group of managers from England, Scotland,
France, Germany, and a few from Asia. Two of us were delivering a
management program for those managers identified to be on the fast
track. That session was chaotic. The French felt superior to the Brits
and vice versa; the Germans felt better than the entire lot. At the end
77
of the first day a vice president from the United States came up to me
and said “Don’t worry about their buy-in, we’re an American company
and they work for us so they have to shut up or put up.” It didn’t matter
that the Europeans were totally responsible for their own organizations
and the company was dependent on their commitment and loyalty in
order to excel in their marketplaces. The U.S. executive preferred the
fast, short-term route, and not the long-term buy-in route.
An attitude of superiority can affect every set goal of a corporation:
productivity, revenue, quality, timelines, and the bottom line. You can-
not have a healthy relationship if one makes the other feel inferior. My
family was often called DPs, the slang term for Displaced Persons, in the
1940s and 50s. I first remember hearing it at age seven, and I thought the
acronym sounded quite American and I liked it. When I asked my dad
about it he told me what it really meant: that you had no place to call
your home and that you had no reputation with people who could protect
your honor if something went wrong. For example, if I pushed someone
in school for saying something about my immigrant family, and later people
were talking about what I did, there would be no one there who knew me
to say, “She usually is a very caring, gentle person; something must have
provoked her.” As a DP, I had no reputation, thus, no one to defend it. I
have never forgotten the feeling of inferiority.
When we are in a position of superiority—either technically, politi-
cally, or financially—we generally have the advantage. When we take
advantage of that position, we risk being perceived as arrogant rulers
and not wise collaborators. The wise superior is benevolent and cares
about the other party’s needs. He or she is confident in reaching the
best results. A superior who abuses the advantage, and uses it to con-
trol and force his own ideas, destroys trust and will not build a long-
term relationship. A benevolent superior, on the other hand, declutters
the road for progress to be made toward mutual goals and concerns.
Understand Youthful Arrogance

In our culture, younger people are far superior to those who are
older. They are the consumers of a capitalistic society. Who hasn’t heard
of the prime 18- to 34-year-old demographic? The wise older person,
78
Superiority Complex
on the other hand, is not in demand. Our youthful culture, our families,
and our media regard the elderly in our country with less value than
younger people, than the middle-aged, than even the leaders. Every-
thing we do says we don’t value the elderly: our obsession with looking
young is apparent in all of our advertising, from vitamins to clothing.
As an adolescent culture we haven’t found the beauty in old age.
Our expectations of our older community set them up for acting or
performing like they do. It is the same in the business arena—our ex-
pectations of a certain national culture set the stage for their antici-
pated behaviors. It’s common to hear, “What can you expect at her
age?” or, “I can’t count on her description of what happened; she doesn’t
remember it all.”
My older sister calls me occasionally to update me on my mother’s
health. My mother is 90 years old, mobile, exercises, and keeps house—
the one I grew up in. When my sister relates my mom’s visit to the
doctor, she does so on the assumption that anything that is wrong in the
analysis is my mom’s interpretation and not the doctor’s—and many
times it is. For example, the doctor felt my mom needed more outside
activity, especially during the long Michigan winters, so he told my mom
to volunteer. And he told her a second and third time.
My mom is a giving and loving woman. She would notice what our
neighbors needed and she would help. She bakes cookies for the Catholic
elementary school in her neighborhood. When we were kids, our mom
worked hard outside the home so we could all go to college. She doesn’t
want to volunteer; she wants to contribute in her own way. She did not
need an organized event to show her how to give to her community. But
the doctor had the same answer for all “old people.” First, you’re too
old to get paid for what you do, and second, everyone must fit into
volunteering. He never thought of asking an older person what he or
she preferred, because his expectation was they would not have any
idea anyway.
My sister, out of concern, chided my mother for “not volunteering”
because she wanted her to be less lonely. The doctor gave my mother a
suggestion and that was that. She should do it. Why don’t we question
and listen more intently? We also don’t go to older people to benefit
79
from their experience and their well-developed sense of judgment. I

seldom hear, “Call your grandmother. I think she would have some
good suggestions or insights to help resolve your problem.” I have heard,
“Call your grandmother and see if she will take you for the week.” This
value, and its lack of priority, reflects a capitalistic view of importance:
an image-focused, quick-fix, profit-generating, fast-moving society in
which the older person does not fit. In an international negotiation,
this attitude creates a disadvantage for our side because it becomes an
obstacle to hearing and understanding the other side’s needs.
In addition, the speed and lack of concern in this approach can
often be perceived as presumptuous and overbearing (intended or not).
Having come from an immigrant family, I felt the clean, soundless, ini-
tially painless slice of the cut-you-down knife. Working in the business
arena I have seen blatant and subtle arrogance sit defiantly on the other
side of a table. Working off-shore, I have seen the slights and the or-
ders that command obedience instead of requesting cooperation. The
fault or weakness of this attitude is that short-term success will only
endure until a competitor introduces itself. Internally it can severely
impact productivity. When someone is demeaned, his energy is focused
in anger or retaliation and not on the job to be done.
In global exchanges, long-term planning supports the sustenance
and promotes the growth of a business. Within the framework of the
superior there can be a difference of level of expertise, level of posi-
tion, and level of importance. Each of us has had superiors—some we
have appreciated and others have made a day feel like a month. The
distinction is found in arrogance and self-aggrandizement or exagger-
ated product and service promotion. Superiority diminishes the value
of both the perpetrator and the victim.
Snapshot of the United States

The United States, a country of 300 million people of mixed races
and heritage, has welcomed many immigrants in its young history. The
majority of the people are of European descent. English is the predomi-
nant language, though many still speak their native tongues of Ukrainian,
80
Superiority Complex
Polish, Spanish, Chinese, and many others. It is a rich and diverse coun-
try with a variety of cultures, religions, and customs.
The geographic location—North, South, East, West, and even the
Midwest may dictate the way business is done. The East Coast is more
conservative and formal in dress and attitude than the West Coast. The
West Coast’s warm weather brings with it a more casual environment,
including clothing. A sport coat for men and a blazer for women would
be considered formal on the West Coast. In large major cities, it is safe
to wear a dark color suit and tie for your business meetings, unless
indicated differently by your host.
The United States is an individualist society—laws and policies gen-
erally support the individual. All men are created equal is part of the
United States Constitution, and women are still working for equality in
pay and for higher positions. The workforce of the United States is
strong and increasing in diversity. Women are present at every level of
management. Self-reliance is more pronounced, which makes teamwork
and concern for others a bit more challenging.
In general, the people of the United States are not as knowledge-
able with regard to other cultures. Americans carry an attitude that
indicates they believe their way of doing things—including business—is
the most accepted and best, and many times the only way, regardless of
culture. Newspapers best reflect this approach because the international
portion of most large newspapers is very limited and small in compari-
son to other nations’ newspapers. Readers believe local news is the
most important. I have taken businessmen to Asia who arrive not know-
ing where one country is located relative to another. Many still believ-
ing that all Asian cultures are alike, or even the same.
The different American business cultures are better recognized than
the diversity of national cultures within the United States. Walking into
an organization’s headquarters can reveal many components of the
corporation’s culture. These same corporations might have sub-cultures
in their divisions or sectors outside the corporate climate. For example,
I have visited McDonald’s Corporation headquarters and Motorola
corporate headquarters and there is a distinct difference between the
two environments. Upon first entering the buildings, I can notice and
81
feel the ambiance. At McDonald’s, everyone, including the guard, greets

you with a smile, and people in the corridors greet you or nod. At
Motorola headquarters, on the other hand, the people are more re-
served, to-the-point, and a little aloof. The décor of the building also
hints at the ambiance. One reveals official and technical, the other ex-
hibits family and relationships.
Understanding business cultures in the United States helps you to
better respond to the business client, while making them feel more com-
fortable. The business culture often includes a mix of national cultures
because of the frequency of mergers, such as the union of BP (British)
and AMOCO (American). Understanding this dynamic better prepares
you to respond to and manage your negotiation.
B A firm handshake lasting a few seconds, while maintaining
eye contact is considered appropriate when entering and
leaving.
B Business cards do not hold the importance or formality of
recognition that they do in other countries.
B Introductions are often made without the title of the per-
son, and other times with the Mr. or Ms., or simply the given
name with their family name.
B In larger cities, dark suits and sometimes sport coats with a
tie are expected of men; women also dress in suits or dresses.
B In smaller towns/areas, casual attire is fine. For men, khaki
pants and a shirt, and for women, neat slacks or a skirt
with a shirt or blazer. Jeans or shorts are not appropriate
for the large cities or small towns, unless the client speci-
fies it is “Casual Friday,” and you may wear jeans. Usually
women do not.
B Gifts are not common. A modest gift or a work of local arti-
sans would be acceptable. Large corporations discourage
gifts, especially if they appear lavish and more like a bribe.
Lunch or dinner is appreciated.
82
Superiority Complex
B Business is often conducted during breakfast or lunch, rarely
during dinner. Dinner is reserved for enjoyment and celebration.
B Many public facilities today do not allow smoking. Some
people do not allow smoking in their homes. Always, as a
courtesy, ask permission to smoke.
B Standing in line and waiting your turn is common practice in
the United States.
B Americans are competitive in work, leisure (sports), and
socially—house, car, clothing. It is a culture that empha-
sizes accomplishment and individual initiative.
B There are rules, regulations, and laws addressing everything
in business. The United States is the most litigious society
in the world.
B Business people in the United States are generally opportunistic
and risk-takers. Many times they may appear to “want it all.”
B People in the United States may be straightforward, tena-
cious, and somewhat controlling in conversations.
B Americans easily disagree and are direct in saying “no.”
B “Saving face” and other formalities are not a dominant con-
sideration with people of the United States.
B Money (the bottom line) is a top priority and always an is-
sue in the United States. “Time is money” could also be
considered a mantra for business people in the United States.
B Schedules and deadlines are serious considerations for the
American business person.
B The work ethic is part of the foundation of the American
culture. American lives often seem to revolve around work.
Negotiations
B Americans do not like silence. This is your strategic advan-
tage. Wait, and they will give you more information.
83
B People from the United States are generally decisive, fast

paced, and value information that is to the point.
B Speed is important to the Americans because time is money.
B Once they agree to a deal, they seldom change their mind,
unless it saves them money.
B The people of the United States are often considered the
“innovators” versus other countries being considered the
“perfectors,” such as the Japanese. Innovation takes prior-
ity over tradition or history.
B There are rules for everything and there are experts for ev-
ery function. Company policies rule.
B Because the United States is considered an ethnocentric cul-
ture, it is often ignorant of outside information and abstractly
tries to find sameness in the outside world.
B People of the United States consider themselves problem-
solvers and negotiate from their strengths with give and take.
They consider their top strengths to be money and power.
Often, they not do recognize the other side’s power and prefer
their own solutions. Some refer to these businessmen as
“playing hard ball”—demanding what they want, when they
want it because they have the power of size and money.
B Sometimes when the American wants to lay all the cards on
the table, he or she is having a difficult time managing the
exchange.
B Objective facts determine the substance and decisions of
the negotiation for the people of the United States instead
of subjective feelings. The facts are often influenced by the
ideologies of democracy, capitalism, and consumerism.
B Building a relationship is a spoken consideration, but it is
usually not a top priority.
B Contracts, depending on the complexity of the negotiation,
are sometimes brought to the first meeting.
84
Values: A Matter of Priorities
CHAPTER 5:
Values:
A Ma
Matt ter
of Priorities
“What we must decide is perhaps how we are
valuable rather than how valuable we are.”
—Edgar Z. Friedenberg,
“The Impact of the School” (1959) from
The Vanishing Adolescent
Agenda
A. Barriers to valuing the other.
B. Breeding of the polite or courteous—do ideas of what
is polite or courteous keep us from seeing value?
C. Surface characteristics: height, size, clothing, and
social habits.
People who espouse a traditional attitude of superiority should move

to practicing respect, away from existing beliefs to specific behaviors,
which assure the integrity of each person. Many times, if a new method
or process makes us feel uncomfortable or out of control, we think it
must be wrong or not worthwhile. Depending on how strange the “other”
may seem determines the level of “wrong” he or she must be. Differ-
ences often dictate values. It is important to be able to change the fear
of differences to the respect of the individual and the value of his or her
input. Personal relationships have often been destroyed because of the
85
clashing of the priority of values of each individual. Think of it as a

marriage: If a woman’s first priority, for example, is having a great deal
of money (and the house, car, and jewelry that go with it) and her
husband’s first priority is not the same, the relationship will suffer, and
potentially end, unless the priorities become more compatible. Priori-
ties of extreme difference will create a tug of war.
Natural barriers, such as mountains or oceans, place practical and
functional parameters around cultures. Artificial barriers, such as tur-
bans or saris, can handicap the exchange in a negotiation. The unknown
is often a threat. Judging someone or some action by one’s own stan-
dards, criteria, or culture, limits understanding. Reasons for the differ-
ence don’t seem to surface simply because no one asks. The barriers are
not all of mountain stature. They can be little dips in a road, but can, just
as easily, distort or block one’s view. Colors, textures, fabric, styles, sizes,
scents, and even food can all be barriers to valuing differences. Color is
the most obvious difference, and carries with it so much tragedy and
pain, that it is often the most difficult to approach. Color applies to people,
to races, and to cultures. Colors were what brought peoples together and
at the same time, what distinguished one people from another.
The art of bringing varied colors, textures, and sizes together in
one space is what first reveals value. Art, from watercolors to theatre,
generates, in every person of every color, the same emotion, pain, and
joy. We have to be able to see through someone else’s eyes, from their
window, from their pain, and, of course, from their joy.
Interpret Language
Language is a barrier, but is far less of an obstacle than its misinter-
pretation. My mom lives in an old ethnic neighborhood in Grand Rapids,
Michigan. I grew up on Hovey Street by John Ball Park Zoo, among
Polish, Russian, Lithuanian, Latvians, and other eastern Europeans. The
church was the focal point, and it, too, was Polish. My grandfather
built the first Russian Orthodox Church in the town. Our community
was Russian and Polish, and I went to school with the other Eastern
European ethnics.
86
Now, 55 years later, a Hispanic family from Mexico moved in next
door to my mother. I could tell she was very apprehensive and fearful,
not for her personal safety, but because this family represented the “other.”
To her, Mexicans are so “different.” She reared six of us in our house,
but she told me she couldn’t tell how many Mexicans were living next
door. She thought there were nine: six men, two women, and a toddler
girl. She knows she can’t say anything that truly hints of bias or prejudice
because I would be upset. So she talks about how many actually live
there or those who come to visit. She says a couple of nice things about
the demeanor of the woman and toddler daughter who live there. Then,
on Mother’s Day, my older sister and her husband took my mom out to a
restaurant. They came back to mom’s house and were saying goodbye on
the front porch. At the same time one of the men from next door was
going into his house, carrying some hanging flowering baskets, and my
mom and sister commented to him how beautiful the flowers were. He
said a few words in English, and they chatted for a minute.
Later that afternoon, after my sister left, the man from next door
came to my mother’s door with a basket of flowers. He happened to
work at a nursery. At the end of that same week my mother went to
his door with a huge batch of cookies, (her specialty gift for families,
neighbors, and local schools). The man who was there couldn’t speak
English so all he kept saying was “thank you, thank you, thank you,”
each with a little more emphasis. Then he hugged my mom. As a result,
they found value in each other—family, flowers, and food replaced lan-
guage. This shared priority of values gave substance to their relation-
ship. It’s a new beginning for my then 89-year-old mother and for the
loving, young Hispanic family. For my mom, the hug did it.
Understand the Mirror-Driven Society

Image is a top priority in the United States. Many studies have shown
how being tall and attractive can influence your success in a business
organization. Our television programs and commercials reflect a soci-
ety of ideal size and standard beauty (from soap operas to sitcoms to
even the news): relatively flawless people. Image is a strong component
of perceived success, especially within the business community. It is a
87
top priority. Of course the image is the one we, in our business culture,
design as appropriate and correct. The clothes, smells, haircuts, car-
riage, manners, and even food choices are all image barriers or image
includers. Often in our culture, what you wear, where you live, and what
you drive are the three primary determinants of your worth, net, or self.
Some people are uncomfortable not being able to classify or identify the
clothing manufacturer’s product in the closet or the automaker’s item in
the driveway, much less the sari of India on a business associate. I have
witnessed people devaluing what someone says by how they look or
what they’re wearing. Watch. You see their eyes travel from the shirt to
the trousers to the shoes.
In other countries, looks are not as important as what is said. How
it is said is the second priority. It’s true that this is also important in the
United States, but beware the distinct difference. A man who is tall,
handsome, and welldressed in the U.S. business arena can say very little,
or even nothing, and be perceived as effective or powerful. We judge
what is not said as astute because he looks the part. Face off with a man
small of stature, quiet in approach, wearing an understated, older suit
and asking questions—strategically we think we have control. Often we
tend to categorize someone by what we can see, while what we see does
not reveal principles, motivation, or character.
These categorizations reflect our high level of insecurity when inter-
acting with the “other.” Our insecurity is most apparent through the lens
of the gated community. There we are most protected against outsiders.
Within the gated community there is a synchronicity of values. Everyone
lives in similarly priced houses; drives a high-end car, such as a BMW or
Lexus; and wears Brooks Brothers suits. Even the colors of the cars seem
predetermined—subtle, earth tones, black, beige, white, and an occa-
sional life-crisis red (convertible preferably). The gated community ex-
cludes based on wealth or quality of possessions, and it includes if you
can afford the necessary accessories. Twenty-four-hour protection keeps
out anyone who threatens this sameness. What could be more of an af-
front to community? You seldom see your neighbors because you don’t
mow the lawn or clear the driveway or trim a hedge—so there is no ca-
sual, unplanned contact. As long as community is exactly “‘me”’ I won’t
88
have to be involved because I’m confident there is no threat of differ-
ence. The oddity is that our very competitive posture and our arrogant
lack of value for others are often founded on this very insecurity. We, as
Americans, work so hard to acquire what we have, and then what we have
begins to control so much of who we are, what we do, and where we live.
If you carry this analogy into the business community it works in a
similar way for similar reasons. An American company has a standard
of practices and regulations. If a foreign manager wants to change
certain processes, he or she learns that there is an “American way” of
doing things and it is the only way. If nepotism is bad, it’s bad for all
countries. Building relationships is limited to the professional and not
the familial. If contracts are not valued or needed in the same way in
India, China, or Thailand, as in the United States, then it’s not ac-
ceptable, no matter where you are negotiating the business.
There are two frameworks for building a company: one is entrepre-
neurial and the other is militaristic. The larger the company grows the
more militaristic in organizational reporting it becomes. American cor-
porations see themselves as a desirable neighborhood (as they should),
yet the criteria for moving into their neighborhood is restrictive and
growth-limiting. For example: the person in charge should be American;
and the processes for project planning, for performance reviews, for
systems, and for finance should be the same (as decided by Americans).
Shooting-from-the-hip is the respected style and the most aggressive
person will be rewarded.
In order to negotiate a respectable, actionable agreement, it has to
address the needs and cultural ways of the other team, as well as our
own. If both sides’ needs are not met, the agreement has no chance of
holding water. Addressing surface or superficial differences is a simple
introduction into appreciating differences. It is a good step forward—a
way to symbolically shake hands, safely chat, learn about their culture,
and set the tone for your relationship. The relationship will grow if
both sides move substantively to resolve problems.
89
“The apparel oft proclaims the man.”
—William Shakespeare (Hamlet, 1600)
The introduction of a person is initially without words, but with
fabric, color, and style. Ideas are dressed in the cotton or wool and
only brought out if the fabrics appeal to the “in” crowd. The style,
quality, and familiarity with the clothes either include or exclude the
foreign person. To say it another way, the gift wrapping often becomes
more important than the gift.
The best definition for a barrier that I have found is, “anything that
constrains progress or access to.” I like this definition because it in-
cludes access to information, involvement, decision-making, or even
breaking bread together at the table.
Many times just being aware of a barrier helps us to take positive
action—either climb it or walk around it. That’s the first step to valu-
ing someone or something that’s different. These barriers limit access
to, and limit input from valued perspectives and thinking. If you don’t
understand the differences of others, you tend not to solicit opinion,
idea, or fact from the foreigner. This is a critical step in valuing. One
must work to include, in discussion or input, in sharing of information,
and, most importantly, in the actual decision making process—from
beginning to end. In a negotiation, identifying and recognizing the
other’s needs—either to validate what you researched or to uncover
new needs—is the primary requirement. Some cultural barriers, such
as language or social courtesies, camouflage the true and essential needs
of the other side. Often faulty assumptions are made, and then the strat-
egy goes awry. Questioning techniques can be an instrument for har-
mony or a cacophony for failure.
Several years ago, at a neighborhood block party in the northwest
suburbs of Chicago, I was observing my young and old neighbors as they
were introduced to and interacted with Mrs. Yeh, a Chinese woman who
has lived in the neighborhood since its beginning. She is a gracious, happy,
and positive woman. She searched me out when I arrived. I introduced
her to my relatively new neighbors who were in their late 60s, similar to
Mrs. Wang. They were polite, but took leave as fast as they could. The
90
younger ones reacted the same. After asking, “Which house do you live
in?” they asked her nothing and moved on to another neighbor.
As they became more and more excluding, I started telling them about
Mrs. Yeh, the physician, her husband, an anesthesiologist; and her son
and daughter, the physicians. I brought up China and Confucius and the
poetry Mrs. Yeh writes. While discussing some of Confucius’ writing,
the other neighbor realized it sounded Christian. She couldn’t reconcile
that the Chinese held similar beliefs of virtue before Christianity came
on the scene. I believe it’s too difficult or uncomfortable for some indi-
viduals to work at understanding someone with a strong accent or differ-
ent beliefs. I kept thinking, why aren’t they clamoring to talk with her so
they can better understand a different point of view, a different culture, and
a different image? Especially a culture that is in the news every day. Some
say, if you get to know someone, it is easier to appreciate the culture. I
agree. Yet how will they ever get to know anyone different if they don’t
explore, ask, and listen? The values of our differences are not artificial;
they are below the surface and require an interest in knowing. There is a
fear, in neighborhoods and in business, to explore and possibly discover
a likeness to us that could be even better than we or our beliefs are.
Perhaps it is simply a fear of the unknown, or an apprehension of the
change of learning, or even a lazy lack of interest.
Embrace the Other

There is a Russian proverb that states, “The tears of strangers are
only water.” Because I lived above my Buczia and Dzia Dzia, I know
my Buczia lived this philosophy. Even though she and my grandfather
sponsored many relatives and friends after World War II, it took some
time before Buczia reacted to them as family. When a stranger was
finally included in our family they became family. This proverb takes
into account the virtue of empathy introduced in Chapter 14. I always
thought of my Russian, Polish family as warm, gregarious, and gener-
ous. I thought they had a “work hard, play hard” approach to living.
They bartered trades and networked and negotiated business at their
social club. They were my exposure to Eastern Europe.
91
In the spring of 2001, I worked in Krakow and St. Petersburg for

the first time. I finally got to meet my mother country. I was in shock,
and terribly disappointed. The people were so harsh, so suspicious of
everything, and angry at the world—especially the Western world. They
were not the welcoming people I had expected. I hated myself for not
liking them. After I spent 12 days touring with my husband, I came to
some conclusions: the poverty, the despair, the futility of working so
hard and getting so little for it; the old thoughts and relative comfort of
living in Communism continuously fight the new ideas of entrepreneur-
ship; and their thinking are all strongly influenced by their existing con-
dition of hopeless poverty; an abusive mafia and the richness of their
history only made it harder to accept the present. Only music and the
arts seemed to relieve the intensity of their pain. Their sensitive and
giving spirits came out with each day we spent with them.
Ludmilla, a director of our hometown school district’s sister school
in St. Petersburg, reflected the generosity of my grandparents. Ludmilla
and her husband, Valerie, offered to move from their apartment so that
we could use it instead of paying for a hotel. They prepared and served
a meal that cost them a month’s salary, and did it with love and atten-
tion. It was difficult to reconcile the clashing of the past with the op-
portunities of a questionable future. Finding value in what is foreign to
each of us is an ongoing effort, yet it is the answer to negotiating effec-
tively across the borders. Ludmilla and Valerie’s magnanimous gener-
osity shocked us and revealed the caring feeling that took priority over
money. Sometimes, in the negotiation workshops I facilitate, when one
side of the negotiating teams might give easily and often, the other side
would immediately try to take advantage of the other side’s willingness
to give a little. This thinking was short term. Being giving was not con-
sidered a difference in priorities or a strategy to initiate and to build
trust or establish a relationship.
Art Is Universal
In many of these diverse perspectives, art serves as a good role
model. In its extended diversity, it appeases many tastes. Its variances
are as numerous as there are artists. To look at art from as many
92
perspectives as possible gives us the view of a dancer, of a trucker, of
a mother, of a CEO, of a child, and of grandfather. Art interprets the
complex and difficult with an ease or pain of the receiver or the vic-
tim. Art is meant to provoke or disturb. If we dislike a work of art,
that also is a purposeful response.
“Thanks to art, instead of seeing one world, our own, we see it mul-
tiplied and as many original artists as there are, so many worlds are at
our disposal.”
—Marcel Proust, Remembrance of Things Past: The Past Recaptured
(1913–1927)
Appreciating the beauty and singularity of a culture’s art is the fin-
est compliment and expression of value. A culture’s development is
measured and held together through its arts: music, dance, painting,
paper cuttings, wood, glass, flowers, furniture, skin nailing, and porce-
lain. This is their civilization. Each culture, within its uniqueness, shares
a soul of person with every other culture, and this soul is an individual’s
right to dignity.
Prioritize Values
Differences bring depth, substance, and relativity to individual think-
ing. Sometimes one can immediately see or feel the value of a different
perspective, and other times one feels more comfortable with sameness
or with a long-held belief. Overwhelming sameness often rests in com-
placency, self-righteousness, and arrogance. Many times we claim to
hold the same values. Priority of values sets the direction of our life’s
activities. Priority of values determines our choices and often the out-
come of our actions.
One day, I was in the square in Old Krakow sitting in the sun, watch-
ing the people walk by: seminarians, priests and nuns, older men and
women, and young people. There were a few mothers with their chil-
dren, playing in the center of the court. Two little girls were together
working on a drawing. Julika was singing a song with a great deal of
verse repetition. Her friend, Tatania wanted her to stop singing. So
then Julika came running to her mother and she said, “Mommy, Tatania
wants me to stop singing and I don’t want to stop.” The mother answered
93
softly, “She doesn’t want you to sing? Then don’t. She’s your best
friend.”
I relate this incident because of my initial reaction. At first I thought,
“Julika has the right to sing if she wants. She could ask Tatania what
song she wanted to hear.” I definitely felt for Julika and was somewhat
upset with her mother for not standing up for her daughter’s rights.
Later, I realized it was a matter of priorities. My priority was the right
of the individual and Julika’s mother’s priority was friendship. Initially,
I couldn’t understand why this little happening preoccupied my think-
ing. I then realized we often share the same values with another cul-
ture, but it’s where that value sits in a priority list that creates a barrier.
Julika didn’t argue with her mother; she understood her friendship was
very important, and she didn’t want to hurt Tatania. After having reared
four children, I, too, felt their friends were valued, but at times I ap-
proached my children in a defensive way when I was trying to teach
them to be considerate of a friend. “Let Kenny go up the slide first this
time, just this one time.” Taking turns and being fair were principles
that supported their maturation, whereas just being a good friend was
left understood, unspoken.
How do you express value of another’s world? Is it through telling them
that you respect their culture? That’s akin to saying “I’m an honest person,”
or, “I’m trustworthy.” Those statements put someone on guard instead of
reassuring them. Your actions build a reputation of trust and honesty. Once
again, it’s by what you say and what you do. In the next chapter we’ll begin
the “what to do” in behavior and then in building the virtues.
Initially, you have to want to know more about the other—out of
interest or out of need. Ask more. Look for why the other does things
differently to better understand what motivates their actions. Investi-
gate the history of the culture to discover the worth of their past as it
exists now in the present.
If a cultural barrier is exclusion, then you must include. Include
“the different one” in:
B Conversation
B Meals
B Meetings
94
B Social events
B Problem-solving/discussion
B Celebrations
B Teams
B Shopping
Then include yourself in their:
B Cultural events
B Historical monuments
B Art
B Museums
B Local restaurants
B Markets for food and for local artifacts or crafts
B History
B Newspapers/books
The answer to how to value or lead cultural diversity is not a short,
simple three-step process. Valuing diversity is an ever-evolving process
of building a new intercontinental virtuous culture. A strong background
for negotiating the best solution for both cultures focuses on mutual
need and benefit. It’s the most cost effective method for creating a
productive working organization housed in the strength of its commu-
nity. To negotiate better or to secure the desired results requires an
understanding of the other side, their priorities, and their point of view.
Without asking or without exploring we decide who fits and who
doesn’t. We judge for the wrong reasons and then try to make up for it
with respectable excuses: “She’s so difficult to understand, I don’t want
to embarrass her,” or, “He gets so emotional, this is business…” or,
“He has to get more aggressive, if he wants to be heard….” We’re a
melting pot, but we want every one to melt into the pot and become
“American.” While that’s not a bad idea (in theory), it makes us think
that everyone should look, act, think, and speak “American.”
Today, offices are more virtual than they are “virtuous.” In order to
create “a new intercontinental virtuous culture,” perhaps “the virtual”
has to work on a negotiating structure for communicating respectfully by
95
e-mail, teleconference, or the Webinar. The virtual office, and its vir-
tual meetings, have often handicapped the development of honorable
relationships. The misuse or abuse of technology often sends negative
messages, whether intended or not, and these messages weaken the re-
lationship and the long-term contracts for business. Technology has
greatly helped people to meet, to work together, and to produce, yet at
the same time it has made it more difficult to build a relationship of
substance and feeling. It is often a challenge to work virtually in your
own culture. Add to this difficulty the international problem presented—
to hear an innuendo, to interpret a look, or to understand within an
accent foreign to us—these concerns often determine the outcome of a
negotiation, good or bad.
In the June 2007 Negotiator Magazine, Charles B. Craver cites a
Northwestern University study done with regard to “Conducting
Electronic Negotiations.” Craver writes:
“Bargaining involves personal interactions. It is difficult to have
good personal interactions conducted entirely in writing. It is so much
easier to establish critical rapport through in-person or telephone ex-
changes during which the parties talk directly to one another. Profes-
sors Leigh Thompson and Janice Nadler of Northwestern University
have conducted several interesting studies in this regard. They divided
students into pairs and instructed them to conduct negotiation exer-
cises entirely through e-mail exchanges. Half of the participants were
given a five-minute schmoozing telephone call during which they could
discuss their personal lives, their school experiences, and similar top-
ics. They could not talk about their negotiation exercise. When nego-
tiators who got the preliminary schmoozing phone call worked on their
exercises through e-mail exchanges, they behaved more cooperatively,
reached more agreements, and achieved more efficient arrangements
than the participants who had no preliminary phone calls.
“It is thus important for persons who plan to conduct their nego-
tiations through e-mail exchanges to take a few minutes to telephone
each other in an effort to get to know one another and establish some
rapport.”
96
This is excellent advice, not only for the international exchange,
but for any electronic discussion. Designate time only for a casual con-
versation—weather, family, hobbies…. To know the other sides’ pri-
orities of values, familial and business, to address their concerns first,
and to listen without anticipative judgment, will give you an edge in
every negotiation. To stay focused on the issue, the solution, and/or the
process will keep you moving with the other side toward mutual ben-
efits in the final results. Once you delineate the structure to be followed
electronically then the verbal behaviors take the lead in determining
your results.
Knowing the other side’s priority of values gives you a more knowl-
edgeable way to approach: deciding where to begin in order to have
them listen, where to progress, and how to ultimately secure agree-
ment. Knowing their perspective creates a more accepting environment
for the business-focused conference calls. Their priorities become part
of your strategy. Trust insures movement toward your prioritized of
needs. Together, a harmony of perspectives grows.
Snapshot of Poland
The Communist regime was overthrown in Poland in 1989. It is the
biggest Slavic country in the European Union. Poland is a country that
has lost its identity several times. It dates back to the 10th century and
often is referred to as an excellent example of a transition country. A
symbol of resistance against totalitarian systems, Poland is now build-
ing a democratic system—a parliamentary republic—and free market
economy. Because of its history of national ownership, the Polish people
exhibit a resiliency and a true entrepreneurial spirit. Poland is now a
parliamentary republic.
Located between Germany and Russia, the Poles consider them-
selves a western European nation. Their strong belief in the Roman
Catholic Church kept Poland less Communist during that era. The
Poles are indebted to the Church for keeping their cultural identity.
Catholicism is the only religion in Poland today. Although some of the
97
communist attitude still remains today. Poland is a multiparty democ-

racy with a president, a prime minister, and two legislative houses.
Poles are friendly, industrious people;they love to talk, and conver-
sation is highly valued. They are more ceremonial than Americans in
dress, in welcoming, and in manners. Once again, building relation-
ships is key to doing business. Poles are friendly, industrious people.
They love to talk and conversation is highly valued. They are more
ceremonial than Americans in dress, in welcoming, and in manners.
Once again, building relationships is key to doing business. Poland has
been most loyal to the United States. As a result, Poles are more open
to change, to new business products, and new ideas.
B Poles tend to be conceptual and analytical in thinking, but they
value relationships over the law.
B Truth is determined by both objective facts and subjective
feelings.
B Don’t show superiority—instead learn a few Polish words.
B A show of “economic” imperialism irritates.
B A colleague in Krakow, Kris Gluc, describes the ignorance
of some businessmen who visit with this statement, “Don’t
be surprised with civilization and no “white bears in the
streets,” Learn about the culture, the history, geography,
and sports.
B While the fall of communism makes decision-making more
of an individual responsibility in Poland, it doesn’t exclude
reaching group consensus.
B Poland is a male-dominated society.
B Shake hands when you meet and when you leave. Include it
with an exchange of business cards and casual conversation.
B Address Poles with formal titles such as Mr. or Mrs. and
their name.
98
B Avoid loud behavior. Poles are soft spoken.
B Women who speak more forthrightly might face a bit of re-
sistance from their male counterparts.
B Sunday is a traditional day for family.
B Dress is formal and conservative—tie and jacket for dinner.
B Poles stay up late. So should you.
B Vodka is the real drink. Don’t get in a contest; leave a little
in your glass.
B Toast “Na zdrovya.”
B Do not bring up your background if you are German,
Hungarian, Russian, or Jewish.
B Shake hands. For friends and relatives, kiss cheeks three
times and hug.
B Business dress is formal and conservative. Dark suits for
men and women (and often dresses for women).
B A gift is appropriate at the first meeting with a Polish busi-
ness person.
B When visiting the home, always bring a gift. If it is flowers,
make it an odd number of stems (even numbers are bad luck).
Red roses have a romantic implication, so if you bring them,
you had better be prepared to propse marriage. Chrysan-
themums are saved for sadness and funerals.
B Always initially address a Polish person with Mr./Mrs./Ms.
along with with their surname.
B Business lunches and dinners are popular.
B It is customary for a foreigner to offer to pay.
B Meetings can start at 8 a.m. Business lunches could be as
late as 4 or 5 p.m., ending the work day.
B Dinner is around 8 to 8:30 p.m.
B Requests for appointments should be made in writing; e-mail
is appropriate.
99
B Lunches and dinners (at clubs and restaurants, not homes)

are acceptable. Breakfast is not.
Negotiations
B Poles can be tough, cheap, and cautious in negotiations.
B Have proposals, reports, and promotional material printed
in Polish.
B Be prepared, knowledgeable, patient, and polite.
B Do not fill the silence.
B Negotiations can take a long time.
B Facts and logical development to a sound conclusion show
respect to the Poles.
B New entrepreneurs want to move along efficiently and
quickly.
B Poles can be very tough clients, insisting on their own terms.
There is a certain pride in being difficult.
B Build flexibility into your options.
B A local representative is inherent to successful outcomes—
Polish businesses run on relationships.
B Bring many business cards—preferably printed in both
English and Polish.
B Data is important, yet Poles tend to go with their gut feelings—
so once again, the relationship is critical.
B Cite examples of similar business deals that were success-
ful, especially deals with respected clients.
B Make eye contact and be yourself; Poles are sensitive to
insincerity.
B Meaningful conversation is appreciated after business is finished.
B Sincere compliments are welcome, but if they are too frequent
and public, they will lack sincerity in the eyes of the Poles.
B Do not hold a one-on-one private conversation while in the
group.
B Do not sit with one ankle resting on the other knee.
100
Five Main Negotiating Styles Are:
1. compromise (yes—especially win-win)
2. bargaining (quite rarely)
3. coercion (hardly acceptable)
4. emotion (sometimes a little)
5. logical reasoning (very important)
Tips for Doing Business

B Learn anything you can in the Polish language—any effort
is a compliment to them.
B Smiles are reserved for friends.
B Still male dominated—business women are often not taken
seriously.
B Be prepared to drink a lot while doing business.
101
Build a Trustworthy Relationship
CHAPTER 6:
Build a TTrust
rust worthy
rustworthy
Rel
Relaationship:
The TTrust
rust Model
“Few things help an individual more than to place responsibility

upon him and to let him know that you trust him.”
—Booker T. Washington
Agenda
A. Organizational Alignment Model.
B. Trans-cultural Alignment Model.
C. Trust Model.
Aligning a corporate mission statement with its practices and be-

haviors is essential. It supports a strong business and a doable business
plan. It’s just like parenting: If you don’t do what you tell your children
to do, they follow your example.
Strategic planning became en vogue in the 1970s. It was always a
part of doing business but it was called different names and often had a
different emphasis. Today, almost every company includes its mission,
vision, and select pieces of its plan online. In the early 1980s, I was
elected to a board of education for a large consolidated district in the
northwest suburbs of Chicago. I, along with a recognized businessman,
103
ran on the platform of developing a strategic plan for the district. This
helped get us elected because most of the voters were businesspeople.
The plan aimed to keep us fiscally sound, focused on results, and was
goal oriented. As a result, every child would have the opportunity to
perform to the best of his or her ability, and, within three years, every
child would achieve 90 percent of his or her potential. I stayed on the
board for a decade and the plan played an important part in moving the
district toward continuous improvement. The superintendents took lead-
ership roles in education in the state and nationally. A strategic plan is
critical because it sets an organization’s direction, the route, and com-
munication to the organization’s employees.
Organizational Alignment Model

(Adapted with permission from Donald T. Tosti, Ph.D., Vanguard
Consulting Group)
The “What” The “How”
Mission/Vision
B
B B BB
Strategic Goals Values

B B B
Objectives Practices
Activities Behaviors
Results
Dr. Tosti’s simple Organizational Alignment Model is headed by

the mission/vision. The left side represents the strategic plan set to
carry out the mission. Following down the left side, you should begin
104
with the strategic goals to the objectives, specify how to reach the goals,
and then detail the activities needed to get there. In comparing infor-
mation on different company Websites, you would probably notice that
many are quite similar and would more than likely include capturing
more of the market share in their particular business. Product or ser-
vice would be highlighted with the benefits and added value. Anything
that would be what your company is about or does would be part of this
side.
The right side deals with the way you’re going to do business. Sim-
ply put, it’s your business values or how you will do business. For ex-
ample, Saturn decided there would be no price haggling with suppliers.
Instead they would offer a good, competitive price and then partner.
Partnering with their suppliers was a business value—how they would
do business. From the value follows the practices that help facilitate or
demonstrate their value. Together, Saturn and its supplier would re-
search and determine a fair, competitive price. Together, they would
determine how to cut costs without jeopardizing quality and then how
to assure quality while minimizing error. The behaviors of individuals
should reflect the values and practices employed. The Saturn team should
elicit opinion from the supplier. They would also invite the supplier to
critical planning sessions. They would not exclude the supplier from
information in order to keep control; instead, they would keep them
updated on changes, progress, and feedback—as partners.
This “how to” side of the Alignment Model is what will help to
assure a company’s economic leadership in this new century of global
markets. It’s how you do your business that will distinguish you from a
competitor. Exclusivity of product or technology is minimal today.
Whether someone copies it or brings a new feature to technology, its
average of 60 days exclusivity will not drive a company’s success. Yet it
is essential to demonstrate how you promote your product, how you
develop business relationships, and what priority people receive in your
organization. Negotiation becomes a priority in building the relation-
ships needed inside your organization and in the external business com-
munity. Telling someone what to do will not be as effective as asking
them how, together, you can finish the project on time. Your business
105
or corporate culture will reflect your priority of values and will direct
how you do business.
In today’s world market, diversity is the core of every operation
and project. It’s the machination of a complex: an interpersonal,
intricately structured organ functioning to produce a fluid and
synchronized person-to-person activity. An interaction of substantive
understanding could result in superior solutions, a mutuality of value,
and a respect for the strength of differences. This is accomplished
through a good negotiating process that leads to a collaborative approach
to solving problems. Quality of product or service, productivity, and
time are each a result of negotiating well the relationships and the pro-
cesses. The cultural mix (business and national) adds value to your
business and helps to determine the targeted results.
Trans-cultural Alignment Model

The National The Universal
Vision
B
B BBB
Cultures Values/Virtues
BB B
Customs Practices
Traditions Behaviors
Results
Trust
Building Relationships
Improves Productivity
The Trans-cultural Alignment evolves from the right side of the Orga-
nizational Alignment Model, the business values and how we do business.
106
Today, diverse cultures are an issue and a reality of a formidable pres-
ence. The person who leads in diversity leads the global market today.
It isn’t a choice; it’s a requirement. The “they” of today pulls in every-
one including the white, Western male. Everyone is someone else’s
“they.” Why are we still using holsters and guns when the competition
is between the brains, the technologies, and the business strategies?
This alignment model addresses the same mission/vision, which, today,
almost every company has to address. The cultural diversity issue is an
integral part of a strategic plan. Understanding this requirement is un-
derstanding the need of negotiating within your organization and exter-
nally with the customer or supplier.
The left side of the Trans-cultural Alignment Model delineates the
individual cultures. It accommodates any national culture. The align-
ment would involve whether the culture and its traditions reinforced
the behaviors, and then, whether those behaviors were in alignment
with individual dignity. Each country’s culture has definitive customs
and traditions that were meant to exclude other countries and cultures.
It is most important to recognize these distinct differences in customs
and traditions. Awareness of these customs and willingness to use them
out of respect is very important. For example, to hand over your busi-
ness card with both hands in Hong Kong and then read the other’s
business card when it is handed to you shows that you value the culture.
The left side of the model is an expression of respect for individual
culture. Alone, this side will not allow you to build the trust that you
need. The question is: Will this be the deciding factor in generating and
developing a long-term relationship or for setting an environment con-
ducive to building trust? From the first exchange, you want to establish
a respectful and well-functioning association, and recognize their cus-
toms and traditions is an excellent introduction.
The right side of the model includes the Four Strategic Virtues, which,
when used consistently on their own, will build an unshakeable trust. The
behaviors, along with the recognition of customs and traditions, will re-
inforce the trust needed to maintain the relationship. This side of the
model is how you should work across cultures in an acceptable and hon-
orable manner. It defines values, practices, and behaviors—the same as
107
the Organizational Alignment Model. The values here refer to what I call
the Four Strategic Virtues: Consideration, Acceptance, Respect, and Empathy.
In general, these virtues are valued by all cultures. It is the priority of
values within each culture, however, that often adds tension to an interac-
tion between the cultures. Within the U.S. business arena, the bottom line
affected by time and quality is most important. Money and time lead in the
priority of values. One of the drawbacks of being able to make something
of yourself is that sometimes your worth is judged in dollars. Children
learn from every commercial on TV, each marketing piece in magazines or
newspapers and billboards: “You’re worth what you can buy.” Good judg-
ment is often determined by what kind of car you buy. Leadership and
influence are frequently identified by the clothes you can afford. Charac-
ter is assumed by the house in which you live. Family is valued, but if it
interferes with professional advancement, the job wins.
For several years, I was consulting with a U.S. hi-tech company in
their Vancouver office. During one of their restructurings they told 27
of the engineers that they would have to move to one of their U.S.
offices or lose their jobs. The economy was strong, and engineers were
in high demand, so several weeks later the entire group, except for three
or four, informed the CEO in the U.S. that they were leaving the com-
pany. Each had found work with another organization. Management in
the United States was irate. They had misjudged the other culture’s
priorities. The Canadians valued family and country more than a ca-
reer with that company. U.S. management gave the ultimatum based on
an American priority of values. This incident also reflects the weak
leveraging with threats and ultimatums—unless you are willing to live
with the outcome of either choice.
This priority of values also affronts many Asian cultures, because
their first priority is relationship and then learning. If you approach
them with the benefits of saving time and ultimately translating that
into money, you lose their attention. If you talk about the people and
the benefits—from housing to food to education—it will serve as a gra-
cious invitation to work hard together. In a negotiation, being able to
identify the priority of needs of the other culture can help you reach
your highest aspiration of needs.
108
Certain universal, strategic virtues round off our competitive edges
and lay the foundation for Trust: Respect, Acceptance (appreciation
for, value of), Open-mindedness (vulnerability—sincere yet strategic),
and Empathy, recognition of the other person’s need. These qualities
are not exclusive to competition; they enhance the positives of com-
petitive positioning. Confucius spent his life in search of “the benevo-
lent, virtuous man.” According to his Analects, Confucius was not
looking for a reward of afterlife or recognition. Rather, he searched for
an understanding and to get “closer to rightness.” Voltaire, the 18th-
century French philosopher, defined virtue as “a commerce of good
actions.” It truly is the business of honorable living. Confucius also
referred to virtues as actions that took you closer to rightness.
Respect is defined as the way you behave toward others as if they
have innate value. For example, you wouldn’t interrupt someone’s
thought or idea out of respect, and you wouldn’t take a phone call while
you’re talking with someone, because you value them and their time. If
someone is speaking with a thick accent, you would apologize for not
knowing better their language, and indicate how beneficial for both of
you that they understand your language so well.
Acceptance means your behavior does not indicate “superior” ver-
sus “inferior” in the way you treat any other person. Humility replaces
a boastful posture, and you begin to see the actual value or worth in
differences and, at times, you recognize the similarities within oppo-
sites. Making another feel inferior is an unforgettable insult. If you
have to tell someone how smart you are, then you haven’t learned quite
enough; if you have to tell someone how much money you have, the
money has controlled you and will never be enough; if you have to tell
someone how honest or nice you are, it’s a warning! What you say and
do is the other person’s only criteria.
I was delivering training in a refinery when the general manager of
the 5,000 employees called me into his office. A group of Chinese busi-
nessmen were visiting the refinery the next day, and he wanted me to
give him a couple of pointers on how to act with them. I gave him some
of the typical do’s and don’ts, such as present your business card with
109
both hands; make certain you read the ones that are given to you and
make a comment, if possible; slightly nod and bow, and so on.
I didn’t see the general manager for several weeks. When next we
met, I asked him how things went with the Chinese visitors. He said it
went well, but he didn’t do anything I had suggested because he felt too
awkward and clumsy. I told him that was the very reason he should
have done it. His awkwardness would have shown respect and value of
their traditions.
On another occasion, a senior executive from a major corporation
was working with a special partnership in Hawaii. Though all members
were from the United States, there are many traditional differences.
This executive appeared at their negotiations in a suit and tie out of a
formal respect for the group. For about three days, the executive from
the mainland would appear in his suit and tie, and they would appear in
their Hawaiian dress shirts. On the fifth day, the mainland manager had
gone shopping and bought shirt to wear to the meeting. When he en-
tered the conference room, there sat the three Hawaiians in suits and
ties. This is acceptance, value, and respect. An embroidered shirt brought
the group to the best of agreements. Both parties showed they cared
about the other.
A vulnerability or openness shadows the Acceptance Virtue. This
shred of vulnerablility highlights the sincerity of one’s acceptance. You
have the strength to reveal an issue, a need, or perhaps a happening
that reflects a possible weakness in your processes—the beginning of
trust. It also says that, whatever you say, you should expect a consid-
ered, nonjudgmental response. In American culture, this is often seen
as undermining our competitive edge. In a competition, one has to keep
the upper hand. It matters what you reveal and to whom. It’s difficult
to build trust if neither party is willing to expose a wart or weakness.
My husband and I were married for about two years and were hav-
ing one of our more than 200 arguments about being thoughtful. After
the argument wandered into the trust area my husband said, “You just
don’t trust me or my love….” It dawned on me that my husband wasn’t
yet willing to show any fault, failing, or weakness. He wasn’t willing to
be exposed or vulnerable with me. That made it very difficult to establish
110
trust. It was a shock to me: My husband actually didn’t trust my re-
sponse, my reaction, or my love. Essentially, he didn’t yet trust me.
By its definition this vulnerability factor expects a considered nonevaluative
response. The same is true for a business colleague, client, or employee.
Empathy, in the business sense, is to recognize the needs of others
first. Coupled with this recognition is that others must see or hear your
concern for their need. This is a constant essential to have the right to
influence. In negotiations, it’s often said that the fastest route to get-
ting your need answered is to service the other party’s need. It’s not
enough to take care of whatever you assume they want or need, they
have to be aware that you’re doing it in a nonbraggadocio way.
Learning is not age discriminating. All learning is change. With the
wisdom of age and the ability to keep sorting it out and understanding
with depth the reasons behind actions, solutions, and behaviors, we
should be protecting and pursuing the opinion of an older person. Older
people in our society tend to live up to the expectations of its society—
inactivity and exclusion from real life and discussion. Our priority of
value dictates this outcome.
Many times, our expectations of a person create the actions and
inactivity of that person. Because I am progressing with speed into
“elder-dom,” it has amazed me where we, the older generations, are
placed in priority within our young country. Many older people are
more resilient than those ages 25 to 40. They can also balance the sad-
ness and joy of life by setting a priority to the changes.
You seldom hear, “Let’s go ask Grandma; at her age she has a bet-
ter clarity of what should be done. I trust her judgment” or “Mom,
you’ve got to come. You always have a better perspective and a much
wiser solution…” People ahould ask the basic question, “What do you
think should be done, Mom?” and follow up that question with an in-
terested, “Why?” Our behavior or way of treating elders creates the
results we get. If we treat them as a mind with no good ideas or creativ-
ity, that’s what we will get. When we treat them as incompetent, they
retreat into the inactivity of an incompetent.
111
This holds true for any of our international clients or suppliers—if

our expectations are those of less competency or a lack of reliability,
their actions will reflect our expectations. I had to force myself not to
think less of my mother’s abilities at 85 years old. All her life, she compe-
tently took care of and raised six highly educated and accomplished chil-
dren, worked full time for half of that time, and learned the engineering
skills required by her job in order to instruct graduate engineers.
The Behavioral Approach Model displays how our own behaviors
promote the reacting behaviors of others and, in essence, strongly in-
fluence the results.
Behavioral Approach
Values
Attitudes B Behaviors
B Results
B
B
Confident
Integrity
B Expectations B Trust
Results are a direct outcome of your expectations and your behaviors.

The Chinese, in their older and more mature culture, honor and
respect the elder person, and place much value on their opinion and
their suggestion. Teenagers can be seen walking with their arm wrapped
around the shoulder of their grandparent, talking intensely with them
and enjoying every minute of exchange. Interest in each other is most
apparent. A family, out to dinner, automatically includes the grandpar-
ents. It is an expectation. The results reflect the expectations.
The left side of the Trans-cultural Model delineates the customs
and traditions that have been valued for centuries by a specific culture.
112
The right side includes the expectations of the different cultures, and
this directly affects how an individual treats a different person. If you
expect every Asian to be passive and quiet and your response is to talk
over them, more loudly and more aggressively, that will be the result.
Yet knowing they are quieter, you could ask them nonthreatening ques-
tions of their experience. You could listen and sometimes repeat what
they’ve said showing them that you value their input—you actually lis-
tened and heard. If you are working with a Hispanic colleague, and you
believe their “emotional” responses would be better heard if said in an
enthusiastic well-structured delivery, the structure itself gives a sense
of order and credibility to their ”emotion,” which is valued as enthusi-
asm and commitment to their job.
To change the expectations of a business culture or how a business
interacts with others is not only possible, but also essential to the long-
term success and even the existence of an organization. If the organiza-
tion consists of diverse employees, your choices are focused on using
the individual talents to maximize productivity and quality, or to work
around them or “in spite” of them. If you’re an organization that does
not yet have a diverse workforce, you’re lagging in this global market-
place. Your response to the varied needs of this marketplace could be
competitively delayed.
The workforce should reflect its community. If it’s a workforce that
is synchronized in its efforts, its response time, and in reaching its goals,
it is one that leads in diversity.
The Organizational Model and the Trans-cultural Model expose these
differences and then how to find opportunity in those differences. The
Organizational Model shows us the company’s plan and what they must
accomplish. That’s the left side. Then the right side shows “how” the
company will deliver this product or service. It delineates the company’s
business values. It determines if an organization will partner or compete
with their suppliers. It describes the scenario of the “customer is always
right,” and it carries out the constancy of a company’s key beliefs.
If a company is arrogant and follows hardball tactics or strong-
arming a supplier, the behavior reflects their business values. These
113
values could vary depending on external factors, such as the economy

or competition. Yet a company who takes advantage of a supplier in a
good growth period and then expects the supplier to be there for them
when times are tough will fail. And the reverse is true, if, during a slow
economy the company abuses the supplier: when the economy is thriv-
ing the supplier in high demand will service the abusive company last,
slowing product to market.
Because the new marketplace has a grand diversity, how we are able
to relate and service the needs of each individual and then build on that
relationship is going to determine the height of our success. It is not
the product or the service, but how we deliver it and to whom we relate
its mutuality of value. Having the most advanced in technology will be
expected and standard. Knowing and valuing your client will be a dis-
tinction for choice. Because your client, supplier, or partner will be
operating in a global setting, negotiating well will assure resiliency, lead-
ership, and long-term retention of relationships.
Snapshot of Hong Kong

From the first time I worked in Hong Kong, I felt as though it was
more like New York than China. Hong Kong was a British Colony for
100 years, and Chinese and English are the official languages. The capi-
talistic, entrepreneurial spirit of Hong Kong has helped it become a
financial and business leader in the far East and the rest of the world.
In fact, Hong Kong is often considered the economic and cultural link
between the capitalistic West…and the Communist East. The people
of Hong Kong, similar to Westerners, are greater risk-takers than their
Asian neighbors. But at the same time, they are a collectivist culture—
loyal, close, and committed to groups such as immediate and extended
families.
The people of Hong Kong are predominantly Chinese, yet Hong
Kong is very distinct from the Chinese culture. Hong Kong embodies
an intense business culture—entrepreneurial and fast-paced. Being the
finance center for the East, Hong Kong partners financial wisdom and
business acumen with building relationships that strengthen their exist-
ence and support continued growth. Hong Kong consistently improves
114
its leadership in the business world based on the positive attributes of
both cultures—East and West.
B Never confront a Chinese person in public.
B “Saving face” is central to the Hong Kong culture. A person’s
reputation and status reflect on his or her entire family and
on social groups in which they hold membership. Causing
any embarrassment can jeopardize your business.
B When making decisions and acting upon them, Hong Kong
Chinese are guided by their feelings, similar to other Asian
cultures, but they also have confidence in the ideology of
the group. Some of those who are higher educated may be
comfortable with objective facts over personal feelings. Once
again, Hong Kong Chinese are a combination, and they em-
phasize wholeness.
B The color red is considered a lucky color, so wear a red tie
while in Hong Kong. In Japan, on the other hand, it is a
color of death, so avoid wearing it.
B Making a toast is a very important part of the Hong Kong
culture, and the guest of honor always makes the first toast.
B Do not blow your nose in public or at the table.
B Drinking is an important part of relationship-building in
Hong Kong. Even if you don’t drink, take a sip here and
there.
B Gift-giving is an inherent part of the Chinese culture.
B They may applaud you during your visit. A middle school
student body applauded me many times during a day I once
spent with them. I was also expected to applaud back—they
loved it even more when I did it. It is a sign of respect.
B A handshake is common in Hong Kong, and a slight bow for
respect is acceptable.
115
B Appointments are recommended and punctuality is an

expectation.
B Names are written last name first, middle name, and first
name last. Address the Chinese with their title and last name.
B The people of Hong Kong respect and welcome silence to
think and reason. Be patient and allow this courtesy.
B Decision-making is a slow, deliberate process for the Chinese.
B Hong Kong combines Western with Eastern cultures, so they
are familiar with the way of doing business in the United
States.
B Business cards are very important in Hong Kong—when pre-
sented to you, look at it, carefully place in your card case,
or place it on the table in front of you. You must offer your
card in return so as not to insult the person. This simple
omission could prevent you from doing business.
B Hong Kong businesses are generally small and family owned,
employing family members.
B Hong Kong Chinese do not appreciate aggressive, bold
behavior.
Negotiations
B Determine the position and status of each member of the
Chinese negotiating team. It is important to direct your at-
tention and comments to the senior negotiator.
B Ask them to speak first, out of respect. If they insist you
take the first turn, deliver a portion of your presentation
first.
B Present your materials in a humble and comfortable pace.
Humility is respected and aggression is inexcusable. If you
are too bold, you could lose the business.
B Tea often has a consistent presence during negotiations.
Accept and drink the tea, but only after your host starts to
drink it.
116
B Keep the same negotiating team throughout the negotiation.
B A yes does not always signal an agreement. In Hong Kong, it
is a manner of speaking, and it often means, “Yes, I hear
what you say.”
B The Chinese avoid confrontation because it dishonors some-
one, so they will not say no to you. They frequently say “per-
haps,” or “Let me think about that” or even, “It could be
difficult.” These each could mean no. You have to continue
to better understand their needs.
B As Sun Tzu said in the Art of War, “Offer option [to avoid
war].” Prepare many options before going into the negotia-
tion. Options offer some valuable alternatives, and they could
also offer the Chinese business person a way to “save face”
by not accepting your proposal.
B The negotiations may be very slow, with keen attention paid
to details, details, and more details. Near the end, the Chinese
might request a large discount because they know you are
ready to close.
B Harmony is an underlying objective of every negotiation, so
avoid conflict and emotional display.
B Age is revered. Your lead negotiator should be 50 years old
or older. For us older than age 50, this is a wonderful chair
to sit in.
B Hierarchy is also respected and a high priority in the busi-
ness culture, no matter how small the company. Hierarchy
may be determined by position, age, and gender.
B There is a strong authoritative, formal structure in Hong
Kong requiring obedience and objectivity.
B Criticism should be delivered discreetly and kindly—and not
in public.
117
The Business of Good Actions
CHAPTER 7:
The Business of Good
Actions:
Four Str
Str
traategic Virtues
Virtues
“Virtue between men is a commerce of good actions….”

—Voltaire, Philosopher, Philosophical Dictionary (1764)
Agenda
A. The Behavioral Approach Model.
B. Four Strategic Virtues: Consideration, Acceptance,
Respect, and Empathy
A 10-year-old, black sedan taxi, buffed slick to a metallic shine pulled

up to the curb. A young man in a dark suit came around to where I was
standing and opened the door for me. I slipped into the car. It was
meticulous inside and it gave me the feeling of being in a new car when
everything still seems straight from the manufacturer. Instead of a new
car leather scent the inside released the sweet fresh air of a spring flower
garden. There was an air freshener hanging from the rear view mirror.
The “worry balls”’ were rattling in the armrest and next to the meter
sat a jar of warm water. He spoke English with a melody of inflection
that created an accent that distorted the literacy of his words. The trip
119
to TianJin from Beijing took us about two and a half hours. The oppor-
tunity for the driver to practice his English with a Westerner, and my
desire to learn more about this curious country, generated an energetic
conversation that lasted the entire trip.
We talked about my country, the United States (his interest), and
about China and the Chinese people (my interest). His questions were
focused on the freedom of the person—but not in a longing sort of
way—in a need to understand sort of way. He wasn’t concerned with
what people had or owned. His inquisitive exchange was focused on
education, technology, music, past times, and later sex or the freedom
of it. A favorite television program seen there was Dynasty—an old U.S.
television series. Throughout his conversation a most sophisticated
English vocabulary emerged and the grammar was almost impeccable.
He was taught English in school, but most of his learning was self-initi-
ated. What was and continues to be astounding to me is the consistent
involvement with thoughts of Confucius in our casual conversation.
We spoke of building relationships and he interjects: “One must do
their best for others and be trustworthy so that one moves closer to
rightness…” (Book XII of the Analects of Confucius). He continued in
support of the “trustworthy criteria” and said, in order to be trustwor-
thy, “One must never put off the fulfillment of a promise to the next
day.” (Analects)
He was an ordinary person, as he referred to himself, who spoke
confidently of the philosophy of a man of letters. This happened fre-
quently in China. People believed, spoke, and acted on the words of
Confucius. Everyone wanted to learn more as part of the set of prin-
ciples and beliefs that the great philosopher taught. Learning for the
sake of becoming a better person was part of the living culture.
Confucius, the revered Chinese philosopher, dedicated his life to
the search of the benevolent, virtuous man…and to be this man. As a
philosopher in 495 B.C. his Analects validate the universal and classic of
the integrity of the individual and the primary concern of the respect of
the individual. His focus seems to be on the practical actions one must
take to get to that level of benevolence and wisdom, similar to Voltaire’s
thinking.
120
Traveling for business can often be lonely: eating alone, sitting in a
hotel room alone, sitting in a hotel lobby alone. In the beginning of my
work days in Asia, I would tour all the sites, from the Hidden City to the
Great Wall—these were all my activities. Working across the continents,
I found there were a lot of empty hours to fill. I spent the time observing
people, listening to them, talking with them. In the beginning, I won-
dered what makes one person so appealing with the Chinese and another
so offensive? Many people would also question me as to how I could get
a timely response and action from our Chinese colleagues.
On Saturdays or Sundays I would often take walks on the main
streets or sit in a café and watch the people walk along the street. A
singular question kept me watching, “What makes a person charismatic
internationally?” One person can appeal to several different cultures
without changing his or her character or personality. I began to ob-
serve and tabulate their specific behaviors, and the affect of those be-
haviors on the response of the other person.
Looks, social or professional position, family name, and perceived
intelligence can all contribute to a person’s “charisma.” Depending on
the audience and the situation, these assets could support “charisma,”
yet the distinguishing factors rest in a person’s sense of honor. This is
what some writers call character. Initially any one of these factors could
impress an individual. They could even get a group to listen for a while,
but it is the Four Strategic Virtues that give a person an appeal and a
framework for building trust.
Working around the world, experiencing the cultural differences as a
stranger or foreigner, searching for a better understanding of cultural
distinctions (each on its own), led me back to the human, universal prin-
ciples that build trust. This priority of Four Strategic Virtues was the
outcome of studying more about the Asian cultures and the influence of
Confucius on those cultures. I found that building relationships within
one’s own culture or within other cultures required a basic set of principles.
The Four Strategic Virtues are:
1. Consideration
2. Acceptance
121
3. Respect
4. Empathy
Although there are more attributes that contribute to building trust,
these universal virtues are identified tools used to overcome the cul-
tural barriers in the global marketplace. They can be supported for
consistency by the appropriate verbal behaviors. The U.S. business style
is often described as: aggressive, competitive, hardball, in-your-face,
take-the-bull-by-the-horns, and shoot from the hip. In Western culture
these ways of acting are admirable behavior for a business person. At
the same time, the U.S. business person is often described as: warm,
friendly, open, and often inviting.
The aggressive behaviors have become acceptable in the U.S. busi-
ness culture, yet they are often accompanied by cutting people off, com-
peting with suggestions versus building on another’s suggestion, and
consistently telling rather than asking. Acceptable behavior doesn’t mean
good or appropriate behavior. Today we are merging with so many dif-
ferent cultures, and it requires understanding of the other culture’s
priorities and needs.
When referring to the old word virtue, I think of it in terms of
Voltaire, the 18th-century French philosopher, as he described it in his
dictionary. Voltaire’s definition of Virtue places the emphasis on ac-
tion, not on the passivity of chastity: “It is the business of good action,
good doing.” Based on this definition, a person could be virtuous with-
out denying every bigoted belief or thought. Now, if they put those
thoughts into action they could become a man or woman without virtue
and without personal dignity. Yet a person who works with others in
the pursuit of doing “the right,” “the beneficial for community, busi-
ness, or social,” is described as “charismatic” or “good” by people from
all cultures.
These Four Strategic Virtues offer a framework for action and for
building relationships that will cross cultural barriers in the global mar-
ket. You can best improve the bottom line by developing the best in
your people. In the outcome, they perform as much for the bottom line
as do quality standards or cost criteria. A staff that embodies these
virtues assures a work environment of: fewer misunderstandings, better
122
solutions, peak productivity, less absenteeism, and a more competent
and reliable workforce. This business of good actions keeps people re-
spectful and considerate of each other’s need.
These Four Virtues: Consideration, Acceptance, Respect, and Empathy,
work in every culture and with every segment of diversity. With regard
to change, they also assure a high success of implementation of the
“newnesses” required by ongoing change.
These strategic virtues transcend differences and bring honor to
differences. The first virtue, Consideration, is defined as how one re-
sponds to another’s question or statement. I remember, when I was a
young child, I hated asking my mother for permission to do something,
because she was the overprotective, Russian mother who always an-
swered no before any explanation or reason was given. I wanted to ask
my dad because he would initially question me, give comments, and
never make a judgment statement of me or my idea or question. In the
workplace today, people are afraid to ask a question or give an opinion.
They don’t want to look stupid or not prepared or naïve or incompe-
tent. They also don’t want to feel demeaned by the response. If my
mother said no without hearing me out, I felt devalued for a couple of
hours…sometimes angry, other times frustrated. Also, I didn’t know
her motives, I only knew her answer. As I grew older, I learned to begin
with, “Don’t say anything, Mom, until I say. Okay?” That little process
worked, and it diffused my mother’s fear that something would happen
to me.
It’s the same in the workplace. A person should be able to ask any
question or give any statement and be given a response that values their
thinking and signals respect. I have heard so many times, “Why do you
ask? Didn’t you read my e-mail?” A person should be able to comment
and give an opinion without a judgmental comeback, such as, “That
sounds risky, did you give it any thought?” That simple come back can
impact productivity to a low, while establishing a firm basis for a
threatening business culture. Responses similar to these, undermine trust
and result in a cautious and apprehensive work environment. One of the
primary objectives in a negotiation session is to keep the climate open to
discussion, so that you can find out more about their needs and eventually
123
work toward a solution and a solid agreement. This first virtue gener-
ates the foundation for building trust.
Expectations strongly influence the outcome of an interaction, a
decision, and a plan. They are an integral part of a goal set—the ex-
pected results of reaching that goal. It’s the same with people: what are
the results you expect from them, from their actions, from their work?
When you expect them to be competent and reliable they usually are. It
doesn’t mean training isn’t needed or guidance is eliminated, it simply
means to treat them with respect and integrity.
My dad treated me, from the time I was born, as if I was capable and
reliable…and I responded to his expectations of me. It’s not to say my
mother didn’t. She showed great confidence in each of our abilities, yet
her fear of someone hurting us undermined her expression of confidence.
I know when someone treats me as if I was capable and reliable, as
if I had the ability to produce—I usually deliver. I also know if their
expectations of me are minimal, I lose energy and focus. It’s most diffi-
cult to respond contrary to the expectations for any duration of time.
This reminds me of the study done by the Harvard School of Education
with a local high school. The teachers were told at the beginning of the
school year that the groups were divided by their abilities: one, gifted;
another group, high achievers; a third group, average; and the final
group, below average in capabilities. After the year was up, and the
teachers compared how their classes performed, the gifted excelled as
well as the high achievers, the average were mediocre, and the below
average barely hung in there. Then the teachers were told that the stu-
dents were, in fact, randomly mixed among the several classes. Their
expectations drove the performance of the students—the same as our
bias with its accompanying behaviors of expectation—it drives the results.
I have visited many schools in China and the students relate a great
deal of their questions to my family and my children. They are not
afraid or even timid when using complimentary statements regarding
my person. My first visit to a middle school in Beijing was one of my
best experiences.
I met with several classes. The students had the opportunity to ask
me questions and then we would interact in English, so the students
124
would have the rare opportunity to practice with someone from the
United States. They gathered closely around me after the session was
over to give me little gifts and to take pictures. The last question came
from a 15-year-old young man. Of course, it had to do with Madonna.
He asked if I knew anything about what she liked and didn’t like and if
I ever saw her in person. I answered that I knew one thing: she would
think he was very handsome and would probably want to meet him.
They all laughed and joined in with many other questions. At the end,
one of the young men stood up and said, “I like you Madame Lee, you
are beautiful because you have a kindness within you and I know you
are a fair person. Also you are very funny with us.” The class applauded
their colleague. I applauded back. The compliment was heartfelt and
wonderful. What amazed me was that a 15- or 16-year-old boy said this
publicly to a 59-year-old woman in front of all his peers in this trau-
matic time of school years. By this age, our young men know not to
reveal any feelings publicly. By the time these young men become ex-
ecutives in the U.S. business arena, they do not address familial or per-
sonal feelings in any group meeting and perhaps not even well at home.
Has our competitive spirit squelched the juices of emotion out of us
and stopped the public expression of feeling? Can a 16-year-old in a U.S.
classroom interact with and feel value for an older woman…and then
express it? It has been made “inappropriate” to address feelings in the
workplace. In corporate leadership training, it is often cited, by re-
searchers, that an expression of inner feeling builds trust and ultimately
a long-term relationship with a customer, supplier, or colleague. This
does not mean to spill your guts—it means letting the other side know
that you are confused, or disappointed, or even happy with the progress
made.
In a cultural diversity workshop, a young first-level manager was
contesting any value to asking someone from another culture how their
wife was doing or how their mother-in-law was adapting to the Western
culture. He claimed he didn’t want anyone knowing anything about him,
and so he would not show any interest in their life outside work, only in
their business expertise. This is the same man who sends an e-mail to a
peer and copies the peer’s manager so he can get a quicker response or
125
immediate exposure for not responding to him. Working without build-

ing relationships makes being a team member more difficult, and work-
ing across cultures with no understanding of their needs makes coming
to an agreement most frustrating and draining. Results and quality of
resolution both suffer.
Spending the day in the almost-exclusively black Ronald Brown
Community Academy, gave me a view of black culture in the south side
of Chicago that I had not ever recognized. I was “Principal for a Day”
and started the day in my new position by speaking with the entire as-
sembly of students. It became more of an exchange. They had prepared
many questions and also asked me every imaginable question from, “How
much money do you make?” to, “If you have four children how could
you leave them to go to work around the world?” “Were you afraid…for
you? Do you wish you could have done something else?” The way this
school of curious, disciplined, and excitable minds felt free to ask any-
thing and the absence of negative peer pressure was not the same as
“more-white” middle-school children. I have spoken many times to our
suburban high schools and middle schools, even to my brother’s middle
school in Grand Rapids, Michigan, and they ask questions, but they
already are learning not to discuss the personal or familial. It is impor-
tant to recognize the traditions we pass down in order to improve and
do differently when working with cultures that highlight the personal in
developing a relationship.
American culture breeds a more-guarded and arms-length profes-
sional. The business people protect their advantage…they keep it busi-
ness. We must maintain our competitive posture…it’s a risk to reveal
and lose the advantage. A competitive, capitalistic society promotes a
less-involved, more self-reliant individual.
To think of long-term relationships and long-term results one has
to balance the competitive personality with a benevolent confidence, a
confidence that permits us to give without expecting anything in return.
Giving information or pieces of a process, or revealing outcomes wouldn’t
jeopardize our business, and at the same time would help another’s
business, or at the least, help them better understand the problem. When
you have the competitive power it is easy to abuse it. The focus should
126
be on the long-term relationship, over how much more you can take.
It’s like a high school basketball team that out-skills its opponent and,
after a hefty lead, the coach puts in his second string or his third. The
coach and the team don’t try to take all the points they can; instead, the
coach gives an opportunity for the less-skilled players to play, possibly
loosing points, but not the game. In negotiations, sometimes, for the
sake of a long relationship, we give a little more than we secure.
We feed our aggressions so that we can lead in that “cutting-edge
syndrome.” This emphasis on competing, on winning, and on being first,
shoves consideration to the side and doesn’t remain only in our jobs, it
influences our family dynamic and, of course, our children. Think of
the role sports play in elementary school and high school. Shopping,
one of our major pastimes, is also considered a competitive sport if
there’s a sale! The aggressive drivers on our roads and the way we dis-
cuss an issue around a dinner table are also part of that culture. Our
competitive culture challenges the Strategic Virtue of Respect.
Acceptance is the second Strategic Virtue. Acceptance is defined as
exhibiting behaviors that recognize the importance of another versus an
attitude of superiority. It means there is no evidence in your behaviors
that indicate “superior” versus “inferior” in the way you treat any other
person. Humility replaces a boastful posture. Humble sometimes can
border on patronizing. For example: “Your accent is easier to under-
stand than many I’ve heard before.” Humility is felt and sincere. You
begin to see the actual value or worth in the differences, and at times
you recognize the similarities within those opposing differences.
Competition’s first child is superiority, and could often mature into
arrogance or put-down. These Strategic Virtues cannot partner with
arrogance; they affront each other. In l942, in his book, Generation of
Vipers, Philip Wylie said, “Superiority and inferiority are individual,
not racial or national.” Making another feel inferior is a most unforget-
table insult. It is often done through the levels of money, intelligence,
name, or position….heritage. Being boastful of any of these areas leaves
the other party feeling “less than”’ or not worthwhile.
Being aware of your status and also aware of the importance of
others within that accomplishment is a difficult principle to maintain.
127
In 1999, I led a delegation of women professionals to China, Beijing,

and Shanghai. Everyone in the delegation was informed and coached
in advance to the protocol for meeting with their Chinese counter-
parts. The first meeting was disastrous. The president of the U.S.
Professional Association addressed the group first without asking her
Chinese host to speak as a courtesy. That was alright because the
Chinese host would have insisted that the United States go first. The
president of our group began with an itemized list of activities, of
events, and of structure that the U.S. professional organization par-
ticipated in and designed:
z In the United States, the Women Professionals meet
for dinner for their monthly meeting.
z In the United States, Women Professionals have
offices in the loop of Chicago with a full-time staff
dedicated to the administrative tasks.
z The Women Professionals has the largest membership
in the United States.
z The Women Professionals host events.
The woman president set a most competitive tone—her message
was delivered in a prideful and aggressive manner. In China, no one
would pat themselves (or their organization) on the back and would
not compete with an organization that they were hosting. It was as if
there was a prize to be had and we had to win. Diplomacy and respect
fell away to “we are the best and see if you can beat us in whatever.” In
a negotiation, trying to top the other side in any area could result in a
division of thought and action.
The other influence on Acceptance is our drive for the Competitive
Edge. Competition is healthy for the community and for doing business
and staying in business. It’s what stops one organization from taking
advantage of its customers, and it keeps that organization improving so
that it can stay ahead of its competitors. It keeps an economy thriving
and prevents monopolies with their ill effects. Competition is good,
leading is good, aggressive is good—they help us secure the customer.
Yet a respectful balance of competitive with collaborative, leading with
serving and aggressive with elicitive, will help us retain our customers.
128
We sometimes suffer from a national superiority complex even
though it is the individual who carries and delivers the blow. There are
so many Western business people, who, as individuals, feel far superior
to their “developing sister countries.” As an economic and military
power we lead through intimidation and a “better-than-any-other” atti-
tude. Often, we are heard touting the only solution possible, or the only
way to govern…or to rule. There is a Hindu saying, “There is nothing
noble in being superior to someone else. The true nobility is in being
superior to your previous self.”
Respect is the third Strategic Virtue: It is behaving toward others in
a way that assumes they have value. It is a standard way of acting. No
one has to earn your respect. There are many examples of respect in
the work place:
z Referring to someone by name.
z Arriving to a meeting on time.
z Coming prepared to a meeting.
z Not taking calls while meeting with an individual.
z Asking, not telling.
z Repeating what someone said, after listening.
z Answering voice-mail messages and e-mails within a
considerate time.
z Including individuals into the decision-making process
especially if they’re affected by the decision.
z Not interrupting or cutting off someone.
z Answering a question with interest and consideration.
None of these behaviors indicate, “I like you” or, “I believe as you
do” much less “I agree with you or approve of what you’re doing.”
These actions only confirm that every individual is deserving of respect.
Integrity of the individual is the issue. The only way to preserve your
own integrity is by guarding the integrity of others…all others. You
can’t have integrity if you compromise the integrity of another. For
example, if Fred says to Tom, “Your total lack of foresight keeps our
department behind all the others. Don’t you ever think ahead, or, should
I say, don’t you ever think?” Fred’s integrity suffered because of what
129
he said to Tom. Tom felt the pain of the put down, but it was Fred who
lost his integrity.
I have heard many business people say “He/she has to earn my re-
spect.” If you follow that thought, then one may be disrespectful until
the other person earns respect. If you don’t yet know a person well,
then you don’t have to show them respect yet. Any interaction should
have respect as its base—in asking, in listening, and in content. Several
years ago, the Social Studies Department at the University of Michigan
did a study on what people in the workforce, at every level, found most
annoying. The resulting report was called: The Crude and the Rude of
the Workplace.
As the report attests to, our business tradition is more in favor of
the aggressive, rude person than the victim of the rudeness. The most
troublesome aspect of the majority in the workforce was, “No one lis-
tens to me.”
Think of how much work time is lost after an employee is treated
with disrespect. Within a negotiation you might have only a couple of
hours at a time or four or five meetings, and yet you have to build trust
and solidify the relationship. Consider your normal activities from gro-
cery store to Home Depot; there are many incidents that undo an aver-
age citizen. While waiting in a line to purchase my choice, a loose-lipped
young man loudly directs me, “The line forms on the right, can’t you
read the sign?” or, at work, when I ask the help of a colleague, he/she
says, “Figure it out for yourself; I’ve got enough problems of my own.”
I am a summer resident of Grand Haven, Michigan, and last summer I
went to get an assortment of bills for my Negotiation Workshop. I wanted
to use my American Express Travelers Checks. The teller had me sign
them and then she stamped them. I asked if she wanted some ID and
she said, “You do have an account with us, don’t you?” I said, “No, I’m
a summer resident.” In pops “Ms. Rude,” the drive-thru teller, and she
says they can’t cash them without the person having an account with
their bank.
I ask her why people would purchase travelers checks to use in
their own bank. She doesn’t respond to me, but turns to the teller help-
ing me and says, “For all we know those checks could be stolen, then
130
what?” Loud enough for me and everyone else to hear. This whole inci-
dent undid me for the rest of the day and I didn’t even have to work
with or see this person ever again. I couldn’t stop thinking about how
rude, how demeaning, how nasty she was…and it used up all my posi-
tive, productive energy on revalidating my worth and on how to get
revenge. In a negotiation your time is even more limited.
Empathy is the virtue that brings the other virtues to visible results/
behaviors, and an influence that keeps trust securely founded, assuring
a long-term relationship. Empathy is defined as the ability to recognize
the needs of another first. It’s a noun of action. The other person has to
see that you do understand his or her need and that you are concerned
about it. Your words or actions have to affirm your concern for the
need. During the past few years, my off-shore clients have referred to
the United States as a “country without empathy.” The sincerity of
empathy is reinforced by respect. Respect for another culture, its people,
and its differences supports empathy.
Empathy requires that a person not only feels or thinks in an under-
standing way about another’s crisis or demands, but that a person ex-
presses his or her concern or acts in a way that shows support and
understanding of the other’s feelings. It requires being able to recog-
nize frustration, confusion, embarrassment, loneliness, and fear….then
acting on that recognition with a sincere willingness to help or to talk.
It is often described as the ability to walk in another’s shoes and then
tell them feelings or do something that shows your concern. It’s the
difference between saying, “I understand how you feel,” and “Losing
my job threatened the security of me and my family and made me feel
so worthless,” when talking with someone who just lost their job.
There are daily opportunities to address, in an empathetic way, the
other person’s needs:
z Give the other enough information—not too much as
to confuse.
z Send an e-mail with specific details and not the entire
document for them to sort through.
z Clarify information.
131
z Create processes that are easily understood.

z Try to accommodate someone’s schedule—because of
children or lack of public transportation or difference
in time.
z Ask about the other’s issues/concerns.
z Know the other’s needs.
Empathy is key to getting what you need and want out of a negotia-
tion. It assists in sorting out, developing options, and in the end having
an agreement that both sides can implement.
Many times, in the planning stage of a negotiation, empathy involves
anticipating the other’s needs and exploring options that would relieve
the other side’s concerns. Creating an appealing option for the other
side often brings the focus back to your needs, and this balance of re-
sponse maintains a climate for positive progress. Without vulnerability
and without empathy it is impossible to establish the trust needed to do
business.
If these Four Strategic Virtues are consistent in a person’s commu-
nication style and character, trust is the primary outcome. The defini-
tion that best describes a cross-cultural trust is: Confident Expectations.
Trust is the fundamental basis for any working relationship. Consider-
ation, Acceptance, Respect, and Empathy plant the seed for growing
trust. Consistency and vulnerability will assure its continued growth.
Snapshot of India
India is a focused and hard-working country—both practical and spiri-
tual in its way of life. In some ways, it is a country of paradoxes: techno-
logical and mystical, aggressive and solicitous, bold and gentle. It is located
in southern Asia, and it has a population of more than 1.1 billion people.
The predominant religion is Hindu (more than 80 percent) and the two
predominant languages are Hindi and English for commerce and the gov-
ernment. Today, India focuses on technology—software development
and testing, computer support, call centers for technical support, and
the Internet.
132
When I asked a colleague of mine, Rasheed Ahmed, who works
here in the United States for a technical company of India, what is an
obstacle for a business person from the United States to do business in
India he says that India’s complex society presents challenges for the
American businessperson. He said, “Indian society is very diverse and
complex because it is home to many religions, languages, and cultures.”
He said, “There are social norms when it comes to the caste system,
which is part of Hinduism. Although in the business environment it
[this system] is not very obvious, but it does play a role when mixing
people from various backgrounds. It is not doable for foreigners to
understand these dynamics unless one studies the cultures. It is highly
recommended to seek the guidance of a local businessperson.”
He also cautioned that many Indians often use English words that
imply different meanings in India. For example, many times the person
from India uses English words, that may be misunderstood by Ameri-
cans. For example, if an Indian business person says, “We have such
and such…” it may not necessarily mean he or she actually has it in
possession at the moment. It could mean, “We can acquire it, or, we
can make it, or, we are sure we can do it.” These small misunderstand-
ings can easily create confusion and possibly jeopardize trust. A good
way to avoid these misunderstandings is to be very specific in giving
information and clarify so as to avoid making assumptions.
B A conservative, dark suit and tie is appropriate for business.
One cannot be dressed too formally for India. Women should
wear conservative dresses or suits.
B Casual dress is comprised of a shirt and trousers for men.
Women should keep their arms, chest, back, and legs cov-
ered. Slacks and a blazer would be acceptable casual attire
for women.
B Greetings are accompanied with a hand shake. For women, a
nod, or a handshake is appropriate, if she offers. There should
be no signs of public affection. Recently Richard Gere was
issued a citation and ordered to appear in court for kissing on
133
the cheek, several times, the Indian woman actress, Shilpa

Shetty at a press conference for AIDS conference. He should
have known the cultural disrespect of kissing his colleague,
even in jest.
B In India, the cow is revered. Wearing clothing or accesso-
ries crafted from leather may appear disrespectful to Indians.
B Never touch the head of any person, including a child, of
India. The head is the house of the soul.
B Family takes priority over work whenever the need is pre-
sented. Indian businesspeople value others who exhibit a
similar priority and care for family.
B Whistling and winking should be avoided in any country,
including India.
B Hindus do not eat beef and Muslims do not eat pork—avoid
either meat. Generally, they are vegetarians.
B Countries vary in the courtesy of opening a gift in front of
the giver—some say it appears greedy if opened immedi-
ately. Other traditions say you should open it to show your
appreciation. In general, in India, do not open a gift in front
of the gift giver if it is wrapped. When I have done training
for companies in India, they have given me beautiful en-
graved silver [Indian] bowls and plates. These tokens have
been presented to me, and I sincerely show my apprecia-
tion for the artistry, the craftsmanship, and the reflection
of India.
B Never point your feet at someone, even when resting on your
other leg. It is considered an affront—insulting disrespect.
Also, don’t touch another with your foot.
B Hindi and English are the major languages. English is usu-
ally used in doing business. There are 14 other major lan-
guages used and more than 300 minor languages still used in
India.
134
B Avoid standing with your hands on your hips. It is consid-
ered aggressive and confrontational.
B Make appointments a month in advance. If possible, secure
an Indian business representative and have him make the
appointment with the appropriate person for you.
B Mid-morning appointments are good, followed by lunch, and
then a possible return after lunch to complete business.
B Titles are also important in India, to show respect and con-
sideration. Consistently use them.
B In business, it is a system of hierarchy. A hierarchical sys-
tem is also in place in business. The senior colleagues are
respected and obeyed. Supervisors are expected to monitor
the work of all individuals and, ultimately, responsible for
meeting their deadlines.
B Honesty and respect help develop your trustworthiness with
the Indian business person.
B Saving face and self-esteem are primary priorities to the
culture and to doing business. Individual criticism should
not be public.
B Indians are very hospitable and generous. When you are in-
vited to their homes, you must accept. Bring candy or flow-
ers to the hostess/host, and do not thank them for the meal.
A “thank you” is seen as payment for their hospitality.
135
DO DON’T
Ask open questions. Expect a definitive answer now.
Give specific guidelines. Be vague or unclear.
Be aggressive (it shows

Be honest and sincere.
disrespect).
Take a small present. Bring large or expensive gifts.
Expect lunch and business. Expect dinner and business.
Make appointments at least one Just show up and think you will be
month in advance. seen.
Reconfirm appointment one week Just assume the appointment is

prior and and again once in India. confirmed.
Make appointments late in the

Assume our work schedule is
morning/early afternoon (ideally
universal.
between 11 a.m. and 4 p.m.).
Be on time for your appointment. Expect timeliness.
Use titles whenever possible

such as, Professor or Doctor. If
no title is known use, Mr., Mrs.,
or Miss.
Negotiations
“No” is considered harsh and confrontational, final in implication
in India. More subtle refusals are considered more polite and less af-
fronting. Evasive refusals are more common, and are considered more
polite. It is better to say, “I will try” than than to say, “No, that won’t
work.” It is too aggressive.
Aggression is often perceived as disrespect. In a negotiation you
don’t want a “retreat” or “shut-down,” and our Western, aggressive
style could do just that.
136
B Going to the home for dinner is part of doing business, and
a critical part of building a relationship necessary for long-
term business.
B Criticism about an individual’s ideas or work needs to be done
constructively, without damaging that person’s self-esteem.
B It is important to create an ambiance during the negotiation
that is non-threatening and safe for a productive exchange.
An Indian who is trying to say no might be telling you that
he is willing to try, but realistically he might not be able to
get it done in the indicated time frame indicated.
B It is also important for them to know that mistakes can be
made without repercussions or severe consequences. The
environment has to be safe for attempts and for new solu-
tions to be tried.
B In the negotiation, usually only the senior most person might
speak. The others might not agree, but remain silent out of
respect for the senior member.
B Tilting your head from side to side is a nonverbal signal for
understanding what is being said, or that the listener agrees
with you.
B Westernized Indians may reflect the straightforward, asser-
tive, and direct Western style. You may then respond ap-
propriately to their style in like kind.
B Women are treated with respect in the work place. They
feel quite safe and secure in most organizations.
B Women should plan their wardrobe keeping in mind the con-
servative dress codes and the respect of India’s customs and
traditions. Working in another country demands that the
foreigner respect their laws and their traditions.
B Humor does not abound in the workplace. The work ethic is
focused and intense.
B Most traditional Indians do not drink or eat meat. Keep this in
mind when planning entertainment for Indian businesspeople.
137
The Charismatic Multi-national
CHAPTER 8:
The C harisma
Charisma tic
harismatic
Mul ti-na
Multi-national:
ti-national:
Lending a Hand to Neighbors vs.
Managing a Business Arr angement
Arrangement
“Faced with a hostile Congress, President Bill Clinton came up with a
strategy that tied the informal remarks at which he excelled to small-
scale initiatives aimed directly at middle-class anxieties. If Clinton
talked like the guy next door, he governed like a man lending his neigh-
bor a hand.”
—Naftali Bendavid Chicago Tribune Jan. 14, 2001
Agenda
A. Respect and individual integrity cement the foundation.
B. Leading the differences—not abolishing them.
C. Influencing with behaviors—not ordering edicts or
commanding obedience.
This is the strategy the U.S. business community should adopt, and
some have. Lending a neighbor a hand, relating to the familiar and build-
ing trustworthy friendship is much more than the typically acceptable
professional friendship in the U.S. business culture. The Gated Community
139
attitude of “select, isolate, and protect,” strongly influences our way of

doing business today. Building a relationship is more demanding than
assuring the bottom line—it requires more time up front and consis-
tent actions. It also shifts the emphasis from the dollar to the people
involved. A process or procedure is far easier to implement than deal-
ing with people, because a process can remain constant, whereas people
add the dimension of diversity.
Build Business, One Customer at a Time

Perhaps we have to go back to our more-entrepreneurial age—when
there were big-business and small-business owners. Small businesses
today still employ the largest percentage of our working population. I
have a friend, Toby Levin, who lives in Marengo, Illinois, far northwest
of Chicago. She and her son, Robert, still own and operate Levin’s, a
dry good store. After 85 years in business, they know they will soon
have to close the business because of the influx of malls and big busi-
ness. That is a reality.
Toby told me that she and her husband, Ralph, used to barter with
their customers for eggs and milk and even for their insurance. They
also allowed their patrons to pay 50 cents per month toward the back-
to-school shoes they would buy for their children in the fall. They didn’t
even have to send out a reminder bill to their customers.
These certainly are different times with larger businesses, but this
strong trust between business owner and customer resembles how busi-
ness is done in many other countries today. It is the attitude that is key
to negotiating a long-term relationship and a long term-contract today.
How do you negotiate a multimillion-dollar contract and establish the
trust of a small-town family business? How do you keep clients loyal
for 85 years? Big business has to adopt the family-owned-business way
of doing business to excel in this global market. It comes back to a
renaissance of the one-on-one way of doing good business—the way
it should be done through Consideration, Acceptance, Respect, and
Empathy—and not the western way of doing business; the bottom line
is the first consideration.
140
A glimpse of different countries gives us an idea of how their needs
are prioritized. The end goal is generally the same. Each business wants
to enhance their business, stay, and grow in business—increase market
share and revenue. Yet the way to get there differs. Once a relationship
is established, you will have room for requests, for exceptions, for your
own way—as long as your principles remain constant and your trust-
worthiness isn’t questionable.
Learning the traditions and history of a culture is an excellent way to
enhance your appreciation of it. If you work in this global market, it’s diffi-
cult to capture the essence of each, so begin with the universal. Go back in
our history…. What supports the healthy development of a relationship?
I once attended a meeting in which 11 men were sitting aggressively
around a boardroom table, each concerned about his next remark. No
one focused on what had just been said. Some were working on what
they planned to present while others talked on their cell phones and
still others made arrangements for dinner. Someone louder than the
rest took over, “Let’s get this moving; we don’t have much time. We
have to restructure the organization, develop a new strategic plan, and
reassign the people…this afternoon.”
What Could Be More Important Than a

Total Reorganization?
The room was set up in a U shape—several men from different
countries were attempting to negotiate an agreement for structure out-
side the United States. There was a gentleman from Venezuela, one
from England, another few from the United States, and still another
from China. There were also representatives of Colombia and Costa
Rica. The aggressors seemed to be the United States and England. They
spoke more often, more quickly, and more loudly than anyone else,
and, of course, more assertively. In fact, they knew the questions…and
the answers. The Venezuelan was using his best approach to enter the
exchange, saying, “May I ask a…” In the time it took him to breath in,
the American tractors ran over him with another suggestion. The Brit
ignored him, as if he never heard his first few words. The exchange
took off, and it was the Brit and the American neck and neck, racing
141
toward the value of their own ideas. The rest of the group became spec-
tators in the competitive sport of globally doing business—western style.
All that was missing were the cowboy hat and boots. Whoever is quick-
est to the draw gets to live and to tell.
This scenario took place in Houston in June 2004. The group was
diverse, yet the discussion was one-sided. How could we lead, much
less retain, a customer base? Negotiation, by nature, is inclusive—one
side needs the other and vice versa. It has a healthy tension, but it
doesn’t have to be hostile. You can feel the tug of the rope, but you
don’t have to end up in the ravine. Both sides are trying to stay at a
steady level—both progressing toward and developing workable, do-
able solutions.
Embrace Diversity in Thought and Culture

Diversity is defined as a strength of multi-faceted differences within
an individual. To define diversity in this way begins with the multitude
of perspectives with which one can look at another person. From within
one person, there are thousands of beliefs and likes influencing that
person’s thoughts and actions. When you add the person who is looking
at the other, depending on their vantage point, they see it even more
differently. It is beautifully complex. It is not only which facet of the
person is in sight; it’s also what is the point of vision and perspective of
the onlooker. It now becomes numbers of individual differences, num-
bers of viewers, views/perspectives of viewers, and beliefs or attitudes
placed in the middle of a work culture, integrated with ethnic, reli-
gious, and social cultures…now you have the beginning of diversity.
When you add the cultural modifier, cultural diversity, it relates to
the behaviors and beliefs of any grouping that exclude or include indi-
viduals through their “shoulds”’ and “should nots.” This adjective ad-
dresses all segments of our society: the neighborhood, the town, the
state, and the country. There are even defined business cultures—from
the National Society of Professional Engineers to the “Let’s retire to
Florida” culture. Boy and girl cultures exist in almost every country.
Girls are cultured to be more caring and nurturing, while boys are cul-
tured to be more aggressive and competitive.
142
Most of us want to be included, to be a part of something. The irony
comes when we are included because usually someone else is excluded
for the very reasons you’re included. Find the commonalities, discover
the value of the difference, and wisely choose the best solution. Negoti-
ate how to get there. The same behaviors overlay all cultures, just as
the principles supporting trust and integrity enhance the traditions of
all cultures. If someone asks me my thoughts with regard to a change in
IT systems, and then asks me more with regard to the impact of the
new system on my work area, I become more willing to hear why the
change is imperative. If they continue and build on my suggestions, I
become more interested in making the change work. Together we begin
to negotiate how to make this change to a new system that is easier for
everyone involved.
Asking, reinforcing, probing, and paraphrasing strengthen my inter-
national charisma and offer me another opportunity to lead and to in-
fluence the other side to come closer to what I need and they need. My
behaviors help me manage their responses and their behaviors—knowing
the impact of my behaviors keeps me leading the dance.
In 1995, I attended the Fourth World Women’s Conference. Hun-
dreds of countries were represented. There were so many natural bar-
riers to restrict relating one to the other, especially language and, of
course, the role of women in each culture. In the evenings, there was an
outdoor theater and stage set up, and every night a different country
would entertain with music and dance. Eventually everyone would join
in—without even knowing the exact words. Women would smile at each
other and motion or signal feelings. The momentum of that instant car-
ried them. Music and emotion twirled a thread through each woman,
uniting us in an energy that reinforced, comforted, and motivated—no
matter the aspiration. These moments are instants when you’re pushed
into valuing the difference, preferring the difference, and loving the
moment. Music might not be the answer for every business situation,
but it shouldn’t be ignored as if it were the impossible. Art has brought
together many nations of many individuals and often is the preferred
gift, corporation to corporation. Hear the difference, as in music, see
the difference, as in art, and then approach with understanding. An
143
agreement to appropriately address their need, which will in turn serve

the need of your organization, will result.
Prioritize Differences
How can we make the difference a preference? If we do, we have
made a change in a world dominated by competition and superiority. In
one of my first seminars in China, the participants were all managers/
executives and high-ranking government officials. As in the United
States, I asked each participant what they would enjoy doing if they had
some free time. Almost all gave a similar response. “I would sit in a
park, chatting with a friend,” one said. Another added, “I would sit
with my family and friends listening to music and talking.” Many of us
would say similar things, if we thought about it, but even if we didn’t,
we would certainly value their perspective. Instead of focusing on the
difference and the irritation or fear of that difference, find something
that’s a shared value within the difference. If, in Western culture, our
top priority is time and we can’t get the other side to value time as their
top priority, we should look for another value such as celebration, to
leverage the need for adhering to a time line.
At the same Fourth World Women’s Conference, I was working on
a presentation titled, “Getting Women Elected: A Grass Roots Effort.”
I didn’t realize the appeal of the presentation was in the “grass roots”
part of it. Women from vastly different areas around the world wanted
to know how to do something and how to do it in their country. When I
was trying to organize the presentation in the weeks before the confer-
ence, I kept trying to think of a story that would create an interest,
something unusual and avant garde, something exciting and futuristic.
What worried me was that Americans often think we have the best an-
swer and solution for every problem in every country. At the same time,
people from other struggling countries often expect us to give them the
answer and solution. I wanted to avoid any feelings of superiority.
Support the Integrity of the Individual

As I entered the business world for the first time (at age 46), I was
stunned to find out that a person’s honor was not the commanding
144
force in business. Instead, it was competitive fairness that drove a prin-
cipled businessperson’s actions. The process wasn’t as important as the
outcome. Many corporations have “the integrity of the individual” in
their key belief statements introducing their strategic plan, but their
policies and compensation plans don’t appear to align with or support
the integrity of the individual.
In the name of competition, the latitude of fairness is very inclu-
sive. In competition, you think of yourself and your win, first and fore-
most. Shoving someone aside to get to where you have to go, in a
company, is fair. Keeping information to yourself is fair. Never helping
your colleague is fair. In a competition, you should never reveal a weak-
ness. One must appear and act superior to their competitor. These ac-
cepted assets undermine building a relationship with a client and with a
colleague. What’s worse, it doesn’t support integrity—yours or theirs.
My story of “peeling the peaches” was what brought together sev-
eral hundred women from 29 countries—it gave us a unifying focus.
Each had her own peeling-the-peaches experience growing up. It gave
us an immediate shared identity and integrity. From this focus, our
discussions could emerge on level ground for all of us. Plainly, it made
it easier to talk. We were looking for a process for campaigning that
would work in every country, and the peaches story helped us find it in
the short time allotted, two hours.
Similar stories of running for election and losing; of trying to set up
a parent/teacher organization; of trying to campaign for a wage, any
wage, for labor; and of trying to be treated with integrity were more
easily told because they could identify with the United States and its
peaches. That also made the women from countries, at different stages
of development, see the powerful United States as a colleague and not
the authority, as a comrade and not an official, as a mutual effort and
not an expert’s dictate.
In order for a U.S. businessperson to do business with other cul-
tures, he or she must find the commonalities in values, feelings, and needs.
This is extremely difficult if the U.S. posture is one of superiority and
competition. Often, I can’t find what’s mutual because I am so preoccu-
pied with the strangeness of person: a stranger in action, in language.
145
In the spring of 2006, I worked in Krakow and then in St. Petersburg.

Because part of my family came from St. Petersburg, my husband joined
me at the end of my job so we could get to know the city. It was a
wonderful two weeks of music, fine art, architecture, and palaces that
challenged the definition of lavish.
For the entire month, I had been looking for an old icon to take back
to the United States to give to the Russian Orthodox church in Grand
Rapids, Michigan, that my grandfather built and in which he served as a
deacon. We visited a group of young artists who had a shop and a booth
at the Savior of the Blood Church plaza. They took the time to educate
my husband and me with regard to the icon art—facts about the tempura
paint used by the monks and the oil paint used by ordinary artists. We
visited with them several times, and on our last day on the way to the
airport we stopped, and they still had an icon of the head of St. Nicholas
with a three-dimensional halo with an open book in the foreground. I
loved it, so they came down in price, and I bought it. I forgot to put it in
our suitcase and carried it in the artist’s bag they gave us.
My husband threw it on the scanner belt, and that was it. The au-
thorities asked us to open the bag. Once they saw the icon, they confis-
cated it because we hadn’t gone to have it authenticated. We had no
proof of its age, and anything older than 100 years old could not leave
the country. I begged them to let me take it. I even tried to bribe them
with money. Nothing worked. They were going to keep my icon for two
months to give me time to have it authenticated. After almost getting
arrested, I gave them the name of a friend, Ludmilla, a Russian teacher.
After several visits to the Russian consulate in Washington, D.C., and
many dollars, my daughter secured the papers permitting my friend to
pick up my icon. I told Ludmilla that at least they should have under-
stood that I wasn’t trying to hide it. She said that was probably what
offended them the most. They saw that as typical U.S. flagrant arro-
gance, an obvious boldness daring them to take it. The fact that I delib-
erately threw it on the scanner in an open bag was an affront to their
rules and their integrity. Ludmilla told me if I was going to “smuggle” it
out of the country, I should give it an intelligent and desperate attempt,
146
instead of having the customs agents lose face. I looked at it from a
totally different perspective—and both perspectives could be right.
I still do not have my icon, even though Ludmilla came to visit in
October. She didn’t dare hide it. So it sits in her home waiting for the
day I can visit it again. The government sent me a picture of it with the
authentication papers stating it may never leave Russia. My choice is to
live with it in St. Petersburg.
Many times we are so entrenched in our own need, our own idea,
and our own way of doing things, we forget that others have a different
point of view. After all, one man’s trash can be another’s treasure. One
day, while I was working in Thailand, I had a realization. I watched the
beautiful, diminutive Thai women wait on my table with such graceful,
quiet moves. I never saw them come or go. They had beautiful faces,
always smiling, and were elegantly fluid in their appearance. I was walking
down the hotel corridor looking at these women and I thought of how
unattractive I must have appeared to them—5 feet 7 inches, angular,
Russian face, square jaw, wide forehead, and angular, high cheek bones,
moving with the careless abruptness of a sprinting Golden Retriever. It
never occurred to me that I looked weirdly different and that they might
be trying to find the value or beauty in my differences.
In business, we want the other party to move our way. Our objec-
tive is a working long-term relationship. Why are we not trying to see it
from their point of view? Why are we competing with everyone?
The circle is now complete. It took me 12 years and many work
junkets into the different continents to realize that the strangeness or
foreignness of each country was not the issue surrounding diversity.
The bias or the bigotry was an easy way to exclude or include, but chang-
ing a belief based on a legacy of beliefs was not possible. The ability to
manage your own behaviors for a period of time could establish a new
set of behaviors. The behaviors support the Strategic Virtues and be-
come processes or guidelines for working and negotiating with other
cultures. Changing your behaviors results in better outcomes and per-
haps even a positive affect on your beliefs.
147
For most of the first several years traveling and working abroad,
my focus was on the differences—which customs and traditions distin-
guished one culture from another culture. I looked at all the do’s and don’ts
for each country and then the development of their art and ultimately the
socioeconomic climate. In the end, I realized, after searching for
sameness, then investigating the differences and their respective
values, I came back to the benefits of what we shared in sameness of
principles. Individual behaviors had the greatest impact on a negotia-
tion and on all cultures. I had to take a good look at what made the U.S.
business style less appealing to so many other, older cultures. Behaviors
became the consistent factor in being seen as charismatic. It became
apparent that the behaviors influence not only your style for a negotiation,
but they also strengthen your way of doing business, and of leading and
managing within your organization. Asking versus telling, reinforcing
versus ignoring, and collaborating versus competing were a few of the
changes required for managing an excellent negotiation and for leading
in the international market.
Close-Up of South America

South America, unlike Asia, is a continent of countries with some
similarity of heritage. Backgrounds are primarily Spanish and American
Indian, and most countries, except Brazil, hold Spanish as the common
language, as English is in the United States.
It is a continent of warmth, charm, and generosity, all wrapped in
an effusive sense of humor. Even though they had their own type of
cowboy (los conquistadores), South Americans present a more inclu-
sive posture. They are friendly, similar to the Americans, and they ex-
tend it to touching—for women this means shaking arms, and for both
men and women, holding elbows and even walking arm-in-arm. South
Americans epitomize the physical metaphor of lending a helping hand.
This doesn’t mean they are not shrewd negotiators, however, it means
they are friendly and likable shrewd negotiators. It’s a great tactic—
they want to know you better before doing business. I equate this to a
family-owned-business attitude.
148
Latinos enjoy social conversations and celebrating special occasions,
including your visit. Dinner out, toasting the guest, and getting to know
you better are standard happenings when doing business in Latin
America. similar to Asians, Latinos are more interested in knowing you
than they are in knowing your corporation or product. Their approach
in negotiations is not straightforward like the American way. Instead, it
is more social because they are focused on building a relationship.
Though Latin Americans are tough negotiators, their style is more
approachable and amiable than our straightforward, tell-it-like-it-is
westerner style. It will take longer for them to become comfortable
with us, the westerners, than it will be for Americans to be comfortable
with Latin Americans. It is critical to establish your trustworthiness
through your sincerity, reliability, and interest in them. You should
approach any disagreement from a positive, or at the very least neutral,
perspective. Latin Americans would not embarrass you or have you
“lose face,” and you should work within the same framework. If they
trust you, you will get the business instead of someone else.
Being a warm and friendly culture, Latin Americans do not like to
transact business, especially negotiations, on the phone or via e-mail.
They prefer face-to-face meetings and negotiations. E-mail, of course,
is good follow up and a resource for transferring information. It is dif-
ficult to build a relationship or establish trust electronically. Added
attention should be given to your e-mails, to show respect and interest.
Include a friendly note in the beginning and always include a greeting
and a close.
Some Latin American countries often have a key negotiator, a
spokesperson for the team. Other countries, including Brazil, might
have the person(s) of authority arrive later into the negotiation. Ob-
serve who is who as they come into the group. Working with Latin
Americans is pleasant and enjoyable. Securing the best contract is
dependent on how much they like you. Most Latin Americans prefer
a win/win and work to make the agreement mutually beneficial, if
possible—harmony.
149
Snapshot of Colombia
I have worked around the world and I have observed many richly
different cultures. It has taken me 17 years to note well the classical
norms of principles and values and the exclusivity of cultural tradi-
tions and customs. It is difficult to isolate and recognize every country’s
distinctions in culture, just as it is for me in the United States. The
North, South, East, and West regions each have distinguishing, cul-
tural characteristics. If I described one area as common for all areas,
I would probably be wrong 75 percent of the time. Whatever I present
about the countries is only a small piece of who they are, gleaned
from my experiences, which further influences one way or the other
the general statement of culture. It was easier for me to find the
commonalities, like common ground in a negotiation, get comfortable
with what we shared, and then move together to an understanding of
our differences. Once we got on the same side of the multicultural
table I could pursue the differences and discover their distinct values
and then choose the best solution for the issue being negotiated. So I
had to travel from trust, yet the peak in productivity is worth the
investment.
Every country has a culture exclusively its own—a culture rich in
traditions and customs, that, when understood, can show different val-
ues, strengths, and purpose. To work in a collaborative effort requires
an understanding of and appreciation for these cultural differences. It
also requires the flexibility to use the other’s strengths when the situa-
tion is conducive and appropriate, or when the situation is low risk and
could show a willingness to do it “their way.”
I started my career many years ago in Bogotá, Colombia. The Barajas
family, with whom I lived, was loving, generous, and consistently con-
cerned with my well-being. They taught me how to become involved
with what really mattered—the people. Working from the people to the
process—from the structure to the action—made them each successful
in whatever their interest. After we became better acquainted with each
other, the Barajas family helped me in my endeavors in whatever way
150
they could. They also included me in every enjoyable family activity—
making me feel as a valued part of the family.
The same is true when doing business with South Americans: get to
know the person and then their needs. Don’t mistake friendliness for
an easy-to-persuade attitude. They are astute in understanding and in
implementation. They know how to make an organization work well,
through its people. South Americans also know how to celebrate, which
has a wonderful affect on productivity and commitment to doing more.
Colombia is a country of beautiful mountains, of a plateau like Bogotá
with perfect weather, usually around 72 degrees, and a country of ex-
tremes in poverty and wealth. It is a country based on group- or team-
thinking versus the thinking of individualism.
The Americans, Colombians, and Venezuelans each bring different
strengths to the workplace and to a negotiation. A different priority of
values influences outcomes—and, if the priorities are not the same or-
der, unnecessary conflict can surface. For example, if the priority of
building relationships faces off against the priority of time-savings then
a tension of differing approaches occurs, misunderstandings create er-
rors, and time is wasted.
Time is not a high priority in Colombia or Venezuela, so expect a
delay of half an hour or so for every meeting—social or professional.
As is often questioned, “la hora inglesa, o la hora espanol?—meaning,
the English hour or the Spanish hour? I recently worked in Bogotá,
Colombia, and they would arrive for the session 30 minutes late and
then spend another 20 minutes greeting each other. On the third day,
we discussed coming on the English hour so that we could get out on
time and go to dinner together that evening. They would always accom-
modate me and stay later into the day because they didn’t come back
from lunch or breaks on la hora inglesa. We negotiated the fourth day
starting time, and everyone came within five minutes of the starting
time. Our relationship was solidified. On the fifth day, we went back to
la hora Colombiana!
In the same session, there were two participants from Venezuela.
Before the session began, four of the Colombian men arrived early to
151
have lunch with me. During lunch, we were talking about my work his-
tory in Colombia. Then they asked me about Venezuela, and if I felt
Venezuelans and Colombians were similar people. I was not as familiar
with Venezuela as Colombia, because many years ago I began my ca-
reer in Colombia. So I thought for a minute or two and carefully said,
“I believe the Venezuelan business person is a bit more bold.” In uni-
form they erupted into laughter and said, “That is the difference!”
Colombia is a country of 43 million people. Twenty percent of the
population controls the vast majority of the nation’s wealth while 55
percent live in poverty. What’s more, it is almost similar to India in
that it has in place a caste system: Colombians of European descent or
white Colombians (20 percent), mestizos (58 percent), the bulk of their
society, and then mulatto (14 percent).
B Shake hands; women may clasp forearms or kiss each other
on the cheek.
B Greetings take time—Colombians ask many questions and
spend a great deal of time completing salutations. Do not
hurry them—it is seen as disrespectful.
B Celebrations are an important part of living.
B Lunch is the main meal of the day.
B Attire is always professional, business appropriate.
B Similar to in other countries, leave a small amount of food
on your plate to let them know enough was served.
B While dining keep your hands on the table, never in the lap.
It is impoliste, and you could be considered subvertive or
not forthright, according to my host family in Bogota.
Business Practices
B Foreigners must be punctual.
B Be a 30 minutes late for social engagements.
B Schedule appointments a week in advance.
152
B Do not hurry the introductions—take time to chat.
B Invites are often given to the home—bring a gift.
B Gifts are acceptable and expected for the children of the
family. Liquor, wine, pastries, candy (preferable from your
own country), and flowers are acceptable for the hosts. Mari-
golds and lilies should not be given because they are gener-
ally reserved for funerals.
B Wrapped gifts will not be opened in front of you so as not to
appear greedy.
B Inland Colombians are more formal; coastal, more casual.
Negotiations
B Have a Colombian contact—to introduce you, meet you, and
reserve a hotel room.
B Never change the members of your negotiating team. Nego-
tiations will stop.
B Colombians are very proud of their country—it is good to
know something about their history, their art, their music,
and, their culture. Show an interest. This is worth noting for
any country, even though it is pronounced for Colombians.
B Avoid comparisons, especially negative ones, of your coun-
try to Colombia.
B Lunch is the main meal and a good time to build the
relationship.
B Let them make the first toast.
B The person who invites usually pays—but they might still
argue with you.
B Recognize that the Colombians are very friendly and hu-
morous, yet very shrewd negotiators.
B While negotiating, protect the honor/integrity of the Colombian.
B Colombians ask many questions—do the same.
153
Part II:
Negotia
Negotia ting to Shi
tiating
Shooting from the hip could cost you a toe, possibly a foot!
Crossing the Cutural Divide
CHAPTER 9:
C rossing the C ul
Cul tur
ultur al
tural
Divide
First rule of War: Avoid war.

Second rule of War: Offer options.
—Art of War, Sun Tzu
To negotiate is to reach an agreement, a harmony of opinion, ac-
tion, or character. This definition sets the tone of a negotiation: problem-
solving, and, hopefully, harmony. For me, to negotiate is the ability to
influence or persuade an individual to move my way, by showing a concern
for his or her needs. The negotiating style influences someone to follow
and allows you to lead or serve. In today’s transcontinental market and
diverse workforce, your ability to manage and lead in your business
culture and the global marketplace is determined by the negotiating
style in a business transaction.
Data is easily available to anyone. There is duplicity of technology
and a diversity of services in the marketplace. Today, almost every-
thing is negotiable. A global marketplace presents variables in need,
product, and cultures, all of which require a skilled negotiator to do
day-to-day business. A leader within an organization influences follow-
ers by showing a sincere concern for their needs, and the same is true
of a negotiator. Often, recognizing and identifying the needs of the other
157
side is a challenge, but that is the fastest route to securing what we need
for our side.
Internal, external, and international negotiations offer an opportu-
nity to better understand the processes and skills needed to be an effec-
tive negotiator in your office and across the oceans. It introduces a
process to better prepare and plan your negotiations. The behavioral
portion of the following chapters reveals how to better manage your
own behaviors to promote a fruitful exchange and to influence the re-
sponse of the other party and also the outcome of the negotiation. Recogniz-
ing the affect of your behavior on another helps to more appropriately
choose what you say and how you say it. In the end, it is the only way to
get what you want.
Define Your Style

A negotiating style invites likenesses and differences while building
relationships. It neutralizes hostility, ownership, and a competitive pos-
ture. A negotiating approach is most effective when working across
varied national cultures and when working with the diversity of your
own workplace. Finding the common ground becomes a norm, both
culturally and in day-to-day business. When a negotiation is initiated
with an identified need of the other side, and also concern for their
needs, it becomes a means for leading in the direction you want to. As
we have learned, many cultures will not respond to an order—even
those considered more timid. They will quietly resist. A commanding
style will succeed if they present their idea within a negotiable alterna-
tive and a desirable benefit for both sides.
As a negotiations educator, I have learned that a “warm-up activ-
ity” is effective to start a training session, because it can give a quick,
insightful view of the participant: their likes and needs on a more per-
sonal level. In a negotiation, this is an equally effective tool: It can
quickly reveal the substance of a person—either a commonality or an
opposing value. Either way it is valuable information to have up front.
What’s more, it sets a tone of collaboration, and, when negotiating with
different cultures, it gives a neutral, human-to-human appreciation. An
158
exchange of personal facts or situations and an interest in the other’s
business and country could reveal safe areas of personal common ground.
Later in the negotiation, knowing these facts could relieve tension (should
it arise) and progress the negotiation more quickly toward problem-solving
and away from individual “must haves.”
For example, if you know that the person sitting on the opposite
side of the table enjoys sailing and you also enjoy sailing, your percep-
tion of them changes. A small revelation humanizes the other, even
when his or her personality is, at times, annoying, it could temper your
reaction. When tension rises or they appear obstinate or an immovable
cement head, you could more easily back off, remembering he too en-
joys the Platters or Pavarotti, allowing you to better manage your own
reactive behaviors. It also offers a simple, enjoyable common ground
for relief or for self-control.
Many countries throughout Asia, South America, and Europe dedi-
cate time to the courtesy of familial exchange. From the initial greet-
ing, you are building a relationship. Well-researched and planned
questions will help you set the tone and the direction of the negotiation.
Our Western culture often promotes a more straightforward approach
than that of our Eastern partners. I frequently hear, from the business
people I train, “I want to put my cards on the table, get down to the
brass tacks, and settle it. None of this dancing stuff! Say it like it is.”
The problem is that the Americans I train know what they want,
when they want it, and the way to get there, but they are seldom con-
cerned with what the other party thinks or needs. Speed is second in
importance to money saved. It reflects short-term thinking, and fails to
recognize the needs of others. The other side, however, might not trust
the straightforward approach and, consequently, not respond positively.
They might want to better understand the reasons behind an offer, the
purpose of several options presented and, most importantly, be assured
of your trustworthiness. A long-term relationship and customer reten-
tion are most difficult to establish when trust is in question from the
beginning.
159
Set the Right Tone

These niceties do not contradict being firm and confident. Instead,
they set a receptive background for being firm and establishing the cred-
ibility of your strengths. What’s more, it shows your ability to listen. A
negotiation that begins with a me-centered approach wastes valuable
time for the parties involved to come together to achieve solutions. A
well-functioning family is dependent on the concern of each member
for the other members. If a mother or father, for example, does not
teach the children the primary importance of caring for each other, the
family becomes a group of individuals coming together for practical
reasons as opposed to a supportive team. In the business world, the
same is true. It is the beginning of a break down of meeting, of mean-
ingful relationships, and of purpose for staying together.
It would be so much easier if a Motorola could build a relationship
with a Nextel, rather than Ed Zander with Gary Forsee. Group-to-group
affiliations or associations are easier, yet still dependent on the one-on-one,
which commands more in understanding, concern, and communication.
A negotiation is not company-to-company; it is person-to-person and is
dependent on the individuals in the actual negotiation. Their behaviors
have a strong influence on determining the outcome and the time in-
volved. A simple posture such as beginning the negotiation with “tell-
ing” versus “asking,” or allowing the other to go first, could offend and
appear arrogant to a Russian or a Chinese business person. This simple
gesture works across all cultures, including the United States. It is a
courtesy to ask.
I think of the business or social dinners I have attended and when
the evening is over, I realize the other two couples never asked me a
single question. I can take a plane nonstop to Hong Kong (16 hours and
45 minutes) and occasionally chat with the gentleman next to me. I get
off the plane knowing his three wives intimately, and he doesn’t even
know my name—let alone whether or not I am married. Asking is an
underused strategy for building the trust and, ultimately, the relation-
ship to assure good business.
160
Achieve Mutual Comfort

Initially, achieving a level of mutual comfort—with the language or
accent, customs, and business style—is the objective. This doesn’t mean
you must know all of the customs and traditions of the specific culture,
it means you must have an observant appreciation for the differences
and an obvious interest in learning more about the other party—their
families, city, and culture.
A delegation of three women business owners and several women in
business from the United States were meeting to negotiate with the
government and several businesses in China for specific projects in that
they could partner. We were halfway through the negotiation and the
hierarchy of the bank invited us to dinner that evening at a restaurant
in old Shanghai that was known for its culinary superiority. We arrived
a few minutes early and the hosts from the bank were waiting for us.
The room was regal. Everything was placed with an artistic sense and a
purpose, from the flowers to the seating at the table. The highest in
authority sat with his United States counterpart. The meal was 24 courses
and each one supported some part of your body, tasted better than the
prior course, and was elegantly presented. Even the cheek of the fish
was delicious in flavor and texture. After we were more than halfway
through the dinner and several gracious toasts, the waiter brought out a
beautiful porcelain platter with a huge domed lid, set it on the lazy
Susan and ceremoniously lifted off the lid. Voila, a heaping pile of french
fries!
Everyone laughed and chatted about the first McDonald’s in Beijing
and the foods of both cultures—the way the Western culture gave you
one plate filled with one meat and vegetables and the way the Chinese
meal was meant for a little taste of everything.
The french fries became the neutral topic for setting a tone of
we-want-to-work-together. What a grand start for the negotiations! Food
is a universal strategy for getting to know each other. We looked at the
Chinese government and banking officials more as willing partners who
wanted to satisfy us—in food and in business. A climate of shared con-
sideration and respect enabled us to move forward more quickly the
161
next morning when we approached the actual business and its issues.
Somewhere between the opening and closing, trust must be initiated
and established—that happens slowly by each word and action. French
fries can become a common denominator, especially if both sides like
them. Needs and concerns are more easily expressed when common
ground for the relationship is highlighted. When they came to the United
States we made certain duck a l’orange was part of their dinner along
with fish.
Learning the skills to negotiate is learning to relate and to listen to
build trust and to establish long-term relationships. It is a direct route
to securing and retaining business. Working within the customs and
traditions of myriad cultures affords many perspectives, and, frequently,
multi-faceted solutions that ensure the success of the agreement’s imple-
mentation. It is not a demanding process. Rather, negotiating is a mat-
ter of interest and concern, and the results are understanding and a
workable solution for the respective situation.
Crossing the cultural divide is meeting halfway. Choosing how to
get there is selecting the right strategies to make your move appear
more natural and sincere. Finding a way that is appropriate for many
cultures is finding Consideration, Acceptance, Respect, and Empathy
expressed in universal actions. Negotiating is an accepting way to do
business for both parties and both cultures. It is a process designed to
include, to incorporate, and to coalesce. Yet, it is a process that pro-
motes fear and apprehension in most of us. The goal of a negotiation is
to bring harmony through agreement. Therefore the process of negoti-
ating is as important as the result—the agreement. How you negotiate
will determine the relationship, the revenue, and the long-term busi-
ness plan.
162
Recognizing the Needs of the Other Side
CHAPTER 10:
Recognizing the Needs
of the Other Side:
TThe
he FFastest
astest Route to Get ting W
Getting ha
hatt
Wha
You Need
“Grieve not that men do not know you; grieve that you do not know men.”
—Confucius, Analects
Agenda
A. Team composition—feel like it is a person-to-person
exchange.
B. Matching needs—priorities and principles, yours and
theirs.
C. Identifying power—yours and theirs.
The previous quote embodies what assures successful negotiations

and sound agreements. A strong agreement is grounded in knowing and
understanding the other. While preparing and planning a negotiation,
delineate your objective and list your critical needs. At the same time,
your issues, priorities, and expectations should also be considered from
the other party’s perspective. Take the other’s needs into account.
In the end, understanding the other side’s critical needs will ensure
an agreement that can be implemented effectively by both sides. This
163
type of preparation will minimize post-negotiation negotiations and will

result in a compatible, solution-oriented approach to the negotiation.
For some countries in South America and Asia, getting the agreement
is the beginning of negotiation. Often times in cross-cultural negotia-
tions, cultural considerations are not included in planning efforts. It is
as important to research the culture with which you will be negotiating,
as it is to have data to support your case. If you want the negotiation to
become the problem-solving exchange that will bring about an outstand-
ing agreement, you have to recognize and understand the other party’s
expectations of the process and the outcome.
Identifying and prioritizing the needs of the other side often leads
to the development of a wide range of options and strategies for the
negotiation. This is the first step to influencing the other side to listen
and collaborate. Showing a considerate concern for their needs, when
sincere, is the initial layer for building trust. Meeting their needs is
finding solutions that best answer the primary issues of both sides. This
requires an understanding of substantive behavioral needs and inter-
personal/cultural behavioral needs. Some negotiators are brilliant at
ferreting out the technical, the tactical, and the organizational, but their
voices go unheard when dealing across cultures because they cannot
manage the exchange, primarily their behaviors. It is necessary to also
service the interpersonal need of the others—converse with them in a
manner to which they can hear and easily respond.
Matching perspectives and meeting needs is the goal. Seeing it from
their point of view is a discovery, supporting success. Gift giving is like
meeting the needs of the recipient. Does the giver think of the person
they are giving it to or do they scout for what ultimately appeals to
them? I have gifts, from people who know me well, that look like the
person who gave it to me—not my taste, not my style, and not my color,
but suiting the giver perfectly. This reflects the attitude many negotia-
tors adopt while planning or shopping for the negotiation. Their prepa-
ration is based on what they need, which is, of course, essential, but
without regard to what the other side expects or needs.
In the negotiation, the other party is thinking, “What about me?”
Instead you could look at it from their vantage point. Observe, question,
164
listen, and then identify their taste, style, and color. Your behaviors
and the way you deliver your message will reveal your sincerity and,
ultimately, your trustworthiness. On the other side of the table, you
will be seen as a collaborator rather than a taker—most important you
will be seen as trustworthy. This behavior will maintain a climate for
clear objectives and for securing the best agreement.
Negotiating Fluidly
Negotiating is somewhat like dancing. Knowing the parameters of
the dance floor gives you a knowing confidence of how far you can go—
to the right and the left, forward and backward. Many times having
several options to offer allows you to determine the tempo of the dance—
the slow and fluid waltz, the invigorating jitter-bug, or an inviting line
dance. Your power is in managing viable options. Some partners are
easier to lead onto the dance floor, while others are a bit stiff and resis-
tant. Recognizing your partner’s need or comfort will help to deter-
mine the outcome. Different cultures favor different dances—Asians
often prefer slow whereas Latin Americans want to pick up the pace.
The Japanese keep you guessing and the Poles definitely prefer a polka—
they are full of energy and dedicated enthusiasm. Enjoying the dance
should be a primary objective. After all, you want to be chosen each
time there is an open slot on the other’s dance card.
One of my major clients, a large corporation, was going through a
heavy loss in market share and a third restructuring. As a result, bud-
gets were cut. The first to go? Training. When negotiating, our com-
pany was well aware of the external factors influencing our client’s
situation. The company’s director of training needed someone to go to
China to take over the training center and deliver most of the training.
He was used to getting what he wanted from us because they were one
of our largest clients.
He called to tell me what he expected and what had changed in their
international contracts. He prefaced what he had to say by giving me
the background on what the organization’s situation, how much their
stock had dropped, and how they had to cut costs. I was well aware of
the situation because it was in the newspapers every other day.
165
The “requests” continued. He wanted me to cut my fee by 1/3, travel

coach to China, and begin work the next morning. He would also cut
the per diem for expenses by 25 percent. Before I left for China, he
wanted my group to develop a new, customized course for him, but he
didn’t want to pay for the development, only the use of it. He was drag-
ging me across the dance floor. When I responded with a summary of
his expectations, he was a bit taken back when he heard the demands
and the reductions in cost, and he began to shuffle. Yet his ultimate
response was, “Oh well, that’s the price of doing business, Catherine.”
We needed the business because two of our major clients were go-
ing through new mergers and had put training on hold. I worried and
considered our options an entire day and night. But, I knew we couldn’t
afford to do it because we would lose money halfway through the con-
tract. I called him back and told him that his price of doing business
would eventually put me out of business.
I would have tried harder to negotiate but the insulting lack of con-
cern for me and what I would need was almost as important in making
my decision as the loss of profit. I didn’t hear from him for almost a
year. And then he called. We began to negotiate. Many times getting
the deal would be worse than walking away from the table. Identifying
and recognizing what the other party needs is critical in being able to
influence and move someone in your direction—to lead smoothly, as a
confident expert, while dancing.
Balance Power
A focus on what you need, what your criteria, is and why you need
it will keep you dancing in the middle of the dance floor without a re-
sponsive partner. In order to get off dead center you have to use an
empathetic approach. When I campaigned for a federal office, I inter-
viewed potential staff members on the phone. One day an interview was
set up with one of the best finance managers in the campaign circles.
She was knowledgeable, efficient, organized, and had a good track
record. I interviewed her for a half hour, or I should say, I listened for
a half hour. She began by itemizing her needs for me:
166
z “I need a place to live close to the campaign
headquarters.”
z “I need a car, preferably one that gets good mileage.”
z “I need insurance for one year—health and life.”
z “I need a petty cash fund—no questions asked.”
z “I need one person to work exclusively with me—a
fund raiser.”
z “I need….”
After she finished her laundry list, I thanked her and never got
back with her—even though she was the best candidate on paper.
First, she never asked a question about the campaign or about me,
the candidate. She didn’t seem interested in the status of the campaign,
the philosophy, the issues, or the current cash balance. As the candi-
date, I felt as if she would put her comfort ahead of everything else,
despite the fact her requests were not at all out of line. Our campaign
was dependent on a force of 1,500 volunteers. She would have raised
money at the expense of the volunteers. Plainly, they would have re-
sented her.
When preparing for a negotiation the tendency is to focus on the
needs of our organization, which is, of course, key to an agreement that
is approved. Yet not being able to identify the needs of the other party,
or not having options to viably respond to those needs, leaves us on the
dance floor alone. In the best-case scenario, it leaves us with a short-
term agreement and the other side already looking for a different part-
ner. Building a relationship is much more demanding than getting an
agreement. Marriage, and its Western success rate, attests to that. When
you master a one-on-one relationship working effectively with a team,
an organization or a city is assured.
While planning the negotiation you must determine your power.
This sounds simple enough, but I have served on negotiating teams for
large corporations and often heard, “They have all the power this go-
around.” To go into a negotiation feeling that the other side has all the
power will be giving the other side an advantage for what they need and,
in return, forfeiting many of your needs.
167
According to Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary, power is influence over

others. It could be in the form of a position/title, knowledge/information,
money, authority, politics, relationships, and the list goes on. But power
is also perception. If the other side perceives that you are knowledge-
able, feel more secure because knowledge is power. If the other side
perceives that you have the authority, that’s power, and if they see you
as confident in statement, in fact, and in understanding, that is negoti-
ating power.
“All power is based on perception. If you think you’ve got it, then
you’ve got it. If you think you don’t have it, even if you have it, then you
don’t have it.”
—Herb Cohen, Everything is Negotiable
A negotiation implies each side needs the other side and there is
mutual benefit in potential outcomes. Many times, in negotiation, we
have to search for our power. For example, when competitors have to
negotiate a contract for working with Federal government and one side
has much more to lose than the other side, the side that has the least to
lose has power. That side can take the other side down with them.
“The greater the power, the more dangerous the abuse.”
—Edmund Burke, “On the Middlesex Election,” 1771
If large corporations abuse their suppliers or take advantage of them
because they are small, when the economy is good the suppliers will go
out of their way to respond quickly and with higher quality to the cus-
tomer who treated them well. This doesn’t mean you should not take
advantage of your power in a negotiation, but it does mean you should
use your power prudently. Fulfill your needs while simultaneously ad-
dressing the needs of the other side. This will lead to a full commitment
during implementation. The ideal time to be benevolent is when you do
hold the power and can be considerate of the other side. This consider-
ation helps build a long-term relationship anchored in trust. It’s a time
when you can reinforce the value of the relationship by doing more for
the other side without jeopardizing your own organization’s plan. This
is long-term planning.
“The sole advantage of power is that you can do more good.”
—Baltasar Gracian, The Art of Worldly Wisdom (1647)
168
A negotiation this “good” is answering the need of the other side
when it is doable without a high demand of your organization in cost,
time, or expertise. When you effectively manage your power, with a
consideration for the other party, while securing what you must have
for your side, you are building a relationship based on respect and mu-
tual trust. Your power will be a consistent influence assuring the re-
sults you need. A “trust” established is power.
Be perceived as confident, knowledgeable, and of practical, strate-
gic thinking. A strong, thorough plan for the negotiation is the founda-
tion of your self-assurance. This structural plan will also serve as your
reinforcement of power. Following through with a behavior plan of ask-
ing, listening, clarifying, and probing more will keep the discussion pro-
gressing toward agreement. While building a perception of power, trust
becomes more or even less apparent. Trust is confident expectations of
the other side in the quality of agreement and in behavior for action.
Trust takes over power in value.
Snapshot of Argentina
Argentina is a country of 40 million people, 85 percent of whom are
of European descent You will generally find Argentines with Spanish
and Italian ancestry, but the South American nation also includes those
from France, England, Germany, Poland, Ukraine, and also the largest
Jewish population in South America. In the 1990s, Argentina also at-
tracted many immigrants from the Pacific Rim.
The people are warm and welcoming, but at the same time are con-
sidered serious or focused. Similar to the other South American coun-
tries, it is essential to build a good relationship with your potential client
to bear a fruitful negotiation and secure a successful working relation-
ship. Perhaps due to the pronounced European heritage of the Argentines,
they are often thought of as somewhat sedate, or as demonstrating a
more-cultured approach over the other South American countries, in
taste and in the humanities.
What’s more, Argentines are not as open to controversial discus-
sions of new suggestions or ideas, as much as other Latin Americans.
Their experiences dictate a great deal of their thinking, giving them a
169
more subjective perspective. A great deal is weighed with consideration

to feelings and faith.
B Shake hands; give your name and nod.
B Friends shake hands; embrace; kiss—both male-to-female
and female-to-female.
B Argentines, similar to Colombians, might use double first
names on their business cards, although they might not use
both in conversation. In my experience, however, most do
use both names, such as Juan Pablo.
B When conversing, Argentines will stand close to you, while
maintaining eye contact. It is important to respect this cul-
tural habit, because it is part of their warmth and gracious
demeanor.
B A pat on the shoulder reflects their friendship.
B Your dress is very important in the Argentine culture. You
will be scrutinized and judged by what you are wearing—
both the clothing’s quality and its style.
B Conservative dark suits are best for men and women during
business meetings. In the evening, women should wear
dresses or skirts.
B Yawning, similar to in other Latin American countries, is
considered rude.
B Sitting on a table, a ledge, or a box is not polite.
B When dining, keep your hands on the table, just as in
Colombia.
B When invited to a barbecue (asado) do not wear jeans, and
wear a jacket or blazer.
B Liquor is considered a fantastic gift because of the high taxes
placed on it. Other gifts, such as chocolates and flowers are
acceptable when invited into an Argentine’s home. Bird of
Paradise is a preferred flower because they are less com-
mon and very beautiful.
170
B Do not present a leather good as a gift because Argentina,
along with Colombia, produces leather products. Gifts made
in the United States should be high quality.
B When leaving a meeting, a dinner, or any encounter,
shake hands with everyone to say goodbye—the same as in
Colombia.
B Be on time—whether they are or not. Your importance is
subject to their importance or seniority.
B For social engagements, be at least 30 minutes late.
B Hire, possibly through your embassy, the most-qualified
Argentine representative for your introductions and follow-
up tasks.
B Executives may work into the night—10 p.m. is not unusual.
B A high-ranking individual usually makes the decisions—
although he does keep in mind the best interest of his ex-
tended family when making decisions.
B Business dinners in restaurants are common—business lunches
are less common. Most people go home for lunch.
B Argentines usually do not discuss business during the meal
time.
Negotiations
B Akin to other Latin American countries, negotiations move
slowly in Argentina because the top decision-maker often
has to reach consensus with several others.
B Once again, personal relationships are much more impor-
tant than company-to-company relationships.
B A first visit should follow hierarchy—the highest ranking
member accompanied by the negotiating team. This custom
should also be observed in many Asian nations.
B Similar toVenezuela, do not change negotiators or team
members because you are working to build relationships.
171
B The Argentine negotiator is firm, difficult to persuade, and

does not often make concessions. Playing “hardball” back
will not work. Instead, offer options. Try to diminish risk
factors through data.
B Kindness and respect are a standard for the Argentine busi-
ness person.
B Character/honor is a priority in doing business.
B Avoid aggressive behavior—being empathetic shows a con-
cern for their needs.
B When dealing with the government, make certain you have
one or two Argentine representatives on your negotiating
team. This is helpful in almost all countries.
B Issues are not considered resolved until the final contract is
drawn. A negotiation could take several sessions and mul-
tiple visits.
B Contracts are generally very detailed. Often times this is an
historic trust issue.
Working in Argentina, Venezuela, and Colombia, you can see simi-
larities resulting from each country’s focus on building relationships.
The distinct customs of these Latin American countries each pay re-
spect to the establishment of good relationships. These multinational
businesspersons want to work with someone whom they like and can
trust. Showing your appreciation for the music, art, history, and terrain
of their country is a first step to securing a successful relationship.
172
The Mandate
CHAPTER 11:
The Mandate:
Mandate:
A Blueprint of the Dance Floor
Confidence is perceived power and confident expectations is trust.
Agenda
A. Setting the objective—yours and theirs.
B. Identifying all issues and ranking them—yours and
theirs.
C. Setting the parameters—reflecting theirs.
D. Develop your strengths and their strengths.
E. Brainstorm alternatives/options favorable to them.
On October 30, 1999, the Korea Herald featured an article by Kim

Dal-choong, president of the Sejong Institute, entitled, “In search of
confidence building: the South Korean perspective.”
Kim Dal-choong suggests, “…institutionalizing confidence build-
ing measures (CBMs) between the two Koreas as well as among the
four major powers [in northeast Asia] is a key step toward achieving
stability and prosperity on the Korean peninsula and in northeast Asia.”
173
In his piece, Kim Dal-choong highlights multi-national dialogue,

cooperation of agencies and organizations, signing and implementa-
tion of agreements, and several other options as CBMs. The third,
and most difficult, level of CBMs is an exchange between North and
South Korea.
Institutionalizing confidence-building measures must be considered
in both trust building and in achieving perceived power when negotiat-
ing. If you are sincere and confident in what you are saying, you are
building a perceived trustworthiness. If you are confident in your prepa-
ration and your mandate, then you may be perceived as holding power.
From a negotiation’s initial greeting, you take a first step toward
trust. What is said, how, and by whom are all important. At the same
time, an individual’s perceived confidence can keep the other side be-
lieving in the data and listening further. At that point, confidence is
perceived power. To secure the best agreement, solid in substance for
both sides, you have to have introduced and developed several CBMs—
a productive exchange, viable options, collaborative solutions, and ini-
tiatives for continued problem-solving and a solidification of trust.
The ambiance created by confidence-building measures is one of
partnership focused on working together to come up with the best reso-
lution and agreement. Being prepared for the negotiation is one of the
best confidence building measures. Know as much as you can know, set
parameters around all major issues, and feel confident about your best
case and your worst case. Plan as many options as you can to address as
many issues as you have identified.
The negotiation process ideally consists of three stages:
z Setting the mandate—internal.
z Negotiating with the other side—external.
z Presenting your agreement—internal.
Two thirds of your time is spent internally—advanced planning and
after securing the agreement. The external negotiation is dependent on
how well your internal preparations are managed. Your mandate usu-
ally determines the outcome of your negotiation. It is your framework
174
The Mandate
for confidence, and it also allows you to focus on building trust and,
ultimately, a relationship through astute personal behavior management.
Getting the Mandate

External Negotiation
Validate Manage
Needs and ÃÄ
Behaviors
Wants
ÃÄ
ÃÄ
Maintain Secure
Collaborative ÃÄ Agreements
Climate
Ä
Internal Negotiation
Plan/
Strategize
ÃÄ
Sell Agreement to
Ä
Ã
Collect Get Mandate Team

ÃÄ
Data Mandate
Ä
Ä
Need Implementation
As the model shows, a specific need sets the process in motion.

This need (to win a contract or maintain a relationship) requires your
organization to develop a plan for the external negotiation. The plan
results from thorough data collection, determining the appropriate strat-
egy and completing the right mandate.
175
Set the Mandate

Mandate is a strong word—it is your direction to take action. These
are your orders, and you should not stray from them. Anyone who has
a vested interest in this agreement should participate in this segment of
the process—preparing the mandate. The one who has authority over
you—your boss, or the ultimate decision-maker should have a say in
the final mandate. This will help eliminate mini-negotiations with your
client. An absolute rule is: never go outside your mandate without con-
ferring with your mandate team. It is your confidence in knowing your
limits and their confidence in believing your limits.
The plan is a power tool during the external negotiation, providing
content and direction. During the external negotiation, the negotiator’s
primary responsibility is to maintain a climate for a fruitful exchange.
Securing an agreement that can be implemented by both sides is the
objective.
The resulting agreement is what the negotiator brings back to his
mandate team for approval and implementation. If all of the issues were
carefully worked out, and various options and limits agreed to in the
initial stage, this final stage of the negotiation should move smoothly, if
you stayed within your mandate.
The process for preparations has five steps:
1. Determine the objective of the negotiation.
2. Develop your strengths/power.
3. Identify and rank issues.
4. Set parameters.
5. Brainstorm alternatives.
When you plan a solid structure, it gives you confidence and per-
ceived power—a dance floor ready for designing new steps that are
agreeable and doable for both dance partners.
If I know how far I can go in cost, quantity, or abstract concept, I
can move with ease and flexibility on the dance floor. Knowing where
to start and when to stop solidifies my confidence and my flexibility. If
used in a sincere and straightforward manner, the starting point also
176
The Mandate
helps in your timing and in building additional confidence. These be-
ginning steps help to declutter and sort out the complexities of issues
and of strategy. With every step taken in planning for your side, you
also have to think about what the other side will want or be planning.
Even role playing their responses can give you an idea of follow up or of
other options. It will help to minimize surprises. Thinking of their needs
and their reactions could reinforce your approach.
Set the Objective, Determine Strengths, and

Identify Key Issues
The first step in preparation is to set the objective. Delineate the
outcomes you expect from the negotiation. You will never get more
than you aspire to, and if you don’t set the direction for the negotia-
tion, how will you know where to go, how much to push, when to stop,
and what to go after? If I determine that my objective is to get the best
price because demand is high for my product, then that will decide my
negotiating emphasis. But if my objective doesn’t also include main-
taining a relationship with the other side, I might put the relationship at
risk because my objective was singularly focused: high price. Keep these
questions top of mind: How does this negotiation affect future con-
tracts? What are some long-term benefits? If you place your objective
within a long-term plan, that line of thinking will help determine what
you need now, balanced by what you would like to secure in the future.
This is the time to determine strengths (yours and theirs). This step
in the process is key to being perceived as confident. It also forces you
to address their strengths and consider ways to take advantage of or
merge your strengths. In order to effectively respond to the other party’s
needs you have to know what values you have to offer. There are many
benefits to knowing your strengths: know what concessions can be made,
know what to leverage better, know which viable options to offer, and
strategically plan timing and priority. Being aware of your weaknesses
can force you to address them in a proactive manner, minimize sur-
prises, and sometimes fill the gap. It is far better than hoping they won’t
come up in the negotiation.
177
The third step is to identify any issues that should be considered.

Once you have brainstormed the issues, prioritize them according to
“musts” and “wants.” Take the same issues and prioritize them for the
other party. This process generates the first move toward empathy for
the other party. If you put yourself in their shoes and start thinking like
they might be thinking, it will give your negotiation an expanded outline
of considerations and a good transition into the development of appeal-
ing and doable options. Your approach will be focused on what the
other side needs, which will keep the other side listening and help you
get what you want.
Understanding the issues from both points of view allows you to
lead on the dance floor and manage the exchange. To uncover the criti-
cal needs of the other party requires both a substantive understanding
of the issues in play and a behavioral understanding of the other side’s
culture. Often times, understanding the culture, whether a business or
a national culture, can reveal better strategies and options.
Keep in mind that culture is behavioral. Respect and empathy an-
chor your consistency of good behavior when working across cultures.
If your priority of issues is vastly different than that of the other party,
it could work to your advantage or it could be nonnegotiable. For ex-
ample, if Colombia’s first priority is employing people and yours is sav-
ing time, this is a workable situation if you plan on hiring soon. If you
present your side first, without asking questions to reveal the other
side’s need, insisting on a demanding schedule to save time, they might
stick their heals in the ground.
Your opening issue becomes a strategy determined by how well you
know the other side’s issues and concerns. Do you target their key issue
or do you develop the negotiation with lesser important issues? To ad-
dress their issues versus your concerns is a more effective strategy. Know-
ing their concerns helps you ask the right questions and to place your
needs strategically within the common ground for solving problems that
affect both of you. Identifying all known issues, theirs and yours, and
ranking them in a priority reflecting both sides’ needs is the basis for
issue planning and for a thorough approach to the negotiating table.
178
The Mandate
Establish Best- and Worst-Case Scenarios

The next step in planning is to set the parameters of the dance floor.
Establish your opening and your bottom line for each of your primary
issues. It is better to know how far you can move either way versus
engaging a fixed target without defining the outer limits.
You decide to buy a new car, and after you do a bit of research you
conclude you would like to pay around $20,000—your “targeted price.”
You are willing to spend somewhere in that range. You choose a dealer
close to you for easy access to service. The salesman asks you, “What is
your price range?” and you wisely reverse the question and ask, “What
is the list price and what is your suggested sales price to me?” The
salesman offers you a sales price reduced from the list price of $28,000
to $26,000 and you only know you want to spend about $20,000, but you
don’t know what to respond with as your best case. So you fumble and
sputter for a number of seconds and you settle on $18,000.” In those
critical, few seconds you lose a little of your perceived confidence, and
they know. The salesman has the advantage and he stands firm against
your “uneducated, absurd” offer. Also you don’t know what to stand
firm on; will you accept $23,000 or only $22,000 (your worst case)? You
will be a dance partner that moves with hesitance and not with smooth
confidence or knowing expertise. The limits of the dance floor allow
for flexibility of movement without stumbling. You know where you
can dance and just how far you can go with a routine, or in negotiating
and during the exchange. A dancer can judge when and where to start a
specific set of steps by the parameters of the available dance floor—
knowing where to start and where he/she will end up. In the end, this
flexibility is perceived as confidence and, ultimately, power. Knowing
the limits of the dance floor allows you to pick up the tempo when
needed, manage the pace, and even know when to dip (and close).
Knowing your best- and worst-case scenarios requires research and a
bit of gut feeling/intuition. It also requires high aspirations. You will never
get more than you ask for, and if you don’t ask, you don’t have a chance.
Establishing your best and worst case, while aspiring realistically high, is
179
key to your credibility and to the outcome. You will generally never get
more than you request.
Growing up on the ethnic west side of Grand Rapids, Michigan, my
mom and dad purchased all of their appliances from Nawara Brothers,
four blocks from our house. For three generations, our family bought
their appliances from Nawara brothers. More recently, I was staying
with my mom after she had bypass surgery. She wanted to clean out the
house, and her 1940s Maytag wringer washer, which was in mint condi-
tion, had to go. She wanted Billie Nawara, from the shop, to pick it up
and take it away.
My mom and I set our best and worst cases. She knew local appli-
ance stores were charging $50 delivery fees. We were not purchasing,
but we did have a long relationship with the store. We set our worst
case at $50, and if Billie understood how many family buyers my mother,
the matriarch, could still influence, he would take it away for no charge,
our best case. My mom said she would be satisfied with a $20 fee.
At that point, my younger brother, Dan, stopped by and asked what
we were doing with the Maytag—a neighbor of his just bought one at a
flea market for $125! Shocked by our lack of flea exposure, my mom
and I realized we hadn’t done our homework. If Billie from the shop
could sell the Maytag for $125, we should get half of that (aspiring high,
$75) and our worst case became no charge for pickup (former best
case).
Billie, third generation wise, gave her the $75. With a small invest-
ment, long-term thinking paid off later when two great nieces bought
their first home appliances from him. Ethnic neighborhoods build
strong, dependable networks—networks of relationships built on a his-
tory of trustworthiness.
Going into a negotiation with a general target of where you would
like to end up leaves you initially wobbly when the other party goes
either way of your target, and seldom in the most confident lead posi-
tion. The meeting to determine a mandate or a specific set of orders
should include anyone who has a vested interest in the outcome of the
negotiation, especially your superior. It requires outstanding skill to
180
The Mandate
negotiate internally and secure a mandate that is high in aspiration and
yet realistic enough to be believable. But the mandate determines the
height of your success, and it gives you the layout for reaching your
destination.
As you approach your worst-case scenario, and you make the other
side aware of this movement, step by step, throughout the negotiation,
they will believe you. The specific best/worst for each issue gives you a
trust-building vehicle and a way in which to be perceived as confident.
You can then more freely focus on behavior (yours and theirs), and on
strategy when you are in the negotiation. You can confidently lead the
dance.
Ask—It’s the Only Way to Receive

When I was first elected to our local board of education, we had to
approve the salary and hiring of new teachers. Before the board meet-
ing I was going over charts to compare salaries, and I noticed that there
was a wide disparity between one set of experienced teachers. One pro-
file struck me. The teacher had the same number of years of experi-
ence, a masters degree, and similar involvement as two other new hires
and yet, his salary was going to be $17,000 more. I asked the superinten-
dent what the distinguishing factor was and he said, “None. That teacher
asked for it.” This story covers two issues when negotiating: One, you
almost never get more than what you ask for, so when setting your
mandate, aspire realistically high. Second, asking should replace any
assumption.
The United States is considered a telling nation, so asking is usually
an afterthought. One of my corporate clients had been negotiating with
a competitor, by government compliance. They kept telling me that
they have given and given and given, because their competitor had the
favor of the government this time and they saw no other way. I asked
them what they had asked for—they didn’t think it was necessary to
ask, instead saying, ” They should know after all we’ve given.”
Use planning time to declutter background information and place it
in a plan. You have to know what your expectations are—what you or
181
your team must have leaving the negotiation and what you can use for
leverage. Think about how this all fits into your long-term plan. The
parameters for each issue are your guide, and stepping outside of them,
without considering your team, could be hard to sell when you come
back to the office with an agreement. Also, not being committed to
your parameters will leave you in a weak position in the negotiation,
being hesitant when deciding where to go next, and when to stop. Be-
lieving in your plan, using the plan as an integral part of your strategies
and responding within the guidelines of your plan give you better con-
trol of the negotiation and its process.
Once the issues are identified and prioritized with set limits, you
can take the issues and brainstorm any alternatives or options for each
issue or multiple issues. The alternatives should be viable as well as
appealing and valuable to the other side. These options offer choices
that would be advantageous to them and also are workable from your
point of view. If the negotiation is complex, putting your best and worst
targets around the options you offer will give you more identifiable
control.
When working with teenagers, for example, you may tell them they
must be home at 11 p.m., no questions asked. Usually they stick their
heals in the ground and won’t move from their request. It’s war! You
can offer them alternatives such as, “Come home at 11 p.m. and bring
your friends for pizza.” Or, “Leave the pizzeria at 11, call us when you
leave, and that will give you an extra half hour with your friends.” It is
the same in business, offering new, creative alternatives and managing
those alternatives gives you power. It also diffuses and sometimes moves
you off of dead center.
For example, when I am trying to secure an agreement for training a
large number of corporate employees, and cost is their number-1 issue, I
can offer several alternatives to help reduce their direct cost. I may sug-
gest training their own staff to instruct as a large cost savings for the long
term—no travel expenses, no delivery fee, and no outsourcing—only a
royalty. If there is a delivery issue, options could be: Supplier hold re-
serve stock, JIT delivery, both parties agree to resolve scheduling prob-
lem. Alternatives help you to prevent war and save a relationship.
182
The Mandate
There are many possible solutions for any given issue. Think of
several so you will have options in your arsenal to find what best suits
the other side’s needs. Think also of options the other party might
offer, and be prepared to respond. Consider what your alternatives
and theirs may cost, and what the trade-offs may be. Anticipate what
the trade-offs could be; many times what you consider as viable trade-
offs are their first priority in issues. This preparation in issue, alter-
natives, and trade-offs is a constructive way to build a collaborative
approach to problem-solving and, eventually, to agreement. Once you
have identified the issues, established the parameters, generated many
options, and targeted specific trade-offs, you should not stray from
this mandate.
As you prepare, the other side’s culture should be a consideration
in every step of your plan. Understanding their cultural expectations
will make apparent workable options and strategies. You will know if
your first few meetings are dedicated to a better understanding of the
other side’s business and personal perspectives.
When moving into strategic planning, consider how to use the data
you have collected to influence your client within their cultural perspec-
tive. How can you best meet their needs while also satisfying your needs?
The issues’ parameters and the options’ strength will give you the sup-
port required to knowledgeably plan your strategy. Concentrate your
work on looking for common ground. Discover the common ground in
context and in culture. This up-front work will facilitate the later imple-
mentation of your agreement. Addressing the common ground will help
to resolve related concerns and will give you successes to build on.
Snapshot of Chile
Chile is the longest country in the world—4,000 miles long and only
100 miles wide. The northern part is the driest place on earth. Some of
the areas of the Altacama desert have not had any rainfall in recorded
history. The southern part of the country is very much like Sweden and
Norway, complete with glaciers and fjords.
Chile, which has a population of about 16 million, is a country that
values the arts and literature and is reputed to be the world publisher
183
of books written in Spanish. In recent years, its wine industry has grown
by leaps and bounds. One can often find Chilean wine at shops through-
out the United States. In fact, every country I travel to today offers
Chilean wines in restaurants—and no matter the price, it is usually very
good. The official language in Chile is Spanish and they are a homog-
enous people—generally mestizo (European and Indian decent).
The Republic of Chile is a multiparty republic with two houses: the
Senate and the Chamber of Deputies. Michelle Bachelet was elected presi-
dent in 2006, and she is the country’s first female leader. Chile has a
lower “machismo” (extreme masculinity—an authoritative man of mas-
culine strength) rate than the other South American countries. The people
of Chile hold a personal sense of honor and loyalty to family and commu-
nity. Respect is a basis for all interactions as is consistent courtesy.
B For Chileans, truth is more subjective and personal, because
they consider feelings more important than facts.
B There is a larger middle class in Chile than most other Latin
American countries, but there is a notable percentage of the
population living in poverty and a small elite class.
B Their sense of order is reinforced by their respect for laws
and for morality. Both create a structure that offers security.
B Chile is a collectivist society as opposed to the individualist
society present in the United States.
B Family, extended family, and extended long-term relation-
ships hold significant importance in all areas of life—family,
business, or government.
B Chile is a more formal society in manners—business and social.
B Do not give black or purple gifts as these colors are reserved
for funerals.
B When greeting in a group, greet everyone with a handshake.
Women often pat the forearm or shoulder; if they are more
184
The Mandate
familiar, they will kiss on the cheek. Similar to other Latin
American countries, greet every person hello and goodbye—
socially and in business.
B Business cards, out of courtesy, should also be printed in
Spanish and given and received with eye contact, a smile,
and taking care to notice and place in a holder. Offer a busi-
ness card to everyone in the room. This is a courtesy in most
Latin American and Asian countries
B Office hours are 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. and Chileans expect punc-
tuality, even though they often do not respect the time.
B Business conversation should begin with some social chit chat.
B Set meeting times a week in advance.
B Meeting in the morning followed by a business lunch is most
appropriate.
B Address Chileans by Mr./Mrs./Ms. until they ask you to call
them by their first name.
B Chileans invite businessmen to their homes—send flowers
or candy ahead to the hostess.
B When pouring the good Chilean wine, do not pour with your
left hand and do not pour in a fashion to let the wine lap up
the sides of the glass. Manners are very important in Chile—
try everything that is served you.
B Keep your hands above the table at all times, just like in
Colombia.
B Maintain eye contact and remain close when a Chilean is
speaking with you.
B If you receive a gift, open it immediately.
B Dress is conservative—dark blue or grey suit. Women should
dress in suits and heels.
Negotiations
B Initially a senior executive, accompanied by the mid-level
executives, should meet with their senior person.
185
B Personal relationships are primary in Chile.

B Honesty and integrity are most valuable; avoid doing any-
thing that would embarrass a person or seem like criticism.
B Chileans are straightforward and serious in negotiations, yet
they are not aggressive or pushy. As stated before, kindness
and respect are paramount.
B They consider appearances, including the hotel you stay at—
is it a finer hotel?
B Have options of consideration, such as a continued service
package, or financial terms with special considerations.
B Be knowledgeable with regard to their history, the arts, their
wines….
Chilean culture respects the hierarchical, and you will be expected
to defer to the most senior person present. Observe and listen, you will
be able to discern who is most senior by how each person is treated.
186
Common Ground
CHAPTER 12:
Common Ground:
C ultur
ultur al and C
tural ontex
Contex tual
ontextual
“There must be, not a balance of power, but a community of power….”

—Woodrow Wilson, 1917
Agenda
A. Common ground is the focus.
B. Strategic planning and development.
1. Cultures determine strategies.
2. Open-air Markets.
C. Sample strategies.
1. Questioning—a new strategic art.
2. Issue vs. series planning.
D. Long-term approach.
President Wilson’s statement reflects an inclusive attitude of nego-

tiating a community of power—powers integrated to build a durable,
lasting agreement. It takes the balance of power to a collaborative level.
Instead of each party retaining a singular, excluding ownership of power,
which could tip the balance at any time, each side puts their power in a
187
repository, and it becomes a community of power. As a result, common

ground becomes more fertile for strategy planning. Although common
ground is an area of potential mutually beneficial agreement, it isn’t as
inclusive in its interpretation, because its focus is on the issue at hand,
which is contextual. The common is defined as, “of or relating to a
community.” Common ground is a community of business and of cul-
tures, and when married to a community of power it becomes an agree-
ment of actionable solution and inclusive of culture and relationship. If
a negotiation is progressing and needs more than one meeting, common
ground can build a strong framework of past business and/or past agree-
ment. Initially consider three tasks:
z Examine the issues involved in the negotiation and
identify options in areas where the differences are
slight and also those where they are great.
z Rank areas of common ground from strongest to
weakest—yours and theirs.
z Consider the relationship, both cultural and long-term.
Using common ground has many benefits, including an indication

of which issues are areas of potential agreement and areas from which
movement can occur. Planning your strategy and tactics is often de-
manding, causing apprehension and fear. Observe. Ask. Listen and take
advantage of silence. Your strategies will develop and shape to fit each
distinct situation. Strategies are situational and people-dependent,
whereas researching facts and collecting data are definitive and practi-
cal. Collecting data is your dance floor with visible boundaries; strategizing,
on the other hand, is deciding on the dance, the tempo and the smoothly
designed steps to fluidly move with your partner to accord and com-
plete the dance.
Planning Strategically
The strategic portion of your planning requires anticipative cre-
ativity, familiarity with the client, and astute listening to better respond
spontaneously. There is no one prescription for strategy that can assure
188
Common Ground
a successful negotiation because of the diversity of people and situa-
tions. There are certain strategies and behaviors, however, that work
well, in general. We can see how specific behaviors have a positive or
negative affect on people. The same is true for strategies. There are
three typical strategies for focusing on common ground:
z Opening and closing: Begin the negotiation with a summary
of previous or current agreement and close the negotiation
session with the positives of common ground and subsequent
agreement.
z At an impasse: When the other party appears to be a cement
head and you can’t chip away enough, move to another issue
and another area of common ground.
z Conceding: Make the other side aware of your concession
in a subtle way so that you may come back for consideration
from them in another issue of common ground. When you
decide to give a little, your largest amount of concession
should come at the beginning of the negotiation. This shows
a serious consideration for compromise. As the negotiation
progresses, you should concede less and less to indicate that
they are getting closer to your bottom line or that you might
walk away.
When planning strategies, it is important to take into account any
influences over which you have no control: interest rates, competition
(off shore and domestic), currency exchange, downsizing, and so on.
How do these noncontrollables affect your strategy? A certain consid-
eration when working internationally is the national culture—another
non-controllable. It is behavioral.
In training, I learned that certain standards, acceptable methods
used in Western culture were considered more affronting in other cul-
tures. For example, to give feedback, especially to an individual, in front
of a group, whether good or constructive, is not appropriate in many
Asian cultures. Saving face is more respectfully subtle with the con-
structive and the positive. Criticism and overt praise might be seen as
compromising the team. Many recent articles in business publications
189
and newspapers have projected our focus in business turning from a

manufacturing to a service industry. While serving as president of the
National Association of Women Business Owners in Chicago, our board
did a trend study to anticipate our members’ changing needs. We found
that current trends reveal that the standard way of doing business—the
Western way—will be changing in order to accommodate the way of do-
ing business in China, India, and the rest of the world. Cultural consider-
ations are a determining factor in how we strategize and do business. If a
Korean customer consistently plays “hard ball,” and we return with “hard
ball” the opportunity to secure the contract and establish a relationship
is limited. We can remain firm, respectful, and considerate without jeop-
ardizing our case. Trust is forever the common denominator.
Developing a Clever Strategy

My husband and I are involved with a small group of Chinese engi-
neers who want to create a joint venture with an established company
in China and a medium size American company that manufactures cables
and harnesses for computers. My husband asked if they had an exclu-
sive with the Chinese company and, if so, could he see the contract.
They said there was no need for a contract because they held a long
relationship with their Chinese partners. That was it! No explanations
were necessary. The established relationship was better than a con-
tracted partnership. During their fourth meeting, my husband asked if
we could have a shared statement of commitment to the project. Again
he was told that they are like family. At this time in the negotiation, we
could not contest the integrity of the relationship. Later, when the ne-
gotiation is nearing agreement we could approach a more Western way
of doing business—a legal contract. This is also a matter of building the
trust that sustains a harmony for agreement.
Strategies depend on timing and the manner of delivery of the mes-
sage and situation, which also includes consideration of the cultural
aspects. To force someone to do what you want requires more work
and time, and is usually shorter in effect. To be clever in observation,
in questioning, and in relating, supports a strong, tactical plan. Under-
standing the other side and their needs and how they overlap with your
190
Common Ground
organization’s needs helps you choose the right strategy. Confidence in
knowing your plan is viewed as strength in quality and substances.
Although strategies are situational and often spontaneous, planning
your strategies is critical to your outcome. Knowing where to start,
when to move from one issue to another, and at what point to reveal
certain information or to ask a key question—knowing when to waltz
and when to tango and, more importantly, what your partner needs.
Examples of Strategies
Strategy Impact
Ask well-planned questions: z Gets people involved.
z Open. z Reveals needs and wants.
z Creative.
z Logical.
z Experience-based.
Request proposals for solution. z Focus is on options

(interests), not position.
Suffer the silence. z Provides time to think.

z Forces other party to
contribute more actively.
z Results in ambience of
partnering for solutions.
Listen with intensity. z Uncovers needs and wants.

z Helps create workable
options.
Good guy/Bad guy. z Easily recognized; sets

long-term reputation.
Rephrase to positive or neutral. z Keeps the environment

open for an exchange.
191
Put yourself in their shoes. z Helps discover the “why”

behind their position.
z Facilitates identifying their
needs.
z Generates more options.
Slow the pace with summary. z If given too much
information and not time
to think, can move from
reactive to pensive.
Save face—provide dignity. z Builds a relationship.
Move to problem-solving z Creates a partnering

approach. posture.
z Strengthens
relationship.
Have a good BATNA (Best z Know how far to go on
Alternative To a Negotiated issues.
Agreement). z Gives confidence of a
viable alternative.
Know your BATNA. z Helps develop options.
Use differences. z Differences in priorities,

interests, and beliefs
could be beneficial when
blended in a solution.
Be aware of timing. z Builds credibility—too
soon or too late in giving
or requesting information
can diminish trust.
Start with issue of lesser impor- z Sets foundation for common
tance and perhaps more easily ground.
resolvable. z Creates receptive
atmosphere for exchange.
192
Common Ground
Effective Questioning
Ten years ago, giving the right solution was paramount for an engi-
neer, a manager or an executive within an organization. Today, asking
the right questions is the key to uncovering the best solution, from a
pool of many acceptable solutions. In today’s business environment,
considering technology’s fast pace, and its brief life of exclusivity, ques-
tioning techniques can drive a collaborative approach to reaching an
agreement that can be implemented without going back to the negotiat-
ing table many more times.
Planning good questions is a good strategy. Questions that produce
valuable information and direction need to be prepared. “Winging it”
usually works one out of five times, not four out of five times. Some-
times the questions must be asked often, spread over a subtle persis-
tence until you can see what is really behind the other’s resistance and,
uncover unspoken needs. Several encounters might be needed. Using
questions such as: How? Why? Could you give me an example? can be
very useful at this time. If your questions make it easy for the other
side to think and understand, they will listen more and ultimately give
you credit, while continuing to build the relationship. Different types
of questions are more appropriate in different situations. The question
categories on the opposite page, for example, appeal to different people
who have different ways of thinking. From working across cultures,
I’ve learned that every culture has individuals who like one category
over another. Innovative questions allow open, free thinking—any an-
swer is a right answer. Yet, a more analytical person feels comfortable
being asked analytical questions of sequence, steps, or relativity. Ev-
eryone likes to be asked an experience-based question because only they
have the right answer.
193
Questions
Type Purpose
Overhead z Initiate conversation.
M Open z Stimulate thinking.
a Closed z Get group’s attention.
n
z Keep group focused.
a
g Direct z Include less-vocal
i Open members.
n Closed z Uncover additional
g information.
z Redirect negotiation
process.
Innovative z Stimulate thinking.
z Encourage additional
options.
z Generate discussion.
z Move toward shared
problem-solving.
E
Analytical z Relate concepts and
x
reasoning.
p
l z Explore new information
o and/or options.
r z Direct discussion toward
i solutions.
n z Establish common ground.
g
Experience-Based z Set amiable tone.
z Provide credibility.
z Clarify through specific
examples.
z Acknowledge value of feelings,
history, and shared experiences.
194
Common Ground
When managing the exchange, questions become the core of your
strategy. They are a bit more difficult to prepare because presuming the
other side’s reactions requires a bit of role play in your planning. None-
theless, it is much more effective than telling with a tone of authority.
Plan, Issue by Issue

In this planning stage (not the actual negotiation), keep the issues
independent. You may subdivide your issues into several options, each
having their own parameters. Work issue by issue without series plan-
ning. It helps to declutter so you can better understand all the vari-
ances within each issue and then the impact of one issue to the other
and to another. If you plan, thinking of scenarios with sequential devel-
opment, you will lose flexibility and restrict your movement during the
negotiation, appear tentative, and then be perceived as less confident—
a loss of perceived power.
For example, if you decided, in your planning time, that if they bought
15,000 widgets you would give them a price of $1.50 a widget and pay-
ment terms of net 30 days. If they then lay on the table 12,000 widgets at
$1.10, net 45 days. Your feet are tied together by your scenario and you
can’t dance as smoothly, thus, as confidently. During the negotiation
you may easily create a scenario knowing the parameters of each issue
and easily present, modify, or change with flexibility during the nego-
tiation.
From the simple to the more complex negotiations it is better to
plan issue by issue versus series of issues with an accompanying set of
scenarios. If you set parameters for each issue and several options for
each issue, even if there is an overlap you have given yourself a flexibil-
ity in movement, an ease in your response, and an ability to more flu-
ently build on the other side’s proposals.
If the issue is complex, break it down into manageable segments
with their own parameters. This process is exclusive to the planning,
however, and as a result, you will be able to manage better the exchange.
Within the planning you are aware of one issue dependent on another
issue, for example volume can influence price, yet you do not deter-
mine your parameters based on that dependency. You will do it in the
195
negotiation. Asians and, often times, South Americans cluster issues in

the negotiation. It’s a strategy to muddy the clarity of understanding
and to handicap movement. If you have a plan that is issue-based, you
are better equipped to thoughtfully and strategically respond to a se-
ries or set of suggestions.
I think of it as book shelves in a library: one shelf houses cost; one,
quality; another, scheduling; and another, technology. All of the issues
are there with a sense of order. I can easily find what I need—book by
book and issue by issue. If the other side stacks the books in a mixed
pile, I can still isolate one and know where it fits on the shelves. I know
how much room I have and how far I can go. I recognize that eventu-
ally I will need books from each shelf, but the delineated placement of
each will facilitate my efficient use of them. Once in the negotiation, I
can link impact of one issue to another and leverage, but when planning
it is best to prepare issue by issue. It gives you structured yet flexible
space without confining your issues to one specific sequence.
Overcoming the Cultural Handicap

In many national and business cultures, the way of life requires
negotiating more than in the West. The barter system reinforces nego-
tiating skills. Asian and Latin American cultures often expect an ex-
change, either verbal or of product. In retail, the cost, quality, volume
issues all are negotiable—depending on your skills. Negotiation is an
expectation in retail, in wholesale, in every area of business, and in
relationships. Negotiating the necessities such as groceries and cloth-
ing, is a sound and good apprenticeship for negotiating business deals
with far less risk. This negotiating style often becomes a primary part
of their management and leadership style. In fact, most people in these
cultures are offended when you don’t negotiate—they presume it is a
haughty arrogance or a cultural ignorance. In my opinion, it goes back
to the emotions necessarily felt in a negotiation. It is an experienced
way to realize and feel the need and the benefits for building a relation-
ship. The impact on the bottom line each month easily becomes evident.
As I’ve explained, I grew up in the flat above my grandparents (Russian/
Polish immigrants) in Grand Rapids, Michigan. Every Saturday my
196
Common Ground
grandfather, Dziadzia, took my older sister and me to run errands and
shop. We would go to the butcher, fruit stand, bakery, and myriad other
destinations. In the end, we would always end up at the ice cream par-
lor. My Dziadzia would chat, network, negotiate, and chat some more.
He negotiated meat to meat and vegetables to the pound. He always
had options and weighed the external factors, like what was in season,
and that made a difference when buying fruit. He negotiated today’s
bread versus yesterday’s and the day before. He knew what was hap-
pening in the business world. He also was a deacon in the Russian
Orthodox Church, which helped to affirm his trustworthiness, and he
managed the Falcon’s Polish Club, which gave me a well-established
social network.
But most importantly, his first concern was consistently how to help
the other person—to fill their needs. He built a strong network, negoti-
ating and introducing one business owner to the other. He found com-
mon ground in their business issues and in relationships. He approached
with sound process and appropriate behaviors. His relationship with
each of them was solid—trust was never wobbly. Just as corporations
build a community of reliable and competent suppliers, he built a com-
munity of reliable providers. Of course, his ultimate authority was my
grandmother—at least when it came to veal, sweet cheese, and fresh
cabbage.
The Chinese are another great example of this style. After working in
China for many years, I noticed that when a Chinese person was asked a
question, even one of historic fact, they would preface their answer with
“It depends.” If I asked, “Do the rural people of China usually farm?”
The response would be, “It depends how close they are to a city and in
which province they live, and what their family before them did.”
If I said, “The Chinese are more emotional than they initially ap-
pear.” The response would inevitably be, “It depends….” The delivery is
neutralizing, nonconfronting, and inviting for comment—a good way to
maintain a climate open to interaction and negotiation. It depends is ef-
fective for every culture. In Western cultures, we often feel that we must
have an answer and we immediately jump to a fact, a problem, an idea, or
a solution. The Western absolute often shuts down an open exchange.
197
Embracing Long-Term Thinking

Many times business people focus on a quick fix. It’s natural—we
are a convenience-oriented society obsessed with immediate gratifica-
tion. It is difficult in our society to think long term because much of
our productivity and compensation is not measured in those terms. In
today’s marketplace, customer retention and revenue and market share
increases are our primary focus. But building relationships prior to
negotiation, during the negotiation, and in follow up offers many long-
term benefits. But, it takes longer.
Both retention and expansion require strong relationships built in
the global market. Long-term thinking and acting will pay off—in cus-
tomer retention, in anticipating markets and needs, and in a stable and
growing revenue stream. This is difficult because our business values
are not always aligned with our strategies. For example, often we com-
pensate dependent on a quarterly return, while promoting long-term
strategic thinking and planning.
Shopping on the island of Phuket, Thailand, is a wonderful example
of a negotiation-oriented culture. The beach is magnificent—sand so
white and fine you feel as if you are walking on a smooth marble floor
with a comfortable give to it. The sky meets the sand with a blue so
deep you’re convinced artificial coloring is added each morning to give
it a flawless and consistent color.
The people are equally beautiful. They are slight in size, features,
and gesture. The waitress at the café can set your table and serve you a
drink with a bowl of nuts, but you are not aware of anyone entering or
leaving. It is an atmosphere that soothes you into a contemplative com-
fort with sitting, watching, and thinking of the wonder of a unifying,
harmonious world.
Along the water’s edge of this beach are boutiques—grass huts, re-
ally. Each has its own specialty—blouses, gold jewelry, linens. The shop-
keepers are proud of their product and its quality. They easily sell to
the tourists, and they manage well their overhead and bottom line. I
was working in Phuket for two weeks, and, while shopping, my objec-
tive was to buy for my family and at the same time, learn more about
198
Common Ground
Thailand and its people. Consulting had finally paid off—a warm desti-
nation in January (a welcome respite from the Chicago cold). There
were paradise-like accommodations, complete with a daily back mas-
sage on the sand, as the Thai women walked on my back and gave me
therapeutic relief with their feet.
The first week, I walked the beach every evening, stopping at a few of
the shops, getting to know four of the entrepreneurs well enough that by
the end of the week, we had tea together. They told me of the artists who
embroidered the shirts, of their town, and of their temperament. I pur-
chased, after negotiating a good price, a couple of blouses for my daugh-
ters, a shirt for my son, and a good knock-off watch for my husband. The
shopkeeper said to me, as he handed me the shirts, “This is good for you
and good for me.” In the West, we would call that a win/win situation.
If one shop didn’t sell what I was looking for, the owner would
recommend another down the beach. But it was important that I go to
the recommended shop and not somewhere else along the way. This
follow through showed my respect to the shopkeeper and reinforced
my reliability. But throughout my shopping adventures, I found that
none of the shops had an embroidered shirt large enough for my mom,
a solid size 16 by U.S. sizing standards.
At the end of the third week, one of the boutique owners had a shirt
made for my mother for me to take back to her. The price was half of
what I had paid for the first two he sold me. Why did he make this
gesture? He said it was because of my loyalty to his business. Now, a
few years later, I still purchase items from those shopkeepers, products
they send to me at one-fifth the cost of current purchase prices. We
built a relationship based on our values and needs—shared and dis-
tinct. Together, we continue to negotiate and anticipate the other’s need.
And, I don’t look off-the-shelf for anything I wear or give—my family
has worn some pretty strange-looking outfits.
Recognizing the Mutually Beneficial Approach

The aggressive, straightforward, and speedy telling style of Western
culture can be effective in some situations. For working across bor-
ders, asking more questions, summarizing the other side’s input, and
199
expressing an understanding of and concern for their needs, it is far

more effective. In other words, take time and give consideration to
building a relationship. The same is true when you are developing a
personal one-on-one relationship. If you ask questions and the other per-
son asks very little, it will be hard to maintain an involved relationship.
Knowing the appropriate timing supports a revealing exchange of
thoughts and ideas and can also work to solidify trust. If you are using
a distributor for your products and another distributor is courting you
with an offer to pay more, but you would like to continue to partner
with your current distributor and increase the price, your timing is criti-
cal. If you tell your current distributor right up front that someone is
willing to pay more, they will feel they are being strong armed. But if
you start negotiating, and they aren’t willing to give on pricing, then the
time could be right to tell them you have another offer, but you would
prefer maintaining the relationship you have built with them. Begin with
a question: “What can we do to reduce the price and what would be the
trade-offs?” If it is too soon, the message you send hints at a threat and
jeopardizes the collaborative approach and, quite possibly, finding the
best solution.
Korean and the Japanese businesspeople are skilled in taking ad-
vantage of last-minute concessions, compromises, and actions. I use
this tactic when I am leasing my company car. I wait until I am walking
out the door to clarify that 15,000 miles instead of 10,000 is included in
what we discussed. We have reached agreement on the entire package,
and now it depends on the mileage. It usually works. I also bring my
husband as part of my strategy. His male presence lends credibility to
my negotiation.
When my husband and I were transients of corporate America, I
would go for one week to wherever we were being transferred to find a
house for the six of us. If, after the first day, I would tell the Realtor
which one I was most interested in, and she would respond, “Yes, won-
derful choice, I do believe there is another couple interested in it, let’s
put in an offer,” I would become skeptical. It is too soon to have estab-
lished a confidence or trust in her. The next day I would secure a dif-
ferent Realtor.
200
Common Ground
First, the Realtor knew I wanted to buy in a week and she still made
an attempt at pushing the sale, and I didn’t believe her. Even if she was
telling the truth, I didn’t believe her. The same is true working the
beach boutiques of Thailand—timing was everything. It is an important
part of building the relationship. If the dance moves too fast or you dip
at the inappropriate time emotions get the best of you, and you lose the
confidence of the lead partner in the dance. Trust becomes the primary
issue. Every statement and every question works toward trust.
Are you looking for a one-time-only dance partner or for a commit-
ment to become regular partners? It makes a difference in your objec-
tive for the negotiation and in how you plan to reach your objective. If
your overwhelming concern is to satisfy the bottom line, your strate-
gies will reflect the short term, and usually this comes at the highest
price. Even if this is not the other side’s top priority it will become part
of their strategy to manage you. If time is your primary issue and it is
number 10 on their list of priorities, they can easily use it to wear you
down to give more in their yet-to-be-identified issues.
To reach an agreement is a demanding task. And when it is with a
culture different from yours, it can become a formidable undertaking.
It takes a great deal of focused effort and time. To get to a point, as
dance partners, where you can smoothly change the lead and the tempo
without loosing confidence in each other, is success and a testament to
established trust. Focusing on solutions and refraining from an “us”
versus “them” mentality will widen your options. Trust becomes the
basis for future business.
Snapshot of Venezuela
Venezuela is a beautiful country of more than 20 million people, the
majority of whom are mestizo, along with a very small percentage of
Amerindians. A representation of Italian, Portuguese, Arab, German,
and African ancestry compose the remainder of its population. Simon
Bolivar is recognized as the leader of Venezuela who won its indepen-
dence from Spain. It is now a multi-party Republic with a president and
a council of ministers. It is, however, an authoritarian society that pre-
fers decisions be made from the top. The official language is Spanish,
201
and several Amerindian dialects are still used. The majority of the people
are Roman Catholics.
Family is the top priority in Venezuela. Family businesses are com-
mon, and when deciding on a supplier, most businesses will go with a
distant relative—no matter how distant—rather than one that is part of
the business community. Venezuela is also a male-dominated society,
yet it is one that makes critical business decisions based on how it will
affect the family.
The way of “doing business” in Venezuela follows the guidelines of
two different factions. The older generation prefers to get to know you
personally and not your institutional organization. The younger gen-
eration wants to better understand your business, rather than you per-
sonally. Relationships are still very important to this younger generation,
many of whom were educated in the United States.
B Dress is conservative business suits for both men and women,
and style is important to women. Your clothes reflect your
status and success.
B Be on time for every appointment, even a bit early.
B Greet Venezuelans with a firm handshake while saying your
name, not a greeting.
B Lunch is for business; dinner is for socializing.
B The senior visitor should give a toast, preferably in Spanish
and complimenting Venezuela.
B Morning meetings should be followed with an invite to
lunch—a consideration.
B The senior member of your team should sit opposite their
senior person.
B Gifts should be given—a pen or something for the office.
Guests may bring candy and flowers, especially the national
flower—the orchid—when visiting a home.
202
Common Ground
B Initial business contacts should be made through a local
agent.
B As the transactions continue, a delegation of representatives
could be considered.
B All documents and materials should be written in Spanish
unless your client responds in English.
B Confirm the meeting time three to four days in advance of
your visit.
B Business cards are considered the first step in building a
relationship.
B When being introduced, present your business card with
care, print facing the other party.
B Chit chat can be annoying, so allow an adequate amount of
time to become acquainted, but don’t linger.
B The date is written: day, month, year, similar to many South
American countries.
Negotiations
B Do not monopolize the conversation because Venezuelans
prefer to “control” the exchange and, generally, prefer to be
in control.
B Ask before telling your story/side. Always invite the other
side to speak first.
B Truth is usually based on subjective feelings influenced by
an ideology of humanitarianism, and not just on the facts or
data presented.
B Take time to get to know each other. Venezuelans move
slowly in a negotiation.
B Do not change members of a negotiation team. This is true
for most countries, especially in South America.
203
B “Machismo” is a very strong influence in this culture, so

women should show the right amount of consideration and
restraint in negotiating and working in Venezuela.
B Within the negotiation, how well you manage your behav-
iors to maintain a friendly climate, open for a good exchange
is more important than the content of the negotiable issues.
It is more important that they like you and like doing busi-
ness with you, than what you are offering as a business prod-
uct or service.
B Because the Venezuelans, similar to the Asians, would not
want to “lose face” and embarrass their families, they prefer
the negotiation be friendly, where everyone gets along. This
doesn’t mean they will be easy; they will still be tough and
even stubborn.
B Do not mention an attorney or contract until the negotia-
tions are over.
B The emphasis of the negotiation should be long term and
not the immediate. You are first building a long relation-
ship, and then solidifying business.
B After the first session, the senior member of the team should
send a thank-you note to the senior member of the Venezuelan
team.
B Do not discuss government, politics, or the country’s policies.
B Know the country’s history and cultural highlights.
Venezuela shares some of the same perspectives, business values,
and customs as other countries in South America. Yet it is distinct in
its history, its art, and its environment. Complimenting Venezuela to
its citizens is desirable, yet it must be sincere and true. The people of
Venezuela and its culture make work and negotiating enjoyable.
204
Building Trust
CHAPTER 13:
Building TTrust:
rust:
Vulner abilit
abilityy and C
Vulnerabilit onsistenc
onsistencyy
Consistenc
“Trust men and they will be true to you; treat them greatly and they
will show themselves great.”
—Ralph Walso Emerson, Prudence, Essays: First Series (1841)
“It is better to trust virtue, than fortune.”

—Publius Syrus (85–43 B.C.), Moral Sayings
Agenda
A. Logic is not persuasive—negotiating includes emotion.
B. Levels of trust.
C. How to negotiate a relationship.
D. How to negotiate an inter-cultural agreement.
When the Four Strategic Virtues are consistent in a person’s com-

munication style and character, trust results. The best definition of a
cross-cultural trust is: confident expectations. Trust is the fundamental
basis for any working relationship. Consideration, Acceptance, Respect,
205
and Empathy plant the seed for growing trust. Consistency and vulner-
ability will assure continued growth.
Think of your relationship as a trust fund. It houses the money,
assets and belongings of an individual or individuals that have been
collected through the years. It is a positive repository—full of memo-
rable and valuable things and places. It represents stability, reliability,
giving, and consideration based on money and possessions. The same is
true for building a fund of behaviors—words and actions. Behaviors
that reflect reliability, consistency, interest, and concern can offer sta-
bility and longevity in a relationship. The added value is that these be-
haviors work across cultures. These behaviors can be learned, practiced,
repeated, and made permanent habits. This fund can ensure a trusting
relationship—an interpersonal trust fund. A trust fund is for the fu-
ture; it represents long-term planning. The same is true for the trust
fund of behaviors. The risks are almost nonexistent, and the returns on
your investment are innumerable. It has a strong influence on your
bottom line and on the stability of your business.
Establish Trust
How do you establish trust in a relationship—business or personal?
What are the key factors? People respond to these questions in many
different ways. Some say honesty is essential, others say reliability, and
still others value follow-through most. All of these qualities are impor-
tant in generating and building trust. When working across cultural and
business borders, there are three major factors that are essential in
establishing trust. These three components reinforce the Strategic
Virtues and are led by a:
z Concern for the other’s need.
z Vulnerability.
z Consistency.
Vulnerability is a prerequisite to a trusting relationship. In a com-
petitive, capitalistic society being vulnerable is almost counter to our
culture—it would be exposing a weakness. Yet, without revealing a part
of yourself or of your organization that is less than six sigma, the ex-
change remains more formal and guarded. The message you’re sending
206
Building Trust
to the other party is “you’re not trustworthy” or, “I don’t yet trust that
you will see me as weak and not take advantage of my weakness.” The
first step in building trust is to expose a vulnerability.
A vulnerability or openness that shadows the Four Virtues shows
that you trust the other person not to abuse, distort, or manipulate the
information you have shared. Revealing an issue, a need, or, perhaps, a
happening that might not be all positive outlines the sincerity of your
actions. It implies that whatever you say, you should be able to expect a
considered, nonjudgmental response. In our American culture, vulner-
ability is often seen as undermining our competitive edge. In a competi-
tion, one has to keep the upper hand. What you reveal and to whom
matters. In a negotiation, however, you will eventually have to move from
the competitive to the collaborative to come to a sound agreement.
The largest component of our society is business, and in second
comes sports.
In a competitive arena, vulnerability is a weakness. Living and work-
ing in a society that is both business- and sports-driven, it’s uncomfort-
able to be vulnerable or exposed, so we avoid it. Until we are willing to
become somewhat vulnerable, however, it’s difficult to develop a mutu-
ality of trust. Whoever first shares a piece of information will not take
the lead. We have control over what we divulge and how we manage
collaboration.
A tough negotiation is about to take place with a government agency.
Let’s call it, the Government Protection Agency, or the GPA. They are
negotiating with a Fortune 100 company; let’s call it, the Blue Waters,
Inc., or BW. I once worked with the corporate team at BW. This morn-
ing the meeting is in the most austere Executive Conference Room.
Enormous in size—dark wood, from wall to floor, and window to door.
Formal and imposing—black and foreboding. The conference table, too
wide and too large for ping pong, could easily seat 24 people. The GPA
contingency arrives—three of them. Dressed in business casual—a col-
legiate look. They walk in straight backed as if carrying on the top of
their head the tray of authority only the government could hold. They
sit in a posture equally erect, ready to resist and to dictate. They have
the power of the law on their side.
207
The corporate team of four enters wearing golf shirts and casual
trousers. They sit across the expanse of the royal table, as if to avoid
any physical contact or any opportunity for the other side to see confi-
dential notes. There were glasses and pitchers of water in the center of
the table making them difficult to reach. What they really needed was a
bottle of vodka, a hunk of cheese, some dense European bread, and
time to talk about their families and their avocations. Instead, they
didn’t even shake hands. The room itself set the less-than-inviting tone
and the attendees seemed to reinforce it.
The corporation opened the negotiation telling the agency their
concerns about the government’s request to use a new piece of outra-
geously costly equipment that would not effectively measure impuri-
ties. The agency didn’t respond. They believe the BWs of the world
answer to them. The number-2 man in the corporation gave another
explanation of why. No response. Blue Waters gave more data and be-
came more frustrated. The GPA remained rigid and nonresponsive in
their posture. They believe their job is “enforcement” and big business
needs to be enforced. That is their power.
There is a painful and regrettable history to this scenario.
The agency had power over the daily functions of the corporation.
While the two parties were forced to work together, the government
could, if necessary, stop the company’s activities. The BW negotiation
team inherited a poor relationship with the agency from their predeces-
sors. Corporate teams, which preceded this team, abused the technical
ignorance of the agents to their advantage by implementing environ-
mental protection systems that inadequately, yet legally, guarded the
waters. The agency team did not have the expertise or knowledge (tech-
nical or functional), to negotiate the best agreement for both sides.
They just didn’t understand the content and, thus, the impossible fed-
eral compliance requirements. The new corporate team tried to explain
to them many times the technical, the scientific, and the impossible,
but the agency would not agree because they didn’t understand or be-
lieve. There was no trust. In fact, the GPA begins with an initial mis-
trust for polluters and BW confirmed it. Also the government can
ultimately issue six figure fines to big business.
208
Building Trust
The government had been manipulated and misinformed before,
and their best choice was to resist. Even if something was to their ad-
vantage, they didn’t believe it. But the corporate team needed their
counterparts. The two groups had to start to rebuild trust from a long
history of distrust. The corporate team laid the new foundation by giv-
ing them small pieces of vulnerability. For example, the corporate team
revealed to the government team why the company’s former process
for tracking invasive chemicals didn’t work. This was their first expo-
sure of a fault.
To rebuild trust takes an enormous amount of time, patience, and
fortitude. It requires a great deal of repetition of: being consistently
reliable, consistently generous with information, and transparently com-
petent. This requires a sincere collaboration from the beginning of all
stages:
z Investigation.
z Development.
z Establishment of neutral data.
Initially most of your support material should come from an out-
side, neutral source. Every interaction could begin with asking—asking
for information, for opinion, and for clarity. It is most helpful to have
all questions followed by why in order to better understand the other
sides’ reasons and to uncover possible hidden agendas. Both sides should
develop together and agree on processes to assure a better agreement
and implementation of the agreement. The establishment and docu-
mentation of actions to be taken is the result of the agreement and
would come with a commitment to do it. The approach must be one of
a new, full partnership, only more consistent and more rigorous.
The two groups did eventually rebuild a trustworthy relationship—
it took more than two years to get back to a base level of trust—and it
took formidable patience and perseverance on both sides. They real-
ized they had to do it. This is good reason for working toward trust
from the beginning and remaining true to your principles.
For several years, I worked in the industrial zone of TianJin, a city
of about 9 million, on the Yahtzee River in China. I frequently worked
209
in this city because it housed a Motorola plant, and I trained their manag-
ers and employees in several different courses. I enjoyed working there
because the training participants were respectful and appreciative of any
new education. For them, astute listening was innate.
If I asked someone to summarize the session at the close of business,
the person would give me back almost verbatim what I had delivered
throughout the day. This is a cultural discipline, shared by many of the
Asian cultures and in Eastern Europe. Listening is a powerful tool for a
successful negotiator. It is an often underestimated advantage because it
is elusive in its presence, but strong in effect. It requires an intense focus
coupled with a practiced ability to understand what the other side is feel-
ing. It is a strong advantage in any negotiation or business meeting, be-
cause it gives you the opportunity to build options and to respond with a
sincere and substantial proposal.
Whenever I worked in the area for several weeks, I would plan to do
my holiday shopping or birthday shopping during the weekends. I would
usually go to the local open-air markets on the outskirts of town so I could
negotiate and get better prices than at the hotel gift shops. The commu-
nity was small enough that the people from the area would follow me on
my shopping jaunt. They would observe my “bartering techniques” but
usually never divulge whether what I did was appropriate or not—or
whether I got the best price. I returned many times during a three-year
period. Despite the language and culture barriers, the townspeople and I
started to build a silent relationship. As I continued to shop, they eventu-
ally indicated a success with the slightest tilt of the head.
These community members became my shopping and bartering men-
tors and coaches. Even though they showed almost no emotion, I could
tell by their body movements when they were pleased with what I had
done. If I did well they would pick up the pace and move on, directing me
to my next stop. If I wasn’t as effective as they expected, they would move
slowly and pensively. I knew when I took the time to talk with a shop-
keeper, my mentors felt better. I knew when I didn’t immediately discuss
price that they were pleased that I had learned the cultural norm. When I
chatted about the artistic craftsmanship, the time it took to produce, about
the evident pride in the product, their soft looks complimented me.
210
Building Trust
The townspeople taught me a great deal, because they took an in-
terest in me and I in them. We built a comfort in being together. This
mutual respect founded a solid base for trust. They showed me the
value of a gentle, quiet, and deliberate spirit as opposed to my abrupt,
voluminous, and intense temperament. They accepted my spirit because
it was sincere and part of my style. We didn’t speak the same language.
We didn’t have the same customs or traditions. Even our beliefs were
extremely different, yet we both prioritized the ideal of a “benevolent,
virtuous man.” It is possible to overcome the barriers and to see the
value of a different way.
Individualism Versus Collectivism

The United States is a nation that emphasizes the rights of the indi-
vidual. In China, the individual thinks collectively, based on a long his-
tory of dynasties and, now, communism. I often think of the first time I
took the ferry from the Kowloon side of Hong Kong to the financial
side, the island. There were packs of people, each walking fast to get on
the ferry. From outside of the station and through the station, there
was a swarm of hurried people, all needing to catch that ferry. We all
walked shoulder to shoulder, silently rushed. It was as if we each had
our designated lanes and we weren’t allowed to change. Everyone was
dependent on the other to keep the same speed, to stay in the same
lane, to be aware of the other lanes. It was like one of those chain
dances done at weddings, only in this one you couldn’t touch. The lanes
were the width of a ribbon and seemed almost color-coded, each per-
son knowing their color. No one shoved me or abruptly cut in front of
me or even acted impatient. Even as a foreigner, I moved with ease and
speed among the mass. Everyone else knew their color and, apparently,
my color.
Living just outside Chicago, I often take the train into the city. The
Metra station at Madison and Canal in Chicago is rush-hour busy but
nothing compared to the ferry station in Hong Kong. When the train
arrives into Ogilvie Station in the Chicago Loop area, everyone is stand-
ing, waiting to get off. As soon as my feet hit the ground in the train
yard, I have to be aware to make certain no one walks on my feet,
211
pushes, or bumps into me. Some are at high speed and don’t look, while
others are barely moving and still manage a collision or two. Some in-
tersect in front of you, forcing you to slow down or run into them.
Often individuals will apologize for bumping, cutting off, or colliding—
there is always a need to apologize. Stepping aside for someone is the
norm. When everyone watches out for everyone else, there is a syn-
chronized effort. It becomes a melodious movement and not target prac-
tice. But it’s still a race. Everyone tries to be first off of the train and
first to his or her destination.
Competition can easily keep one in a win-or-lose posture. This
attitude reinforces aggressive behaviors and often undermines
partnering, internally or with a client. Vulnerability is elusive in a
highly competitive culture, and without it, you cannot build trust. It’s
not surprising, given the American focus on sports that we don’t want
to give the other person an edge. You guard your information, your
ideas, and your feelings.
The vulnerability issue is certainly related to our male-dominated,
competitive culture of business and sports. In the United States, we are
groomed not to mix the business and family during work time. This is
especially true for men. In other countries, however, family metaphors
or examples are often used. Philosophy is an integral part the lives of our
foreign counterparts, including their professions. American men are also
family-oriented; they just don’t talk about it in a business setting.
When I start a training session in leadership or in skilled areas, I
often ask participants to answer a question in their introduction such
as, “What do you do in your spare time, for enjoyment?” American
attendees often answer with reference to their children, but it will be,
“I have two young children, so it’s soccer, baseball…” or they’ll say, “I
enjoy watching sports and golfing.” Their answers are categorical, in-
formative, and safe in a conversational, professional sense.
When I ask participants in China, many will say, “I enjoy chatting
with a friend in the park.” Or, “Holding my son while listening to mu-
sic.” American men appear to be saying their family or personal life is
important, but it shouldn’t interfere or disrupt their careers. The Chinese,
on the other hand, look at the two as integrated pieces of life, not
212
Building Trust
separate, but one inside of the other. The balance of life is essential to
their being.
American businessmen try to protect their advantage—they keep it
business. They believe they must maintain their competitive posture,
and feel it is a risk to reveal anything personal.
Consider Consideration
These business orientations are just another example of differences
across cultures. But this gap can be bridged by shifting your focus from
what you believe about certain cultures, races, and religions to what
you can do to be a “virtuous” man or woman. It is important that you
recognize a need for being able to work well with the people in your
own group, department, or company, and then with your external cus-
tomers. In other words, how can you work better with the diversity in
your work place or community? Doing this will make work easier and
more appealing. Eventually there might be a positive impact on your
original belief or bias.
Often, when working with someone from another culture our inner
feelings include, “I just don’t like him. He has such strange ways and he
doesn’t try to understand what I want.” Or it could be even more judg-
mental, “Blacks can be so undependable, they’re never on time,” or,
“Indians are such pushy people, they’re always trying to take advantage
of you. Their only concern is getting what they want.” Or “The Orien-
tals (instead of the Asians) are all the same, Chinese or Japanese, and
they’re so difficult to understand. You’re never quite sure what they
want. They never take the bull by the horns….”
Shifting focus from what you perceive to be wrong with everyone
else to what you can do (or control) tends to work more effectively
with each individual, no matter what heritage, religion, age, gender, or
social level. Generally, an individual focuses on their own discomfort
and, subsequently, what’s causing that discomfort. Each of us regards
our way of life, of thinking and of doing as the best way, and, as a result,
we weigh every other cultural tradition against our own circumstances.
The other influence on “consideration” is our drive for what we
consider to be normal and reasonable. If we drive on the right side of
213
the road, England is really messed up…and vice versa. Eating with
forks and knives is so much more civilized than those annoying chop
sticks….and vice versa. Wearing a sari is ridiculous; how can anyone
clean house in one of those…and vice versa. But at the same time, we
must remember that what we are doing may be inciting those same
thoughts in others. Shifting our frame of reference to include and be
considerate of other ways will make working across borders that much
easier and more effective.
We can’t change another person’s style, heritage, or beliefs, but we
can change our own behavior so as to influence differently the other
person to work, to process, or to initiate. No matter what your bias or
your preference, everyone feels good after accomplishment. That should
be the goal.
In turn, we also have to change our expectations of the other cul-
ture. If we expect them to be unreliable, our actions will eventually
lead them to be unreliable. If you consistently distrust an individual’s
performance, judgment, or technical skills, that individual will eventu-
ally take charge of less and less. He or she will leave the decision-making
to others and will limit using their technical background.
Consideration, supported by expectation, is a simple process one
can put in place to assure a better environment for an exchange of
information, idea, or process. It’s the foundation for building a rela-
tionship that leads to accomplishment. Interaction by interaction, you
will establish an environment of open discussion.
Today, the power of position seems to determine the latitude for
rude and inappropriate behavior—from putting someone down or even
ignoring someone. Those in power, in management, can set a tradition
of rudeness and leave a legacy of inconsideration and lack of value.
Others down the ranks will find this defacing behavior acceptable and
begin to emulate, creating a business culture that reinforces the offen-
sive. According to a study done at the University of Michigan, rude
actions appear to be rewarded often in this culture.
214
Building Trust
Trust Model
Open-mindedness Acceptance
ining Relatio
a n
int
sh
Ma
ips
TRUST
Respect Empathy
The Trust Model, reveals Trust as the core for building a relation-
ship. The Four Strategic Virtues ensure you will initiate and establish
Trust. Each virtue creates an environment conducive to a fortuitous
and progressive exchange. They ensure an atmosphere safe for com-
ment, questioning, and suggestion. Problems are addressed with an
empathetic response. Respect accompanies every statement, process,
and action—discussion escalates and negotiable solutions result.
Managing one’s own behavioral change is doable with immediate,
noticeable results. The benefits are numerous. Every organization with
a diverse work force and/or with business off shore can increase their
bottom line by being able to take advantage of the values of diversity.
Using diversity’s strengths effectively helps to eliminate misunderstand-
ings and errors—a direct improvement on service and product quality.
215
The opportunity for securing more business in the global market ex-
pands. Staff members work more efficiently and productively with their
colleagues and customers—all of which directly affects the bottom line.
Also, this component of staff development will better align an organi-
zation with their global market plan.
The Strategic Virtues can become part of a person’s social style by
frequently and appropriately using specific verbal behaviors. The Strategic
Virtues are the component of a business plan that reflects the business
values of an organization. They determine how the company is going to
do its business—the good actions, as Voltaire said. Verbal behaviors
support the Strategic Virtues’ growth and expansion. The words we use
and the way we say them invite or restrict interaction. Our behaviors
reflect our beliefs and expectations, either promoting a trusting rela-
tionship or building one of shallow and capitalistic gratification. Know-
ing the actions required by the Virtues, such as arriving early for a
meeting, can be reinforced by how one behaves in the meeting. The
next step in learning how to work more effectively across cultures is
understanding how to manage your own behavior to better influence
the behaviors of others.
Evaluating Emotion
Years ago we sold our first house by owner. We did our homework
and priced the house according to comparables in the area. We cleaned
and painted, tossed out all of the clutter, and mowed the lawn. We tried
to make it look as if no one actually lived there. The first day it went on
the market a couple came through at 9 a.m. They looked through the
house, asked questions about the utilities, the taxes, and the schools.
At 5 p.m. that day we had an offer for the asking price. How do you
think that made me feel? Selling to the first person who came through,
the first day, and for the asking price? Some say, “Great! You lucked
out and sold it for the right price.” Others say, “Terrible. You should
have asked more.” I had the latter feeling. Either feeling is just that—
an emotion. Both sides need to feel they got a good deal, especially if
they are planning on a long-term relationship.
216
Building Trust
I have had many executives in planning sessions, professionally say,
“I don’t let emotions enter into my business thinking.” Yet, they are
the first to say, “He took advantage of us and that makes me furious.”
Or, “That was too easy…and it scares me that perhaps we missed some-
thing.” Many times serving on an American team when negotiating with
China I have heard, “Don’t they have any concept of time? Time is
money. I have never been so frustrated.” Emotions, good and bad, are
part of a negotiation. Being able to manage your own emotions and
knowing the impact of your emotions on the other side is an often-
overlooked quality of a successful negotiator. Expressing your emotion
or feeling, while managing it, is most effective in establishing trust and
in clarifying issues. Letting the other side know that you are confused,
disappointed, or happy is part of building a trusting relationship. Being
aware that the other side also must “feel” as though they got a good
deal is an important part of your exchange.
Recently I was working with project teams who worked consistently
with counterparts in India and China. My objective was to help them
work more efficiently with their colleagues. Among them was a group of
managers of engineers with a hi-tech company in Chicago who had to
work with managers in Beijing, China, via e-mail every other day through-
out the week. With regularity they would set up conference calls. Every
six to eight weeks, two or three members of the U.S. group would go to
China and work face-to-face with their Chinese colleagues. An issue arose.
The U.S. team set deadlines that were given to them by their superiors:
inform the Chinese what needed to be done and by when, offer them help
if they needed it, and close with an agreement to do it.
In essence, they were negotiating time, priority, and commitment.
The U.S. team didn’t look at it like an internal negotiation or as an
opportunity to build relationships. It was an us-against-them scenario.
The Americans felt it was cut and dry—no choice, just do as we say.
The Chinese told me they felt that the U.S. managers issued orders and
they had to obey. They felt devalued and responded by not performing
or, at times, not even responding. The U.S. managers said they had no
choice but to do what was asked of them and within the timeline given.
217
Eventually the U.S. managers started sending e-mails with ultima-

tums bordering on threats—and copied the Chinese engineers’ superi-
ors. From the Chinese point of view, the issue was a matter of respect
and consideration. The U.S. team, however, addressed it as an issue of
competency and reliability. Nothing was being accomplished and cer-
tainly not within the designated time frame. Through behavioral and
cultural training, the U.S. managers did recognize the value in changing
their way of working with their counterparts through a negotiating ap-
proach and process. Negotiating the work, the time, and the process,
led to better relationships and vastly improved productivity.
Emotions are often referred to as reactions or even thoughts. But
the emotions evoked by negotiating are universal. They might include
frustration, anger, elation, confusion, or disappointment. An expres-
sion of what you are feeling helps to build trust. You don’t have to spill
your guts—something as simple as, “I am actually surprised by the overall
cost. Is there a way to reduce the cost?” This is a better way to keep the
negotiation moving than, “Where did you come up with those numbers—
they’re off the chart!”
Emotions, feelings, and intuition are all a part of negotiating a rela-
tionship and a good agreement. They can determine the long- or short-
term nature of a relationship. Expression of our own helps build trust.
Recognizing and addressing the other side’s feelings promotes an at-
mosphere for exchange and for servicing the other’s needs, including
emotional ones. Behaviors and emotions are your common denomina-
tor when working with the rest of the world.
“Because of the personal, emotional nature of business relation-
ships in Korea, how one negotiates is just as important as what is
being negotiated. Koreans will not—or cannot—come to an agree-
ment until they feel comfortable with the people involved; that is, until
they like and trust them. This is true no matter how good the deal is or
how much they might want it.”
— Boye Lafayette DeMente, Negotiating Korean Style, 2001
DeMente’s observation is not only true for Korea, but also for the
rest of the world. If there is no trust, the relationship will quickly wither.
218
A Nation of Superiority
CHAPTER 14:
A Nation of Superiorit
Nation y:
Superiority:
Ask and Listen
“Interest does not tie nations together; it sometimes separates them.

But sympathy and understanding does unite them.”
—Woodrow Wilson, October 27, 1913
Agenda
A. Two nations—two perspectives—two sets of priority of
values
B. Categories of questioning techniques
1. Definition.
2. Purpose and impact.
C. Strategic timing
1. Low threat questions and high threat questions.
2. Low trust language and high trust language.
3. Placement of BATNA.
4. Minute-by-minute trust building.
219
D. Presumptions, calculations, and questions

1. You never get more than you ask for.
2. Presuming is high risk—Knowing is calculated risk.
3. When in doubt, ask—when confused, ask—when put
on the defensive, ask.
Moving from a nation of superiority to a nation of empathy is an

individual-to-individual task—movement of a cultural habit shared by
a large population. Many American business people and citizens at large
portray an attitude of “being-better-than” and “having-more-than.” We
not only have that attitude, but we exhibit it in many different and some-
times offensive ways. Americans believe that they have it better than
anyone else in the world, and more than likely do. But they define “bet-
ter” on their own terms—more money, possessions, and an individual-
ist say-what-you-mean style. This has become an established posture in
our business and national cultures. At the same time, we believe that
the way we do business, learn, and live is best for us and for everyone
else in our world. Some might consider this style a matter of pride, but
it often appears boastful, and at other times it is seen as an attitude of
superiority.
In Asian cultures a person does not speak of his or her accom-
plishment, even in a “we” team-like format. Rather, they expect oth-
ers to speak of them and praise their abilities, successes, and character.
When this cultural behavior faces off against Western culture and
you point out what you and your team have accomplished, the Westerner
overwhelms the Asian character. As a result, the Chinese or Korean
person becomes even quieter. One is trying to impress confidence in
the other with what they have done. The other is annoyed by the lack
of humility—the most revered quality in a Chinese person and in other
Asian professionals.
In the United States, we appreciate humble people, but most of us
in business don’t know how to be, and probably don’t aspire to be. Our
business cultures respect assertive, straightforward, innovative, deci-
sive, and confident people, which, in our culture, translate to effectiveness.
220
Seldom have I heard individuals being coached to be “humble”—
although sometimes it is needed. When our children were going for
their first job interviews after graduation, my husband advised each
one to be confident, assertive, and ask a lot of good questions. He never
mentioned being humble. The contrast or gap between “be confident”
and “be humble” reflects one part of the chasm between the priorities
of each culture and, many times, between their approaches doing busi-
ness and building relationships. Boasting about your own or your team’s
accomplishments, your product, or your past successes will not help to
persuade or move the other side to embrace your suggestions. It will,
more than likely, influence the other side to a posture that will eventu-
ally put you on the defensive.
If the focus is on the work, the partnership and supporting the needs
of the other, a level of perceived humility will evolve, and at the very
least, misplaced pride will not take center stage. In negotiations, focus-
ing on the issues, identifying problems, and resolving differences will
create an atmosphere that supports the teams to move toward an agree-
ment. As a result, the emphasis will be on partnering instead of com-
peting. Trust will also grow between the two parties, which affords the
opportunity to build a better relationship.
Face to face, westerner to far-easterner, the environment might not
be conducive to a revealing exchange. Patting one’s self on the back or
bragging about your product are chillers. These behaviors neither per-
suade nor influence the other side in either culture. Instead they annoy
or irritate—in both edges of the hemisphere. In training sessions, I will
often give business managers a set of General Values, identified by one
word, such as Family, Education, Money, Time, Relationships, Professional
Advancement, Career, and Opportunities. I have them come to con-
sensus in small groups on the top-three priorities for their motherland
and also another nation—United States and China or Poland or
Colombia. They also cannot judge these priorities from their personal
perspective; it has to be the predominant perceived value of the na-
tional culture.
Many participants are surprised when the United States table comes
up with Money, Time, and Advancement; or Money, Advancement, and
221
Opportunities. Many in the room will say Family is the top priority, but
when left with a promotion that means moving a whole family, even if it
would be difficult on children, the U.S. table will say they would take
the promotion so that they can have more to give their family. They
then realize that the money motivates their thinking of what a family
really needs. They often discuss laws such as the Family Leave Act, and
say they wouldn’t vote for it because taxes would go up. Once again, is
it the money or the family? Based on their experience with China, as a
small group they work to identify China’s priorities as: relationships,
family, and education/learning; or team, family, and relationships. We
did this exercise with more than 500 people from all over the world and
the priorities they identified usually fell into the same four or five com-
ponents. From that premise they more easily identified the business
priorities from their side and from the other side. Understanding the
variances in priorities establishes a better foundation for exploring op-
tions and gives strategies a better perspective from which to approach
foreign partners.
Identify the Other Side’s Priorities

If you add the more elusive cultural differences that set the frame-
work of one’s character, it becomes even more complex. Each of us
appreciates humility in a person, but where do we place it as a priority?
Other nations appreciate the more aggressive, innovative, and extro-
verted style of the United States stereotypical businessperson, but within
their culture, where does it stand in their priorities? Trying to find
common ground in business values and character is sometimes more
critical than finding the contextual common ground of the negotiation.
This knowledge or lack thereof influences our strategies and how we
plan a negotiation—what assets to leverage, how to determine our tim-
ing, and, most importantly, brainstorming and developing options that
would answer the needs of the other side.
Strategically identifying the other side’s priorities also allows an
area of flexibility. Western culture prefers a specific answer, firm and black
and white. The Chinese, on the other hand, begin almost 80 percent of
their answers with, “it depends,” leaving a lot of room for discussion and
222
for building alternative options. It’s often difficult for a westerner to
see the “it depends” within a negotiation because he or she wants to
move more quickly to resolution. The “it depends” can ease the imple-
mentation of the final agreement.
This thinking goes hand in hand with contracts. Contract versus
relationship—both are valuable. My husband was exploring a joint
venture here in the United States with a U.S. company that used the
manufacturing facilities of a large corporation in China. I had taught
these young Chinese entrepreneurs several years earlier, and they were
now working for an American corporation and wanted to develop this
joint venture. They came to my husband and me to try to find the
joint venture partner because they wanted someone who spoke without
an accent to call on the businesses here, understanding how an Asian
accent can sometimes add tension and possibly a barrier to securing
the appointment. At the first meeting my husband asked whether they
had a contract with the company in China, and Victor answered, “They
are long-time friends of my family.” At the end of the third meeting
my husband said, “Do we have the conditions of the joint venture
documented?” Victor answered that when the time was right they
would have it because it is like family. If my husband Tim had pressed
them and insisted early in the discussions, he would have lost the op-
portunity. Timing of the questions is important. Also a nonlegal trust
of their relationship must be apparent to the other side because it will
be the beginning of a trustworthy relationship and eventually a suit-
able legal contract.
These differences can easily polarize efforts and become more in-
tense with a contrasting set of priorities, which often complicate and
subvert a negotiation. It is imperative that we recognize that there are
natural and fabricated walls that go up because people want to feel
comfortable and safe within the parameters of their own culture—
business and national. These barriers are differences. Each person’s
current needs are considered in an historical perspective, which helps
to set their priority of needs. The anticipation of a long-term relation-
ship and its affect on current needs is also a strong consideration for
both sides. Standing firm on a contract when you haven’t yet established
223
trust can prevent you from securing the information you need and from
securing an agreement at all. If you must do business the Western way,
you might have to forfeit business outside the West.
I was asked to serve as an advisory resource to a joint venture in China,
the Zhu Hai Province. Nine years into the joint venture, the parties were
still negotiating. A U.S. oil company was contributing 80 percent of the
cash, while the Chinese invested the remaining 20 percent. The negotia-
tion team included three Chinese and six Americans. The United States
consistently talked of saving the Chinese time, which is money, and prom-
ised large profits. The United States team felt confident in “playing
hardball,” and using a little coercion because they contributed the major-
ity of the dollars, and they were from the most powerful country. The
Americans had purchased a piece of land for the purpose of building a
chemical plant, but they couldn’t secure the permit to build on the land.
The Chinese took their time to respond to the requests of the United
States because time was not their number-1 priority, and the United States
joint venture told them many times that time was critical. The Chinese
had to meet deadlines, set by their organization. The Chinese listened,
and then they waited. They said little. The United States grew more frus-
trated as each month and each year elapsed without a facility. But they
didn’t ask. The Chinese were concerned about how many people would be
employed, about whether management would be local, and how could they
partner with people who gave orders. But the United States didn’t ask.
The United States joint venture continued to do business, relate, and
negotiate according to the traditions and guidelines they developed through
the years of doing business Western style. The Chinese continued to dis-
tract them, take them off track, and destroy their schedules. But the United
States didn’t ask.
After several planning sessions, the American team members agreed
to prepare key questions to relieve the demanding hardball posture with
the Chinese. The United States eventually discovered that the govern-
ment official with the authority to approve zoning and building was the
mayor of the town. The mayor was the brother-in-law of the Chinese joint
venture team leader. Members of the United States team recognized their
power in the dollar ownership, but didn’t consider the power of the Chinese
224
team in local knowledge, relationships, and governmental connections.
After all, the Americans felt it was an American-owned company and
they had the power of 80-percent ownership. It is almost impossible to
create positive solutions if one side abuses the power they have. Ac-
cording to many national accounting firms, the Good Will percentage
can be up to 30 percent when determining the value of a company. It is
tempting to go for it all when you have the power, but this is actually
the critical time to wear your principles on your sleeve. If you are strong
or you have the favor of the deciding governing body, use the power to
come to the solution that best services your organization while also
servicing the other side. As Voltaire said, “Virtue between men is the
commerce of good actions.” The business or commerce of good action
is the essence of good relationships. If you use your power to develop a
balance in the agreement, you will be building a stronger relationship.
Empathy is the willingness and ability to walk in another person’s
shoes. Empathy can mean different things to different people—from an
understanding to an expression reflecting mutual feelings. In our train-
ing sessions, we define it as a show of concern for the other’s need, based
on the premise that you have identified their needs. In other cultures it
can also be defined as a show of concern for the other. Many times the
U.S. businessperson is working on proving his or her own power and
competing with the perceived power on the other side, while ignoring
others’ needs and being seen as a cold, nonreceptive person—friendly,
but a bit self-centered. The empathy factor is important, especially when
negotiating across cultures where a lot is frequently misunderstood.
Empathy brings with it versatility. If you can identify with the other
person’s issues, you can usually respond better to their requests. To
ask and to listen becomes a norm for the exchange. To answer and to
reveal reinforces the trust.
Question Empathetically
The skill of empathizing can move the exchange simultaneously from
low-threat questions into more high-threat questions. Fact-collecting
questions set the stage because they reveal very little about problems or
results. Instead, their focus is on what exists. Build on the information
225
collected from those questions and then move into the concerns. The
ambiance evolves from low trust language to high trust language. This
second level of exchange involves questions that relate more to prob-
lems, consequences, implications and, ultimately, causes. Once these
questions are asked and become a substantial threat, you can deter-
mine, by the willingness of the other side to answer, where your trust
level is. If their answers reveal some vulnerability or weakness—eureka—
the trust has graduated to a higher level. A word of caution, however:
Maintain consistent trustworthiness. Each side should be talking
about the problems or gaps, and then each side should shift back
and forth from problem to solution. You can almost feel the other
side nuzzling up and looking over your shoulder as you brainstorm
potential solutions.
It is often less frightening to presume or assume rather than to
calculate and ask the question when you are afraid of the answer. I have
observed so many negotiating teams and become frustrated. Often, it’s
because they dance around and around without asking a direct ques-
tion. Many times this is a result of a lacking trust; other times it is
because they don’t want to hear the answer to a question. The worst is
usually a presumption. If they do finally ask, it is not the right question.
For example, a distributor wants more of an in-demand product. He
asks if production is picking up, if the currency exchange has been good,
if packaging has been an issue…he asks everything except what he re-
ally needs to know—can he have more product now.
Varied types of questions suit varied ways of thinking. For example,
the question categories on the opposite page appeal to different people.
From my observations working across different cultures, every culture
has individuals who prefer one category over another. Innovative ques-
tions allow open and free thinking—any answer is a right answer. A
more analytical person, on the other hand, feels comfortable being asked
questions of sequence, of steps, or of relativity. Everyone likes to be
asked an experience-based question because only they have the right
answer. Making it easy for the other side to respond is beneficial. They
give you credit for their comfort in answering and for their ability to
discover solutions.
226
Good questions get people involved, initiating the first step toward
buy-in. Another bonus is the ability to identify new needs and wants
from the other party. Each of these benefits moves the two parties to-
ward problem-solving, and away from “I-must-have….” When confused,
ask. When put on the defensive, ask. When in doubt ask. When pre-
suming, ask. A question is a safe strategy, and global interactions re-
quire more clarification and more frequent asking. You are working to
develop a community of trust and move closer to your agreement.
Asking Questions
Questions
Type Purpose
Overhead z Initiate conversation.
M Open z Stimulate thinking.
a Closed z Get group’s attention.
n z Keep group focused.
a Direct z Include less-vocal members.
g Open z Uncover additional
i Closed information.
n z Redirect negotiation process.
g Innovative z Stimulate thinking.
z Encourage additional options.
z Generate discussion.
E z Move toward shared problem-solving.
x Analytical z Relate concepts and reasoning.
p z Explore new information and/or
l options.
o z Direct discussion toward
r solutions.
i z Establish common ground.
n
z Set amiable tone.
g Experience-Based
z Provide credibility.
z Clarify through specific examples.
z Acknowledge value of feelings, history,
and shared experiences.
227
The timing of your questions and your responses will either solidify
your trustworthiness or diminish it. The same question or response
may be heard or interpreted as supportive or threatening depending on
when, in the negotiation, it is asked. For example, if my client has sent
out an RFP (a Request for Proposal), and I am on the short list after a
week of presentations, and we begin the negotiation with him telling me
that he can get my training easily for a third less in cost, it is the first
statement and proposal out of his mouth. Now, I know it is his best-
case scenario, and he probably cannot get it for that price. He has given
me the advantage by introducing his cost proposal and my competition
too soon. Even worse, he has undermined the trust we have established.
The same is true, if you ask an indicting, high threat question too soon.
No matter how well you know the client, no one wants to begin with
something problematic, or the consequences of your latest crisis. Every-
one wants to begin with a feeling of accomplishment or of recognition.
Embrace BATNA
BATNA—the Best Alternative to No Agreement—is effective depend-
ing on timing, the manner of delivery, and the validity of the message. If
you use your BATNA too soon into the negotiation you lose credibility
and trust. For example, say you are going to your boss to ask for a promo-
tion and a commensurate raise in salary. You have been informally offered
a position with another firm at a higher level with a small increase in salary—
your BATNA. You would prefer staying where you are because you like
the organization and its people, and you are comfortable with the pro-
cesses they use and their way of doing business. If you are beginning the
negotiation with your superior, you would explore your options. If progress
seems at a stand-still, then you could introduce your BATNA and tell them
you would prefer continuing your work with them, but you would have to
give serious consideration to other oppertunities. You would prefer not
leaving the company. Sincerity is the essence of this exchange. Then, your
BATNA doesn’t sound too much like a threat or ultimatum. It sounds like
“what is” and it leaves your superior aware that you have a choice—to stay
or to leave. The timing and the way you introduce your BATNA can help
determine your outcome.
228
Because the United States is considered a “telling” nation and not
an “asking” nation, I often think of the numerous assumptions and pre-
sumptions made, upon which much of the “telling” is based. Working
across cultures seems to actually promote assuming—either out of fear
of the unknown or anxiety over finding out the unknown, another as-
sumption is that what isn’t known or understood, will be bad. I am not
certain, and I find myself assuming what the causes of the consistent
assumptions are. If I tell a team to ask the other side, they are uncom-
fortable if it has to do with traditions or customs. There are ways to ask
without it sounding like an interrogation or a threat or a patronizing
question. Sincerity and interest deliver the message in a tone of consid-
eration and concern. If it is asked out of frustration and control, it
could sound more threatening.
Typically, one person will say to the other side, “Do you under-
stand?” and the other side will politely reply, “I do understand,” or just
nod. And everyone thinks they are on the same page. It is the weakest
form of clarification. It doesn’t check actual understanding or agree-
ment. It would be better to ask a content-rich question that would
secure a level of understanding while also saving face if there is a mis-
understanding. For example, “Do you think this new process for track-
ing would be beneficial in your department?...In what way?” or, “Do
you anticipate facing any obstacles using this tracking system?” Asking
good questions will result in good discussion, which can reveal areas of
misunderstanding. Many good questions should be followed with “why”
so that strategically you may uncover reasons, motives, and, of course,
needs—both personal and organizational. Presuming is high risk, but
checking and knowing is calculated risk.
Putting aside an interrogation or inquisition, questions represent a
masterful tool for avoiding confrontations, closed-mindedness, and stale-
mates. If someone is trying to put you on the defensive, don’t respond
with a defensive statement. Instead, ask a question. When in doubt or
confused, ask for clarity. When ready to give your fourth or fifth sug-
gestion, stop and ask the other side first what they would like to pro-
pose. If you tell too often you can be perceived as concerned only with
your point of view or your needs. In the end, the information and clarity
229
gleaned from your questions will help you get what you need for your
organization. The other side will also get what it needs to implement
the agreement from their side.
Empathy, recognizing and showing concern for their need, is the
key to securing an outstanding agreement—a long-term partnership in
doing business. At the same time, it will reinforce the strength of your
relationship through the development of a history of trustworthy activ-
ity. In the Asian, South American, and Eastern European cultures, the
relationship is the core of doing business. Empathy is the most secure
route to developing the heart of the relationship. It requires astute lis-
tening, strategic questioning, and a genuine focus on problem-solving.
To empathize with another’s needs services your needs. Understanding
the other side’s issues and showing your concern moves you closer to
solution and a contract.
Stating how capable you are is not persuasive. Their true recognition
of your capabilities is power—your power. The first borders on an atti-
tude of superiority and the other is an indication of respect. Focus on the
other side with a sincere interest and the agreement will be solidified.
230
John Wayne Is Dead
CHAPTER 15:
John Wayne Is Dead
Wa Dead::
The Most Diffic ul
ultt Nego
Difficul tia
Negotia tors—From
tiators—From
Two Perspec tives (Ours and TTheirs)
Perspectives heirs)
“I tended to share Metternich’s view that the perfectly straight

forward person was the most difficult to deal with.”
—Henry Kissinger
Agenda
A. Characteristics of the most difficult Western negotiator.
B. Traps we fall into.
C. Characteristics of the “Silent One.”
D. How to deal with the most difficult negotiators.
People bring individual perspectives, social styles, and personal

idiosyncrasies to the negotiating table. Your versatility in dealing with
these idiosyncrasies (theirs and yours), will greatly influence the out-
come of your agreement. Difficult people require you to address the
interpersonal need in a way that makes them feel comfortable. I am a
person who thinks broadly about how to resolve any problem within
the big picture. If I am negotiating with any of my engineering clients
(more technical business partners), I reinforce my flamboyant style
231
with data, graphs, and any other pragmatic and structured materials. I
stay within a tight time limit, and I ask very specific questions. As a
result, they are more comfortable and respond more easily. Different
styles require different treatment. Some are easier to work with. Each
person has their least favorite.
Working internally is more difficult than negotiating externally.
Preparing with your team and possibly your superiors, for negotiations
is the essence of negotiating. In fact, it is often more difficult to work
with your colleagues and reach consensus on the mandate for the nego-
tiation than it is to execute the negotiation. But the prep work and
planning should be less tense. Collecting all the data and strategizing
your approach should be easier, but that isn’t always the case because
internal relationships can promote a sense of sibling rivalry. In The
Hands-Off Manage (Career Press, 2007), Steve Chandler and Duane
Black state, “Organizational life is a constant process of negotiation
and sales. It’s an ongoing opportunity to promote a particular perspec-
tive in order to accomplish a purpose you are working toward.”
Preparing for the negotiation can be planned, but the negotiation
essentially becomes a one-on-one, making the behavioral element more
demanding and, often, the deciding factor of the long-term results. As a
result of our Western culture, the mythical cowboy sometimes materi-
alizes and takes his seat. Many cultures find this person the one with
whom it is most difficult to negotiate. The “straightforward” often be-
comes an excuse to bully, to do a little arm-twisting, a bit of coercion,
or, most annoyingly, a bit of grand standing. From the first exchange
within a negotiation, trust is on the line. It’s either developing, or it
isn’t. As you discuss the deal’s parameters, you’re also negotiating a
relationship—adversarial or collaborative. It becomes difficult when
one side forces the other to stick their heels into the ground. Ultima-
tums or restricted choices force the other side to retreat further from
agreement. Other cultures respond with:
z Resistance.
z Retreat.
z Obstinacy.
z A walk away—mental or physical.
232
John Wayne Is Dead
Many different cultures find themselves sitting across from what
we label the cowboy, from the Wild West. The John-Wayne attitude is
often used to show us who is the boss. It combines the straight shooter
with the silent type—a recipe that results in the other side’s frustration
or anger. A shoot-from-the hip posture coupled with a for-us-or-agin’-us
attitude doesn’t leave room for negotiating. Good solutions remain in
jeopardy and the exchange becomes a battle of resistance. There are rules
to follow for doing business the United-States-way. But to be competi-
tively aggressive, there is no time to protect the weak. Rule number-1: The
bottom line determines most results—immediate results. In order to avoid
being seen as a cowboy in hat and boots:
z Be empathetic—recognize their needs first and address
their concerns.
z Ask questions—not only for information and ideas/
suggestions but to also be perceived as interested.
z Be cosmopolitan—know distinguishing cultural
considerations.
z Ask again—when in doubt, confused or telling too
much.
z Paraphrase and summarize what they say.
John Wayne was a hero and, at the same time, a man to be feared—
paradoxically a villain. Except, John Wayne was always on the side of
the good people, fighting evil. He walks in with an arrogant swagger. He
pulls up a chair (if he ever sat down) and straddled it, looming over the
table and telling it like it is—for him and the good people. He is confi-
dent, unshakeable, and imposing. He means what he says and says what
he means. If he doesn’t get what he wants, he issues an ultimatum or a
threat. He works to decide how and when to hurt or wound the other
side if they don’t do what he wants. His entire demeanor reflects a this-
is-not-negotiable attitude, so listen up. But remember, he is always deal-
ing with the bad guy.
To the other cultures, John Wayne is a friendly yet a demanding
other party—giving an opportunity to work for him and obey his or-
ders. He is kind, when it is his way. He represents a narrow and rigid
233
view of the world and the solutions out there. His ideas are the pre-
ferred and the best. It is difficult to present him with a Colombian way
or a Polish way or any other way of resolving the problem. Everything
different appears less effective to him.
Interviewing business people across the world and audiences of my
presentations, I asked how they would describe the U.S. negotiator.
The three most frequently stated modifiers were: aggressive, arrogant,
and absolute.
We collected research and documented the data. We had simulta-
neously finished a leadership program for a client in which we in-
cluded a module that was titled, Triple A Coaching—Active Listening,
Acknowledgement, and Assertive Behavior. The comparison brought
to our attention is the gap between the international perception of the
U.S. negotiator and what we present as the U.S. leader. The assertive
and aggressive components were the only shared perspective—they
closed that style gap with a positive balance of the aggressive. While
this is not every negotiator in the United States, it is the John Wayne
negotiator: identified as the most difficult one for many countries in
Asia, South America, and Eastern Europe.
There are also cowgirls out there, who use the Wild-West style in
their approach to doing business. They have strong, male role models.
They are cool, tough, and immovable. When I was working on a joint
venture in Hong Kong, a woman executive was sent as the third man-
ager to lead the joint venture team. She was firm, confident, and smart.
During the first team meeting, she plopped herself down on top of the
conference table and would swirl to face whoever was speaking. She
wanted to be casual, yet in charge. Instead, she was ignorantly disre-
spectful and ultimately ineffective. She certainly wouldn’t have adopted
this approach in the United States, but for some reason, she thought it
would be effective in Hong Kong—the New York of the Pacific Rim.
But in Hong Kong, women are groomed to build relationships, to be
less harsh, and more accommodating. Naturally, it’s generated from
their role in a family: from mother to matriarch. Although I was attend-
ing this meeting as a consultant, I almost didn’t use this example for
fear you wouldn’t believe it. But in today’s business world, because
234
John Wayne Is Dead
men make up the majority and the system was designed by men, women
often emulate male role models. Working and negotiating globally would
be facilitated far better with the feminine assets a woman offers: astute
listening to identify the other side’s needs, empathy to show concern for
those needs, and positive reinforcement to motivate involvement.
If two teams meet at the negotiating table, they need each other. To
achieve the best possible results is important to you and your organiza-
tion. In order to accomplish this you have to understand the other side—
their problems, their circumstances, and their needs as well as yours.
Your options and solutions must answer the primary needs of both
sides. Culturally speaking, other countries have told us who their worst
client is: the straightforward, shoot-from-the-hip cowboy. John Wayne—
the one who says it like it is. Behaviorally, this person is incongruent
with other cultures. Now who do we see as the most difficult client or
other party, from our cultural perspective?
Battle Silence
The most difficult negotiator for an American businessperson to
see across the table is the Silent One—the strong, silent, and elusive
counterpart of John Wayne. American businesspeople have difficulty
negotiating with a side that embraces a poker face, someone who doesn’t
give much of an indication of yay or nay, and is externally nonreactive.
With very little indication of whether they like the road you are taking,
Americans are easily frustrated. This doesn’t mean they don’t talk, it
means they don’t give much of an indication if they like it or they don’t
like it—the spontaneous feedback needed to highlight progress—
appealing or objectionable.
What’s more, pleasantly appointed comments such as “I understand”
or “I agree,” are even more frustrating. The other side is saying that
they actually do understand what you are saying and agree that it is as
you’ve said, but they are also saying that they don’t necessarily agree
with your request or your solution. This is one who could say yes as an
acknowledgement of hearing it or as an “I see” statement, and inside is
thinking “Why don’t you ask me?” To further describe this Silent One,
he or she is also slow in their response and in their tactics. A slow,
235
silent type is almost anti-American, because it is cloaked in a jacket of

humility. We are used to a what-you-see-is-what-you get presence with a
somewhat forceful, take-charge delivery of his message.
We often presume that the Silent One is smart because they don’t say
enough for us to judge their intelligence or ignorance. We also see them as
secretive—they must know something I don’t know. What happens when
you sit opposite this silent person? Into what traps do you fall? Think
about it. When someone says very little and patiently waits, we accommo-
date by saying more and asking less. Our reaction is similar throughout
the global market, including in our own country. Facing a Silent One, we
tend to:
z Give more information to fill the silence.
z Talk faster and repeat often because they obviously didn’t
hear us the first time.
z Ask less to accommodate telling more.
z Lose focus and direction in our delivery.
z Deceive or exaggerate with a fervor in order to persuade
the silent one.
These traps eat up valuable time, slow the process of building a pro-
ductive relationship, and can also undermine our trustworthiness. What
we should be doing instead is:
z Anticipate who they are and where they are.
z Ask more Open and Experience-based questions.
z Listen astutely to their responses and probe further with
another question.
z Request suggestions and then build on their ideas.
z Start with low-threat questions—the factual and
analytical.
z Have data, charts/graphs and demos readily available as needed.
z Prepare and present material that will reassure the other
party of a good outcome—a trust-building strategy.
This Silent One is more difficult than the pessimist or the confronter:
with the pessimist and the confronter, you still have an idea of what they
236
John Wayne Is Dead
don’t like or don’t want. There is very little agreement or disagreement
with the silent type. Without these, we are left with no sense of direc-
tion and without an understanding of the other side’s needs.
Other cultures find John Wayne a formidable opponent because he
seems to believe he has the best and only solution. He doesn’t ask a
great deal and has the answers before the question is asked. This type
of negotiator allows little room for differences, especially when it comes
to business because he believes his way is the most beneficial for both
parties. He can be very sincere and forthright, but not always persua-
sive. He puts all of his cards on the table, which doesn’t allow problem-
solving or feelings of accomplishment or concession to develop on the
other side. It might bring an agreement, but a relationship would still
be in question.
Each person has his or her own least favorite person with whom to
negotiate, but, there is one characteristic that equally irritates everyone.
Whenever someone makes you feel inferior simply by acting superior—
more knowledgeable, better than your organization or product,
wealthier—it is an enormous challenge to negotiate a workable solution
with him or her. It is a posture of levels that cannot mature into a part-
nership. Trust is always in question because one wonders when the supe-
rior thinking individual will once again drop comments or stories of their
superiority and your consequential inferiority. This attitude promotes a
guarded exchange and a drawn-out, extended negotiation. It is difficult
to influence another person when you have devalued them.
These two difficult negotiators respond differently to distinct cul-
tural perspectives. One side, the Asian and the Eastern European, is
comfortable with silence and with less indication of agreement or dis-
agreement. The other, Western cultures, prefers some indication of
agreement or objection. In fact, overt objection supersedes subtle im-
plications. Neither style is wrong, but an awareness of how appropriate
it is to the situation and to the culture may help you to negotiate an
agreement. Knowing the types can also prevent you from falling into a
trap when facing the cowboy or the Silent One. You can anticipate who
they are, ask rather than tell, and give visual support rather than repeat
yourself. Understanding better the other side will move them closer to
237
your side. Sending an ambassador of careful aplomb could be more

strategically effective than your posse.
In The Book of Five Rings Miyamoto Musashi explains the rules for
learning the art, [martial] which include two that are appropriate for
every style of negotiation: Rule number 1: Think of what is right and
true, and rule number 7: Become aware of what is not obvious.
238
Verbal Behaviors
CHAPTER 16:
Verbal Behaviors
viors::
Behaviors
Wha
hatt You Sa
You Sayy and How You Sa
You Sayy It
“A beautiful behavior is better than a beautiful form; it gives a

higher pleasure than statues or pictures; it is the finest of the fine
arts.”
—Ralph Waldo Emerson, (1844)
Agenda
A. Maintaining a listening climate.
B. Management of behaviors.
C. Benefits of a pattern of behaviors—ethical.
D. Influencing the cultures—the negotiating behaviors.
E. Negotiating behaviors to avoid—behaviors to use.
F. A friend in China—a business partner in the United States.
From parents to family, from friends to work colleagues, and from

community to media, there are many influences on a person’s develop-
ment. As a result, each of us acquires religious and secular beliefs in
addition to attitudes toward people, lifestyles, personal styles, and cul-
tural stereotypes. Biases and prejudices eventually result. Without rea-
son or good sense, we believe what we believe. It’s almost like an act of
239
faith rooted in a constant exposure to a particular religion—the same

happens with prejudice. It’s grounded by a constant repetition of state-
ments, such as a chant or prayer.
Behavioral Approach
Values
Attitudes B Behaviors
B Results
B
B
Confident
Integrity
B Expectations B Trust
Results are a direct outcome of your expectations and your behaviors.

The Behavioral Approach Model indicates the influence of your
beliefs and attitudes on the way you act—your behavior. In the end,
your behaviors elicit an expected or stereotypical reaction or way of
acting from the recipient. To change your beliefs could take an ex-
tended and dedicated effort or a traumatic event. To change your
behavior for a working hour, however, can be done tomorrow morning,
and then again the next day. By the third attempt, you will become
more comfortable with the change, and you’re well on your way to
being a businessman of virtue by creating a commerce of good actions.
To change your actions and habits begins with a small step and
often ends in a significant and positive impact. The fact is, change, in
the larger sense, begins with one individual and one action. To have a
whole group change at the same time just doesn’t happen. It begins
with you. As Tolstoy said, “Everyone thinks of changing the world, but
no one thinks of changing himself.”
240
Verbal Behaviors
The change begins with a small verbal behavior. The same is true
for building trust. It begins with what you say and what you do. The
behaviors that influence a $50,000 deal are the same that influence a $1
billion deal. And even better, the most effective behaviors used in India
work in Colombia, Russia, and the United States. They are behaviors
that diffuse, reinforce, attest to listening, and, in the end, reflect a con-
cern for the other side’s needs. They are the behaviors that assure
Consideration, Acceptance, Respect, and Empathy—the Strategic Vir-
tues. Today, all good business transactions require good negotiating
skills and the behaviors that support them. Your behaviors reflect your
character and personal honor.
Respect Individual Integrity

What will sustain your integrity? Well-found integrity is rooted in
your sincere respect for every other person’s dignity. Without ongoing
and consistent respect for others, you will jeopardize your dignity, and
integrity is out of the question. Maintaining your integrity is dependent
on how you interact and work with others. Usually, a person thinks if
they have studied all of the data and designed impressive materials,
they will be viewed as dignified or as having professional integrity. They
think that the more they know, the more dignified they are. But dignity
and integrity are the results of the way you treat the audience, your
colleagues, or any group. Based on this premise, the answer to working
effectively with a diversity of cultures is universal because it is address-
ing the integrity of the individual.
Respecting the integrity of the individual leads to the idea that the
specific traditions or customs of a distinct cultural group do not deter-
mine the method of treatment, of discussion, or relating to diverse cul-
tural groups. The constant, one’s humanness, dictates the guidelines
for relating, valuing, and influencing and, ultimately, establishing trust.
Knowing how to hand someone a business card in Hong Kong, with two
hands followed by actually reading the other’s business card in turn, is
an important sign of respect for their customs, but it isn’t what earns
you respect or trust in return. This premise does not exclude learning
about the other cultures—you should understand as much as you can
241
about the cultural differences before you work with them. Yet, after 12
years of study, I have found that the behaviors of an individual are what
build a relationship. If your behaviors attest to your recognition and ap-
preciation of the other’s traditions and customs, you will surely benefit.
Your behavior—what you consistently say and do—creates a global
charisma. Let’s examine our political leaders. The world knows the char-
ismatic one. Is it their looks, their imposing height, or their intellect?
What makes a Clinton appealing internationally and a Milosevic despised?
It’s what they say and what they do. Some actions are more obviously
disgusting, and often it’s the tiny verbal behaviors that elude and have
the greatest affect. One small verbal behavior, said often enough, has a
grand affect on results or on a person. It is the outcome of questioning
with openness, responding with an obvious attention to what is being said
and repeating in a variety of ways what was said or exchanged.
All behaviors are important to the development of a relationship,
and understanding a culture supports working within that culture. Some
of the offensive behavior in one culture is, however, also inappropriate
in others. For example, showing the sole of your shoe to someone in the
Far East is offensive. Imagine the body positions required that reveal
the sole of your shoe; you shouldn’t be configured like that in any cul-
ture. Recently Richard Gere, the well-known and accomplished movie
actor, was in New Delhi, India, for an AIDS event with Shilpa Shetty,
an Indian movie star. After the recognitions, he kissed Shetty’s hand,
then her cheeks, and then he embraced her with another kiss to the
cheek. In India, public displays of affection are taboo, and across India
they burned Richard Gere in effigy. What he did would not be consid-
ered inappropriate in the United States, but in India it is extremely
disrespectful. Gere should have done his homework. Showing respect
for Shetty would have protected his integrity.
No matter the relationship you are trying to build, organization-to-
organization, or function-to-function, the demands are the same as
building any one-on-one relationship, such as from spouse-to-spouse
or friend-to-friend. Seven key behaviors will help you be perceived as
caring about others’ needs while minimizing misunderstandings and
242
Verbal Behaviors
errors. These seven behaviors are: Ask, Probe, Acknowledge, Para-
phrase, Summarize, Build, and Behavior Alert.
Influencing Behaviors
Interpersonal Influencing Business
Impact Behaviors Impact
Perceived Ä Ask More Harmony

interest in
Probe
Ä Better solutions
others
Ä
Ä
Acknowledge
Listening Ä Reduces error
Clarify Ä
reinforcement improves quality
Summarize
Build
Ä
Builds a
Maintains
foundation Ä Behavior
for trust Alert
Ä relationships
U.S. residents should be called Staters before we are called Americans.

Why? Two reasons. First, we are “telling” (stating) most of the time
instead of asking. And second, South America, Central America, and
Canada are often offended when we refer to the United States as America
when they consider themselves as part of the Americas. Our competi-
tive culture, bred from entrepreneurship, is eager to give answers—and
the only right answer. It must fit everyone’s need, without even know-
ing everyone’s circumstances or need. There are advantages to this
posturing, especially when in an actual competition. But if this com-
petitive style infects every aspect of our business dealings, our family
lives, and our communities, individuals begin to lose the respect needed
to build trust for a relationship.
Our questioning techniques become a more give-me-the-facts, just-
the-facts approach. “How many people attended? Were they angry with
the down sizing? Who asked questions? Did they follow the process?”
243
Sometimes it’s worse when we put the answer in the question. Consider a
team leader who has just received feedback on issues within the team. The
number-1 issue identified, which received the lowest score, was team com-
munication. The team leader entered a meeting whose agenda was to ad-
dress the feedback. His first question was, “We don’t have a communication
problem, do we?” No one was going to answer, “Yes, we do,” because he
was their superior and they wanted to keep working there for a while longer.
Questions can also be limiting or controlling: “We have two choices. Do
you prefer the new software system or the former?” Initially the affect or
cost of “superiority” is not noticeably measurable. Verbal superiority com-
ing in a loud and aggressive voice limits contributions from other cultural
voices.
Occasionally, our attempts at being gracious sound patronizing. Be-
haviors can be modified or adjusted to best meet the situation. Instead of
telling, we could ask first and perhaps even follow up with another question—
a probing question. Sometimes giving an example could help clarify for
someone whose first language is not English.
We could also check our understanding by repeating what they said or
paraphrasing it. This works with a summary also—listing what the discus-
sion has included to that point. A summary could extend each point to
include consequence or impact. A summary is a little longer than a para-
phrase, but it works to diffuse, clarify, and reinforce.
For our straightforward style, these verbal techniques will round our edges
and give the other side a chance to think and to contribute. Telling someone
aloud that their suggestion is a good one and it could even promote more
contributions and better suggestions to answer the problem.
These simple, verbal behaviors: Questioning, Probing, Clarifying, and
Reinforcing, are what constitute the best type of listening, and there is no
better compliment in an interaction or communication than to be heard
and valued for what you’ve said. In fact, it is the critical factor in building
relationships, in coming to the most worthwhile solution, and in establish-
ing good business. What’s more, we can easily make these behavioral
changes, if we have the will. We can start with one individual, one meet-
ing, and one hour, and after a few of these one-on-ones a pattern will
emerge and you have eventually developed a positive new habit.
244
Verbal Behaviors
I once met a sales manager in a five-day workshop who took on the
responsibility of training his own men in “what he knew was best” for
sales. Before he joined the corporate arena, he was a career military
officer. I was trying to convince him how important verbal reinforce-
ment was as a spontaneous form of feedback, and, of course, to keep a
solid group dynamic going for learning. His typical reinforcers were,
“ …bad answer. Mary, you give it a try. No, can’t work. Dick, give me
something doable…think before you answer next time.” This was can-
dor shooting from the hip, and it hurt. His videotapes convinced him
that people stopped talking after a few of his zingers. By the end of the
week he had made progress, his least negative was, “I’ll throw that up
for challenge…!” Glory, glory, hallelujah! The underlying objective
during every negotiation session is to keep it open for a beneficial ex-
change until an agreement is reached.
Negotiating Behaviors
Creative Problem-Solving
Interpersonal Negotiating Business
Impact Impact Impact
Express
Appears open Builds trust creates
Ä Feelings
and honest
Behavior
Ä an open climate
increases clarity
Alert
Ä
Indicate
Irritates
creates Disagreement
Ä Stalls negotiations
defensiveness Rankle Ä reduces trust
antagonizes Attack
Ä
Increases risk Less chance of

maybe
Reason
Ä total agreement
perceived as Overload Ä may complicate
unwilling Counter issue
245
Show Digital Respect

Today, many negotiations transpire over the Internet and continue
through e-mails. If someone refers me to a business in another country,
we negotiate through the Internet. An e-mail has a note of finality when
you press send. It delivers no innuendo and there is no way to soften a
word with tone of voice. If it is going to another culture, clarity and
respect should be emphasized.
Courtesy cushions its hard flatness. In fact, you almost have to ex-
aggerate considerations. Reinforcing behaviors, from agree to clarify
and summarize, keep the exchange respectful. The behavior alert, along
with an expression of feeling, give it a listening structure and, at times, a
facial expression. In essence, these expressions help to build trust. Se-
quencing, bulleting, and condensing information are part of the nonvi-
sual structure and are respectful to and considerate of the other side.
Giving reams of information, just so they have everything they need, is
less respectful, especially for a different culture. If you disseminate too
much information, they will have to sort through the clutter, determine
relativity, and then begin their task.
You do not save time by skipping salutations and a person’s name,
yet you undermine the value of the relationship, and sending a message
sans the ending signature abruptly halts the message and the energizing
positive tone for a move forward. Would you ever leave a room without
a goodbye and expect the other side to want to be enthusiastic about
continuing the exchange? Bad habits with the use of e-mail are repli-
cated in a business culture and become an accepted use—a tradition.
This doesn’t mean they are effective or appropriate. Rather, they just
are part of that business culture.
Ask. Don’t Tell.

Questioning is an artful skill that can be developed through planning
and preparation. So many people believe that coming up with questions
is saved for the actual meeting or encounter. Presenting your case is far
easier than asking the right questions to uncover needs and solutions.
Asking is the best initiator of consensus building, and the best tool for
246
Verbal Behaviors
promoting the learning process. The most effective technique for avoid-
ing being on the defensive, asking reinforces that you are concerned
with the other party’s needs and that is the only path to influencing
someone else. It signals your interest in their opinions and ideas in-
stead of being concerned only with your own point of view.
A good question gets a visceral response—someone’s first thought,
which often doesn’t yet have depth. Probing questions, however, pursue
the initial answer given. They are questions that guide and ease the
thought process—perhaps relating one idea to another or expanding on
a suggestion. They are invaluable because you can’t ask one without
listening to someone, and your probing could guide the other side to
the development of a solution. Questioning gives value to the other
side’s thinking and their ability to problem-solve or create. Probing is
listening translated into questions. A probing question says, “I heard
your answer and now I want to know more of what you think.” Ques-
tions followed by probing questions, given direction by positive and
neutral reinforcers, and an occasional summary, generate a verbal dy-
namic that is both productive and trust building.
A Sample of a Question Development
Topic: The merger
z When was the announcement made?
z How many people will be affected?
z How did your people react to the news? Are they
talking about it?
z What do you think are the major issues?
z What can we do to begin addressing these concerns?
z How can we partner in these efforts?
z If we do what you suggested, what results do you
expect?
Asking questions, out of interest, and with the confidence that ev-
ery person is competent and reliable usually reflects a collaborative
approach. Asking interrogative questions, on the other hand, would be
the same as dictating all the answers. Most individuals in the business
247
arena “tell” and seldom listen long enough to probe the answer of the
question. It’s a cocktail party mentality. You talk to a person and then
you move onto the next. Your goal is to say “hello” to everyone at the
party as if you were on a political campaign, and you used sound bytes
to be able to fit everyone in, in the time allotted. Two people convers-
ing: “Hi, been on any trips lately?”
“Yes, I went to San Lucia.” “I went to Mexico City this winter.”
“I stayed at the local Hilton.” “I stayed at the Westin.”
“The food was fabulous.” “Mexican food is the best.”
“The cost has gone up…” “Mexico City has big city prices now…”
These are two people going along side by side, but the exchange is
not there and the outcome of the cocktail conversation is, “I’ll go onto
the next person.” Neither person feels valued and the depth of conver-
sation is “cocktail party,” not “long private dinner.” If you value a
person’s opinion or thought, you will invite them to dinner to hear what
they think. If you want to pay back a large number of people, you invite
them for cocktails and cross them off your need-to-entertain-them list.
It’s the same with developing business relationships. If you are think-
ing long term and want to develop and retain a customer, you invite
them to dinner. If you go after securing customers and possibly satisfy-
ing them, you think more short term and invite them for cocktails. If
you value the competency or reliability of the person, you ask and don’t
tell. If you value the difference in the culture, you ask to learn more.
All of the Strategic Virtues, especially Respect and Consideration,
are supported and strengthened by questioning. To summarize, asking
diffuses defensive posturing, demonstrates a considered attention, and
reinforces the other person’s value of opinion, thought, or process, and
in the end gets out important information needed to minimize misun-
derstandings and errors. This is the first block used in building trust.
Asking and probing are two influencing behaviors that promote a
more harmonious work environment, and at the same time set in mo-
tion a behavioral process for generating better solutions. The work group
perceives you are interested in their input, and they work harder to
implement solutions.
248
Verbal Behaviors
Listening is the primary requirement for increasing productivity
while ensuring quality. Good listening skills reduce misunderstandings
and errors, which directly affect quality and efficiency. Astute listening
is reinforcing to an individual and to a group. It says, “I value what you
say or contribute, and I want to hear more.”
The four verbal behaviors that exemplify astute listening are:
1. Acknowledge
2. Paraphrase
3. Summarize
4. Build
Often when someone is upset or confused they want to lash out or
put you on the defensive. Sometimes there is a divisive controversy and
listening can help make the discussion more productive with well-placed
segments of discussion from both sides. An acknowledgement is suc-
cinctly repeating what someone said without showing agreement or dis-
agreement. It neutrally states that you were listening and heard their
concerns. For example, if an employee says to his supervisor, “Yeah,
we worked our tails off to get the project done on time and our only
reward was more work with an even tighter schedule,” it’s easy to say
what you think, such as, “Yup, that’s life!” However your objective is
to keep that employee productive. You can instead acknowledge what
he said by saying, “Yes, you’ve worked hard to get this project com-
pleted successfully and according to schedule. What can we do to help
make this next job less time-consuming for you and your group?” The
acknowledgement diffuses and reinforces. It keeps the other contribut-
ing and progressing instead of losing time because of perceived lack of
respect or lack of appreciation. This is also effective when someone is
trying to put you on the defensive: answering their question will never
address what they want. They want to put you on the defensive!
Paraphrasing and Summary are exceptional tools in demonstrating
value and recognition to an individual or to thinking and contribution.
Paraphrasing is restating or rephrasing what someone just said—for
clarity, understanding, or focus. A summary is also a restatement, but
it usually includes more than two items. It refocuses the person or group
249
and it clarifies and reinforces the contributor. It’s a wonderful tool for
teambuilding and it takes a few seconds. Seldom do team members in
our culture take the time to show support of someone who has helped
the process or resolved the issue. More likely, if it’s good, we move on
until we hit something that is negative or in error. We then give feed-
back to whomever. A simple, positive comment such as, “Your research
is so complete that it’s going to make the implementation piece so much
faster and clearer” can make all the difference Once again, this reitera-
tion reinforces and clarifies.
Build Through Action

The fourth and last verbal behavior is the Build. This is a sugges-
tion or action added to another person’s proposal. It is not additional
information, comments, or opinions, but an action added to an action.
You cannot build without listening to another’s entire suggestion or
idea. It is not a counterproposal! For example, “Let’s move the head-
quarters to the suburbs so that it would be a more cost-effective rental
price and more of our employees would be accommodated.” Comment-
ing in response that the suburbs are too spread out and no one could
use public transportation is a comment not an action. To build would
be to say or suggest, “Let’s consider moving to a part of the city closer
to the train stations.” Or you could suggest, “If we move to the sub-
urbs, let’s be certain to provide shuttle service to and from the train
stations.” It’s possible to change it enough to make it more appealing to
the entire group and of course more effective.
The benefits of using the “build” are numerous. It ensures good
listening and it often develops and improves an original suggestion. The
team effort is reinforced and the value of each individual’s contribution
and worth is demonstrated. This verbal behavior supports consensus
building and in the end promotes implementation of ideas.
Asking, Probing, Acknowledging, Paraphrasing, Summarizing, and
Building are verbal behaviors that construct a professionalism based on
the Four Strategic Virtues: Consideration, Respect, Acceptance, and
Empathy. These behaviors generate a respectful and substantive ex-
change within an ambiance of trust—the beginning of a solid relationship.
250
Verbal Behaviors
Asking and listening graciously show that you value the other’s input. As
a result, you will create a collaborative and problem-solving dynamic.
Minimize Misunderstandings
The last behavior is labeled Behavior Alert. Neil Rackham’s original
Huthwaite Group Research indicates that this little, simple technique
helped to build trust and to minimize misunderstandings. After years
of observation of international negotiations, it has been confirmed that
this behavior is extremely beneficial, especially when negotiating with a
group of people whose first language generally is not common in the
group. A Behavior Alert introduces what you are going to say next. The
following are a few examples:
z Let me ask a question.
z I would like to make a proposal…
z Allow me to summarize…
z I’ll trace the progress of the meeting…
z As a point of clarification, you suggested…
z I’ll sequence the steps to the process for us…
These verbal warnings of what will come next are valuable to some-
one listening to English as a foreign language. It invites them into the
discussion in a considerate manner. It requires minimal effort to add this
small change to your behaviors, and it has such a grand and important
affecte. People listening will listen better following a behavior label be-
cause they know what they’re waiting to hear. And it has the added value
of trust building, which helps to keep the negotiation progressing.
Prioritize Values
Collective behavior is what we call culture. Throughout the 1990s
many of the major U.S. corporations worked to change their “business
culture.” But because culture is behavior, it’s very difficult to change.
Behavior has to change individual by individual, influencing the group.
There has to be an element of trust already established within the orga-
nization so that people have confidence in the people who recommend
changes. Upper management that has not previously exhibited commitment
251
to change will have difficulty promoting a change. If individual integ-

rity is your primary business value, and your practices are not aligned
with this value, then how can you lead diversity? If you only reward and
recognize contributions to the bottom line, individual dignity is not
your primary value. Instead, it’s money. Priority has a great deal to do
with how your message is perceived. If you value a diverse work force
but you can’t seem to find any qualified blacks, Hispanics, Vietnamese,
Poles, or Russians because it is too time consuming, time is your actual
priority. And if your company’s workforce is predominantly white and
male, the priority of your values will tell you why.
Circumstances or external factors shift your priorities. When there
was a scarcity of software engineers diverse cultures were employed
because the labor shortage moved the priority of value. After my son
had been married for about four or five years and had a one-year-old
child, I asked him why he hadn’t gone back to school to get his master’s
degree. He told me he needed time to spend with the baby; time to
spend with Quin, his wife; and time for work and relaxation. I said that
it probably would become more of a priority later. He was upset be-
cause he said it was his number-1 priority, but it didn’t seem to be the
right time. Circumstances do influence our priorities, but until we make
something number 1, it usually doesn’t happen soon.
To have a more harmonious and synchronized work group, people
have to take priority over product, technology, and the bottom line. Cor-
porations should realize and lead the value of diversity, searching hard,
and hiring well. These seemingly unimportant verbal behaviors equip your
workforce with a quantifiable way to express valuing the integrity of the
individual. This has a strong impact on productivity and, ultimately, the
bottom line. When I’ve attended a meeting where these behaviors were
infrequently used, the outcome usually lacks substance and consensus
was never born in the session, threatening implementation.
These behavioral changes are specific enough to do, manageable enough
to accomplish, and research shows they have a positive affect in influenc-
ing your colleagues. Focus on what you can do now by being a strategi-
cally virtuous businessperson. Consistently demonstrate Consideration,
252
Verbal Behaviors
Acceptance, Respect, and Empathy. Whether you hold some strong be-
liefs regarding certain cultures you will have maintained your integrity
through protecting the other cultures.
Prepare Options
Negotiating with your competitor is very difficult. Often times work-
ing with groups such as the federal government or with the Environ-
mental Protection Agency, it’s a requirement to partner projects with
your competition. Many times the cards are dealt in your favor and you
hold the trump card, and you think, “Let’s get em.” You charge ahead.
Your thinking is for this negotiation and this negotiation only—you’re
not thinking long term when your competitor may hold the trump card.
Addressing every negotiation as if you will be dealing with this person
for eternity colors your approach and your objective. When you have
more perceived power, more leverage, and can more easily manage the
options offered, you should be a “benevolent negotiator.”
As a parent of four teenagers, I recognize the power of developing
options. When my daughter, Moira (the newest driver and fourth child
in the family), asked to use my car to take four of her best friends to
the movies and out for pizza, I was ready with my options. “Sure, you
may use the car, but you have two considerations. You can either pick
them up for the movies, bring the pizza home with you, and then have
their parents pick them up here after, or, have their parents drop them
off here at our house for the movies and return for them here at 11:30,
and you drive to the movies and to the pizzeria and enjoy the pizza at
the restaurant.” Both options weren’t perfect, but they were viable.
With our first child, a year apart, I would have instantly reacted
with, “No, you can’t pick up each of them, go to the movies, out for
pizza, and then drive all of them home!” Immediately, our first born,
Stephen, would answer with, “Yes, I can! You just don’t trust me with
your car.” Andrea would have argued with Stephen to use the car and
the discussion would move toward who trusted whom instead of a solu-
tion to driving the car that night. By the time we got to the solution, we
didn’t like each other.
253
Be Consistent
The opening of a negotiation sets the tone—hostile, friendly, or
guarded. The other side can only judge you by what you say and do.
They don’t know your motives, nor do they care what your motives are
until you decide to reveal more of your values and principles. Your
words should stay consistent with previous statements. For example, if
you are a manufacturer selling directly to distributors, and you have a
product that did very well this year, the demand seems to be stable, and
you’re negotiating an extension on the contract that is soon to elapse.
You are attempting to maintain a friendly ambiance because this dis-
tributor is one of your best, so you tell them how much you appreciate
their reliability, their professionalism, and the valued, long-term rela-
tionship you’ve built. Then you proceed to almost double the price of
the product. On one hand, you blow kisses and tell them you love them,
and then you take advantage of a higher-than-most profit, which says,
“I don’t love you that much.” Every word you say is heard and then
interpreted—messages must be consistent and action is the key.
As I’ve said, negotiations are one on one. It is never the United States
versus China—it is Condeleeza Rice versus Hu Jintao, president of China.
The exchange is dependent on behaviors, reinforced by your approach,
preparation, and the data. You could appear very well prepared with a
briefcase full of data, but what you say and how you say it could undermine
the outcome. You are the persuasive, influencing piece of the negotiation.
If you persist in telling and proposing, you will be perceived as cen-
tered on your needs or concerns. If you ask, probe, and acknowledge,
you will be perceived as concerned about their needs. When you para-
phrase or summarize the other party’s contributions, using their words,
it puts their words in print. Your paraphrase tells them that you lis-
tened and you value what they say.
Maintaining an open and nonthreatening climate for a collaborative
and trust-building exchange requires managing your verbal behaviors,
while working to influence the behaviors of the other side. Agreements
that are reached in a threatening and bullying way are often followed by
a difficult implementation, packed full of continuing, follow-up
254
Verbal Behaviors
negotiations. A long-term relationship is questionable since the trust
needed to value working together is subject to threats and ultimatums.
Research also shows that coercive methods to persuade are not effec-
tive for the relationship.
Scenerio How to Respond Impact
A person listens attentively Summarize and then Ask. Example: Clarity and a better idea of
without much contribution or We’ve described four steps to the new the person’s opinion, and
interaction. His or her silence process. How would this new process possibly of the person’s
is often seen as acceptance. help—or not help—your group? needs.
A person might agree just to Ask a safe question based on their own Disagreement is avoided and
be agreeable, even if they experience. Example: Have you worked the person is now involved in
don’t agree with your with a similar system in the past? How more of a nonthreatening
perception. well did it work? approach.
Some people have been Ask for an idea or for a suggestion. Moves person from
programmed by the system to be Example: Given what we’ve discussed, defensiveness toward action
defensive when questioned about how can we secure the resources we and solution.
their lack of action or their need? Where should we start?
heritage.
The person seems reticent Summarize and continue with a The person moves with
to setting an action plan question. Example: Where would you confident expectation of
or tasks. prefer to start the plan? Keep goals himself/herself.
limited and specific so the person isn’t
overwhelmed.
The manager wants the engineer Agree with the other person’s sugges- Builds confidence
to lead part of the meeting, buttions and then Build on his or her idea. through expectation and
the proposal on the table is Example: That’s a good idea. Could reinforcement.
more about research. you please investigate other options and
then present them to the team at our
next meeting?
A person doesn’t do his part on Ask him what he could do to improve Develops responsibility and
the team and/or doesn’t follow the process that’s in place. Then put self-esteem.
through. him in charge of touch points for the
team. When he follows through, be
sure to acknowledge it and him.
Under the directive, “Show Reinforce him for the quality of the Confident expectation
more initiative; take charge,” report, then tell him how that his work supports improvement and
the person develops a report, will be received better if he delivers it to development of initiative.
sends it to you, and asks (or the group. Set a time to help him The U.S. business culture
expects) you to lead the prepare. relates “show initiative” to
discussion about the report. an aggressive approach.
255
Person has a cocky self- Recognize that insecurities often Reinforced self-confidence.
confidence at the expense of accompany someone who acts “cocky.”
others, with sarcasm or put- Focus on what is right in what he says.
downs. Look to Reinforce his strengths and
specific accomplishments by assigning
tasks that take advantage of his
qualities.
Older civilizations and cultures Ask questions from their past experi- This exchange begins the
value the past and the experiences and continue to Ask how these “buy-in” process, and also
ences of years ago. Individuals relate beneficially to the present. facilitates the eventual
from these cultures still believe Talking about the positives and implementation of a
in tradition and prefer discuss- negatives of the past is beneficial to this solution or change. The
ing how new ideas and processes person. Reinforce the value of their focus of today’s leaders and
relate to older ones. experience and Build on it. managers is on the future,
and on change.
Snapshot of Brazil
Brazil is the largest country in South America, with a population of
188 million, 55 percent of whom are of Portuguese ancestry. Half of
this nation’s population is less younger than 20 years old, and 90 per-
cent of Brazil’s population live on a 200-mile stretch of the Atlantic
coast—10 percent of Brazil’s overall landscape.
The country is culturally diverse and is not Hispanic. While most resi-
dents are of Portuguese lineage, 40 percent are of mixed heritage, including
African, Asian, and Germans. Less than 1 percent is of Amerindian descent.
Brazil is a multiparty federal republic with a president and two legisla-
tive houses: a senate and a Chamber of Deputies, similar to many other
South American countries. Portuguese is the official language though some
people speak German, Spanish, Italian, French, English, and Amerindian
languages. In fact, studies have documented 234 languages in this country.
In Brazil, there is a strong sense of class and status related to a
person’s job. Similar to other South American countries, division be-
tween rich and poor is distinct. Machismo is also strong with Brazilian
men who expect women to be subservient
B Unlike their sister countries Brazilians do not want to talk
about family or home.
256
Verbal Behaviors
B Their approach to problem-solving is to favor subjective feel-
ings over facts.
B In decision-making, family loyalty is the first consideration.
B Parentela is an extended group of relatives—a social structure
that is key to how they do business. Nepotism is most acceptable.
B Take your time when meeting or greeting a Brazilian. A hand-
shake is acceptable, and later it might progress to an embrace.
Women kiss on the cheeks. Shake hands when encountering
a group and when leaving the group in business and socially.
B Similar to Venezuela, Argentina, and Colombia, Brazilians stay
close to you when they are talking with you. They like to make
physical contact: touching your shoulder, your arm, or patting
your back. Do not back away—they could consider that insulting.
B The United States gesture for “okay” is vulgar in Brazil.
B Conservative suits are most appropriate, especially for women.
In Brazil, the acceptability of your dress can shake the bal-
ance of your business relationship with a Brazilian. Jeans
are unacceptable. For casual, men should weak slacks and
long-sleeved shirts.
B Gifts, after the first meeting, are acceptable. They could be
electronic gadgets, DVDs, good pens, and if invited to their
home, candy, champagne, or liquor. Gifts for the children
are also a good idea, such as sports-related T-shirts and caps.
B Brazilians are not punctual, but you should be patiently punctual.
B Make appointments a week ahead.
B 10 a.m. to noon is a good time to meet, and then take a
Brazilian to lunch at a good restaurant—it is key to building
your relationship.
B You must commit to a long-term investment with both time
and money. Without building this relationship, you will not
secure business in Brazil.
257
B Your Brazilian representative is key to your success in do-

ing business in Brazil.
B Know the prestigious restaurants.
B Do not discuss business until coffee has been served.
B Stay at a first-class hotel—it reflects your success.
B Brazilian dinners typically can go from 7 p.m. until 2 a.m.
B Social is business and business is social.
B Do not use the term “Americans” when referring to United
States citizens; the Brazilians, similar to the Canadians, con-
sider themselves American.
Negotiations
B Be patient—this advice was given to me before I traveled to
work in many different countries and continents. It will take
several trips and negotiation sessions to secure business in
Brazil. Remember, you are building a relationship.
B Use local professionals to assist you—accountants, lawyers
and representatives.
B Be resilient. Brazilians will review material, data, and num-
bers many times.
B In Brazil, they do not appreciate aggressive behavior or any
confrontation. Our straightforward, put-your-cards-on-the-
table approach is not respected.
B Do not change negotiating team members—it is a one-on-one
relationship.
B Do not use Argentina as a third-party reference, because
there has always been a bit of a rivalry there.
B Manage well your frustrations. The exchange may be very
enthusiastic, with many shut outs and interruptions, but this
is their positive, invigorating style.
Brazilians like to discuss all issues randomly without sequence or
priority. Your issue planning should help you remain flexible and con-
fident through the less orderly negotiating.
258
Getting Ahead of the Cultural Changes
CHAPTER 17:
Get ting Ahead of
Getting
the C ul
Cul tur
ultur al C
tural hanges
Changes
“Control over change would seem to consist in moving not with it,
but ahead of it.”
—Marshall McLuhan, Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man
Are the new rules governing international negotiation strict, clear,
and defined? Maybe not, but there are two solid rules that are constant
and determine your level of success: The first is a consistent practice of
the Strategic Virtues—creating a “commerce of good actions,” which
design the framework for Trust. And second, use the Influencing
Behaviors—the specific, small verbal behaviors, which become a strat-
egy for maintaining trust and building relationships.
To negotiate well is to influence, and to influence effectively is to
lead. Leading today requires an ability to lead across a diverse array of
cultures, races, philosophies, traditions, and customs. Adopting a ne-
gotiating way of doing business creates a consistent dynamic of col-
laboration and mutuality—in between is agreement and action. This
style is inherent to building relationships because it allows for differ-
ences and seeks to discover options to care for the other party’s needs
in addition to your organization. Because of the fast-changing global
marketplace and the growing demand for solutions instead of products,
259
negotiating has become the key to building business and increasing rev-
enue. The skills used in negotiating are not only effective within a nego-
tiation, but also in working within your team, your community, and
your family. Each area is dependent on relationships. The skills and
techniques enhance your contribution in each of these situations.
Most countries outside the United States embrace negotiating as
part of their everyday activities—from food to clothing, and from shared
restaurant table to shared office space—everything is negotiable. They
practice from childhood into adulthood. It is an integral part of their
culture. In the United States we negotiate for a car, a house, and for
business. Other than the scattered flea markets, we don’t have the
plethora of open-air markets in use across the world. Negotiating in a
street market is an art, and all art takes time and thoughtfulness. In the
United States, we have time for neither.
Mind the Gap

There is a noticeable gap in our business professionals—a negotiat-
ing gap. The skills required to manage an interaction, identify the other
party’s needs, and reach an agreement that is mutually beneficial are
often subjugated to our aggressive, competitive, shoot-from-the-hip
telling style. It has worked on the western front, but now there is a new
frontier. The marketplace has expanded to places we want to work. As
you read in the snapshots of several emerging markets, relationships
dominate all other priorities, including the bottom line. Every country
cited, from Chile to China and India to Russia, values relationships
over time and money. Money might be a strong second for some, but
relationships were consistently number 1. “Liking” the person they are
doing business with is more important than what they secure in the
contract. This reinforces the known premise—every negotiation is a
one-on-one. This premise of “being liked” doesn’t weaken our strategic
plan, it should reinforce it so that the other side will be influenced by
our strategies. Today the American way of doing business is not the
only way of doing business. We must get ahead of these changes to
economically lead in the global marketplace.
260
It is important that we understand the stereotype that represents us
off shore. As many psychologists have cited, it is often difficult to rec-
ognize the person others see in us. It is easy to observe others, and
when we are particularly annoyed by others’ behaviors, we wonder why
they don’t see themselves for the yahoo they are. Frequently, my hus-
band and I go out with a married couple, and after an evening with
them, we wonder how they ever got together, much less married each
other—and they most likely are thinking the same of us. It would be
helpful if we could see ourselves with a neutral and objective clarity,
like others see us. We can’t because they see us without seeing what we
are feeling at that time. They see us without knowing our motives, our
reasons, our feelings or our history. Their points of view are external
and our points of view are internal. This relates to power and influence
as a perception. If other cultures see us as a John Wayne-style cowboy,
charging aggressively, telling the solution in an arrogant manner, and
competitively developing an agreement then that perception is reality.
Think of when you try to take a family photo. We have four children
and five grandchildren and whenever we are all together, we take a
family photo. Sitting in the middle of that snapshot, I often feel every-
thing is perfect. Then when you look at the instant digital image, you
see the imperfections and goof offs of the group and you retake the
picture. We must understand who we are, and then figure out how to
adapt to achieve the best possible results.
We are recognized as a culture strong in fairness to the individual,
excellent at planning and building companies, creative in financial mat-
ters, and in processes. The people of the United States are generally
touted as being friendly, innovative, generous, and hard working. Ap-
plying these attributes to the way we do business and negotiate rein-
forces building strong relationships with our clients and extending our
influence to the long-term contract and, even better, to the long-term
relationship. Taking the innate assets we have and using them to con-
struct an international network of business colleagues and a global com-
munity of expertise, of partnership, and of friendship gives us the ability
to lead successfully to continued economic benefit.
261
Beware Your Inner John Wayne

In the past 50 years, we have moved from John Wayne protecting
the honor of a woman to Sarah Jessica Parker on Sex and the City por-
traying sex with a competitive edge. Nevertheless, John Wayne’s style
is preserved. We read it in the newspaper, on the Internet, and see it on
TV. Shoot from the hip. Wanted dead or alive. You’re either for us or
against us. But the idea of the right way is often determined and iso-
lated to one perspective—ours.
Building solid relationships based on trust and creating influence
around the new world market is the premier rule for working and lead-
ing globally. Identifying and understanding the barriers and the differ-
ences among cultures is the beginning of exciting partnerships. First
recognizing who you are and how you are perceived helps you to adjust
your own behaviors to the interpersonal needs of your global clients
and colleagues. Knowing commonly shared values, feelings, and prin-
ciples is the avenue to your continued success. Appreciating this sameness
takes us only halfway to an appreciation of the differences. The United
States business style and its more common characteristics frequently
include superiority, arrogance, competitiveness, and exclusivity in lan-
guage and in attitude. Superiority, arrogance, and exclusion can under-
mine relating, building trust, and, certainly, partnering in business. We
love our country and are proud of it, but each attitude taken to an
extreme could keep us isolated out of new business.
Embrace the Other

Staying and working in different countries is a huge bonus. We learn
and we come to understand and appreciate our foreign partners. The
impact of differences is much stronger when you are in South Korea, in
their hotels, eating their food, and hearing their language because you
are the foreigner. When you have the opportunity to talk with them, to
problem solve, and to socialize with them, your exposure has a depth
and a significance that goes beyond keep-your-hands-on-the-table or
present-your-business-card-with-two-hands awareness. Whether you are
a small manufacturing business, a company in the service industry, or a
262
large hi-tech corporation, the business interactions require the same
behavioral skills. You may work face-to-face or virtually through
e-mail and teleconference and the challenge to your behaviors is even
more demanding of your skills. Today almost every business interfaces
with the larger global workforce. If not you, your clients most likely do.
Seldom do I present or instruct to an audience that is not diverse—
even the women in business audiences are older, younger, Hispanic,
Asian, Indian, Polish, Bulgarian, and African American. It makes work
much more exhilarating and appealing. Negotiating with other cultures
offers you opportunities for new ways to think, to process, and to act.
It offers you ways to excel with a new facility for implementation and
possibly a new consideration for your staff and colleagues.
Training and consulting in international management development
and team development for almost two decades introduced me to many
new ways of thinking and of doing business. It gave me an opportunity
to observe the behaviors of businesspeople from different cultures and
countries. I watched for the detail of a specific behavior that helped
define a person with international charisma and how each behavior ini-
tiated and established a relationship based on trust. The preceding chap-
ters serve as a guideline for how to use universal base processes and
behaviors for building trust and earning the right to influence within
different cultures. Each of us is already using the behaviors, but not
frequently enough and not at the appropriate time. Many times our
behaviors don’t invite options or alternatives from the other side. In-
stead, an attitude of superiority in solution and in action pushes the
other side to silence and we lose the benefit of their suggestion.
One summer we had a new patio installed, which covered more than
three quarters of the back of our house, curving around two enormous
trees. Soon after, we hired a small, local landscaping company, owned
by a gentleman from Colombia. They came in with a Bobcat, an auto-
mated mini-crane used for digging foundations, to work the ground
around the patio and accidentally hit the patio in the middle and cracked
it. It was brand new and I was upset. The next day we met and tried to
negotiate the replacement. Because I was in the right, I wanted the
263
patio ripped up and replaced and that was that. I couldn’t hear anything
else because I wanted my new patio back just the way it was, and my solu-
tion was the only solution because I was the offended party—and I was
right. Paul, the Colombian owner, was patient and agreed that I was the
victim. He eventually gave me three or four different options. The options
actually sounded appealing. He suggested they cut away the area that was
cracked, make it a step down to the yard, floor it with patio stones, and
continue the beautiful pink salmon stone around the gardens bordering
the patio, at his cost. Later he included several hostas and other plants. I
love my patio, but most of all I love the step down and the gardens, which
would not have happened except for the accident and Paul’s negotiation
skills. I was John Wayne, and he was the “Silent One.” Fortunately, I
eventually stopped to ask and to occasionally listen. We still use Paul’s
services, as do several of my neighbors, friends, and relatives. Paul and I
are both happy and we trust and like each other—an asset to any relation-
ship, global or local.
Recognize Your Own Behavior

A person’s words, tone, and expressions (or lack of expression) either
influence the other side to respond, to listen more, or to graciously
retreat—or not so graciously shut down. The many cultures in which I
have worked affirm that certain behaviors generate respect and, ultimately,
trust. You can see through the various snapshots that aggressive behavior,
lack of concern for people, and a shoot-from-the-hip, straightforward ap-
proach are not appreciated or respected by every other country. I have
delivered negotiation workshops across Asia, South America, Europe, and
North America. Planning, strategy, and tactics were an essential part of
the workshops, yet the audiences consistently said they appreciated most
the behavioral feedback. The universal appeal was in recognizing their
own behavior, the impact on the other side, and how they could better
manage outcomes.
The strategic virtues and the influencing behaviors ensure appropriate
behaviors and practices that promote a proficient exchange and a respectful
negotiation. The virtues and behaviors are emphasized because they are the
specific words and actions that facilitate change and that work across the
264
cultures. The do’s and don’ts give you an introduction to a culture’s cus-
toms, traditions, and practices. If you know to ask and probe before tell-
ing, the other side will see you as interested in their point of view, their
culture, and their needs. If you continue through the discussion with
acknowledging, paraphrasing, and summarizing, the other side will know
you are listening and that you are concerned with serving their needs. If
you then follow up with building on their suggestions, they will feel the
benefits of your collaborative approach to problem-solving. Negotiation,
by its definition, should result in harmonious actions. Here you’ve learned
how to use a universal base of behaviors for trust building and earning
the right to influence within different cultures.
Observing many individuals’ behaviors does not mean everyone, or
even you, are exactly like the examples given. When you identify your
own behaviors (which ones you use and which you don’t), you have a
specific area or behavior on which to focus your efforts. When we get a
glimpse of how we are seen, and not how we see ourselves, then we can
work on the specific behaviors that could modify our style and posi-
tively influence the other side in a negotiation.
Many of the aggressive behaviors that are appealing to business or-
ganizations in the United States and are considered acceptable, even
desirable, are inappropriate when working in different cultures. Our
western style houses many behavioral strengths from support statements
to giving innovative suggestions. We have a formidable base for estab-
lishing a relationship. To ask more, probe more, and build more will
cement an unbreakable trust, and you and your business will be the
consistent beneficiary. Trust, as defined as confident expectations, places
the initial responsibility with you—approaching every client on the pre-
sumption that they are respectful, reliable, and trustworthy.
Here you’ve learned the steps to what you, as an individual, can
actually do to create and maintain strong relationships. But it is not a
magical prescription. Rather, it is a practical plan detailed to behavior.
It is appealing to me because it has given me a sense of control that
allows a strong hold on a negotiation’s direction. I can manage my own
behaviors and influence others to superior results. I can stand firm and
not be considered stubborn, and I can offer proposals through builds
265
and not be considered arrogant. Managing my own behaviors gives me

resiliency when responding to others’ behaviors. It gives me confidence
that invites interaction and allows me to be competitive without ap-
pearing to be disrespectfully aggressive. It takes the best assets of a
U.S. business style and places them in an empathetic approach to serv-
ing the other side’s needs. By being aware of what you say and what you
do, and understanding the impact of your actions, you can easily modify
or adjust your behavior. Only you can make the change. You are in
charge.
266
Index
acceptance, 21, 43, 121, 205

definition of, 127-129
Index behavior,
acceptance of, 109
importance of, 108 importance of correct, 148
acceptance of behavior, 109 recognizing your own, 264
acknowledging, listening and, 249 Behavioral Approach Model, 18, 240
action, building through, 250 behavioral approach, model of the, 112
advancement, importance of, 221 behavioral change, reasons for a, 215
affiliations, group-to-group, 160 behaviors, aggressive, 122
diversity and influencing, 243
agreement, negotiating an, 164, 176
negotiating, 244
agreements, strong, 163
verbal, 239-258
alternatives, brainstorming, 176
Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement, see
ambassadors, Americans as informal, 56 BATNA
Americans, blatant arrogance, 80
negotiating style of, 44-45
brainstorming alternatives, 176
superiority and, 220
brainstorming, 173
approach,
Brazil, 20
behavioral, 240
business considerations of, 257-258
mutually beneficial, 199
cultural considerations of, 256-257
Argentina, 20
negotiations and, 258
business considerations of, 171
snapshot of, 256-258
business culture, 16
negotiations with, 171-172
U.S., 122
business,
arrogance,
building, 140
blatant, 80
Chinese, 37-38
capitalistic, 31
music and, 143-144
subtle, 80
businesspeople, multi-national, 56
art, importance of, 92-93
buzzwords, cultural, 53-54
Asia, 19
behavior in, 26 capitalism, 40
close up of, 32-34 changes, getting ahead of cultural, 259-266
Asian cultures, superiority and, 220 charisma, international, 143
asking, Chile, 20
probing versus, 248 business considerations of, 184-185
the importance of, 181 cultural considerations of, 184
aspirations, having, 179 negotiations in, 185-186
balance of power, 166-168
China, 19
barriers,
breaking down cultural, 90
cultural considerations of, 35
how to break cultural, 94-95
dos and don’ts of, 35
BATNA, 192
growth of, 33
embracing, 228-230
negotiations in, 44
267
negotiations of, 36-38 culture,
revolutionizing business, 33-34 American, 126
snapshot of, 34-38 business, 16
Chinese business, 37-38 Chinese, 27, 36
Chinese, 36
Chinese culture, 27, 36
definition of, 27
Chinese,
embracing, 142
answering questions of the, 197
expectations of a business, 113
elderly and the, 112
individual, 107
closed questions, 33 Japanese, 45-48
collaborative, other cultures and being, 41 male-dominated, 212
collectivism, individualism versus, 211 Western, 14, 159, 197
Columbia, 20 development, a sample of question, 247-248
business practices of, 152-153 differences, prioritizing, 144
cultural considerations of, 152 digital respect, showing, 246
negotiations in, 153-154
diversity,
definition of, 142
Venezuela and, 151-152
embracing, 142
comfort, achieving mutual, 161-162 influencing behaviors and, 243
common ground, understanding cultural, 95
contextual 187-204 divide, crossing the cultural, 162
cultural, 187-204
Eastern Europe, 19
looking for, 183
close up of, 68-69
commonalities, finding, 143 exposure to, 91
Communist Party, 34 elderly, cultural respect for the, 112
community, U.S. business, 139 emotion, evaluating, 216
competition, 39-48 empathetically, questioning, 225-227
advantages of, 128
empathizing, the importance of, 225-227
competitive, other cultures and being, 41
empathy, 21, 43, 122, 205
competitiveness, drawbacks of, 77 business and, 111
composition, team, 163 definition of, 131-132
confidence, the importance of, 191 importance of, 108
overview of, 230
confident, being perceived as, 169
English, other countries speaking, 58
Confucius, business and, 120-121
exclusion, 53
consideration, 21, 121, 205
verbal, 55
definition of, 123-127
importance of, 108 experience-based questions, 33
the importance of, 213-215 expressions, the importance of, 66
consistency and trust, 205 external negotiation, 158, 174
consistent, importance of being, 254-255 Family Leave Act, 76
cost, as the number-1 issue, 182 family, as the top priority, 222
creative problem-solving, 245 feelings, finding commonalities in, 145
criticism, 189 fluidly, negotiating, 165-166
cultural barriers, breaking down, 90 food, negotiating over, 18, 161
cultural changes, getting ahead of, 259-266 Four Strategic Virtues, 18,43,107,108,122,147,205,216, 264
cultural divide, crossing the, 162 practicing, 45
priority of the, 121
268
Index
Getting the Mandate diagram, 175 key issues,
greeting, negotiating, 174 identifying, 177
targeting, 178
ground, common, 183
knowledgeable, being perceived as, 169
gut feeling, using your, 179
Korea, 19
handicap, the cultural, 196
lack of concern, displaying a, 166
Hong Kong, 19
business considerations of, 115-116 language,
cultural considerations of, 115 as a cultural barrier, 59
negotiations in, 116-117 bridging differences with, 66-68
snapshot of, 114-117 communicating with, 60
excluding, 57
hostility, neutralizing, 158
including, 57
inclusion, 53
interpreting, 86-87
India, 19 obstacles of, 63
cultural considerations of, 133-135 understanding a different, 57-58
dos and don’ts of, 136
leverage, issues and, 196
negotiations in, 136-138
listening,
revolutionizing business, 33-34
acknowledging and, 249
astute, 188
individual integrity, respecting, 241
summarizing and, 249
individual, integrity of the, 144-145 verbal behaviors for, 249
individualism, collectivism versus, 211 long-term planning, 168
inferior, making people feel, 74 long-term thinking, 198
influences, external, 165 maintaining relationships, 215
influencing behaviors and diversity, 21, 243 management development, 14
Influencing Behaviors Model, 18 mandate,
innovative questions, 33 getting the, 175
integrity, securing a, 181
individual, 144-145 setting the, 174, 176-178
respecting individual, 241 market, Asian, 32
internal negotiation, 158, 174 measures, confidence-building, 174
internally, negotiating, 181 mirror-driven society, understanding the, 87-89
international negotiations, 158 misunderstandings, minimizing, 251
international training, 14 money, importance of, 221
intuition, using your, 179 multi-national businesspeople, 56
issues, music,
clarifying, 177 importance of business and, 143-144
identifying, 176 importance of, 61
possible solutions for, 183 pronunciation of words in, 61
targeting key, 178 mutually beneficial approach, 199
Japan, 19 national superiority complex, 73
snapshot of, 45-48
needs,
cultural considerations, 46
communicating your, 167
business considerations, 47
finding commonalities in, 145
negotiations with, 48
negotiate, learning skills to, 162
John Wayne style, 231-238
negotiating behaviors, 244
269
negotiating fluidly, 165-166 snapshot of, 97-101
negotiating internally, 181 power,
negotiating power, 168 balance of, 166-168, 187
definition of, 168
negotiation,
negotiating, 168
building relationships and, 105
common ground in a, 20 practical thinking, 169
external, 174 praise, overt, 189
getting the agreement for a, 164 priorities, identifying the other side’s, 222-225
importance of, 17
probing questions, asking, 247
internal, 174, 217
probing, asking versus, 248
preparing for a, 167
thinking of the other party while, 164 problem-solving, creative, 245
negotiations, 157-172 process, negotiating, 174
China and, 44 productivity, impacts of, 30
definition of, 157 quality, impacts on, 30
external, 158
question development, a sample of, 247-248
internal, 158
questioning,
international, 158
effective, 193
negotiators, different attitudes of, 148
the skill of, 246-250
objective, setting the, 177
questions,
office, virtual, 96 asking, 227
open questions, 33 closed, 33
open-mindedness, 43 experience-based, 33
innovative, 33
options, preparing, 253
open, 33
Organizational Alignment Model, 104, 108
planning good, 193
overcoming the cultural handicap, 196 probing, 247
ownership, neutralizing, 158 type of, 194
Pacific Rim, doing business in the, 15, 40 well-planned, 191
parameters, rank, identifying, 176
breaking down into, 195 regime, Communist, 97
setting, 176 relationship,
paraphrasing, listening and, 249-250 building a trustworthy, 103
personal relationships, business and, 85 building long-term, 159
long-term, 147, 216
perspectives,
maintaining, 215
individual, 231
women and business, 43
matching, 164
reorganization, importance of, 141
philosophy, 212
respect, 21, 43, 122, 205
planning,
definition of, 109, 129-131
advanced, 174
importance of, 108
long-term, 168, 206
showing digital, 246
moving to strategic, 183
strategic, 103 Russia, 19
business in, 71
Poland, 19
culture of, 70-71
negotiation in, 71-72
doing business in, 101
snapshot of, 69-72
negotiating styles in, 101
negotiations in, 100-101 scenarios,
establishing best-case, 179-180
270
Index
establishing worst-case, 179-180 consistency and, 205
Seven Influencing Verbal Behaviors, 18 gaining, 42-44
silence, battling, 235 how to establish, 206-211
Silent One, importance of, 33
definition of a, 235 rebuilding, 209
facing a, 236 solidifying, 200
vulnerability and, 205
social styles, 231
United States, 20
society, mirror-driven, 87-89
business considerations of the, 83
South America, 20 cultural considerations of the, 82-83
close up of, 148-149 negotiations of the, 83-84
stage, planning, 195 snapshot of the, 80-84
strategic planning, 103 society of the, 81
moving to, 183 values,
strategic thinking, 169 Asian culture and, 108
strategically, planning, 188 finding commonalities in, 145
prioritizing, 251-252
strategies,
prioritizing, 93-97
examples of, 191
the importance of timing and, 190 Venezuela, 20
strategy, developing a clever, 190
Columbia compared to, 151-152
strengths, cultural considerations of, 202
determining the other side’s, 177 negotiations of, 203-204
determining your, 177 snapshot of, 201-204
style, John Wayne, 231-238 verbal behaviors for listening, 249
styles, social, 231 verbal behaviors, 239-258
subtle arrogance, 80 virtue,
summarizing, listening and, 249 acceptance, 110
superiority complex, national, 73 meaning of, 122
superiority, virtues, strategic, 109
a nation of, 219-230 vulnerability and trust, 205
Americans and, 220 vulnerability as a weakness, 207
Asian cultures and, 220
vulnerability, definition of, 206
attitude of, 78
the barrier of, 74-75 Wayne, inner John, 262
team building, multi-national, 14 Wayne, John, 22
teenagers, working with, 182 weakness,

revealing, 145
thinking,
vulnerability as a, 207
embracing long-term, 198
practical, 169 Webinar, use of the, 96
strategic, 169 Western culture, 14
time, importance of, 62, 151, 221 women,
tone, setting the right, 160 business relationships and, 43
different cultures and, 144
Total Quality Management, 54
words, creating partnerships with, 66-68
traditions, learning the, 141
work ethic, Eastern Europe, 69
Trans-cultural alignment model, 106-107, 112
workforce, reflecting community in the, 113
trust model, 215
youthful arrogance, understanding, 78-80
trust,
271
About the
Author
C atherine M. Lee
Catherine M. Lee, with her husband, Timothy, lives in Barrington,
Illinois, a suburb of Chicago. She left the paid workforce for twenty
years to raise her four children and re-entered into business with a
background in Medieval French and Spanish literatures. She remains
involved politically and professionally with her community. As a grand-
mother of six, her past time is the six, and her second priority is pro-
moting the integrity of doing business, for their future.
Catherine negotiates everything—from open-air markets to Macy’s,
from food to fitness, and from salaries to joint ventures. Her children
ask her to shop for them, but prefer not to shop with her.
Catherine Lee is the founder and President of CDL & Associates,
an international training and management development company serv-
ing major corporations in North America, the Pacific Rim, Latin
America, and Europe, including Motorola and BP (AMOCO), its first
two clients. She has been training businesspeople in negotiating since
1990. Catherine’s political involvement has required negotiations with
municipalities, state and federal governments, and countless officials
from other countries. She was recently named one of the most influen-
tial woman business owners in the greater Chicago area. She also works
internationally to support women to economic independence. CDL &
Associates, Inc., 847.381.2269, e-mail: clee@cdlassociates.com,
www.cdlassociates.com.
272

Catherine Lee - The New Rules of International Negotiation - Building Relationships, Earning Trust, and Creating Influence Around The World (2007)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Catherine Lee - The New Rules of International Negotiation - Building Relationships, Earning Trust, and Creating Influence Around The World (2007)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Catherine Lee - The New Rules of International Negotiation - Building Relationships, Earning Trust, and Creating Influence Around The World (2007)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

“Catherine Lee’s The New Rules for International Negotiation is a

must-read for anyone who desires to become more effective in the

“I have personally witnessed Catherine Lee’s practical wisdom and

“Carrying her multicultural experience, intuitiveness, and keen

“This book is bound to work for people who work in an environ-

All rights reserved under the Pan-American and International Copyright

THE NEW RULES OF INTERNATIONAL NEGOTIATION

The Career Press, Inc., 3 Tice Road, PO Box 687,

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

To Timothy for consistently giving a positive response to my every

Globalization is no longer a concept. It is a reality that speaks to

Negotiation is an ever-present aspect of business. Being elected and

and a half of work with Motorola, I was asked if I would go to Beijing,

My interest in another’s culture, religion, and people was the genesis

Close-Ups and Snapshots of the

The cultural considerations I present in the book, introducing cer-

“It’s an outlook, an attitude.”

Two waist-high, cloisonné Chinese vases filled with fresh flowers

not be good in sales because he’s insensitive to others needs. He would

Arriving at a strong awareness of differences creates a discomfort

Chindia: How China and India

Ask them first—ask background questions, both personal and business,

Give specific guidelines. Criticize.

Expect reliability and

Compliment sincerely and

Clarify/Summarize/Ask. Ask, “Do you understand?”

Include socially and Exclude from lunch, information,

Include early in problem-finding Think of a nod as a sign of

Read business card immediately Project attitude of superiority.

Show interest in their history, art,

Disregard how you

Express an interest in their

Show a recognition of their

B Managers value communication, even when there is no busi-

“We must scrunch or be scrunched.”

Round up time—corral those creatures and brand them the U.S.

lose, to rule or to serve. The idea of a winner or a loser often is the

Compete and Collaborate

Be Open to Gain Trust

required foreign business to include a Chinese joint venture partner that

Talk. Don’t Tell.

Team is an inherent part of the Japanese culture. I was in Hong

B To assure zero surprises, the Japanese prefer information in

There are guarded gates, identically designed row houses, consis-

setting for my first venture into Niewiadomski family womanhood. The

As multi-national businesspeople, we sometimes forget our primary

“Which foreign languages do you recommend our students learn to work

within those professions. “The bottom line” is a business term now

understanding of exactly what they were marching for. I would inevita-

understand what the other party has said, because of an accent or a

Close-Up of Eastern Europe

Moving from a Communist to capitalist society has been difficult for

Commissars: Bartering for Payment, Surviving the Crash of the Ruble,”

“Superiority and inferiority are individual, not racial or national.”

We sometimes suffer from a national superiority complex, even

observations indicate your success and are respected. It is the telling

Level the Playing Field

Understand Youthful Arrogance

from their experience and their well-developed sense of judgment. I