We propose a normative model of transactional negotiation in which cooperative and competitive behaviors wax and wane across four stages: relational positioning, identifying the problem, generating solutions, and reaching agreement. Based on a classic proposition of communicative flexibility in high-context cultures, we propose culture-specific dyadic movements within and across these stages. Our sample included 102 high-context dyads from Russia, Japan, Hong Kong, and Thailand; 89 low-context dyads from Germany, Israel, Sweden, and the United States; and 45 United States–Hong Kong and United States–Japan mixed-context dyads. Dyads negotiated a complex, 90-minute transaction with integrative potential. We audiotaped, transcribed, and coded their negotiations for sequences of information and influence behaviors. The unit of analysis was the action-response sequence. Results confirmed that the pattern of sequences varied across the four stages and the frequency of particular sequences varied with culture. We suggest that negotiators can use this model to manage the evolution and strategic focus of their negotiation, especially during the first two stages, when the use of influence-information sequences and reciprocal-information sequences generate the groundwork for joint gains.

This study compared the negotiation behaviors of Japanese and U.S. managers in intra- and intercultural settings. Transcripts from an integrative bargaining task were coded and analyzed with logistic and linear regression. U.S. negotiators exchanged information directly and avoided influence when negotiating intra- and interculturally. Japanese negotiators exchanged information indirectly and used influence when negotiating intraculturally but adapted their behaviors when negotiating interculturally. Culturally normative negotiation behaviors partially account for the lower joint gains generated by intercultural, relative to intracultural, dyads. The behavioral data inform motivational and skill-based explanations for elusive joint gains when cultures clash.

In this article the authors investigate the relationship between culture and joint gains by examining the role of information sharing and power strategies in intracultural negotiations. Previously, the authors found that the relationship between cultural values or norms and joint gains was uncertain in six cultures: France, Russia, Japan, Hong Kong, Brazil, and the United States. Of the five values and norms measured, only norms for information sharing in negotiation were directly related to joint gains. This article explores and extends prior findings by investigating the strategies used by negotiators in the same six cultures. Cultures that maximized joint gains used direct information‐sharing strategies or a combination of indirect and direct strategies. Power strategies may help or hurt joint gains, depending on a culture's values and norms for power and whether or not power‐based influence is used in conjunction with sufficient information exchange. The findings suggest that understanding the other party's cultural characteristics and strategies can help negotiators plan how to focus on information exchange and deal with unusual power strategies that they may encounter.

Summary This study compares negotiation strategy and outcomes in countries illustrating dignity, face, and honor cultures. Hypotheses predict cultural differences in negotiators' aspirations, use of strategy, and outcomes based on the implications of differences in self‐worth and social structures in dignity, face, and honor cultures. Data were from a face‐to‐face negotiation simulation; participants were intra‐cultural samples from the USA (dignity), China (face), and Qatar (honor). The empirical results provide strong evidence for the predictions concerning the reliance on more competitive negotiation strategies in honor and face cultures relative to dignity cultures in this context of negotiating a new business relationship. The study makes two important theoretical contributions. First, it proposes how and why people in a previously understudied part of the world, that is, the Middle East, use negotiation strategy. Second, it addresses a conundrum in the East Asian literature on negotiation: the theory and research that emphasize the norms of harmony and cooperation in social interaction versus empirical evidence that negotiations in East Asia are highly competitive. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.