Business Negotiations: An International Perspective Case Study Assignment

Table of Contents

Introduction

Discussion of the Problem

What Went Wrong

How I Would Handle the Negotiation as CEO of the American Company

Conclusion

References

Introduction

Negotiating between cultures entails knowing different cultures 'business etiquettes, communication styles, and decision making. The shambles over videogame maker Videomart and Japanese software firm Osatech demonstrate the ramifications of cultural mismatches. The American team approached the talk with a result oriented, intense sales mentality, while the Japanese emphasized cooperation, patience, and trust (Volkova, 2024). However, their failure to bridge these cultural divisions led to a failed agreement. As Videomart CEO, I would do more strategic planning, develop the proper negotiation climate and structure the discussion to complement Japanese business values. This will entail cultural investigation, employing an interpreter, building relationships and cooperation. By applying these changes, I would boost the chance of a successful negotiation, obtaining an invaluable partnership with Osatech, and also developing a powerful presence in the Japanese marketplace.

Discussion of the Problem

What Went Wrong

International business negotiations are oftentimes demanding and call for an extensive knowledge of cultural customs, communication styles and company protocol. With regards to the fake deal between American company Videomart and Japanese firm Osatech, substantial cultural misalignments resulted in the breakdown of what might have been an advantageous business relationship. In an intercultural communication viewpoint, the failure is grounded in variations in negotiation styles, cultural ignorance, unrelated expectations and communication challenges regarding business processes. These elements helped produce doubt and stress and resulted in a poor negotiation.

Differences in Communication Styles

Among the greatest negotiation headaches was the obvious distinction between the American and Japanese teams in Communication styles. The Americans conveyed in a minimal context, emphasizing direct, thorough, and simple dialog. They offered clearly with figures, market share and monetary advantages and utilized convincing, assertive language. They attempted to persuade the Japanese using Videomart's industry leadership, basing on factual assertions and thinking that hard figures will get them a small business. However, their strategy wasn't consistent with the Japanese negotiation method. By comparison, the Japanese employ an impressive context style of communication, relying more on verbal cues, indirect speech, and implicit meanings (Banasik-Jemielniak & Ka?owski, 2022). They were attentive listeners that nodded and smiled all through the talk. But this didn't always imply understanding or endorsement as the Americans incorrectly assumed.

In Japanese society company communication is usually skillful and fast reactions are unusual, as discussions call for thorough consideration and group consensus. Once the Japanese team began asking technical issues rather than financial terms, the Americans saw that as an effort to spy on very sensitive data instead of real interest in working together. This misunderstanding fed a suspicion along with defensiveness which widened the communication gap between the 2 teams. The Americans desired verbal confirmations and solid commitments; the Japanese chose to develop relations over time prior to making a choice (Thomas et al., 2020). The American team was dissatisfied at not having a quick agreement; they considered it a waste of time even though the Japanese looked at the Americans as too aggressive and impatient. This fundamental difference in communication types slowed significant negotiation and caused each side to frustration.

Mismatched Expectations and Business Priorities

Another factor of negotiation failure has been mismatching of Business Priorities & Expectations. The American team entered the meeting with a transactional attitude, centered on striking a fast profit deal. They emphasized market expansion, earnings and efficiency and stressed the way the alliance could monetarily benefit Osatech. They expected the Japanese team to find out the value in their proposal immediately and sign a deal. However, this strategy was completely incompatible with Japanese company culture. The Japanese view business negotiations as much more than contracts and numbers: they entail creating respect and trust for long-term relationships. They said they expected the Americans to develop relations before discussing business details. The Japanese company requested item specifications be talked about first in an attempt to not drag things along but instead to make certain the alliance was strategically and technically viable (Seaborn, Barbareschi & Chandra, 2023). Japanese society treats jumping into a contract without much due deliberation as negligent and even foolish. But this sluggish approach didn't prepare the Americans because of it. When Osatech did not commit quickly to the agreement they got impatient and frustrated. The Japanese in turn viewed the Americans as aggressive and brash and doubted their honesty and dependability as business partners. This particular struggle of targets resulted in distrust and prevented a mutually positive solution.

Lack of Language and Cultural Awareness

A significant oversight by the American team was to ignore the significance of language and cultural awareness in global business negotiations. Though the Japanese staff supplied an interpreter to assist with communications the Americans didn't. This particular oversight hampered them since they had been completely reliant on the Japanese interpreter for signifying. In addition, no one of the Americans knew and understood Japanese, restricting their ability to identify slight variations in speech, firmness, and gesture (Richardson et al., 2023). Numerous misunderstandings happened because of language barriers throughout the negotiation. The Americans took the Japanese team's smiling and nodding as proof of agreement, when actually they were expressions of courtesy and attentiveness.

Direct refusals are believed to be rude in the Japanese way of life, therefore Japanese negotiators tend to frequently remain quiet or reply vaguely. Unaccustomed to this particular cultural custom, the Americans thought their idea was being considered but had been later disappointed when no commitment was made. The Americans didn't comprehend the significance of Japanese business manners. Hierarchy and respect are crucial in professional relationships in Japan. They're usually very formal talks and decisions are reached collectively instead of individually. The Americans, though, anticipated rash decisions from one authoritative figure, an alternative to the Japanese practice of team consensus. By not acknowledging these cultural distinctions the American team even disrespected the Japanese team, further tarnishing relationships.

Breakdown of Trust and Perceived Bad Faith

A crucial component of good business negotiations, particularly for Japanese society, is integrity and respect. However, the trust between Osatech and Videomart broke down throughout the negotiation, primarily because of miscommunication and cultural misunderstanding. Japanese eyes observed the Americans as focused on legal contracts and formalities. The frequent references to attorneys indicated the Americans didn't believe in Osatech and had been planning for confrontation instead of creating a partnership. In Japanese company culture, rigid adherence to legal frameworks is often considered bad faith, showing the absence of confidence in the opposite person (Al-Mamun, 2023). This perception wrecked the Americans credibility and prompted the Japanese to back away from negotiations.

The Americans took the Japanese company's detailed questions regarding product specifications as suspicious. They read through these questions as an effort to obtain insider insight without making any deal. This particular anxiety was fuelled by enviable stereotypes like suspicions of Japanese companies spying in Silicon Valley which have long dominated conversation in American business circles. The American team grew to be more defensive, avoiding complex details and declining to speak openly. This particular protective approach just reinforced the Japanese team's suspicions regarding Videomart's integrity and dedication. The two parties were no more confident in one another by the end. The Americans regarded the Japanese as uncooperative and impatient, and the Japanese as impatient, untrustworthy and culturally ignorant (Brimbal et al., 2020). Negotiations ultimately fell apart without agreement or mutual understanding, and the Americans left home empty handed.

How I Would Handle the Negotiation as CEO of the American Company

The unsuccessful negotiation between Osatech and Videomart exposes the consequences of cultural misalignment and an absence of preparation for intercultural engagement. In case I was CEO of the American company, I would do strategic, relationship based, culturally based negotiation to guarantee a great negotiation. This will entail preparation, developing the best climate and framing the negotiation well.

1. Comprehensive Planning Before the Negotiation

International negotiations call for much more than an enhanced company proposal: they call for awareness of cultural customs, business ethics and expectations. The initial Videomart / Osatech negotiation failed mostly due to cultural awareness and poor planning by the American team. In case I was CEO of Videomart, I would plan the negotiations completely through cultural investigation, employing the best individuals and also developing trust prior to formal discussions begin.

1.1. Cultural and Market Research

Exploration into the company culture and negotiation style of the counterpart is among the most crucial steps in preparing an international company negotiation. The case study American staff missed the fact that Japanese business culture emphasizes trust, consensus-building and patience whereas American business culture generally values efficiency and directness (Zidaru, Morrow & Stockley, 2021). To stay away from this mistake, I would ensure that my staff undergoes cross-cultural training centred on:

Style of Japanese communication: Unlike Americans, who are generally direct, Japanese professionals are more indirect. They use subtle cues, facial expressions and silence to communicate messages. To understand these particulars might avoid misunderstanding of the answers.

Hierarchy & group decision-making:Japanese businesses are generally hierarchical in structure - decisions involve several stakeholders. It had been a costly error by the Americans believing Osatech's general manager had single decision-making power. I would teach my team members to develop relationships with every key stakeholder instead of depending on instant decisions from one individual.

Patience in Japanese businesses:Japanese businesses pause prior to making huge commitments. The American strategy of pushing for a fast agreement went against this particular standard. I would train my staff to think long term and respect Osatech's choices.

I'd also do market research to discover:

Position in Japanese video software market:What exactly are Osatech's major items, competitions & weaknesses?

Demand for Videomart's software in Japan: Should our software be altered to local preferences?

Japanese versus American video game businesses:What can we learn from unsuccessful partnerships?

1.2. Using an Expert Interpreter along with Cultural Consultant

The Americans didn't employ a qualified translator, a significant error in the failed negotiation. That placed them at a disadvantage since they had to translate entirely on the Osatech in-house engineer. Miscommunication became a genuine threat, particularly in technical talks, without a skilled interpreter. I'd certainly get yourself a bilingual interpreter that speaks business & technical language for efficient and clear communication. This interpreter can be handy:

• Ensure our communications are understandable in Japanese.
• Decipher subtle cultural clues that American team members may miss.
• Outline difficult technical concepts for both parties (Sunny, Undralla & Pillai, 2020).

I also would employ a Japanese cultural advisor to assist us with business ethics, common negotiating etiquette and warning signs. This will enable us to negotiate the cultural differences of the discussion without taking unintended offenses.

1.3. Making Initial Connections Before Serious Negotiation

In Japanese company practices, negotiations don't begin with contracts and figures - they start with relationships. The American team didn't realize this and quickly demanded contractual talks, fostering distrust. To stop this, I would prioritise creating a good connection with Osatech executives prior to launching formalized negotiations. This would involve:

Conferences:Rather than get into a formal company meeting, I'd arrange casual lunches, dinners or even networking opportunities with Osatech professionals. Such sociable situations could provide both teams opportunities for individualized relationship and trust.

Going to Osatech's headquarters:A trip to Osatech's headquarters will demonstrate appreciation for the company. Additionally, it would reveal their company culture, workplace culture and team dynamics.

Providing goodwill:Japanese business practice considers gift-giving as a sign of appreciation. I would bring a modest, yet thoughtful company present as a goodwill gesture for our team. This may be something symbolic of our business history or achievements.

A few informal technical discussions:Rather than pressing for instant agreement, I will suggest joint technical sessions where engineers from both companies might talk about compatibility and improvements (Hoel, Feunou & Wolf-Ostermann, 2021). This will facilitate a teamwork society instead of a transactional culture.

2. Climate for Negotiation

The right atmosphere for a negotiation is vital when interacting with business partners from various cultures. In the case study, Videomart's negotiations with Osatech were ultimately a failure as the Americans dominated the discussions with a tough sell mindset whereas the Japanese emphasised relationship building, patience and trust. In case I was Videomart CEO, I would do things differently to develop the proper environment for a productive, culturally sensitive negotiation.

2.1. Building Mutual Trust & Respect

The Japanese company approach is founded on trust. Unlike American negotiations where the emphasis is frequently on productivity and fast deals, Japanese firms take their time in assessing possible business partners before signing a contract. The American team's speed to close a deal fast might have been regarded as impatience or even hypocritical by Osatech executives. To develop respect and trust, I would:

Build relationships before negotiations:Rather than plunge into business meetings head on, I'd have my staff schedule many informal meetings - dinners or cultural excursions - to develop trust and camaraderie.

Show interest in Osatech's company: Rather than asking what Videomart desires, I'd promote discussions on Osatech's vision, objectives, and challenges. That could give the Japanese team the feeling that we're not simply performing a sale but a partnership forever (Sovacool et al., 2024).

Patience in negotiation:I would prepare my staff for a number of rounds of talks - the Japanese decision-making procedure is inner consultation and consensus building.

2.2. Creating an Atmosphere of Collaboration Instead of Competition

The American strategy in the unsuccessful negotiation was aggressive and centred on Videomart's industry superiority. This method probably alienated Osatech, who believed the Americans had been far more focused on creating a declaration of superiority than cooperating. To produce a far more friendly atmosphere, I would:

Frame it as mutual benefit:Rather than stating Osatech "needs" Videomart, I would state the way the two might intertwine in the worldwide video game industry.

Encourage expertise sharing:Rather than revealing technical details, I'd plan technical exchange meetings so engineers from both companies could talk about product compatibility and opportunities for development (Nikoletos et al., 2024). This will alter the balance of negotiating to co-creation.

Use diplomatic language:I will make certain our team does not talk confrontational stuff and requires things like "together," "joint success," "vision."

3. Structure the Negotiation for Success

3.1. Organizing the Discussion to Match Japanese Priorities

The original American team mistakenly focused on financial and market arguments. However, the Japanese were concerned more about technical specs and compatibility. As CEO, we would modify our negotiation schedule to reflect Osatech priorities by:

• Managing technical discussions, ensuring that Osatech recognizes the quality and compatibility of our software before discussing financial terms.
• Supplying a functioning prototype or model, showing our dedication to collaboration and transparency.
• Slowly adding contractual talks instead of requiring immediate commitment.

3.2. Aiming for a Flexible & Incremental Agreement

The original negotiation also failed as it had been an all-or-nothing deal. Rather than total commitment outright, I'd suggest a phased arrangement whereby both sides slowly establish trust. For instance, I'd say:

• A partnership on a trial basis, whereby Osatech might try a restricted software licence before signing a bigger deal.
• Joint development programs, where the two firms might improve the application collectively to more closely match Japanese industry requirements.
• Flexible licensing terms allowing Osatech to scale the agreement depending on trust and performance (Feitosa et al., 2020).
• Such an incremental strategy will mitigate risk for Osatech and permit possible deepening of the partnership afterwards.

3.3. Transparency to Address Trust Issues

Fearing corporate espionage, Osatech demanded engineering plans in the unsuccessful negotiation and the Americans got defensive. This reaction undermined trust. I'd look at it differently as CEO by:

• Defining what technical details may be discussed without compromise of intellectual property (Hamza & Pradana, 2022).
• Proposing NDAs (Non-Disclosure Agreements) to safeguard both businesses interests.
• Hosting joint research sessions - enabling both companies developers to go through the application together.

Conclusion

The Videomart - Osatech negotiation failed primarily because of cultural misalignment and poor planning. The direct and competitive American approach clashed with Japanese patience, consensus-building and trust - based approach. The negotiation would've turned out differently if it was approached with better cultural consciousness, strategic relationship building along with a collaborative mindset. With cooperative negotiation, respect, and preparation, Videomart has landed a long term, advantageous connection with Osatech. This particular case shows the significance of cultural intelligence in global business, demonstrating that success in overseas markets isn't simply about product strength but also about adapting to company cultures.

References

Al-Mamun, A. (2023). Bangladesh's development goals and Japaneseee FDI: Prospects and challenges. Journal of Management and Training for Industries, 10(2), 1- 36.https://search.informit.org/doi/abs/10.3316/informit.T20240506000138911837394 23.

Banasik-Jemielniak, N. B. J. N., & Ka?owski, P. K. P. (2022). Socio-cultural and individual factors in verbal irony use and understanding: What we know, what we dont know, what we want to know. Review of Communication Research, 10.https://rcommunicationr.org/index.php/rcr/article/view/10.

Brimbal, L., Kleinman, S., Oleszkiewicz, J. S., & Meissner, C. (2020). Developing rapport and trust in the interrogative context: An empirically-supported and ethical alternative to customary interrogation practices. Interrogation and torture: Integrating efficacy with law and morality, C5.https://research.utwente.nl/en/publications/developing-rapport-and-trust- in-the-interrogative-context-an-empi.

Feitosa, J., Grossman, R., Kramer, W. S., & Salas, E. (2020). Measuring team trust: A critical and meta?analytical review. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 41(5), 479- 501.https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/job.2436.

Hamza, R., & Pradana, H. (2022). A survey of intellectual property rights protection in big data applications. Algorithms, 15(11), 418.https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4893/15/11/418.

Hoel, V., Feunou, C. M., & Wolf-Ostermann, K. (2021). Technology-driven solutions to prompt conversation, aid communication and support interaction for people with dementia and their caregivers: a systematic literature review. BMC geriatrics, 21, 1- 11.https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12877-021-02105-0.

Nikoletos, G., Papoutsoglou, I., Spanos, G., Nizamis, A., Lalas, A., Votis, K., & Tzovaras, D. (2024). Digital marketplaces in European research landscape: A systematic literature review. Open Research Europe, 4, 223.https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlehtml/2024/ee/d3ee03270a.

Richardson, E. V., Nagata, S., Hall, C., Akimoto, S., Barber, L., & Sawae, Y. (2023). Developing a socially-just research agenda for inclusive physical education in Japan. Quest, 75(4), 361- 378.https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00336297.2023.2206578.

Seaborn, K., Barbareschi, G., & Chandra, S. (2023). Not only WEIRD but uncanny? A systematic review of diversity in humanrobot interaction research. International Journal of Social Robotics, 15(11), 1841- 1870.https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12369-023-00968-4.

Sovacool, B. K., Del Rio, D. F., Herman, K., Iskandarova, M., Uratani, J. M., & Griffiths, S. (2024). Reconfiguring European industry for net-zero: a qualitative review of hydrogen and carbon capture utilization and storage benefits and implementation challenges. Energy & Environmental Science.https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlehtml/2024/ee/d3ee03270a.

Sunny, J., Undralla, N., & Pillai, V. M. (2020). Supply chain transparency through blockchain- based traceability: An overview with demonstration. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 150, 106895.https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360835220305829.

Thomas, J. M., Edwards, P. P., Dobson, P. J., & Owen, G. P. (2020). Decarbonising energy: The developing international activity in hydrogen technologies and fuel cells. Journal of Energy Chemistry, 51, 405- 415.https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2095495620302448.

Volkova, O. (2024). LEADERSHIP IN CROSS-CULTURAL ENVIRONMENT- CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES.https://digikogu.taltech.ee/et/Download/75370721-89f3-448d- ad85-9f6908cca156/Eestvedaminekultuurideleseskeskkonnasvljaku.pdf.

Zidaru, T., Morrow, E. M., & Stockley, R. (2021). Ensuring patient and public involvement in the transition to AI?assisted mental health care: A systematic scoping review and agenda for design justice. Health Expectations, 24(4), 1072- 1124.https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/hex.13299.