Examples Of Cultural Clash In The Boardroom

Assignment 3: Cultural Clash in the Boardroom

The representatives in the boardroom consist of both Chinese and German nationals, and both parties bring elements of their culture, such as way of thinking and feeling, into the discussion. In the communication that is taking place here, there are both addressers and addressees. Each culture has a world view of its own, and the two parties are interpreting the messages from their frame of references. In this case, we have both a Western and a non-Western culture, where the former can be described as a low-context culture, and the latter as a high-context culture. This becomes evident as the Germans and Chinese find different things important when communicating. For example, it is important for

I believe that when these two parties are discussing these ethical issues, both the Europeans and the Chinese are using their framework of reference, and therefore they both believe they know "how things should be done," because they both feel like that is the "nature of things." Almond China, representing the values of the German parent company, prioritize the law perspective and value their standards. Just like the Chongqing No. 2 Chemical Company they see their way of dealing with, for example sales, as the right way to do it. I believe that both parties are being judgemental about the other one's value system, when talking about safety and ethical issues there are traces of ethnocentrism (Browaeys & Price, 2015, p. 360-2). In addition, they have probably not spent enough time getting to know each other, which as mentioned above is important in high-context cultures. The Chinese may feel like they do not know their business partners and consequently there is no trust. Overall, these two parties do not have a mutual understanding for each

The example in chapter 15 is by all means applicable to what is going in the boardroom. There is both a Western and non-Western way of negotiating represented and what makes it hard to carry the process forward is related to what have been mentioned above. For the Europeans, the goal is the to close the deal, and for the Chinese it is to create a life-long partnership, which according to the Westerns, can be dealt with later. Instead of forming long-term relationships, the detailed contracts and legal aspects are in focus for the Europeans, who can be considered as particularists. Westerners have more of a win-lose, competitive approach, whereas the non-Westerners has more of a consensus-building, win-win, integrative approach. The Chinese, who are more universalists, would rather see an agreement between the parties that would benefit them both and creates a harmonious relationship. However, the Chinese way of negotiating have competitive elements as well, in this case their strategy is to make a "joint quest" and be persistent. Since both of these negotiation styles have competitive traits and two different agendas - the result is a collision (Browaeys & Price, 2015, p. 377-80,