These studies integrate research on social influence and negotiation to predict the effectiveness of influence strategies in the East and the West. Building on prior research documenting cultural differences in preferences for interests, rights, or power arguments (Tinsley 1998, 2001), we propose that framing such arguments as logical versus normative appeals will further explain cultural variation in influence-strategy effectiveness. We present results from a negotiation-vignette study demonstrating Canadian students are more responsive to arguments framed logically, whereas Chinese students are more responsive to arguments framed normatively, depending on the ethnicity of their counterpart. Then we present results from a negotiation simulation conducted by U.S. and Japanese dyads, indicating that these within-culture patterns of influence effectiveness support the social-psychological needs perspective and predict negotiation outcome. These findings offer extensions to existing theory on culture and negotiation and implications for managers in cross-cultural negotiation and conflict settings.
|Original language||English (US)|
|Number of pages||20|
|Journal||International Studies of Management and Organization|
|State||Published - Jan 1 2013|
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Business and International Management
- Strategy and Management