Chapter 6: THE FUNCTION OF BIAS Perception versus Reality

CHAPTER 6

The Function of Bias

P ERCEPTION VERSUS R EALITY

CULTURAL BIASES can be both a weapon to avoid and a shield to hide behind. The dividing line between weapon and shield is that between unfavorable and favorable stereotypes. Negotiators must learn to use their counterparts’ biases to achieve the most favorable result. Every culture is perceived by other cultures as having both bad and good features, and these are usually based on some kernels of truth. The Japanese are seen as intelligent but uncreative. The British are snobbish but polite. The Germans are precise but rigid. Americans are self-centered but clever. Sometimes these characteristics are linked to national borders and sometimes to ethnicity (Asian values demand . . . ), religion (Muslims always . . . ), geography (Westerners consider . . . ), or politics (Socialists insist on . . . ). However, human nature makes it easy for both whole cultures and individuals to believe the positive about themselves and discount the negative. Any self-respecting Japanese will staunchly defend national intelligence while quietly rationalizing the lack of Nobel Prize winners. Germans will likewise extol their engineering prowess while downplaying the inflexibility of their legal system.

Using Your Counterpart’s Bias to Your Advantage

Negotiators rarely have the time to address the problem of biases head-on, and besides, to do so means running the risk of offending a potential business partner. The most efficient technique is to play to the positive stereotypes and defy the negatives. This method will keep the counterpart off balance and in a constant state of trying to figure out the other side. Meanwhile, the negotiator maintains only a positive image in the mind of their counterpart. This requires a good bit of research, coupled with the ability to quickly pick up on the individual biases of counterparts. WARNING: Don’t attempt this technique until you are clearly aware of the counterpart’s biases. Otherwise, you may waste a lot of energy dispelling stereotypes that don’t exist.

Finding Achilles’ Heel

Negotiators must make a resolute effort to clear their own minds of prejudice, if for no other reason than that prejudices stand in the way of efficiency. Assuming that counterparts are intelligent, reasonable, insightful, honest, forthright, precise, clever, punctual, or sophisticated is just as bad as assuming they’re not. Skilled

negotiators must be able to detect their counterparts’ strong points as well as their weak ones and to act accordingly. Rarely can success be found by being oblivious to an opponent, and there’s only a slightly better chance in granting the benefit, or drawback, of the doubt.

Perceptions are based on available information. The axiom “All things come to those who wait” doesn’t apply to international negotiations. Active, directed cultural research with a great deal of input from expatriates should be accumulated prior to negotiations. Information should be judged by its source and all viewpoints solicited. WARNING: Don’t use cultural materials published by the government of the target country as primary sources. They’ll probably be riddled with their own particular biases.

Once introductions have passed and negotiations have begun, each side will be attempting to check the accuracy of their respective research. Negotiators should deal only with the reality facing them across the table. There’s no value in attempting to force the facts into a preconceived pigeon hole no matter how well researched. Predictions can depart from outcome. Negotiating, like accounting, must use its poor forecasts as a tool to restructure the process. Missing the mark is a reason to improve research—not to drop it.

Economic Prejudice

The developing world and the technological economies continually eye each other with the intention of profit. The former wants to skip a century of nondevelopment to secure cutting-edge products at cut-rate prices. The latter sees millions of unjaded consumers willing to snap up products that have long since run their course in the domestic marketplace. This economic disparity can be piled on top of the standard biases already at work.

Negotiators should be aware that countries that have experienced significant colonization well into the 20th century are very sensitive to this issue. Companies from foreign lands will not always be greeted with hardy welcomes. Instead, they may be met with protests by local citizen groups, as has happened in parts of India recently. The phrase “Investment, not investors” is fast becoming a rallying cry in many developing countries. These economies are demanding access to the world’s cash supply without signing on for what many of them see as the “cultural decadence” of their benefactors. Foreign negotiators may find themselves being held responsible for a whole host of problems that they neither had anything to do with nor intended to profit by.

In previous centuries, “commerce follows the flag” was the rule of international business (e.g, the Opium War); today’s precept is closer to “culture chases commerce.” Negotiators in developing economies must realize that although they’ve been directed to drive hard bargains, the patience of foreign investors has long since worn out. International companies are no longer willing to take accusations of “cultural imperialism” seriously. For them, 21st-century technology brings 21st-century culture, with all its inherent problems.

Both sides of the table must realize that a take-it-or-leave-it attitude will not produce useful results. The key for each side is the ability to understand their

counterpart’s position and, to some degree, manipulate it as part of the overall strategy. Such planning will be discussed in detail. For now, suffice it to say that making the other side believe it has won is a victory in and of itself.

Playing the “Race Card”

An unfortunate reality of international negotiations is that the race of the participants will have an effect on the discussions. Regardless of the personal feelings of those in charge of the process, racial characteristics need to be taken into account. Understanding one’s own racial perceptions, as well as those of counterparts, is an essential part of preparations for face-to-face meetings.

Researching the biases of counterparts and then either playing to them or counteracting them can be an effective tool at the negotiating table. Racial bias is, after all, a weakness and weaknesses are to be exploited. Even where racial diversity is limited or a single negotiator is used, the ability to reinforce or reverse a stereotype at the proper stage of negotiating can completely unbalance the opposition. However, playing the “race card” is a delicate matter that’s prone to backfiring, so it’s best to have it well planned out in advance.

Cultural Accommodation

Cultural considerations will arise time and again, even when they’re not the subject of direct discussion. Each side must come prepared to accommodate the other to a reasonable extent, and such accommodations can be myriad. The days for meetings may be chosen to allow for holidays or religious schedules. Even the time of day can be scheduled based on local activity, as may be the case in hotter climates where the populace traditionally observes some form of siesta or shou shei. Similarly, negotiations may be interrupted for prayer by orthodox Islamic teams.

Late-night meals, after-hour socializing, marathon sessions, and multiple “time outs” for consensus taking will all require accommodation. Each side should respect the other’s need to maintain some of their respective cultural patterns, even when operating on foreign turf.

The Value of Kindness

Kindness may be universally appreciated, but it can also be interpreted as a sign of weakness in some cultures. And the leap from being kind to being obsequious can sometimes be a short one. A kindness withheld can be taken as a slight, while a kindness granted may be viewed as a patronizing act. The phrase “You are too kind” can be taken literally, with the result that the speaker now feels obliged to respond with an even greater benevolence. This is especially true in business cultures with a gift-giving tradition. Research will allow negotiators to recognize when they’ve gone too far or have been too niggardly.

Kindness is also an effective tactic. Keeping counterparts in sufficient “debt” while negotiations progress may lead to significant concessions. Negotiators must

take care not to allow this ploy to become evident and to remain on guard for turnabout. Kindness can produce social debts that may require economic payment.

Manners That Matter

What constitutes good manners is by no means universal. International operators are always in a position of trying to determine what is proper and when. Translators, expatriates, embassy protocol officers, and host government representatives are all useful sources of information.

Working in the international arena demands a great deal of flexibility. Extroverts may suddenly have to recognize the value of reticence. Negotiators comfortable with dignified bows as a greeting may be thrust into a world of bear hugs or even an exchange of salutatory kisses. Women used to being treated with deference can find themselves excluded from important conversations. While negotiators may not always find these situations pleasant, they should never be surprised by them.

Table manners are another area that can have a direct effect on business. At some point, international negotiations put the players in a dining situation. The desire to “break bread” with trusted associates is strong in all of the world’s cultures. It may be at a private home, the company canteen, or an exclusive restaurant. Wherever it is, you can be assured that the table manners of the participants will be observed and assessed. The inability to choose the proper silverware at a Parisian banquet will mark the perpetrator as culturally backward. Similarly, the inabilty to use chopsticks at a Shanghai luncheon will unveil the negotiator as a cultural novice, while asking for chopsticks in a Manila restaurant may be taken as an insult. Eating fried chicken in Atlanta with a knife and fork may evoke a humorous response, while using a left hand to pick up food in Delhi may elicit wide-eyed stares from one’s hosts.

Manners in any form—whether it’s knowing how to address someone of senior rank or for whom to hold a door, which utensil to use or how not to dress for a particular occasion—are small points that speak volumes. They’re the nuances that drive successful relationships and promote understanding. Their presence denotes both cultural research and concern, while their absence signifies naivete or boorishness.

For more on business protocols for individual cultures see the World Trade Press Passport to the World Series (25 country-specific titles).