See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235295929

Cross-cultural sales negotiations: A literature

review and research propositions
Article in International Marketing Review February 1998
DOI: 10.1108/EUM0000000004481

CITATIONS

READS

55

1,172

2 authors, including:
A.C. Simintiras
Swansea University
37 PUBLICATIONS 542 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE

All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate,

letting you access and read them immediately.

Available from: A.C. Simintiras

Retrieved on: 20 November 2016

International
Marketing
Review
15,1
10
Received April 1996
Revised May 1997
Accepted September 1997

Cross-cultural sales
negotiations
A literature review and research
propositions
Antonis C. Simintiras
The Open University Business School, Milton Keynes, UK, and

Andrew H. Thomas
European Business Management School, University of Wales,
Swansea, UK

International Marketing Review,

Vol. 15 No. 1, 1998, pp. 10-28.
MCB University Press, 0265-1335

Introduction
International business comprises a large and increasing portion of the worlds
total trade (Johnson et al., 1994; Czinkota et al., 1995). The growth of
international business has gained momentum faster than previously recorded,
outstripping domestic business (Daniels and Radebaugh, 1995). The impact of
such growth on many companies is that they are now rushing to become
insiders in international markets they formerly paid little attention to, or
ignored completely (McDaniel, 1990, p. 1). International markets, it is believed,
offer companies opportunities to market their products and services on a worldwide scale and reap the benefits of the particularly high stakes involved (Mintu
and Calantone, 1991).
Companies involved in international business, deal with sales transactions
or negotiations which span national and cultural boundaries. That means, sales
negotiators interact with individuals from unfamiliar cultures that exhibit
different negotiation styles, behaviours and expectations about the normal
process of negotiation (Graham and Sano, 1984). This presents several potential
culture-related obstacles that confront the international negotiator (Deutsch,
1984; Frank, 1992; Graham and Sano, 1984; Hall and Hall, 1987; Tung, 1984;
Zimmerman, 1985) and a failure to anticipate, understand and effectively
remove these obstacles can lead to a failure in cross-cultural negotiations.
Competence, therefore, in international negotiations is one of the most
important and indispensable skills in all kinds of international business
(Fayerweather and Kapoor, 1972, 1976; Root, 1987; Wells, 1977).
Despite the growth of international business and the importance of
international negotiations, the literature relevant to cross-cultural sales
negotiations is mainly normative and largely disjointed. In this study, we
attempt a synthesis of literature findings relevant to the interactive part of the
international sales negotiations process. More specifically, the purpose of this
study is three-fold. First, to set the scene by providing a brief overview of the

role of culture on negotiations. Second, to examine the literature pertaining to

cross-cultural sales negotiations by using the negotiation process as an
integrative and analytical framework. Third, to explore other areas of research
and put forward several research propositions which extend the research
domain and enrich the theoretical understanding of cross-cultural sales
negotiations.
The impact of culture on negotiations
Negotiation is one of the most important elements of the selling and buying
functions, (Neslin and Greenhalgh, 1983). Negotiation is a process in which two
or more entities come together to discuss common and conflicting interests in
order to reach an agreement of mutual benefit (Harris and Moran, 1987, p. 55).
The negotiation process is a complex process which is significantly
influenced by the culture(s) within which the participants are socialised,
educated and reinforced (Graham, 1985a; Hamner, 1980; Harnett and
Cummings, 1980; Tung, 1982). For example, an individuals conduct during a
negotiation encounter is influenced by ethnic heritage (Hawrysh and
Zaichkowsky, 1989), and the attitudes and customs which are embedded in
his/her culture (Shenkar and Ronen, 1987). Individuals having the same cultural
backgrounds tend to display common patterns of thinking, feeling and reacting
in line with their cultural heritage. As a result, behaviour in negotiation is
consistent within cultures and each culture has its own distinctive negotiation
style. The intra-cultural literature which examines sellers and buyers from
the same cultures, provides evidence for this consistency (e.g. French (Dupont,
1982); Mexicans (Fisher, 1980); Brazilians (Graham, 1983, 1985a); Middle
Eastern Arabs (Muna, 1973; Wright, 1983); Chinese (Graham and Lin, 1987; Pye,
1982; Shenkar and Ronen, 1987; Tung 1984) and Japanese (Graham, 1984; Tung,
1984; Van Zandt, 1970)).
Despite the rather rich literature pertaining to intra-cultural negotiation
behaviours, there is little attention paid to inter-cultural or cross-cultural
negotiation behaviour (Adler and Graham, 1989; Mintu and Calantone, 1991).
International sales negotiations that occur across national boundaries are crosscultural (Adler, 1986), and a negotiation is cross-cultural when the parties
involved belong to different cultures and therefore do not share the same ways
of thinking, feeling and behaving (Casse, 1981, p. 152). Such cultural
differences prevalent in cross-cultural negotiations can affect the process and its
outcome (Hamner, 1980; Tse et al., 1988).
Studies attempting a comparison of the various negotiation behaviours in
different countries (Adler, 1986; Adler et al., 1987; Burt, 1989; Cambell et al.,
1988; Copeland and Griggs, 1985; Foster, 1992; Graham et al., 1988; Harnett and
Cummings, 1980; Hellweg et al., 1991; Herbig and Kramer, 1992; Weiss and
Stripp, 1985) have mainly adopted an intra-cultural perspective and
demonstrated that negotiation behaviours differ between cultures.
Furthermore, a study by Druckman et al. (1976) which attempted to isolate

Cross-cultural
sales
negotiations
11

International
Marketing
Review
15,1
12

differences which could be attributed to culture only but not variables such as
age and sex, indicated that negotiator behaviour differs between cultures.
The ability to achieve mutually beneficial outcomes from cross-cultural sales
negotiations is believed to be crucial to sales success internationally (Cohen,
1980; Fisher and Ury, 1981; Llich, 1980; Nierenberg, 1963; Raiffa, 1982;
Unterman, 1983; Warschaw, 1980). Negotiation outcome is the point in the
process when the parties reach some form of agreement on the total set of
issues that have been discussed (Dommermuth, 1976). Negotiation outcome can
be measured in terms of sale versus no sale (Pennington, 1968) or profits (Dwyer
and Walker, 1981; Lewis and Fry, 1977; Pruitt and Lewis, 1975) and satisfaction
(Dwyer and Walker, 1981). The latter have been found to be operationally
superior to the former (Graham, 1985b, 1985c).
High and low-context cultures
Hall, (1976, p. 129) states that a crucial dimension of culture that has particular
relevance for negotiation situations is the context of communication. More
specifically, Hall, (1976) postulates that cultures fall along a high to low-context
continuum, according to the role of context in communication. In certain
cultures communication uses low-context and explicit messages. These are
almost digital and could be translated into simple computer units (bits)
(Usunier, 1993). Individuals rely on formal communication with information
transmission concerning behaviour being chiefly verbally expressed (Cateora,
1983; Foster, 1992; Root, 1987). Such low-context countries include, among
others, the USA, Canada, Switzerland and Germany (Graham, 1988; Onkvisit
and Shaw, 1993).
In high-context cultures, less information is contained in precise verbal
expression, since much more is in the context of communication. The context of
communication is high because it includes a great deal of additional
information, such as the individuals background, associations, values and
position in society (Keegan, 1989). As such, a message cannot be understood
without its context (Onkvisit, 1993). According to Hawrysh and Zaichkowsky,
(1989, p. 35) high-context cultures are those in which the perception of the
individual is inextricably bound to his or her relationship and the context in
which they occur. High-context cultures are characterised by the expressive
manner in which the message is delivered (Onkvisit, 1993) (e.g. using non-verbal
behaviour, such as facial expressions, gestures and body language (Root, 1987;
Usunier, 1993). Individuals unfamiliar with the complexities of non-verbal
behaviour may experience difficulty in understanding messages, which leads
Hall (1976, p. 127) to suggest that it is sheer folly to get seriously involved with
high-context cultures unless one is really contexted. Such countries include
Japan, China, Brazil and Mexico, Spain, Italy and Middle Eastern Arab nations
(Graham, 1988; Onkvisit, 1993).
In the next section, the literature pertaining to the interactive part of the
cross-cultural negotiation process will be reviewed. More specifically, both the
non-task related and task-related or endogenous factors influencing

cross-cultural sales negotiations are examined. However, other exogenous

factors which also influence the negotiation process and include, among others,
the importance of the negotiation, the stakes of the respective negotiators (i.e.
the amount of perceived gain or loss associated with particular results)
(Gladwin and Walter, 1980, p. 66) and the nature and complexity of issues to be
negotiated (Tung, 1988), although very important, are beyond the scope of this
study.
The negotiation process
After the initial preparation that precedes a cross-cultural sales negotiation, the
interactive part of the process of negotiation can be divided into two different
stages:
(1) non-task related interaction; and
(2) task-related interaction (Adler, 1986; Graham and Sano, 1984, 1986).
The first stage, non-task related interaction, describes the process of getting to
know each other or of establishing rapport between members of negotiating
teams (Adler, 1986; Adler et al., 1987; Hawrysh and Zaichkowsky, 1989). This is
the stage of the face-to-face interaction which opens the meeting and excludes
those interactions related to the exchange of information regarding the
business of the meeting. It involves negotiators getting to know contacts.
Non-task related interaction outcome will be influenced by status distinction
(Graham, 1983; Oh, 1984; Tsurami, 1971) impression formation accuracy
(Graham, 1985a) and interpersonal attraction (Benton, 1971; Berscheid and
Walster, 1978; McGuire, 1968; Morgan and Sawyer, 1967; Swingle, 1966) of the
negotiators.
The second stage of the negotiation describes the task-related interaction and
it is concerned with the business of the negotiation. It involves an exchange of
information regarding the needs and preferences of negotiators (i.e. the various
alternatives open to them). This stage places emphasis on information
exchange (Graham, 1987; Graham and Andrews, 1987), persuasion and
bargaining strategy (Hawrysh and Zaichkowsky, 1989) and concession making
(Anderson, 1995) that culminates in a final agreement. High and low-context
cultures (Hall, 1976), it is believed, exert an influence on both the non-task
related and task-related factors, which, in turn, influence the outcome of crosscultural sales negotiations (Graham, 1988; Graham and Herberger, 1983; Hall,
1976; Herbig and Kramer, 1992).
In this section, we examine the literature pertaining to each stage of the
international sales negotiation process and explore areas for further research.
More specifically, the study focuses on the role and the likely impact of:
(1) importance weighting attached to status distinction;
(2) perceived similarities and differences of the negotiators; and
(3) degree of reliance on non-verbal communication, at various stages of the
negotiation process and its outcome.

Cross-cultural
sales
negotiations
13

International
Marketing
Review
15,1
14

The integrative framework which has been used to guide the analysis is
diagramatically shown in Figure 1.
Non-task interaction
Status distinction
At the non-task interaction stage of the negotiation process status distinction
plays an important role. Status can be defined by interpersonal rank, age, sex,
education, the position of an individual in the company and the relative position
of ones company (Graham, 1988; Hawrysh and Zaichkowsky, 1989). In almost
any negotiation, there may be differences in the status of bargaining parties
(Graham, 1988) that account for the traditional culturally based power plays
that are a feature of international negotiation (Herbig and Kramer, 1992).
In cross-cultural sales negotiations it is critical that sellers and buyers
understand status distinction. Different cultures attach different degrees of
importance to status in negotiations (Graham, 1988). High-context cultures are
status oriented (Herbig and Kramer, 1992) since meaning and understanding in
communication is internalised in the person (Hawkins, 1983). In such cultures
interpersonal relationships are vertical in nature (Nakane, 1970; Graham, 1988)
and the words used in negotiation are not as important as negotiator status
(Hall, 1976). There is little egalitarianism in negotiations (Herbig and Kramer,
1992) which has prompted Schmidt (1979, p. 2) to emphatically state that in the
past as now, a seller was considered little more than a beggar. Yet the buyer (the
honoured guest) was and remains king. The influence of status distinctions
can be so pervasive that status dictates not only what is said but how it is said
(i.e. different words are used to express the same idea depending on which
person makes the statement).
Examples of high-context cultures where status distinctions are pervasive
include the Mexicans (Condon, 1985), Brazilians (Harrison, 1983) and Japanese
(Graham and Herberger, 1983). In a low-context culture, however, there is little
distinction between roles and relatively fewer rules defining what is appropriate
behaviour (Hawrysh and Zaichkowsky, 1989). Instead individuals rely on an
informal or egalitarian relationship in negotiations (Herbig and Kramer, 1992).
According to Graham (1988), status distinction has a considerable impact on
cross-cultural sales negotiation and can influence their outcome (Graham, 1988).
Furthermore, it has been pointed out by Graham and Herberger (1983) that the
relative status of the seller and buyer in negotiation is the single most important
factor in explaining negotiation outcome. The differences in status distinctions
of negotiators between high and low-context cultures are the source of potential
problems. For example, in line with cultural heritage, a seller from a highcontext culture negotiating with a buyer from a high-context culture will hold
the buyer in high esteem and display considerable respect. However, a seller
from a high-context culture negotiating with a buyer from a low-context culture
is likely to attach importance to the status of the buyer. Since the seller expects
the buyer to reciprocate this respect, the seller may be taken advantage of to the
extent that this has a negative influence on the sales negotiation outcome

Status
distinction

Impression
formation
accuracy
Interpersonal
attraction

Individual
similarities

Exchange
of
information

Individual
differences

Concession
making &
agreement

Task-related interaction

Persuasion
&
bargaining
strategies

Reliance on
non-verbal
communication

The interactive part of the cross-cultural sales negotiation process

Non-task related interaction

Attached
importance

time

Negotiation
outcome

Cross-cultural
sales
negotiations
15

Figure 1.
Diagrammatic
representation of the
negotiation process and
suggested relationships

International
Marketing
Review
15,1
16

(Graham, 1988). Sellers from high-context cultures are advised to put less
emphasis on their status positions to reduce the likelihood of this occurring.
A seller from a low-context culture negotiating with a buyer from a highcontext culture expecting to be treated as an equal in negotiations, will display
egalitarianism. Since negotiations between equals are seldom found in highcontext cultures this will be regarded as out of place by the buyer (Herbig and
Kramer, 1992). This will increase the likelihood that the negotiation will end
abruptly because a buyer from a high-context culture will view this as brash
behaviour in a low status seller and lacking in respect (Graham, 1988, p. 484).
According to the previous discussion, the following propositions can be put
forward:
P1: The lower the degree of importance salespeople from high-context
cultures attach to status positions when negotiating with buyers from
low-context cultures, the higher the likelihood of positively influencing
the negotiation outcome.
P2: The higher the degree of importance salespeople from low-context
cultures attach to status positions when negotiating with buyers from
high-context cultures, the lower the likelihood of positively influencing
the negotiation outcome.
Impression formation accuracy
At the non-task related interaction phase, negotiators tend to form impressions
about attitudes and characteristics of others. It is important that accurate
perceptions of individuals are formed immediately since initial perceptions may
form the basis for the future bargaining strategy. Graham (1985c, p. 134) has
stated that based on this impression, negotiation strategies are formulated,
communications transmitted, and strategies evaluated. Inaccurate impression
formation can have negative effects on subsequent stages of negotiation and
can be detrimental to future negotiation encounters (Cook and Corey, 1991;
Linkemer, 1989; Swan et al., 1984; Weitz et al., 1986).
Findings suggest that on meeting someone for the first time, individuals
have first impressions that precede rationalised thought processes and typically
form instant opinions often based on minimal information (Zajonc, 1980).
Individuals categorise others on the basis of these first impressions due to
personal factors (LaTour et al., 1989; Wise, 1974). For example, the first
impression formed of a culturally dissimilar negotiator may be based on foreign
accent or speech style (Foon, 1986). From this first impression a wide range of
other personal qualities may be assumed. According to Tsalikis et al. (1991,
1992), a salesperson with an accent that is perceived to be foreign is regarded
as less intelligent, less knowledgeable and less effective than a salesperson with
a local accent. It could be argued, therefore, that individuals from similar
cultural contexts displaying communication patterns have a higher likelihood
of forming accurate impressions.

Researchers have examined the relationship between impression formation

accuracy and the cultural similarity of negotiators (Cook and Corey, 1991;
Graham, 1985a; Linkemer, 1989; Swan et al., 1984; Weitz et al., 1986). Findings
indicate that negotiators from dissimilar cultures (high versus low-context),
who appear foreign may have particular difficulty sizing one another up (i.e.
the impression formation accuracy is reduced) (Graham, 1985a). In contrast,
similarities between negotiators facilitate awareness and exploration between
negotiating parties (Usunier, 1993). Similarities enable negotiators to form
accurate perceptions that become the basis for trust and personal relationships
to develop.
Prevailing characteristics of high and low-context cultures provide the basis
for understanding the relationship between impression formation accuracy and
cultural similarities and dissimilarities. Negotiators from similar cultural
contexts display a common perceptual framework of the communication
process (Hall, 1976) and the likelihood of a negotiator forming an accurate
impression of a counterpart is increased. Since the perceptions of individuals
from dissimilar cultural contexts differ (Hall, 1976) the likelihood of a negotiator
forming accurate impressions of a counterpart is reduced. Therefore, the
following propositions can be made:
P3: The greater the cultural similarities as perceived by a seller from a lowcontext culture when negotiating with a buyer from a high-context
culture, the higher the level of perceived impression formation accuracy.
P4: The greater the cultural differences as perceived by a seller from a highcontext culture when negotiating with a buyer from a low-context
culture, the lower the level of perceived impression formation accuracy.
Interpersonal attraction
The immediate face-to-face impression may be influenced by any feelings of
interpersonal attraction or liking between negotiators. Feelings of attraction
that develop over the course of the negotiation as the personal relationship
develops have their roots at the initial contact phase. There is evidence to
suggest that there are cross-cultural similarities in perceptions of attractiveness
(Zebrowitz-McArthur, 1988) and that individuals tend to like others who are
similar to themselves in various ways (e.g. Poppleton, 1981; Vernon, 1964).
Similar individuals are more likely to get along than dissimilar ones (Byrne,
1969; Hieder, 1958; Newcombe, 1956) and perceive others whom they like as
similar to themselves (Lott and Lott, 1965). Similarity between negotiators can
induce trust which leads, in turn, to interpersonal attraction.
Generally, researchers have argued that a positive relationship exists
between the similarity of bargainers, and interpersonal attraction (Bramel,
1969; Byrne, 1969; Lindzey and Byrne, 1968; Rubin and Brown, 1975). Various
dimensions of similarity have been investigated, such as attitudes, interests,
values and personality (Davis and Silk, 1972). In addition, Lott and Lott (1965)
stated that the positive association between interpersonal attraction and

Cross-cultural
sales
negotiations
17

International
Marketing
Review
15,1
18

similarity could reflect causation in either direction (i.e. persons tend to perceive
others whom they are interpersonally attracted to as similar to themselves).
Based on the above findings, it could be argued that sellers and buyers from
similar cultural contexts, who share common personality characteristics and
elements of communication, have a higher likelihood of being interpersonally
attracted than those from dissimilar cultural contexts. Therefore, the following
proposition can be put forward:
P5: The higher the level of individual differences between a salesperson and
a buyer from similar cultural contexts, the lower the level of
interpersonal attraction.
Other findings suggest that the relationship between similarity and
interpersonal attraction is not as simple as it has been described above. For
example, Graham (1985a) points out that negotiators from similar cultures are
not attracted to each other any more than individuals from dissimilar cultures.
Such findings offer some support for the theory of interpersonal congruency
which suggests that under certain conditions interpersonal attraction will be
facilitated by dissimilarities as well as similarities (Lott and Lott, 1965). Thus
the following proposition is made:
P6: The higher the level of individual similarities between a seller and a
buyer from dissimilar cultural contexts, the higher the level of
interpersonal attraction.
Interpersonal attraction can have positive or negative influences on the
negotiation outcome. First, it can enhance the satisfaction an individual derives
from the negotiation (Benton, 1971; Berscheid and Walster, 1978; Graham, 1985a;
Graham, 1988; Morgan and Sawyer, 1967; Swingle, 1966). Second, it can have a
detrimental effect on negotiation outcome (McGuire, 1968). Sellers and buyers
eager to preserve gratifying personal relationships may sacrifice economic
rewards in the sales encounter. Individuals who are attracted are likely to make
concessions in bargaining. Thus an individual negotiator may give up economic
rewards (in terms of achieved profits) for the rewards of the satisfaction derived
from the relationship with an attractive partner (Graham, 1985a).
Task-related interaction
Exchange of information
The second stage of the negotiation process describes the task-related
interaction. During this stage, there is an exchange of information that defines
the participants needs and expectations. More specifically, there is an emphasis
on the parties expected utilities of the various alternatives open to them
(Graham, 1987, p. 417). Negotiators must clarify their situation and needs and
understand their opponents situation and needs. The effectiveness of
communication between negotiators is of particular interest at this stage where
a clear understanding of participants needs and expectations is essential.
A study by Triandis (1960) that focused on the similarity of communicators
found that greater communication similarity leads to more effective

interactions between negotiating parties. It has been shown that

communication effectiveness is reduced even between individuals from the
same cultural background who have cognitive dissimilarities (Stening, 1979).
According to Stening (1979) it would be reasonable to expect that this problem
is exacerbated in cross-cultural interactions where the likelihood of cognitive
dissimilarities is greater.
With thousands of languages and local dialects in the world (Onkvisit and
Shaw, 1993), communication through verbal means is complex. Even in
instances where participants understand each other and are mutually fluent,
the meaning of the information exchanged can be lost as a result of connotative
and denotative differences in meanings cross-culturally (DAnglejan and
Tucker, 1973). In addition to complexities with regard to verbal communication,
cross-cultural sales negotiations are subject to non-verbal communication
problems. Such problems reduce the likelihood that the parties involved in
negotiation will accurately understand their differences as well as their
similarities (Bass, 1971). This, in turn, can lead to a breakdown in the
negotiation process and a failure to achieve a desired outcome.
Researchers have isolated certain problems in exchanging information crossculturally at the negotiation table that fall into a non-verbal category. For
example, it has been found that culturally determined behaviour with respect to
gaze, facial expression and the use of time and space can produce adverse
effects upon cross-cultural exchange of information (Collett, 1971; Furnham,
1989; Hall, 1959; Yousef, 1974). Concerning time, information flow may never
begin if the differing time perceptions in various cultures prevent negotiations
between participants who do not share identical attitudes to time (Limaye and
Victor, 1991).
In a holistic study of cross-cultural sales negotiations, Graham and Andrews
(1987) provide an in-depth analysis of the difficulties experienced. A series of
focal points in the course of the negotiation between American and Japanese
participants revealed that the exchange of information defining the
participants needs and expectations was the subject of cultural variation. For
example, the Japanese buyer in the negotiation simulation asked the American
seller to describe his situation first and did not anticipate the aggressive
opening of the American. In contrast, in negotiations between two Japanese
participants it was the buyer who took control of the interaction and described
his situation first. Throughout the discourse of the interaction there were
verbal and non-verbal communication problems.
The cultural context of an individual is manifest in the communication used
in negotiation. An individual from a low-context culture will focus on explicit
messages and display a great deal of precision in the verbal aspect of
communication (Cateora, 1983; Hall, 1976). Meanwhile, communication between
members of high-context cultures is implicit and features expressive non-verbal
behaviour (Gudykunst and Ting-Toomey, 1988). This can include body
language, gestures and facial expressions. Given the preceding analysis of the
problems experienced in the exchange of information, it can be argued that

Cross-cultural
sales
negotiations
19

International
Marketing
Review
15,1
20

when sellers and buyers from similar cultural contexts negotiate they
instinctively exchange common elements of verbal and non-verbal
communication. However, in negotiations between sellers and buyers from
dissimilar cultural contexts there is an increased likelihood that the information
exchange will be adversely affected by the complexities with regard to verbal
and non-verbal communication. As a result, there is an increased likelihood that
the performance outcomes of cross-cultural negotiations between culturally
dissimilar sellers and buyers will be negatively influenced. This leads to the
following propositions:
P7: In negotiations between salespeople and buyers from dissimilar contextcultures, the lower the degree of reliance on non-verbal behaviours, the
higher the level of communication effectiveness.
P8: In negotiations between salespeople and buyers from similar contextcultures, the higher the degree of reliance on non-verbal communication,
the higher the level of communication effectiveness.
Persuasion and bargaining strategy
The persuasion phase of the negotiation process involves the parties attempts
to modify one anothers performance expectations through the use of various
persuasive tactics (Hawrysh and Zaichkowsky, 1989). Intra-cultural studies
suggest that each country has its own cultural style of persuasion. This
suggestion has been empirically tested and dominant styles of persuasion have
been found to be prevalent in different countries (Glenn et al., 1977). The
literature suggests that there are three basic styles of persuasion: the factualinductive, the axiomatic-deductive and the affective-intuitive. The weight of
each style varies by country. The factual-inductive style has persuasive appeals
made to logic (e.g. typical in North American negotiations), the axiomaticdeductive style appeals to ideals (e.g. typical in the former USSR) and the
affective-intuitive style focuses on emotional appeals (e.g. typical in Arab
countries). Other studies have shown that persuasive tactics are consistent
across countries, such as the use of aggressive tactics present in US negotiation
behaviour (Graham and Sano, 1984; Van Zandt, 1970).
The persuasion stage emphasises the importance of the bargaining strategy
that can affect the outcome of the negotiation process. From a managerial
standpoint, the important question concerning the negotiation process is, of
course, how bargaining strategy affects the outcome. According to Anglemar
and Stern (1978), the bargaining strategy used in negotiations depends on the
function of communication during negotiation. There are essentially two
strategies to bargaining, namely representational and instrumental strategies.
When representational strategies are used communication is based on the
identification of problems, a search for solutions and the selection of the most
appropriate course of action; for example, the salesperson may co-operate with
the buyer and seek information on the buyers views of the situation. When
instrumental strategies are used, communication involves affecting the other

partys behaviour and attitudes (Anglemar and Stern, 1978); for example, a
salesperson may influence the buyer with persuasive promises, commitments,
rewards and punishments. It has been suggested that sellers should refrain
from using instrumental strategies (Graham, 1985a) and should use
representational bargaining strategies where negotiation outcomes prove more
favourable (Rubin and Brown, 1975). A co-operative negotiation environment
increases the likelihood of a mutually beneficial agreement from the negotiation
because of the mutual recognition of the need and potential benefit to the
parties (Derleda and Grzelak, 1982).
Since both the representational and instrumental strategies are based on
communication, they can be linked to cultural contexts. On the one hand, for
example, Rubin and Brown (1975) have suggested that communication between
culturally similar individuals is co-operative (i.e. sellers and buyers from similar
cultural contexts use more representational strategies). This suggestion is
supported by Graham (1985a) who posits that negotiators from similar cultures
use more representational bargaining strategies and achieve more favourable
negotiation outcomes accordingly (i.e. higher levels of satisfaction and profits).
On the other hand, a cross-cultural empirical analysis has revealed that
culturally dissimilar negotiating parties (i.e. those from dissimilar cultural
contexts) tend to use instrumental bargaining strategies but do not achieve
such desired outcomes of negotiation (Graham, 1985a). Therefore the following
propositions are made:
P9: The higher the degree of individual dissimilarities as perceived by a
salesperson when negotiating with a buyer from a different cultural
context, the higher the likelihood of him/her using an instrumental
bargaining strategy.
P10: The higher the degree of individual dissimilarities as perceived by a
salesperson when negotiating with a buyer from a similar cultural
context, the higher the likelihood of him/her using an instrumental
bargaining strategy.
Concession making and agreement
Negotiators can make concessions at any stage of the negotiation process.
Concession making behaviour represents the manoeuvring of negotiators on
the issues being negotiated (Rinehart and Page, 1992). It reflects the negotiators
attempts to move the negotiation process from a point of initial position on each
discussion issue to a point of agreement (Rinehart and Page, 1992). Although
research is not definitive, it appears that individuals from different cultures
have different approaches to concession making (Anderson, 1995). In many
Asian cultures, participants discuss all issues prior to making any concessions;
concessions are made when they believe the end of the negotiation is in sight
(Adler, 1986). In contrast US bargainers tend to make small concessions
throughout the negotiation process (Van Zandt, 1970) which they expect their
opponents to reciprocate (Adler, 1986).

Cross-cultural
sales
negotiations
21

International
Marketing
Review
15,1
22

The final stage of the negotiation involves reaching an agreement based on

the performance of the parties involved. According to Ghauri, (1986, p. 81) the
agreement should foster the development of the relationship and be flexible to
deal with expected or unexpected changes which can occur in the future. The
final agreement of a negotiation may take the form of a gentlemans agreement
as is common in Japan (Oh, 1984), or a more formal Western-style contract.
Conclusion
The intra-cultural and inter-cultural sales negotiation literature suggests that
culture has an important influence on sales negotiations. By focusing on the
interactive part of the cross-cultural sales negotiation, several key variables
such as status distinction, impression formation accuracy, interpersonal
attraction, information exchange, persuasion and bargaining strategy, and
concession making have been identified and examined.
The propositions put forward in this study cover only limited aspects of the
interactive part of the cross-cultural sales negotiations process. However, they
build on existing knowledge and provide the basis for some further theoretical
development concerning the role and impact of the perceived importance of
status distinction, the similarities and differences of the individuals and the
degree of reliance on non-verbal communications, on the task and non-task
related stages of the negotiation process.
From the preceding literature review, it becomes evident that additional
research in the area of cross-cultural negotiations is needed. For example,
additional research should examine the influence of personality characteristics
of the seller on the endogenous factors and the negotiation outcome.
Furthermore, the impact of exogenous variables (such as the importance of the
negotiation, the stakes of the respective negotiators and organisational culture)
on the negotiation behaviour of the seller and the outcome of the negotiation
need to be examined. Due primarily to the fact that most of the experimental
settings studying cross-cultural negotiation deal with individuals bargaining
for themselves, research efforts using negotiating teams from each country,
collectively bargaining for their companies, might reveal greater inter-cultural
differences that influence the outcome of sales negotiations.
In future investigations, an attempt should be made to quantify the influence
of the endogenous variables and examine their impact on sales negotiation
outcomes. For practical purposes, it is not enough to suggest that sales
negotiations will be positively or negatively influenced by endogenous
variables. According to Rinehart and Page, (1992, p. 28) this is a potentially
fruitful area for additional research, investigating different outcome measures
can enhance our knowledge of the negotiation process by linking the impact of
the economic outcomes and the negotiators perception of the success of the
outcome. Additional research that deals specifically with cross-cultural sales
negotiations should address the relationship between exogenous and
endogenous factors and their combined effect on negotiation outcome.

Further research is needed in order to examine the exact nature and

determinants of each endogenous factor in cross-cultural sales negotiations. For
example, what are the antecedents of interpersonal attraction (Graham, 1985a)
and the thought processes that underlie interpersonal attraction in a sales
negotiation context? The degree of inner conflict experienced by sales
representatives faced with attractive clients who make bargaining concessions
should also be investigated.
According to Rinehart and Page, (1992) one approach to additional research
designs would be to study cross-cultural sales negotiations that do not result in
a successful outcome. Findings from failed negotiations will enable researchers
to determine when the cross-cultural negotiation process is most likely to break
down and why. They suggest that further research should take a longitudinal
approach to reflect the repeated nature of negotiations and the building of longlasting relationships. Longitudinal research can yield better results than can be
drawn from isolated sales encounter experiments.
The literature suggests that what goes on at the negotiation table is critical
to the outcome of cross-cultural sales negotiations. It may not be enough to
select the best sales representatives possible unless efforts are devoted to
training them to manage the process of negotiations more effectively (Graham,
1985a). Central to this training should be the development of cultural awareness
skills for salespeople so that they can anticipate and understand behaviours in
the international environment and be aware of the cultural tool kit of
culturally dissimilar buyers.
References
Adler, N.J. (1986), International Dimensions of Organisational Behaviour, Kent Publishing,
Boston, MA.
Adler, N.J. and Graham, J.L. (1989), Cross-cultural interaction: the international comparison
fallacy?, Journal of International Business Studies, Fall, pp. 515-37.
Adler, N.J., Graham, J.L. and Gehrke, T.S. (1987), Business negotiations in Canada, Mexico, and
the United States, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 15, pp. 411-29.
Anderson, R. (1995), Essentials of personal selling the new professionalism, Prentice-Hall,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Anglemar, R. and Stern, L.W. (1978), Development of a content analytical system for analysis of
bargaining communication in marketing, Journal of Marketing Research, February,
pp. 93-102.
Bass, B.M. (1971), The American advisor abroad, Journal of Applied Behavioural Science, Vol. 7
No. 3, pp. 285-308.
Benton, A.A. (1971), Productivity, distributive justice, and bargaining among children, Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 18, pp. 68-78.
Berscheid, E. and Walster, E.H. (1978), Interpersonal Attraction, 2nd ed., Addison-Wesley,
Reading, MA.
Bramel, D. (1969), Interpersonal attraction, hostility, and perception, in Mills, J. (Ed.),
Experimental Social Psychology, Macmillan, New York, NY, pp. 1-120.
Burt, D.N. (1989), The nuances of negotiating overseas, Journal of Purchasing and Materials
Management, 25th anniversary edition.

Cross-cultural
sales
negotiations
23

International
Marketing
Review
15,1
24

Byrne, D. (1969), Attitudes and attraction, Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 4,
Academic Press, New York, NY.
Cambell, N.C.G., Graham, J.L., Jolibert, A. and H. G. Meissner (1988), Marketing negotiations in
France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and United States, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 52,
pp. 49-62.
Casse, P. (1981), Training for the Cross Cultural Mind, 2nd ed., Society for Inter-cultural
Education, Training and Research, Intercultural Press, Washington, DC.
Cateora, P.R. (1983), International Marketing, 5th ed., Richard D. Irwin, Homewood, IL.
Cohen, H. (1980), You Can Negotiate Anything, New York, NY.
Collett, P. (1971), Training Englishmen in the non-verbal behaviour of Arabs: an experiment on
intercultural communication, International Journal of Psychology, Vol. 6, pp. 209-15.
Condon, J.C. (1985), Good Neighbours, Communicating with the Mexican, Intercultural Press.
Cook, R.W. and Corey, R.J. (1991), A confirmatory investigation of industrial buyer image of the
saleswomen, Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 19, Summer, pp. 199-208.
Copeland, L. and Griggs, L. (1985), Going International, Random House, New York, NY.
Czinkota, M.R., Ronkainen, I.A., Moffett, M.H. and Moynihan, E.O. (1995), Global Business, The
Dryden Press, Chicago, IL.
DAnglejan, A. and Tucker, G.R. (1973), Communicating across cultures: an empirical
investigation, Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 121-30.
Daniels, J.D. and Radebaugh, L.H. (1995), International Business: Environments and Operations,
7th ed., Addison-Wesley World Student Series.
Davis, H.L. and Silk, A.J. (1972), Interaction and influence processes in personal selling, Sloan
Management Review, Vol. 13, Winter, pp. 59-76.
Derleda, V.J. and Grzelak, J. (1982), Cooperation and Helping Behaviour: Theories and Research,
Academic Press Inc.
Deutsch, M.F. (1984), Doing Business with the Japanese, The American Library Inc PR (1994),
New York, NY.
Deutsch, M.F. (1994), Marketing Management, international edition, The Dryden Press, Chicago,
IL.
Dommermuth, W. (1976), Profiting from distribution conflicts, Business Horizons, December,
pp. 4-13.
Druckman, D., Benton, A., Ali, F. and Bagur, J.S. (1976), Cultural differences in bargaining
behaviour, Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 413-49.
Dupont, C. (1982), La Negociation: Conduite, Theorie, Applications, Dalloz, Paris.
Dwyer, F.R. and Walker, O.C. (1981), Bargaining in an asymmetrical power structure, Journal of
Marketing, Winter, pp. 104-15.
Fayerweather, J. and Kapoor, A. (1972), Simulated international business negotiations, Journal
of International Business Studies, Vol. 3, Spring, pp. 19-31.
Fayerweather, J. and Kapoor, A. (1976), Introduction to international business negotiations, in
Strategy and Negotiation for the International Corporation, Ballinger Publishing, Cambridge,
MA, pp. 29-50.
Fischer, R. and Ury, W. (1981), Getting to Yes, Houghton Mifflin, Boston, MA.
Fisher, G. (1980), International Negotiation, Intercultural Press, Yarmouth, ME.
Foon, A.E. (1986), A social structural approach to speech evaluation, The Journal of Social
Psychology, Vol. 126 No. 4, pp. 521-30.
Foster, D.A. (1992), Bargaining Across Borders How to Negotiate Business Successfully
Anywhere in the World, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.

Frank, S. (1992), Avoiding the pitfalls of business abroad, Sales and Marketing Management,
March.
Furnham, A. (1989), Communicating across cultures: a social skills perspective, Counselling
Psychology Quarterly, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 205-22.
Ghauri, P.N. (1986), Guidelines for international business negotiations, International Marketing
Review, Autumn, Vol. 4, pp. 72-82.
Gladwin, T.N. and Walter, O.C. (1980), Multinationals Under Fire: Lessons from the Management
of Conflict, John Wiley and Sons, New York, NY.
Glenn, E.S., Witmeyer, G. and Stevenson, K.A. (1977), Cultural styles of persuasion,
International Journal of Intercultural Relations, Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 52-66.
Graham, J.L. (1983), Brazilian, Japanese, and American Business Negotiations, Journal of
International Business Studies, Vol. 14, Spring/Summer, pp. 47-62.
Graham, J.L. (1984), A comparison of Japanese and American business negotiations,
International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 51-68.
Graham, J.L. (1985a), Cross-cultural marketing negotiations: a laboratory experiment,
Marketing Science, Vol. 4 No. 2, Spring, pp. 130-46.
Graham, J.L. (1985b), The influence of culture on the process of business negotiations: an
exploratory study, Journal of International Business, Spring, pp. 81-96.
Graham, J.L. (1985c) Cross-cultural marketing negotiations: a laboratory experiment, Marketing
Science, Vol. 4 No. 2, Spring, pp. 130-46.
Graham, J.L. (1988), Deference given the buyer: variations across twelve cultures, in Contractor,
F.J. and Lorange, P. (Eds), Co-operative Strategies in International Business, Lexington Books,
Lexington, MA, pp. 473-85.
Graham, J.L. and Andrews, J.D. (1987), A holistic analysis of Japanese and American business
negotiations, Journal of Business Communications, Vol. 24, Fall, pp. 63-77.
Graham, J.L. and Herberger R.A. (1983), Negotiators dont shoot from the hip, Harvard Business
Review, Vol. 61, May/June, pp. 160-8.
Graham, J.L. and Lin, C. (1987), Negotiations in the Republic of China (Taiwan) and the United
States, in Cavusgil, S.T. (Ed.), Advances in International Marketing, Vol. 2, JAI Press,
Greenwich, CT and New York, NY.
Graham, J.L. and Sano, Y. (1984), Smart Bargaining: Doing Business with the Japanese, Ballinger
Publishing, Cambridge, MA.
Graham, J.L. and Sano, Y. (1986), Across the negotiation table from the Japanese, International
Marketing Review, Vol. 3 No. 3, Autumn, pp. 58-71.
Graham, J.L., Kim, D.K., Lin, C. and Robinson, M. (1988), Buyer-seller negotiations around the
Pacific Rim: differences in fundamental exchange processes, Journal of Consumer Research,
Vol. 15, June, pp. 48-54.
Gudykunst, W.B. and Ting-Toomey, S. (1988), Culture and Interpersonal Communication, Sage
Publications, Newbury Park, CA.
Hall, E.T. (1959), The Silent Language, Doubleday, New York, NY.
Hall, E.T. (1976), Beyond Culture, Doubleday, New York, NY.
Hall, E.T. and Hall, M.R. (1987), Selling to a Japanese, Sales and Marketing Management,
Vol. 139, July, pp. 58-60.
Hamner, C. (1980), The influences of structural, individual, and strategic differences, in Harnett,
D. and Cummings, L. (Eds), Bargaining Behaviour: An International Study, Dame
Publications, Inc., Houston, TX.
Harris, P.R. and Moran, R.T. (1987), Managing Cultural Differences, 2nd ed., Gulf Publishing
Company, Houston, TX.
Harrison, P.A. (1983), Behaving Brazilian, Newbury House, Rowley, MA.

Cross-cultural
sales
negotiations
25

International
Marketing
Review
15,1
26

Hawkins, S. (1983), How to understand your partners cultural baggage, International

Management Journal, Vol. 38, September, pp. 48-50.
Hawrysh, B.M. and Zaichkowsky, J.L. (1989), Cultural approaches to negotiations: understanding
the Japanese, International Marketing Review, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 28-42.
Hellweg, S.A., Samovar, L.A. and Skow, L. (1991), in Samovar, L.A and Porter, R.E., Cultural
Variations in Negotiating Styles in Intercultural Communication A Reader, 6th ed.,
Wadsworth Publishing, Belmont, CA.
Herbig, P.A. and Kramer, H.E. (1992), Dos and donts of cross-cultural negotiations, Industrial
Marketing Management, Vol. 21, pp. 287-98
Hieder, F. (1958), The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations, Wiley, New York, NY.
Johnson, E.M., Kurtz, D.L. and Scheuing, E.E. (1994), Sales Management Concepts, Practices and
Cases, 2nd ed., McGraw-Hill International Editions, New York, NY and London.
Keegan, W. J. (1989), Global Marketing Management, Prentice-Hall International Editions,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ and Hemel Hempstead.
LaTour, M.S., Henthorne, T.L. and Williams, A.J. (1989), Initial impressions in the retail
environment: a comparison of black and white perceptions, Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 6
No. 4, pp. 329-47.
Lewis, S.A. and Fry, W.R. (1977), Effects of visual access and orientation on the discovery of
integrative bargaining alternatives, Organisational Behavior and Human Performance,
Vol. 20, pp. 75-92.
Limaye, M. and Victor, D.A. (1991), Cross-cultural business communication research: state of the
art and hypotheses for the 1990s, The Journal of Business Communication, Vol. 28 No. 3,
Summer, pp. 277-99.
Lindzey, G. and Byrne, D. (1968), Measurement of social choice and interpersonal attractiveness,
in Aronson, E. and Lindzey, G. (Eds), Handbook of Social Psychology, 2nd ed., Addison-Wesley,
Reading, MA.
Linkemer, B. (1989), Women in sales: what do they really want?, Sales and Marketing
Management, Vol. 141, January, pp. 61-5.
Llich, J. (1980), Power Negotiating, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
Lott, A.J. and Lott, B.E. (1965), Group cohesiveness as interpersonal attractiveness: a review of
relationships with antecedent and consequent variables, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 64 No. 4,
October, pp. 259-309.
McDaniel, O.E. (1990), The new name of the game: global account marketing, The Journal of the
National Account Marketing Association, Fall, pp. 4-5.
McGuire, W.J. (1968), The nature of attitudes and attitude change, in Gardner, L. and Aronson,
G. (Eds), The Handbook of Social Psychology, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
Mintu, A.T. and Calantone, R.J. (1991), A comparative approach to international marketing
negotiations, Journal of Applied Business Research, Vol. 7 No. 4, Fall, pp. 90-7.
Morgan, W.R. and Sawyer, J. (1967), Bargaining, expectations, and the preference for equality
over equity, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 6, pp. 139-49.
Muna, F.A. (1973), The Arab Mind, Scribners, New York, NY.
Nakane, C. (1970), Japanese Society, University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.
Neslin, S. and Greenhalgh, L. (1983), Nashs theory of co-operative games as a predictor of the
outcomes of buyer-seller negotiations: an experiment in media purchasing, Journal of
Marketing Research, Vol. 20 , November, pp. 368-79.
Newcombe, T.M. (1956), The prediction of interpersonal attraction, American Psychologist,
Vol. 11, pp. 575-86.
Nierenberg. J.S. (1963), Getting Through to People, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Oh, T.K. (1984), Selling to the Japanese, Nations Business, October, pp. 36-8.

Onkvisit, S. and Shaw, J.J. (1993), International Marketing, Macmillan, Basingstoke.

Pennington, A.L. (1968), Customer-salesman bargaining behaviour in retail transactions,
Journal of Marketing Research, February, pp. 103-5.
Poppleton, S.E. (1981), The social skills of selling, in Argyle, M. (Ed.), Social Skills and Work,
Methuen, pp. 59-84.
Pruitt, D.G. and Lewis, S.A. (1975), Development of integrative solutions in bilateral negotiation,
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 621-33.
Pye, L. (1982), Chinese Commercial Negotiation Style, Oelgeschlager, Gunn, and Hain, Cambridge,
MA.
Raiffa, H. (1982), The Art and Science of Negotiation, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Rinehart, L.M. and Page, T.J. (1992), The development and test of a model of transaction
negotiation, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 56, October, pp. 18-32.
Root, F.R. (1987), Entry Strategies for International Markets, Lexington Books, Lexington, MA.
Rubin, J.Z. and Brown, B.R. (1975), The Social Psychology of Bargaining and Negotiation,
Academic Press, New York, NY.
Schmidt, K.D. (1979), Doing business in Taiwan and doing business in Japan, pamphlets,
Business Intelligence Program, SRI International, Menlo Park, CA.
Shenkar, O. and Ronen, S. (1987), The cultural context of negotiations: the implications of
Chinese interpersonal norms, Journal of Applied Behavioural Science, Vol. 23 No. 2,
pp. 263-75.
Stening, B.W. (1979), Problems in cross-cultural contact: a literature review, International
Journal of Intercultural Relations, Vol. 3, pp. 269-313.
Swan, J.E., Rink, D.R., Kiser, G.E. and Martin, W.S. (1984), Industrial buyer image of the
saleswoman, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 48, Winter, pp. 110-16.
Swingle, P.G. (1966), Effects of emotional relationship between protagonists in a two-person
game, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 4, pp. 270-9.
Triandis, H.C. (1960), Cognitive similarity and communication in the dyad, Human Relations,
Vol. 13, pp. 175-83.
Tsalikis, J., Deshields, O.W. and LaTour, M.L. (1991), The role of accent on the credibility and
effectiveness of the salesperson, Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, Vol. 9
No. 1, Winter, pp. 31-41.
Tsalikis, J., Ortiz-Buonafina, M. and LaTour, M.S. (1992), The role of accent on credibility and
effectiveness of the international business person: the case of Guatemala, International
Marketing Review, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 57-72.
Tse, D.K., Lee, K., Vertinsky, I. and Wehrung, D.A. (1988), Does culture matter? A cross-cultural
study of executives choice, decisiveness, and risk adjustment in international marketing,
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 52, October, pp. 81-95.
Tsurami, Y. (1971), Ten myths that mislead managers in Japan, Harvard Business Review,
Vol. 48 No. 6, pp. 118-27.
Tung, R.L. (1982), US/China trade negotiations, procedures and outcomes, Journal of
International Business Studies, Fall, pp. 25-37.
Tung, R.L. (1984), How to negotiate with the Japanese, California Management Review,
Vol. XXVI No. 4, Summer.
Tung, R.L. (1988), Toward a conceptual paradigm of international business negotiations,
Advances in International Comparative Management, Vol. 3, pp. 203-19.
Unterman, I. (1983), Negotiators are to be diplomatic, The San Diego Union, 6 August.
Usunier, J. (1993), International Marketing, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Van Zandt, H.F. (1970), How to negotiate in Japan, Harvard Business Review, November/
December, pp. 45-56.

Cross-cultural
sales
negotiations
27

International
Marketing
Review
15,1
28

Vernon, P.E. (1964), Personality Assessment, Methuen, London.

Warschaw, T.A. (1980), Winning by Negotiation, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Weiss, S.E. and Stripp, W. (1985) Negotiating with foreign businesspersons: an introduction for
Americans with propositions on six cultures, Working Paper No. 1, Graduate School of
Business Administration, New York University, New York, NY.
Weitz, B.A., Sujan, H. and Sujan, M. (1986), Knowledge, motivation, and adaptive behaviour: a
framework for improving selling effectiveness, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 50, October,
pp. 174-91.
Wells, L.T. (1977), Negotiating with Third World governments, Harvard Business Review,
January/February, pp. 72-80.
Wise, G.L. (1974), Differential pricing and treatment by new car salesmen: the effect of the
prospects race, sex, and dress, Journal of Business, Vol. 47, pp. 218-30.
Wright, P. (1983), Doing business in Islamic markets, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 59 No. 1,
p. 34ff.
Yousef, F.S. (1974), Cross-cultural communication: aspects of contrastive and social values
between North Americans and Middle Easterners, Human Organisation, Vol. 33 No. 4,
pp. 383-7.
Zajonc, R.B. (1980), Feeling and thinking: preferences need no inferences, American
Psychologist, Vol. 35, pp. 151-75.
Zebrowitz-McArthur, L. (1988), in M. Harris Bond (Ed.), The Cross Cultural Challenge to Social
Psychology, Sage Publications,
Zimmerman, M. (1985), How to Do Business with the Japanese, Random House, New York, NY.