Brexit: New perspectives on negotiation!
The Psychology Sessions: Current Issues in Psychology
'Knowledge and human power are synonymous'
(Francis Bacon)
After completing my MSc Research Study, I, just, realised something simple but hard to grasp initially: the 2 most crucial and 'dangerous' factors in negotiating are cross-cultural differences and non-verbal communication. Nowadays, the negotiation game can be ruthless: these 2 factors can either set the pace for a successful win-win solution or can, even, lead to a communication 'gap' and, finally, a dead end, or an 'unexpected' result (e.g. Brexit).
In this article I've included some of the most interesting and effective perspectives concerning the above key-elements, which can work as: a) useful tools for both aspiring and experienced negotiators, b) a suggestive framework to avoid harmful cross-cultural clashes, and, c) a 'vehicle' to clarify uncertain and dark areas of human communication, which, possibly, led to events such as Brexit! Let's find them out:
Non-verbal communication
- Many historians, researchers and psychologists, still, insist that there is evidence of people using gestures to communicate since ancient times - especially to bridge cultural or language differences, and, even, make a negotiation. The first record of the use of non-verbal language is found in Xenophon’s ‘The March Up Country’ in which he describes unspoken gestures used to help the Greeks cross Asia Minor around 400 B.C (Steven A. Beebe, 2008).
- In ancient Egypt, law courts met in the dark so that the judges could not see the accused, the accuser, or the witness (Seuling, 1988), so as not to be swayed by their demeanours and their non-verbal behaviours.
- Dietrich and colleagues (1996) attached 13 small lights to the bodies of each of two professional dancers and had them perform dances that conveyed fear, anger, grief, joy, surprise, and disgust. Undergraduate students who later watched videotapes of the dances were able to recognise the intended emotions, even in the dark when only the lights were visible. Similarly, Bassili (1978) showed that people can recognise facial expressions of emotion in the dark from only the movement of lights attached to faces; the specific locations of the lights did not seem to matter (Stephen Kosslyn and Robin Rosenberg ,2004).
- A research in the psychology, political, business and
management literature showed that non-verbal communication was highly
valued and was regarded as the key to personal, political or business
success and development. In today’s highly competitive world, effective
communication between or among the interested parties is necessary and
priceless, otherwise misunderstandings, mistakes, deception and 'deadly'
traps can disintegrate and deteriorate the future, e.g. of a promising
company or organization.
- People, usually, in a friendly, family, or business environment tend to pay attention more to the verbal type of communication because they consider it to be more apparent, overt and easy to understand and perceive. This is an illusion as non-verbal communication (body language) is considered to be the most significant because it reveals subconscious thoughts, preferences and hidden ideas that people can not express openly due to fear of relationship breakdown, kindness, embarrassment or respect.
- The verbal messages sent by the use of words and sentences are usually accompanied by a rich array of non-verbal signals, which support modify or, even, completely replace the verbal message. In situations where explicit verbal communication is for some reason difficult or impossible (in the presence of high background noise or across distance), a complicated exchange of non-verbal signals may be substituted consisting of eye gaze, smiles, gestures and postural changes. Philosophically, body language presents difficulties since it consists of codes, which are not written or well-defined but are socially shared norms, which are implicitly adhered to. Perhaps one of the best ways of becoming aware of such ‘unwritten rules’ (Goffman, 1963) is to break them or act in ways unexpected by others in a specific social situation.
- The ability to effectively send and receive such non-verbal messages is essential for social interaction as Michael Argyle (1969) suggested that this ability is a learned skill like any other. Consistent lack of skill in non-verbal communication often results in maladjustment, which may be remedied by adequate training in the necessary communication skills. Generally, bodily messages are seen as more reliable, they communicate emotions, are strongly related to verbal communication, can be ambiguous, are continuous, multi-channeled and culture-bound. As body language is one of the two types of communication, it can help managers, politicians, and, generally, people achieve objectives and put ideas into effect.
- Therefore, non – verbal communication varies from person to person, from personality type to personality type because each man or woman has a different communication style or repertoire in social dealings and negotiation acts. One way to explain negotiation is to view interpersonal communication as the exchange of stories in the form of personal narratives (Ronald B. Adler, 2004).
Cross-cultural differences
- The vision of globalisation is based on strong and sound foundations but as every vision of idealistic nature, it has to deal with a very sensitive and dangerous ‘territory’ which can cause various problems in human communication, in the relationship among different nations or governments and, especially, in negotiation between companies and managers coming from diverse countries.
- Apart from that, agreements between firms or countries are at
the forefront of international business opportunities. Agreements are
the most important international documents that must be negotiated
between governments, companies or people of different nationalities.
Since agreement implementation has become increasingly complex and
confusing, cross-cultural negotiations have begun to represent an
important factor in the globalised economy’s success and survival.
- Bill Scott (1989) stated that the North American negotiation style is one of the most influential in the world based on confidence, dominance, professionalism, participative managerial climate and interest in packages. Rationality is the key-tool of the American negotiators which is reinforced by strong verbal but low non-verbal communication.
- A few years later, Ashridge Management College undertook a survey of nearly fifty American,British and Japanese international companies to determine which characteristics of international management they most valued (Barnham and Oates,1991). The results were the following list of broad competences in order of perceived importance:
- -strategic awareness
- -adaptability in new situations
- -sensitivity to different cultures
- -ability to work in international teams
- -language skills
- -understanding international marketing
- -relationship skills
- -international negotiating skills
- -self-reliance
- -high task-orientation
- -open,non-judgemental personality
- -understanding international finance
- -awareness of own culture.
Sue Davison (in an unpublished paper) argues that the idea of competences of international managers and negotiators may not be sufficient in an understanding of the requirements for managing across cultures and, for that reason, she suggests an ability to: deal with frustrations, isolation, failure, learning how to network, gain support and anticipate differences. She adds that such qualities as ‘helicopter view’,intuition and cultural sensitivity may be difficult to directly teach and acquire but ,she continues, interpersonal skills can be learned at the level of managing intercultural teams no matter what personality traits one might possess. This,together with an understanding of one self as well as the other person’s culture is something which can be highly developed and lead to business success.
Brexit: An (All-in-one) Case study
The EU Referendum's result in the UK (24/6/2016) made me think of certain 'difficult' aspects of cross-cultural negotiation and non-verbal communication: to be fair and objective, even, judging by the article's main picture, it is obvious that doubt, enthusiasm and aggressive reservation are in clash. In order to explain what led a nation to such an important decision, one must, deeply, understand: 1) the country's culture, 2) negotiation tactics and, 3) communication style.
These are UK's most important cultural elements (Roy Lewicki, 1998):
- UK is one of the most individualistic countries by having the third higher level in Hofstede's index.
- Uncertainty avoidance is very weak in this country.
- The British Negotiation style is kind, communicative, flexible and responsive to initiatives. It is, also, grounded on: focus on detail, no decisive hierarchy, refined humour, non-dogmatic criticism, task results, operational efficiency, and coercion at the expense of commitment.
- UK negotiators are, often, viewed as using a less enthusiastic, quite detached, and very rational communication style, which helps them focus on the agenda, and achieve a concrete result or action plan within a specific time.
- Time and deadlines are very important to British negotiators who, also, pay more attention to verbal communication and less to body language.
- The British organisational style favours patience, privacy, information gathering, 'hinting', fixed agendas, methodical planning, fact-and-statistics orientation, and focus on schedules and preparation systems.
- British negotiators tend to be pragmatic, less expressive, aim at a win-lose solution, adopt a formal personal style, communicate less directly, prefer specific agreements and a top down agreement (from specific data to general), and, finally, although, very careful and cautious, they consider themselves as risk-takers.
- Based on Tim Voridis' MSc Research study, when negotiating, British employees tend to avoid constant and facial gestures because can, possibly, show signs of familarity or friendship, which could disintegrate task performance and orientation. As for anxiety, they appear to be more static and less descriptive non-verbally.
It is obvious that most of the above elements played an integral part
in the negotiations, events and talks before, during and after the EU
Referendum. I have to say that the Referendum's result proves the notion
that, although, British people and negotiators tend to be cautious and
careful, they consider themselves to be risk-takers.
In most cases, politicians and political leaders believe that economy's fluctuations together with tax increase and financial difficulties are the main reasons for citizens' resentment towards governmental policies, which can, possibly, lead to events such as 'Brexit'. On the contrary, 'Brexit' proved them wrong, although, some of the above reasons may have triggered certain opposing 'voices'. In such a situation, explanations and answers are more complex than they seem to be.
According to Medius Training, British negotiators do not feel pressured to conform to a general consensus, so a British negotiator will have no trouble saying “No” to any point which other European negotiators argue is for the“common good”. Insularity and the Island Mentality contribute to a certain willingness to fight point by point to the last. Based on that negotiation model, the British Government renegotiated successfully with the European Union 3 set of demands, which were not properly understood or reflected effectively on the Referendum's result by the British citizens: 1) Sovereignty, 2) Mobility and Immigration, and 3) Economy and Finance.
Therefore, negotiation objectives, goal and positions (especially, 'the bottom line') must be carefully planned and mentioned adequately, otherwise emotions and mistrust will overtake reasoning. Communication channels within or outside countries must be 'open' and 'clear', especially, when citizens feel 'trapped' or insecure. If negotiation positions ('the bottom line') are controversial or 'blurry', negotiation, usually, ends up losing its track, because negotiators are not able to persuade the other side. The result is the exact opposite of what was expected or fought for, and that is what exactly happened the day after the Referendum (25/6/16), when 'Brexit' was, practically, realised by every British citizen (although, both Referendum's choices to vote were quite clear and specific).
To be more objective and specific, ideals such as European Unity must be 'revisited', redefined and renegotiated, based on the existing cross-cultural, communication and political differences among all countries in the European Union. Unity means counterbalancing differences. Negotiation's true essence is reaching a win-win solution. Therefore, Unity and Negotiation are, positively, correlated.
References
Adler, Ronald B., Rosenfeld, Lawrence B., & Proctor II, Russell F. (2004). Interplay: The process of Interpersonal Communication. (9th edition, p. 59). Oxford: Oxford University Press, Inc.
Beebe, Steven A., Beebe, Susan J., & Redmond, Mark V. (2008). Interpersonal Communication: Relating to others. (5th edition, p. 199). Boston: Pearson Education, Inc – Allyn and Bacon.
Seuling, B. (1988). It is illegal to quack like a duck and other freaky laws. New York: Dutton.
Dr. Christian Jarrett (2011). The Rough Guide to
Psychology: An introduction to human behaviour and the mind. Rough
Guides, London.
Bill Scott (1989), The skills of negotiating, 6th edition, Hampshire, UK: Gower Publishing Company Ltd.
Nancy Adler(1997), International dimensions of
organisational behaviour, 1st edition, Cincinatti, Ohio, South-Western
College Publishing.
Stephen M. Kosslyn and Robin S . Rosenberg (2004),
Psychology: The brain, the person, the world, 2nd edition, page 314,
USA: Pearson Education, Inc, Allyn and Bacon.
Roy Lewicki (1998), Negotiation: Text and Cases, 3rd edition, Chapter 11, London: McGraw-Hill Company.
www.medius-associates.com/training/.
Picture Source Links
Tim Voridis
Organisational Psychologist/Consultant - Communication and Personality Specialist
'Innovation for a brighter future'.
