英语本科毕业论文（设计）-从国际贸易谈判看中美文化差异的根源.doc

本科毕业论文（设计）题目： 从国际贸易谈判看中美文化差异的根源 学生姓名： 学号： 院（系）： 外语学院 专业： 英语 入学时间： 二 年 九 月导师姓名： 职称/学位： 讲师 导师所在单位： 安徽大学外语学院英语系 毕业论文（设计）提交时间： 二一一 年 五 月安徽大学教务处制A STUDY ON THE ORIGINS OF CHINESE AND AMERICAN CULTURAL DIFFERENCES BASED ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE NEGOTIATIONSA Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the School of Foreign Studies of Anhui University by XXXIn Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Bachelor of ArtsUnder the Supervision of Lecturer WAN ShichangHefei, AnhuiApril 201122AcknowledgementsIn the course of composing this thesis, Ive received assists from many parts.First, I indebted greatly to Mr. WAN Shichang, my tutor who has helped me with the fundamental preparation work for this thesis. His guidance will exert much influence on my life.Second, I would like to extend my gratitude for all the teaching staff in the Department of English especially Prof. ZHU Yue and Prof. CHEN Bin whose scholarship has made my college life meaningful.Last but not least, I wish to thank my friends Kenneth Yeung, Jessica King and Fiona Fang who have encouraged me always either in difficulty or in confusion.A STUDY ON THE ORIGINS OF CHINESE AND AMERICAN CULTURAL DIFFERENCES BASED ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE NEGOTIATIONSXXX Grade 02 English Department School of Foreign StudiesSupervisor: Lecturer WAN ShichangAnhui University, Hefei, Anhui 230039AbstractGlobalization is gaining momentum in recent years, accelerating the exchanges of country in economic, scientific and cultural aspects. As the largest trading partner of each other, China and the US have contact frequently. Because International negotiations are the very basis and prerequisite to carry out international business, they play a very important role in the Sino-US cooperation cases. Whether in direct trade, merger and acquisition or licensing, the international negotiations between China and the US are increasing fast. However, the cultural differences affecting the whole negotiation processes cannot be overlooked. Numerous books and articles have been dedicated to the study of the complexities of cross-cultural negotiations. Since the 1980s, many scholars like G. Hofstede and Hall have contributed to the theories of cross-cultural communication, and quite a proportion of them paid special attention to the cultural differences displayed in Sino-US negotiations due to the representative characteristics of the two.The author adopts a comparative methodology in cross-cultural perspective. By analyzing the different styles of Chinese and American in terms of beliefs and values, time management, risk taking etc the author wants to dip further into the origins of the core cultural elements. Therefore, the further misunderstandings can be minimized with some following suggestions.Key words: Cultural difference; International negotiation; 从国际贸易谈判看中美文化差异的根源XXX 英语专业 安徽大学外语学院指导老师 万世长 讲师安徽 安徽大学，合肥 230039摘要随着近年来全球化的日渐盛行，世界各国在经济，科学和文化等领域的交流随之加强。作为彼此的最大贸易伙伴，中国和美国交流十分频繁。由于国际商务谈判是国际商务开展的基础和前提，因此成为中美合作中重要组成部分。除了直接贸易买卖，包括在并购和授权在内的各项商务案例的数量都在持续增多。然而，时刻影响着谈判进程的文化差异因素不容忽视。商务谈判中体现的跨文化差异性已经引起学术界的广泛探讨。自20世纪80年代，许多学者如G. Hofstede和Hall对跨文化交流的理论领域作出了杰出贡献，而中美商务谈判由于其代表性尤为受到许多学者的关注。作者从跨文化研究的角度通过对比和比较方法分析中美谈判人员的不同风格包括价值观，时间观，冒险观等等，深入探讨了中美文化中的核心组成部分，旨在能为减少此类误解提供前瞻性建议。关键词：文化差异；国际商务谈判Thesis Statement: The Sino-US cultural differences displayed in international business negotiations have their origins in the main cultural trends that used to prevail in the two countries history.OutlineChapter 1: Introduction.11.1 Purpose and structure.11.2 Literature review.21.2.1 The definition of culture.21.2.2 Hofstedes cultural dimensions.21.2.3 The definition of negotiation.3Chapter 2: Cultural differences on Sino-US negotiations.52.1 Negotiating goal.52.2 Formality or informality.72.4 Direct or indirect communication.82.5 Time sensitivity.92.6 Team organization.112.7 Risk Taking.11Chapter 3: Main origins of Chinese and American cultural differences.133.1 Main Origins of Chinese Culture.133.1.1 Confucianism.143.1.2 Taoism.163.2 Main Origins of American Culture.163.2.1 Puritanism.173.2.2 Pragmatism.18Chapter 4: Suggestions.19Chapter 5: Conclusion.19Bibliography21A STUDY ON THE ORIGINS OF CHINESE AND AMERICAN CULTURAL DIFFERENCES BASED ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE NEGOTIATIONS 论文完成时间：2011年4月20日；作者：XXX；出生年月：1985年3月8日；民族：汉族；籍贯：安徽合肥；专业：英语；研究方向：商务英语Chapter 1: Introduction. 1.1 Purpose and structure. With the booming economic development, China has attracted a large number of overseas investments from all parts of the world. When they fix their eyes on the new Chinese market and are eager to penetrate into it, cultural conflicts and failure of communications are the primary problem they have to face with. Negotiations in itself are lengthy and complicated; but with the interference of various cultural elements they constitute a challenging process for both sides. The author, with foreign language study background, is interested in the deep roots of the cultural conflicts especially between China and the US. Besides the geographic and other political systematic factors, within the heritage of philosophical schools or religions, many factors are still eloquent enough to demonstrate the essence of the cultural differences between China and the US. The goal of this thesis is to grope further into the origins of Sino-US cultural differences in international business negotiations in hope of avoiding future misunderstandings and building up beneficial relations with American cooperators.The thesis is composed of four parts: Chapter 1 gives the goal and structure of the thesis and provides literature review explaining the definitions of the relevant conceptions and theories by western scholars; Chapter 2 compares the contrasting styles of Chinese and American negotiators or groups in term of their principles, time management, risk taking, etc; Chapter 3 demonstrates the authors understandings about the historic cultural origins affecting the contemporary cultural difference in negotiation styles; Chapter 4 proposes some suggestions to promote the mutual understanding of the two negotiation sides and prevent potential conflicts.1.2 Literature review. 1.2.1 The definition of culture. In Hall (1986)s definition, Culture consists of those deep, common, unstated experiences which members of a given culture share, which they communicate without knowing, and which form the backdrop against which all other events are judged. Ting-Toomey (1991) said, it is a complex frame of reference that consists of patterns of traditions, beliefs, values, norms, symbols and meaning that are shared to varying degree by interacting members of a community. Hofstede (1980) treats culture as “the collective programming of the mind which distinguishes the members of one human group from another”. Although the concrete definition of culture varies with personal understandings, we can still generalize several characteristics:1 Culture is an abstract concept, which has a wide scope and is related to almost every thought or behavior.2 Culture affects people by unconsciousness. People do not regard culture equivalent as concrete rules which they refer to intentionally before they act.3 Culture is based on integration. A certain phenomena can not be called culture before it is shared by a relatively large group of people.4 Culture is some kind of identification. Cultures vary upon external changes of several factors thus the kind of culture is regarded as a unique label .1.2.2 Hofstedes cultural dimensions. Based on a study of work-related values of more than 70,000 IBM employees in 50 countries and three regions, one of the most outstanding scholar Hofstede (1984) identified four cultural dimensions: power distance, uncertainty avoidance, individualism versus collectivism, and masculinity versus femininity. Power distance means how much the less powerful members of institutions and organizations expect and accept that power is distributed unequally. People in smaller power distance tend to be more consultative and democratic with courage to challenge heir bosses. Uncertainty avoidance designates the extent to which members of a society are anxious about the unknown, and as a consequence, attempt to cope with anxiety by minimizing uncertainty. Strong uncertainty avoidance make people feel threatened in face with unknown things. Therefore it cuts the chances of their risk-taking. Individualism or collectivism judges how much members of the culture define themselves apart from their group memberships. Individualistic people, generally, fix their attention to themselves trying to develop, seek their affiliations. Femininity or masculinity reflects the goals of a cooperation business. The former value high a good working relationship with all while the later stresses a high opportunity for earnings and accomplishments.Michael Harris Bond and his collaborators subsequently found a fifth dimension which was included by Hofstede in his structure as: long versus short term orientation or restraint versus indulgence. People in long term orientation value actions and attitudes that affect long periods: persistence, thrift, shame and respect for the tradition while the contrasting group embraces rapid changes since traditions are no impediments. Therefore, it may take long to develop a business in a high long term orientation ranking society especially for an outsider.1.2.3 The definition of negotiation. 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 (Moran & Harris, 1990). Negotiations take place within the context of four Cs: Common interest, Conflicting interests, Compromise, and Criteria (Moran and Stripp, 1991). Common interest is the most fundamental prerequisite of a negotiation; conflicting interests comes from various aspects but keeps pushing forward the negotiation until the end; compromise is the unavoidable approach to settle the disagreements; criteria provides the conditions under which the negotiations take place. Negotiation consists of two distinct processes: creating value and claiming value. The former is a cooperative process whereby the parties seek to realize the full potential benefit of the relationship seeking to broaden the Common interests and the later is a competitive process in which both parties try to obtain more they desire for in the game of Conflicting interests.Accordingly, negotiation literature can be classified into two broad theoretical perspectives: game theory and social exchange theory. Game theory regards the relationship between negotiating parties competitive as natural beings. The zero-sum theory adopted means that upon one party gains, the other party loses. Social exchange theory views negotiation as a social cooperative process. The interactions and mutual benefits of the two parties are emphasized in order to reach a win-win outcome.Besides the negotiation skills in a normal negotiation as mentioned above, international trade negotiations which are mostly cross-cultural negotiations, require special attention to the cultural differences to which negotiation styles should be modified accordingly. According to Salacuse, different cultures may interpret the fundamental processes of negotiations differently in addition to behavioral differences in negotiation across borders. On a more fundamental level, cultures appear to differ on what is actually being negotiated. Clearly there is a large challenge with negotiating across borders when the fundamental beliefs about negotiations are determined by specific cultures. Based on the above, Salacuse(1991) identified ten factors in the negotiation process that seem to be influenced by a persons culture. Each one has two poles:1 Negotiating goals(contract or relationship)2 Attitudes to the negotiating process(win-win or win-lose)3 Personal style(formal or informal)4 Styles of communication(direct or indirect)5 Time sensitivity(high or low)6 Emotionalism(high or low)7 Agreement form(specific or general)8 Agreement building process(bottom up or top down)9 Negotiating team organization(one leader or consensus)10 Risk taking(high or low)After conducting a survey with a moderately large number of samples, Salacuse finds the close effect of culture on negotiation behaviors. As Sinmitinas & Thomas agreed (1998), individual behaviour in negotiations is consistent with ones culture and is much influenced by his ethnic heritage and culturally-embodied attitudes and customs. Meanwhile, Individuals sharing the same cultural background will have the similar patterns of thinking and acting in line with the shared culture. Therefore, the knowledge of these cultural differences may help negotiators to better understand and interpret their counterparts negotiating behavior and to find ways to bridge gaps created by cultural differences (Salacuse, 1993). Summary:Chapter one first introduces the basic concepts of culture and negotiation as well as their characteristics followed by the five cultural dimensions found by Hofstede and Salacuses cultural influences on negotiation in ten factors. The author finds that some cultural influences in Salacuses theory are closely related to the five cultural dimensions by Hofstede. For example, ones choice in risk-taking is in line with his inclination of uncertainty avoidance and the negotiating team organization with power distance. In the following chapter, the author aims at analyzing the cultural differences in Sino-US negotiations in the structure of Hofstedes five cultural dimensions and Salacuses ten factors. Chapter 2: Cultural differences on Sino-US negotiations. Negotiation practices differ from culture to culture, while cultures affect social interaction in the whole process. With theoretical methods provided, the comparison of Chinese and American negotiation styles is conducted in this chapter. Limited by time, the author only analyses several representative characteristics. 2.1 Negotiating goal. Setting a negotiating goal comes first in a negotiation (or its preparation). According to many scholars, American business negotiators in general have contract-signing as their primary negotiating aim. They view the contract as a set of rights guaranteed or duties inviolable strictly. Thus they think highly of their task of signing a contract. Once the deal is made, the negotiations outcome can be judged. The relationship of two parties is incidental or at most partially assistant to the negotiation process.Unlike American negotiators, Chinese counterparts do not see the signing of the contract as the fulfillment but a starting point to develop further cooperative relationship. Since Chinese negotiators value a sustainable business relationship and are not satisfied with only one single incidental business contract, their negotiation goals are more developing a friendly and trustworthy relationship than making a deal. After a deal is desirably made, Chinese negotiators wish it to be followed with other series of cooperation opportunities.An American executive provides a vivid example by describing his first business trip to China:Case 1You have been waiting months to hear from the Chinese; then when you do, a whole team goes to work helping to prepare your presentation. When you arrive at the hotel, full of anticipation, your Chinese contact says, How about visiting the Great Wall tomorrow? So you agree, but then the next day it is the Ming Tombs, then the Forbidden City, the Temple of Heaven, and so on. You came to do business and you expected them to be in a big hurry, and it turns out that they would rather spend time leisurely sightseeing and chatting (Griffin, 1990).This is a typical case of misunderstanding in Sino-US negotiations: when Chinese business men were busying spending time on building up a sustainable relationship, their American counterparts only thought they were being indifferent and inefficient. Obviously this reflects the disagreement of the negotiating goal of the two parties. The Chinese group sees the negotiation as a dynamic interpersonal basis for opportunity in the long run while the American group sees it as a stationery contract set to solve only current problems.The different negotiating goals reflect cultural differences in two aspects: Chinese culture is based on femininity and long term orientation for which the core is to maintain a sustainable and reliable relationship to benefit in the long run and American culture is just the contrary.2.2 Formality or informality. Personal style refers to the way negotiators communicate with his counterparts. According to Salacuse(1998), a negotiator with a formal style insists on addressing counterparts by their titles, avoids personal anecdotes, and refrains from questions touching on private or family life of members of the other negotiating team. An informal style negotiator tries to start the discussion on a first-name basis, quickly seeks to develop a personal, friendly relationship with the other team, and may take off his jacket and roll up his sleeves when deal making begins in earnest.Normally, Chinese negotiators constrain themselves strictly in the negotiating process. They adhere to their roles with settled positions, obligations, and rules with loyalty. While dealing with their counterpart, they also fix them into the correspondent roles they themselves play. They address them with the job-related titles, as chief executives or educational levels a