their experience, about the business negotiation process involving ... continent was one nation prior to 1947, authors such as Dunung (1999), ... Decision Making: before negotiating, negotiators need to have some information .... 'unstructured' data that has not been coded, investigating a small number of cases in detail,.
INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS NEGOTIATIONS: THE CASE OF PAKISTAN Hussain G. Rammal Cite as: Rammal, H.G. (2005) “International Business Negotiations: The Case Of Pakistan”, International Journal Of Commerce And Management. Vol. 15(2), pp.129-140.
Abstract: This exploratory study focuses on identifying the key cultural and other contextual influences that affect the process and outcome of commercial negotiations between Pakistanis and Non-Pakistanis. A survey of negotiators was conducted asking for information, based on their experience, about the business negotiation process involving Pakistanis and NonPakistanis. Utilizing the studies of Hofstede, and Salacuse, the responses of Pakistani and Non-Pakistani negotiators are analyzed and cultural traits displayed by Pakistani negotiators in international business negotiations are identified.
1.
INTRODUCTION
The integration of the global economy over the last two decades has led to the creation of an environment full of opportunities for firms to increase business with the Third World. But in order to take advantage of these opportunities firms have to face certain challenges. Entering a new market like Pakistan means that business managers have to contend with the challenge of doing business in a different, and somewhat unknown, cultural environment. Ghauri (1983) sums up this challenge by stating that Western firms have faced difficulties in negotiating projects and deals with the Third World, owing in part to a lack of understanding of the cultural needs and behavior of these countries. In order to avoid stereotyping and committing social and other blunders related to differences in culture, managers should take time to understand the culture of the country. According to Cateora and Graham (1999, p.586), Fletcher and Brown (1999, p.84) and Graham (1999, p.76), cultural differences cause four kinds of problems in international business negotiations: at the level of language, nonverbal behaviors (such as eye contact), values and thinking (such as punctuality, use of status and title, self-esteem and face) and decision-making. With a population of 144 million (2002 estimate), Pakistan is the seventh most populated country in the world (Population Reference Bureau, 2002). Ninety seven percent of Pakistan’s population belongs to the Islamic faith, making it the second most populated nation in the Muslim world. As such, religious beliefs heavily influence the national and business culture of Pakistan (Malik, 1999), and can reasonably be expected to influence negotiation behavior. For the majority of Pakistan’s existence, the military has ruled the country. Active and retired military personnel manage many of the state owned enterprises
1
(Hashmi, 1983). This professional military culture has therefore influenced the business culture and may affect the way commercial negotiations are conducted in Pakistan. During this study, it became apparent that literature on commercial negotiations in Pakistan is scarce (Dunung, 1999; Morrison, Conaway & Borden, 1994); moreover, it is contradictory and therefore fails to paint a clear picture for the reader. Most of the literature on negotiations in the South Asian region focuses on Pakistan’s neighbor, India. Perhaps because the subcontinent was one nation prior to 1947, authors such as Dunung (1999), generalize about the way commercial negotiations are conducted in the region. The broad objective of this exploratory study therefore is to identify the possible effects of external forces, culture in particular, on the negotiation process during international commercial negotiations involving Pakistanis, and to help remove any stereotypes that may exist. This paper is divided into seven sections. Section two details the framework used for the study. Section three summarizes the comparative studies of Hofstede and Usunier (1999) and Salacuse (2002). Section four focuses on the methodology used for this study. Section five reports the findings of the study. Section six summarizes the main implications of this study for practitioners while the final section provides suggestions for further research.
2.
INFORMING FRAMEWORK
This study uses Ghauri's framework for the process of international business negotiations (Ghauri, 1999, p.8). The framework takes into account the effects of cultural and other contextual factors on the international negotiation process, and makes linkages between various factors. The survey questions were formulated by utilizing the framework. These factors are categorized under the headings of background factors, atmosphere, strategic factors and cultural factors, and are briefly explained here. Background Factors include: • Objectives: this refers to the end stage each party desires to achieve. They are classified as common, conflicting or complementary. • The Environment: this includes political, social and structural factors relevant to both parties. • Third parties: these are made up of agents, government agencies, consultants and subcontractors. The Atmosphere is made up of: • Conflict/Cooperation: Ghauri (1999, p.6) states that the pre-negotiation stage is dominated by cooperation rather than conflict, as parties look for mutual solutions. As the negotiations progress conflict may appear due to different objectives of the parties. • Power/Dependence: this is closely related to the actual power each party holds due to their position in the market and their available alternatives. • Expectations: these can be divided into two types. Firstly, there are long-term expectations regarding possibilities and values of future business. Secondly, there are short-term expectations concerning prospects for the present deal.
2
Strategic Factors include: • Presentations: negotiators need to know whom they will be presenting to and what the expectation will be. In some countries presentations are made to individuals whereas in others the presentations are made to a team. • Strategy: Ghauri (1999, p.13) states that strategies used in negotiations can be categorized as tough, soft or intermediary. In tough strategies, the party starts with a high initial offer and remains firm, waiting for the other party to make the first concession. In soft strategy the party starts with a low initial offer and makes the first concession, hoping the other team will reciprocate. In the intermediate strategy the party does not start with a very high initial offer and agrees to an offer as soon as it reaches a point which matches expectations. • Decision Making: before negotiating, negotiators need to have some information whether the other side uses impulsive or rational decision-making, or a combination of both. • Need for an agent: part of the strategy formulation is to evaluate whether there exists a need for agents during the process, or whether the firm’s negotiators can handle the negotiations Cultural Factors are made up of: • Time: negotiators need to be aware of the other team’s attitude towards time. If the culture places emphasis on relationship building then the time taken to create such relationships may be considered as time well spent. • Individualism v. Collectivism: negotiators need to have knowledge as to whether the other party will be looking for a collective solution, involving all parties, or an individual benefit for themselves. • Patterns of communication: these patterns help the negotiators become aware of whether the other party will use a direct/explicit form of communication or an implicit/indirect form of communication. • Emphasis on personal relationship: in some cultures negotiations are conducted based on the relationship between the negotiators rather than the relationship between the organizations. This emphasis on the personal relationship means that a trust is created between the negotiators.
3.
COMPARATIVE STUDIES
The results of this study are compared with those produced by Hofstede and Usunier (1999) and Salacuse (2002). These studies are considered to be seminal in the area of negotiations, and deal with the effects of culture on negotiations and cross-cultural communication. Hofstede’s study (1980) suggested that the national cultures of the world differed mainly along four different dimensions. The study was further developed by Hofstede and Usunier (1999) in relation to its significance to international business negotiations. The four dimensions are: (i) High vs. Low Power Distance (ii) Individualism vs. Collectivism (iii) Masculinity vs. Femininity (iv) High vs. Low Uncertainty Avoidance.
3
Salacuse (2002), in his study of cultural influence on negotiations, reviewed literature and interviewed practitioners, based on which he identified ten factors that have an impact on the negotiating process and are influenced by the person’s cultural background. The ten factors are: 1. Negotiating Goals: Contract or Relationship? 2. Negotiating Attitude: Win/Lose or Win/Win? 3. Personal Style: Formal or Informal? 4. Communication: Direct or Indirect? 5. Sensitivity to Time: High or Low? 6. Emotionalism: High or Low? 7. Forms of Agreement: General or Specific? 8. Building an Agreement: Bottom Up or Top Down? 9. Team Organization: One Leader or Group Consensus? 10. Risk Taking: High or Low? The study also utilized the findings of Zarkada-Fraser and Fraser (2001) and Smith (2000) to assist in understanding the perceptions and attitudes of Australian and Canadian negotiators towards international business negotiations.
4.
METHODOLOGY
The research findings presented in this report are based on responses gathered by using a short self-administered questionnaire. Although the focus of the study was to identify the cultural traits displayed by Pakistani negotiators, the opinion of Non-Pakistani negotiators was also sought to assist with understanding the effects of culture in international business negotiations involving Pakistanis. Two sets of questionnaires 1 were prepared: one for Pakistani respondents and the other for Non-Pakistani respondents, with minor variations to suit the respondents. Both questionnaires were produced in English and requested the same type of information from the respondents. This was necessary for comparing the responses of the two sides. The selection criteria for the respondents were the individual's experience in the field of international business negotiations, their position in the company and industry, and their relevance to the study’s research questions. The Pakistani respondents were selectively sampled from the business community in Pakistan and abroad. The respondents were all males aged between 25-55 years. The respondents were Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) and senior managers of private manufacturing and service industries, and represented the cement, food, information technology, insurance, medical equipment, real estate, and pharmaceutical industries. In the case of the Non-Pakistani respondents, the researcher was able to identify some individuals outside Pakistan who had experience in negotiating with Pakistanis. All the respondents were selectively sampled through networks of contacts. The Non-Pakistani respondents were also all males aged between 27-45 years. These respondents were senior managers from Canada and Australia, and were affiliated with freight forwarding, marketing, media and textile companies.
1
The questionnaires used in this paper are available from the author on request.
4
For the purpose of this study, the author employed the nonprobability approach of both purposive and snowball sampling. Such a strategy for this type of study has been advocated by authors like Bernard (1988), Creswell (1998), Flick (2002), Glesne (1999), Hammersley and Atkinson (2000), Miles and Huberman (1994), (Neuman, 2003), and Silverman (2000). From a mail-out of 70 questionnaires in December 2001, 21 useable questionnaires were returned by May 2002, yielding a response rate of 30 per cent. Out of these 21 respondents, 16 were Pakistani nationals and 5 were Non-Pakistani. Out of the Pakistani respondents, 15 are based in Pakistan, and one based in the United States since 1995. Out of the 5 NonPakistani respondents, 4 are based in Australia, with the remaining respondent being a Canadian national operating in Croatia. The advantage of the small sample size was that the study relied on information from a specialized group of people who had the necessary experience and skill to conduct international business negotiations. The idea was to get the best people who can provide information rather than a large sample of people who may have little involvement in or experience of this process/activity. As Flick (2002, p.41) states: “it is their (respondents) relevance to the research topic rather than their representativeness which determines the way in which the people to be studied are selected”. Neuman (2003, p.211) supports the use of small sample size by arguing that qualitative researchers rarely draw a representative sample from a huge number of cases and rarely determine the sample size in advance. An instruction letter written by the author was sent to each respondent. The letter provided information on filling in the questionnaires and provided the mailing address for air/surface mail and e-mail responses. The respondents were also asked to fill a "Respondent’s Details" page stating their name, industry, nationality (in case of Non-Pakistani respondents), telephone, and e-mail address so they could be contacted for clarification of responses, and follow-up interviews. As this is an exploratory study the questions were tailored to be predominantly open-ended. Glesne (1999, p.32) describes open-ended “surveys” as an effective tool in qualitative research. The questions provided the respondents with the opportunity to elaborate on their answers, and to provide any additional information that they deemed relevant and useful for the study. The use of the open-ended questionnaires helped overcome the problem, as pointed out by Bernard (1988, p.247), of forcing the respondents into making culturally inappropriate choices, usually associated with cross-cultural studies in which close-ended questionnaires are used. Based on the information sought, the questionnaires can be divided into three parts. In the first part of the questionnaire, consisting of questions 1-5, the respondents were asked to provide background information about themselves and the other parties. This included questions about the experience of the respondents in the field of international business negotiations, the number of parties involved in the process, and the make-up of the teams, if applicable, in terms of gender, age and their position in the company. In the second part of the questionnaire, consisting of questions 6-16, the respondents were asked questions about the negotiation process including the strategy adopted. The questions included information on whether agents were used by any of the parties, decision-making authority, number of meetings and time required for the meetings. The third and final part of the questionnaire, consisting of questions 17-19, dealt with the outcome of the negotiations. Respondents were
5
given the opportunity to state whether they believed cultural or other contextual factors influenced the process and outcome of the negotiations. For a small percentage of questionnaire respondents, follow-up interviews were conducted for clarification and further exploration of responses. The data collection methods also utilized some features of ethnographic research which include working primarily with ‘unstructured’ data that has not been coded, investigating a small number of cases in detail, and analyzing data that involves explicit interpretation of human actions with minimum quantification and statistical analysis (Flick, 2002; Hammersley & Atkinson, 2000). 5. FINDINGS The study revealed six distinct findings in terms of negotiations involving Pakistanis and Non-Pakistanis. These are: (i) Centralized Decision Making (ii) Relationship Building (iii) Time (iv) Need for Agents (v) Structured Negotiations (vi) Direct vs. Indirect Communication (i) Centralized Decision Making The results of the survey revealed that when the negotiations were conducted in Pakistan, the Chief Executive Officers usually conducted negotiations on behalf of the Pakistani side. This involved role of the Pakistani executive in negotiations is different to the role of the top executives in other countries where the chief executives are brought into negotiations only to sign the agreement, and this only after all issues have been settled and agreed upon by the lower-level executives (Graham & Sano, 1999, pp.356-357). In some instances, where negotiations were held outside Pakistan and required technical knowledge in areas such as information technology, individuals competent in the field negotiated on behalf of the Pakistani side and were given the authority to make decisions. The responses of the Pakistani sample suggested that the decision making process was one where the individuals in power took the final decisions rather than conferring with other individuals or team members. As one respondent stated: "Being the Chief Executive of the company, there was never any restriction on me. Once the board approved the nature of the procurement, it was my responsibility to negotiate the best quality product at the lowest possible price". The Non-Pakistani respondents confirm this point of view. The respondents usually negotiated with the CEO, or with teams that included the CEO. The decisions therefore were taken by people in position of power and were quite quick. One such respondent stated: "Since the CEO of the organization was present, the other team sought no permission and were able to take decisions". This suggests that during negotiations the Pakistani side tends to follow Salacuse’s one leader concept in decision making rather than following the idea of team consensus, where decisions are made after conferring with other team members (Salacuse, 2002, p.9). In terms of Power Distance, Hofstede’s research places Pakistan as mid-range and slightly high, which would suggest a weak centralized decision making system (Hofstede & Usunier, 1999, p.123). Hofstede (1980) states that a high Power Distance culture would tend to have a
6
strong centralized decision making system. The findings of this survey shows a strong centralized decision making system, indicating that Pakistan could be categorized as a high Power Distance culture. The difference in the finding of the survey and Hofstede’s study is probably due to the difference in the sample nature, and perhaps size. The sample used in this study is that of a specialized group of people who deal in international negotiations, whereas it is not clear whether Hofstede talks about Pakistani negotiators in international negotiation scenarios or domestic ones.
(ii) Relationship Building In order to determine the emphasis placed on personal relations, one of the indicators suggested by Lewicki, Saunders and Minton (1999) is to focus on evaluating the role of the negotiators during the negotiation process. The authors claim that in collectivist countries like Pakistan, the focus is on building lasting relationships. Negotiations with the same party can continue for years and changing a negotiator changes the relationship, which may take a long time to rebuild, whereas in individualistic countries like Australia the focus is on the competency of the negotiator and not the relationship-building skills (Lewicki et al., 1999, pp.392-393). To test this claim respondents were asked whether negotiators were changed during the course of the negotiations. The survey showed that the Pakistani and NonPakistani teams did not change negotiators during the course of the negotiations, except in a couple of instances where negotiations had reached a point of deadlock and changing of the negotiators helped get the negotiations back on track. A significant majority of the Pakistani respondents stated that they took time to evaluate the other party in order to build trust and confidence. One particular respondent said: "During the first meeting an assessment can be made of the other party regarding its seriousness to do business, the way they would like to negotiate, quality of the product, and how much mutual trust and confidence can be built". Confirming this point of view a Non-Pakistani respondent stated that initial concerns of trustworthiness or doubt were overcome because of previous dealings with mutual contacts. This may suggest that the Pakistani negotiators place emphasis on relationship building before signing the contract. Building long-term relationships may alter the personal style of Pakistani and Non-Pakistani negotiators from a formal to a more informal one. The responses showed a trend where the meetings were usually held in a formal manner and were confined to the meeting rooms. But an unprompted response from a Non-Pakistani respondent provided a unique insight to the issue. The respondent claimed that after going through the first formal meeting, a relationship was built between the negotiators. This relationship was later used to negotiate future deals with a more informal approach, where meetings were more of a social nature in which the business affairs were updated. This may suggest that once a relationship is built and negotiators become familiar with each other, the Pakistani and Non-Pakistani negotiators tend to take a more informal approach. This claim would have to be further tested. (iii) Time Negotiators may or may not place value on their time, making it either something worthwhile and not to be wasted, or something of no value (Ghauri, 1999, p.12). The survey findings indicated that Pakistanis preferred the negotiation process to be faster than negotiators from other Asian countries. Although unprompted, a significant minority of Pakistani respondents
7
gave the example of Japan and stated that during negotiations with Japanese negotiators they found the process moving at a slow pace due to the time taken to build a relationship, and due to the formal nature of the negotiations where the day-to-day program is laid out. Even though the Pakistanis themselves prefer to build a strong relationship, the time taken for this exercise in Japan seems to be longer than the Pakistanis prefer. On the other hand the American and British negotiators tend to be fast and in a hurry. While negotiations with Americans and British parties required 3-4 days of face-to-face negotiating, the Japanese party normally required 2 weeks. The Non-Pakistani respondents in their responses confirmed this fact and stated that the time required for negotiations in Pakistan was a lot less than in other Asian countries. One NonPakistani respondent even suggested that he was surprised by the short amount of time required for negotiating the deal. The expectation seemed to be of a far greater time requirement for negotiating with Pakistanis. A possible explanation for the fast pace could be the presence of the Pakistani CEO during negotiations. Their presence appeared to speed decision-making, therefore reducing time expended for the entire negotiation process. In terms of Salacuse’s dimension of sensitivity to time (Salacuse, 2002, p.6), the findings would indicate that the Pakistani negotiators’ sensitivity to time is neither as high as the Americans or British, nor as low as the Japanese. (iv) Need For Agents Hofstede and Usunier (1999, p.126) state that in collectivist cultures mediators, or gobetweens have a more important role in negotiations than in individualistic cultures. As formal harmony is very important in a collectivist culture, mediators are able to raise sensitive issues with either party while avoiding confrontation. Ghauri (1999, p.14) suggests that firms need to evaluate whether there exists a need for agents or whether the firm’s negotiators can handle the negotiations themselves. From the survey findings it could be deduced that Pakistani negotiators do not usually use agents except when dealing with highly collectivist countries like Japan, where, as one unprompted response from a Pakistani respondent claimed, trading houses were used to negotiate with the Japanese side. The reason according to the respondent for selecting agents or trading houses in highly collectivist cultures like Japan is due to the amount of time these cultures take in making decisions. But in the majority of cases, the respondents (both Pakistani and Non-Pakistani) believed that the use of an agent was not necessary for the purpose of business negotiations between the mentioned parties. A significant number of respondents from both sides claimed that the fact that all the parties involved were experienced in their field of business meant that they had a common understanding of the way negotiations would be conducted and therefore did not require the services of any agents. The role of agents in Pakistan has been advocated by Macedo (2000, p.5) who claims that it is "a necessary evil". This statement was made after Avicular Controls used a Pakistani agent to deal with Pakistan International Airlines. Based on this statement one would assume that negotiations conducted in Pakistan without the use of an agent might face difficulties. But as mentioned, according to the findings of the survey, agents were not used in every negotiation involving Pakistanis and Non-Pakistanis. In some instances where agents were used by NonPakistani negotiators their role was limited to helping the Non-Pakistani side overcome cultural differences in terms of business etiquettes, and to help overcome the issue of unfamiliarity of the business and national cultures.
8
A useful indication of a culture’s classification in terms of individualism and collectivism is to take into consideration its response to relationship-building, sensitivity to time, and need for an agent. Countries with high collectivism seem to show signs of strong emphasis on relationship-building, low sensitivity to time, and the use of negotiators to avoid confrontation (Ghauri, 1999; Lewicki et al. 1999). Hofstede's study found Pakistan to be highly collectivist therefore suggesting the use of an agent to be necessary (Hofstede & Usunier, 1999, p.123). The result of the study in terms of relationship building, time, and need for an agent, contradicts Hofstede’s findings. Pakistan, it can be said, is neither as highly individualistic as the United States and United Kingdom, nor as collectivist as Japan. (v) Structured Negotiations Salacuse (2002, p.10) states that certain cultures are more risk averse than others and this can affect the willingness of one side to take risks and try new approaches or tolerate uncertainties. To evaluate this argument, respondents were asked whether any formal rules or procedures were agreed upon for the negotiations. The agreement of formal rules would indicate a preference for structured negotiations and avoidance of uncertain issues (Ghauri, 1999; Lewicki et al., 1999). Except for three respondents, who stated that rules were agreed upon prior to the commencement of face-to-face negotiations, all the respondents stated that no such rules or procedures were agreed upon. This would indicate that the negotiations were not as highly structured as they would be had rules been agreed upon. But looking at the comments made, one can see that even though there were no rules agreed upon explicitly, there seemed to be an implied reference to the agreement of rules and procedures. One Pakistani respondent from the insurance industry stated that there are fixed rules and procedures in the field of insurance, and that the rules are almost similar worldwide. This statement reflects the importance of a professional culture advocated by Lang (1993, p.40), which states that people from a similar profession share a common work culture in relation to business practices regardless of their national background. Hofstede states that Uncertainty Avoidance indicates the extent to which a culture programs its members to feel either comfortable or uncomfortable in ambiguous or unstructured situations (Hofstede & Usunier, 1999, p.122). According to Hofstede’s findings, Pakistan is ranked in the high uncertainty avoidance area (Hofstede & Usunier, 1999, p.123). Using the result of the findings in terms of formal rules as an indicator of Uncertainty Avoidance, one would agree generally with Hofstede's finding on Pakistan’s place on the Uncertainty Avoidance dimension. (vi) Direct vs. Indirect Communication Ghauri’s (1999) pattern of communication and Salacuse’s (2002) notion of direct and indirect communication state that cultures vary in the way communication is carried out. Low-context cultures place emphasis on direct and simple methods of communication where the message is clear and upfront and one can expect to receive a clear and definite response to proposals and the questions. High-context cultures rely heavily on indirect and complex methods. From the findings it can be assumed that Pakistani negotiators tend to use an indirect form of communication. This can be deduced from the way the Pakistani negotiators look at the issue of agreed rules and procedures during negotiations. By believing that the terms are implied
9
during negotiations, the Pakistani negotiators demonstrate the tendency to use indirect communication. This claim needs to be further explored.
6.
SUMMARY OF SURVEY RESULTS
The results of the study have revealed some practical implications for practitioners who may be interested in and are actively pursuing negotiations with Pakistanis. The findings suggested a strong role for the Pakistani CEO in the decision making process. Negotiators have to be aware that business negotiations with Pakistanis may involve negotiating with the chief executive of the organization. The strategic implication for this may be that one individual will make the decision in such instances. Presentations could specifically be made to target these individuals, even if the negotiations are held in a team situation. The findings indicated the importance of relationship building with Pakistani negotiators. Practitioners would also be well advised to spend some time in developing a workable relationship with the Pakistani negotiators. This exercise would not only help in building trust between the parties but will also help in future negotiations. The initial time spent on building the relationship would be well compensated in future negotiations as the Pakistani negotiators will not have doubts about the sincerity of the other side and thus business will be conducted in a cordial manner and a faster pace. The relationship can also help negotiate with the Pakistanis in a much more informal way. The findings also suggest that the use of an agent for the purpose of negotiating with Pakistanis depends on the organization. Agents are not always used when dealing with Pakistanis, nor do Pakistanis always employ agents as negotiators. The use of agents would be suited to organizations that are unaware of the way business is conducted in Pakistan. Agents can also help overcome unnecessary red tape when dealing with government agencies in Pakistan. But for companies who have researched the Pakistani negotiating teams and have prepared themselves for Pakistan’s cultural expectations, there is likely to be a lesser need for an agent.
7.
SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH
Future studies may involve looking further into the connection between forming a stable business relationship with the Pakistani negotiators and its effect on formal/informal communication. Researchers need to look at whether creating a stable relationship means that Pakistani negotiators will be much more informal and open about their feelings. Such a study could also provide data about the use of emotions (emotionalism) by Pakistani negotiators. Researchers may also be interested in looking at the way negotiation practices differ not only in terms of Pakistan and other countries, but also within Pakistan. As Pakistan’s population consists of different ethnic groups, people may negotiate differently due to differences in ethnic cultures.
10
Research into the differences in negotiation style amongst negotiators from public and private enterprises may also provide deeper insights into negotiations in a Pakistani context. As mentioned, public enterprises (and a few private enterprises as well) tend to have former army officers as senior managers. Researchers might usefully investigate the way the professional military culture influences the negotiations in these enterprises.
REFERENCES Bernard, H.R. (1988). Research methods in cultural anthropology. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Cateora, P.R. and Graham, J.L. (1999). International marketing. 10th edn. U.S.A: Irwin/McGraw-Hill. Creswell, J.W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five traditions. California: Sage Publications. Dunung, S.P. (1999). Doing business in Asia. 2nd edn. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Fletcher, R. and Brown, L. (1999). International marketing: an Asia-Pacific perspective. Maryborough: Prentice Hall Australia. Flick, U. (2002). An introduction to qualitative research. 2nd edn. London: Sage Publications. Ghauri, P.N. (1983). Negotiating international package deals. Uppsala: Almqvist & Wissell. Ghauri, P.N. (1999). The nature of business negotiation. In Ghauri, P. and Usunier, J.C. (eds), International business negotiations (pp. 3-20). Oxford: Elsevier Science Ltd. Glesne, C. (1999). Becoming qualitative researchers: an introduction. 2nd edn. U.S.A.: Addison Wesley Longman. Graham, J. (1999). Vis-a-vis: international business negotiations. In Ghauri, P. and Usunier, J.C. (eds), International business negotiations (pp. 69-90). Oxford: Elsevier Science Ltd. Graham, J. and Sano, Y. (1999). Business negotiations Between Japanese and Americans. In Ghauri, P. and Usunier, J.C. (eds), International business negotiations (pp. 353-368). Oxford: Elsevier Science Ltd. Hammersley, M. and Atkinson, P. (2000). Ethnography: principles in practice. 2nd edn. New York: Routledge. Hashmi, B. (1983). Dragon seed: military in the state. In Gardezi, H. and Rashid, J. (eds), Pakistan: the roots of dictatorship (pp. 148-172). London: Zed Press. Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s consequences: international differences in work-related values. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.
11
Hofstede, G. and Usunier, J.C. (1999). Hofstede’s dimensions of culture and their influence on international business negotiations. In Ghauri, P. and Usunier, J.C. (eds), International business negotiations (pp. 119-130). Oxford: Elsevier Science Ltd. Lang, W. (1993). A Professional’s View. In Faure, G.O. and Rubin, J.Z. (eds), Culture and negotiation: The resolution of water disputes (pp. 38-46). California: Sage Publications. Lewicki, R.J., Saunders, D.M. and Minton, J.W. (1999). Negotiation. 3rd edn. U.S.A.: Irwin/McGraw-Hill. Macedo, T. (2000). Avicular Controls & Pakistan International Airlines [Electronic version]. Thunderbird-The American Graduate School of International Management. Retrieved October 20, 2001 from: URL:http://www.t-bird.edu/pdf/about_us/case_series/a06000001.pdf Malik, I. (1999). Islam, nationalism and the West: issues of identity in Pakistan. New York: PALGRAVE. Miles, M.B. and Huberman, A.M. (1994). An expanded sourcebook: qualitative data analysis. 2nd edn, California: Sage Publications. Morrison, T., Conaway, W. and Borden, G. (1994). Kiss, bow, or shake hands: how to do business in sixty countries. Holbrook: Adams Media Corporation. Neuman, W.L. (2003). Social Research Methods: qualitative and quantitative approaches. 5th edn. U.S.A: Pearson Education. Population Reference Bureau (2002). World population data sheet: Retrieved January 11, 2003 from: URL:http://www.prb.org/Template.cfm?Section=PRB&template=/Content/ContentGroups/D atasheets/wpds2002/2002_World_Population_Data_Sheet.htm Salacuse, J.W. (2002). The top ten ways culture affects negotiating style: Retrieved June 21, 2002 from: URL:http://fletcher.tufts.edu.au/salacuse/topten.html Silverman, D. (2000). Doing qualitative research: A practical handbook. London: Sage Publications. Smith, M. (2000). International business negotiations: A comparison of theory with the perceived reality of Australian practitioners. Adelaide: Flinders University School of Commerce Working Paper. Zarkada-Fraser, A. and Fraser, C. (2001). Moral decision making in international sales negotiations. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 16(4), 274-293. ___________________________________________
12
