CRITICAL JOURNAL REVIEW

ENGLISH AND COMMUNICATIONS BUSINESS

Lecturer:

Choms Garry GT Sibarani, Se, M.Si, Ak, CA, S.Pd

Author :

Muhammad Isro Milala (7163342030)

PRODI PENDIDIKAN AKUNTANSI

FAKULTAS EKONOMI

UNIVERSITAS NEGERI MEDAN

2018
 CRITICAL JOURNAL REVIEW

A. JOURNAL IDENTITY 1
International Business Negotiations: Culture, Dimensions,
TITLE Context
JOURNAL International Journal of Business, Humanities and Technology

VOLUME Vol. 3 No. 7

KEY WORD business negotiations, cultural dimension of negotiation, context of
international negotiations, international negotiation context, the knowledge
and the key elements of the negotiating parties incompatibility
ISSN
PUBLICATION 2013
YEARS
AUTHOR Kęstutis Peleckis
Reviewer MUHAMMAD ISRO MILALA
DATE 11 Maret 2018

B. Critical Results Report Article / Journal:

ABSTRACT in the abstract the author only explains the background of the title he carries, as
the author briefly explains the context of international negotiations and the
differences with other cross-cultural dimensions. not in describing how the
purpose, methods and results of research he did.
INTRODUCTI in the introduction to the first journal it was said that international business
ON representatives from different countries when preparing business Partnerships or
transactions often analyze the traditions, differences, and nature of other
countries. Business to facilitate business processes trying to adjust to the
uniqueness of others. In order To accomplish this can be analyzed the cultural
dimension that can convey critical nonconformities between parties. Analyzing
incompatibility between different cultures can be used Hofstede's analysis of
cultural dimensions. This can be very useful in designing international business
 negotiation processes because it can convey the distinction between different
cultural dimensions among the negotiating parties.
then say also that there is a different understanding of the various symbols or
actions in different cultures. So, before the start of international negotiations it
was necessary to get acquainted with other cultural features, or even to hire
mediators who knew this culture well. In the specific literature it is advisable to
communicate internationally negotiations with intermediaries who are familiar
with the other party's culture and have a legal background, because they may
have knowledge of the cultural and legal aspects of the negotiations on the other
side of the opponent
RESEARCH The systematic, comparative, logical analysis and synthesis of the scientific
METHODS literature.
DISCUSSION  . in this journal the topics of discussion are:
1. the analysis of cultural dimensions here is said that the context of
negotiations at the international level is faced with differences
between various cultures, among others, namely Long-term attitudes
toward communication, placement, uncertainty avoidance, emotional
differences between the negotiating parties and others. These
differences and other cross-cultural dimensions can influence the
negotiation process between different cultural representatives. It can
be diverse understanding of different symbols or actions in different
cultures. Impact of negotiation strategy for the final The results are
significant, therefore, in the preparation phase of the negotiation needs
to be done cultural studies dimensions of others. In the special
literature observed that for the negotiating team during negotiations
With other cultures needed to adapt. Therefore, it is necessary not
only to get acquainted with other people's culture dimensions, but also
with the differences that exist, which may arise difficulty in
communicating.

provided also the understanding of the culture in which culture is

 defined is a set of beliefs and values writing that culture is the
programming of collective thinking that distinguishes members of one
group from another group in terms of values of form, belief,
assumption, expectation, perception and behavior.
2. hereinafter explained about cultural impact to negotiation
Culture is an important variable affecting international negotiations
and performance. Value and norm which fall within the culture, can
influence stronger or weaker negotiations (Christopher et al., 2005).
Some the authors (Liu et al 2012) argue that culture, accountability
and group membership can determine not only approach to
relationships in negotiations and after (level of negotiation), but also
tend to influence and results of negotiations
3. the context of negotiation
In the context of negotiation negotiation strategy is an important
component, so without the context of bargaining, be so
It's hard to know what bargaining power in negotiations you should
use, what tactics to choose from. The context of cross-cultural
negotiation can be conditioned by the legal environment,
organizational values, culture value. This variable should be
considered; If not, it will be difficult to understand the purpose,
strategies, tactics and other negotiation side relations. Cultural context
conveys a picture a entire cultures that make it possible to understand
the structure of ethical decisions. In a cultural context the main
concern is Given on: not because of cultural differences, not to see
whether there are ethical or not negotiation tactics - but for how
negotiators see what situations and variables they will take into
account during the decision-making process (Rivers et al., 2003). This
author sees that morality and cultural philosophy run the organization
values, legal environment, and perceptions of others. The author
shows that the purpose of organization, legal environment, culture;
morality and philosophy have an influence on choice and
 implementation of negotiation strategies Also emphasized that
morality and cultural philosophy have impact on the ethics of
monetary relations

RESULT 1. There are necessary to provide for potential cross-cultural

incompatibilities in the intercultural negotiations, previously getting
acquainted with different cultures and to foresee measures to prevent or
solve them. In order to prepare for negotiations it is necessary also to
develop an effective negotiating team whose analytical work and
capacities contribute to the achievement the highest outcome of the
negotiations. This is particularly important in the context of preparing for
intercultural negotiations, which require an understanding of another
culture, another language, possession of legal knowledge, knowledge of
the negotiation context and so on.
2. In forming the strategy of negotiations it is needed to get acquainted with
the negotiating context. When planning the international business talks,
preparation is usually more complex than between the subjects of the
same country or regional negotiations. The analysis of the global
scientific literature revealed a lack of research on the impact of cross-
cultural context of the negotiations to the negotiation process and
outcome.
ADVANTAG  the advantages of this journal are on the topic of discussion where the
ES negotiation discussions are explained internationally rather than
nationally, so readers know how international business negotiations in
terms of culture, dimensions and context
DISADVANT  in the abstract not in brief about the purpose, method, and the results of
AGES research conducted by the researcher
 he method of research is not clearly explained by the author in this
journal, just let us know the method but not explained
  the identity of the journal is incomplete
REFERENCE Ashkanasy, N., Gupta, V., Mayfield, M. S., Trevor-Roberts (2004). Future orientation.
In R. J. House, P. J. Hanges, M. Javidan, P. W. Dorfman, & V. Gupta (Eds.), Culture,
leadership, and organizations: TheGLOBE study of 62 societies (pp. 282–343).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Buckley, P., Casson, M. (1988). The theory of cooperation in international business. In:
Contractor, F.J., Lorange, P. (Eds.), Cooperative Strategies in International Business.
Lexington Books, Toronto, pp. 31–34.

Christopher, H., Maria, P., Syed, R. (2005). Cross-Cultural Communication and

Negotiation. MANA. 20 p

Dorfman P., Howell J. (1988).Dimensions of national culture and effective leadership

patterns: Hofstede revisited. In: Farmer Richard N, McGoun Elton G, editors. Advances
in International Comparative Management,. p. 127–150.
B. JOURNAL IDENTITY 2

TITLE NEGOTIATION STYLES IN INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION

JOURNAL The International Journal of ConflictManagement

VOLUME Volume 6/ No 1 1995

KEY WORD Negotiations style,intercultural comunications
ISSN
PUBLICATION 1995
YEARS
AUTHOR Laura E. Drake
Reviewer MUHAMMAD ISRO MILALA
DATE 11 maret 2018

B. Critical Results Report Article / Journal:

ABSTRACT  In the abstract section it has been explained the purpose specifically on how
different intercultural negotiations are proved communicatively. The
evidence shows that the negotiations they are doing deal differently with
international people rather than domestic workers. Therefore, it is important
to move beyond the comparison of cultures as a basis for predicting the
process of intercultural negotiation
 The results suggest that culture performs some global effects in face-to-face
encounters with outsiders. Other negotiation aspects are managed locally, so
it is expected that cultural differences do not appear in interaction
INTRODUCTI the purpose of this study is to focus on how different intercultural negotiations are
ON/PURPOSE proved communicatively. The evidence shows that the negotia- They deal differently
with international people than domestic workers. Therefore, it is important to move
beyond the comparison of cultures as the basis for predict the process of intercultural
negotiations.
RESEARCH Research using descriptive method, this is because the authors use a lot of
METHODS problems that exist then explained by the opinions of experts on existing theories.
DISCUSSION This paper reviewed some problems with the intracultural comparison approach to
explicating negotiation styles in face-to-face intercultural negotiationinteraction.
Specifically, the resiliency of intracultural negotiating behaviors in intercultural settings
is virtually untested. Thus, cultural comparisons cannot be used as a basis for predicting
intercultural negotiation interaction. For example, research questions 1 and 2 were only
partially supported in these data. That is, Americans used an analytic negotiating style
more frequently than Taiwanese in intercultural negotiation. Taiwanese used a normative
negotiating style more frequently than Americans. Thus, in terms of communicative
interaction, only some predicted intracultural differences emerged in intercultural
negotiation.
Additionally, negotiators did rate themselves differently in terms of negotiating style.
As expected, Americans rated themselves as more analytic than Taiwanese. However,
two other differences contradicted expectations. Specifically, Americans rated
themselves as more normative and intuitive than did Taiwanese negotiators. Therefore,
research question 3 was refuted. Taiwanese did not rate themselves as significantly more
normative or intuitive. Thus, in terms of self-perceived negotiating style, only one
predicted cultural difference emerged in these data.
These findings are inconsistent with those of Ting-Toomey et al. (1991) and
Lee and Rogan (1991). However, they point to the critical distinction between
negotiators' perceptions and actual interaction patterns. That is, despite cultural
differences in perceived or reported negotiating style, the same cultural differences
may not emerge in face-to-face interaction with negotiators from other cultures.
One reason for the disparity between expected and observed cultural negotiating
styles is that culture is merely one relevant factor in the intercultural negotiation
equation
Two weaknesses in the present study warrant caution in interpreting these
results. The first is a problem of cultural equivalence. That is, though negotiation
styles are groups of interrelated behaviors, the negotiation style categories investigated
here may contain behaviors which are interdependent for one group and not
for the other. For example, the factual category contains elements of neutrality and
focus on details. It is possible that for some cultural groups these components form
two distinct styles that might exist independently, such that a negotiator may use a
style which emphasizes neutrality, without emphasizing details. Second, although a
styles perspective was adopted in the current study to remain consistent with prior
 research, the notion of styles is problematic and styles research has significant
limitations. For instance, global styles are more difficult to observe that discrete
behaviors. As a result, it is difficult to predict the degree to which individuals adopt
particular style types in various situations or over time

RESULT  in this case With the style of negotiation, only one cultural difference emerged
in this data. This finding is incompatible with the theory of Ting-Toomey et al.
(1991) and Lee and Rogan (1991). However, they show important differences
between the two negotiators' perceptions and actual interaction patterns. That
is, regardless of differences in fermentation culture in negotiated or perceived
negotiation styles, the same cultural differences may not appear in face-to-face
interaction with negotiators from other cultures.

ADVANTAG  Explanations in the explanation taken from the opinion of experts who have
ES already discussed the same thing / related to the title of journal writer
• On the last page of this journal are created / given attachments containing
questions
DISADVANT  I think as a reader of this journal is too centered on the explanation of the
AGES theory described
• Then in the abstract is not in brief about what method used by the author
REFERENCE Acuff, FL (1993). How to negotiate anything with anyone anywhere in the world. New
York: American Management Association.

Adler, NJ, & Graham, JL (1989). Cross-cultural interactions: international comparisons

boy's mistake? Journal of International Business Studies, 10, 515-537.

Adler, NJ, Graham, JL, & Gehrke, T. (1987). Business negotiations in Canada, Mexico,
and the United States. Journal of Business Research, 15, 411-429.

Beliaev, E., Mullen, T., & Punnett, BJ (1983). Understanding the cultural environment:
US-USSR trade negotiations. California Management Review, 27 (2), 100-112.
Brown, P., & Levinson, SC (1987). Dignity: Some universal languages in the use of
language. Cam bridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

Cai, D. (1993, November). Determinants of work in negotiations: Spective intercultural

competition Paper presented at the annual meeting of Speech Communication Associa
tion, Miami, FL