Initially things went fine but deal was not closed even after four rounds of negotiation. Keil and his team went home and the talks ended. So, what went wrong in this case? Edward worked in the American way and so he was quite open and frank in providing all information about his business including the weaknesses. He also tried to adjust with the requirements of Keil and his company. But it confused the Swiss. They considered the negotiation as straight, untrustworthy and dangerous. Swiss counterparts responded by asking to review documents and by hiring an accounting firm to audit the documents of Edward Engineering Inc. Edwards also found the hiring of auditor as …show more content…
The countries where low-context culture exists are usually the regions of North America and Western Europe. Low-context implies that businesses in these regions have direct, distinctive employees who tend to support decisions on facts. Such people want particulars mentioned in contracts and may have issues with trust. On the other hand, High-context cultures are the opposite in that trust is the most important part of business dealings. The regions that account for high-context languages are Middle East, Asia and Africa. Organizations that are based on high-context cultures are usually collectivist. They focus on interpersonal relationships more. Employees from high-context cultures would be always interested in business teams and group success rather than individual achievement. The below mentioned figure explains the differences between high-context and low-context languages in detail. Figure 2.2.1: Country Differences in High-Context and Low-Context Communication
Basic Communication