Lacking pluralism? A critical review of the use of cultural dimensions in negotiation research

Raphael Schoen
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-020-00187-5
2020-04-26
Management Review Quarterly
Abstract:Cross-Cultural-Negotiations are pivotal in global business. Research frequently approaches this topic using cultural dimensions as underpinning conceptual constructs. This paper provides a systematic review of the use of cultural dimensions in negotiation research of more than 30 years. Empirical Cross-Cultural-Negotiation literature has been systematically searched for findings obtained by the use of Hofstede or The Globe Study dimensional constructs and categorized them into four negotiation stages. Findings show that negotiation research lacks pluralism in the use of cultural dimensions: The majority of publications use Hofstede's Individuality dimension as the main reference, whereas the remaining dimensions of Hofstede, and especially those of The Globe Study enjoyed little attention so far—A trend that continues to exist until 2017, including. This review also shows that the use of Hofstede's Individuality dimension delivers contradictory findings in crucial research areas: Competitive versus Cooperative Negotiation Strategy, Integrative Information Exchange, Problem Solving Approaches and its reciprocation. Further, an analysis of research sub-categories reveals an unbalanced distribution, focussing mainly on negotiation strategies and is widely ignoring other areas of research. Implications of the findings and the use of alternative dimensional constructs of culture for future research are discussed.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?