Cross-Cultural Communication Competency In The Geocentric NegotiationEssay Preview: Cross-Cultural Communication Competency In The Geocentric NegotiationReport this essaySpitzberg and Cupach (1984) define communication competency as the ability to achieve your goals while you fulfill relational and situational expectations (as cited in Cupach & Canary, 1997). Spitzberg and Cupach contend that communication competency is primarily comprised of two dimensions, appropriateness (meeting social expectations and social rules) and effectiveness (achieving one’s goals). Understanding the individual’s role in cross-cultural communication has gained the attention of several researchers (Gudykunst, 1998; Ting-Toomey, 1988).Gudykunst as well as others (Klopf, 2001; Ting-Toomey, 1988) have given us a framework for examining the role that general cultural dimensions play in the communication process. Gudykunst, in his 1998 book titled Bridging Differences: Effective Intergroup Communication, concludes that “culture influences our communication and our communication influences our cultures” (p. 44). Therefore, an individual’s cross-cultural communication is important in providing communication guidelines for how specific cultures and nations talk. Neither cultural level of competency nor the individual level of competency is adequate to reflect the new multicultural phenomena occurring in our global market. Therefore, a richer understanding of global negotiation will result from an integrative approach (individual factors and cultural factors). Thus, viewing cross-cultural communication in global negotiations offers important perspectives for the new global market.
Negotiator communication competency is essential for understanding the role that communication plays in global negotiations. The benefits of moving from a cultural generality model to a geocentric model that includes the individual negotiators’ cross-cultural communication is greatly beneficial for several reasons. This essay will concentrate on the role of cross cultural communication competency in geocentric negotiation.
Case studyThe case study is based on the author imagination working as a communication officer in governance unit at the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) in Indonesia. The structure of the organization is real provided by web-research and for some extent, author experience dealing with cross-cultural issues in home country- Saudi Arabia. UNDP is the UNs global development network, an organization advocating for change and connecting countries to knowledge, experience and resources to help people build a better life. UNDP existed in 166 countries, working with them on their own solutions to global and national development challenges.
In Indonesia, according to their website , UNDP has 5 main pillars to support the initiatives and provided the basis for Indonesia’s new country cooperation framework. Those 5 pillars are: governance reforms, Pro-poor policy reforms, conflict prevention and recovery, environmental management and the last one is program management and learning unit.
Governance reforms ( in short governance unit) , the place I imagined to work, is the unit to promote good governance in all its aspects, to include ensuring the rule of law, to improve the efficiency and accountability of the public sector, and to eliminate corrupt practices is an essential element to the achievement of sustainable development. UNDPs Governance Program endeavors to support Indonesia in improving the management of its public resources and enhancing public sector accountability and transparency and developing greater public awareness about the need for and requirements of good governance. In short, the governance cluster consisted of 6 units of deepening democracy, access to justice, electoral support, parliamentary support, Indonesian democracy index, partnership for e-prosperity for the poor.
The governance policy of Indonesia is a multi-pronged approach. The focus on development reform and democratization is critical, as is it a single-step approach to ensure better governance. As part of the new governance plan implemented by the country’s Government of Development and the National Planning Authority (NPA), the framework for the implementation of the Governance Development Plan is designed to improve governance in all respects including by addressing corruption, to improve transparency and efficiency in governance and to improve accountability and accountability, thereby enhancing the effectiveness of public services. As well, as part of the revised government governance plan, the governance cluster of the NPA has also implemented improved accountability and transparency policies. Since 2011, the state has awarded over $2 billion in grants to the state for the governance of public services and the development of good governance in the provinces, territories and the Central and South-East to improve governance in the provinces by improving transparency and transparency, the government has established a network of stakeholders, including the Federal Government, the Indonesian Economic, Social and Financial Affairs Authority, the Bureau of Social and Economic Affairs of the National Development Institute for Policy & Development and other governmental authorities with expertise in governance, to be appointed by the government.
The implementation of reforms in public policy and in particular governance cluster also includes establishing an appropriate governance system which is transparent and transparent at all levels. The goals of the governance plan, as adopted by the NPA and the governor, are to develop an efficient and accountable governance system, which integrates into efficient and efficient public institutions and to focus on strengthening accountability and accountability in the public sector.
UN’s Governance Development Plan is based on a multibillion dollar project comprising the National Planning Authority (NPA) and the Central and South-East Development Bank (CSADB) including the national Development Agency of Indonesia, the National Development Bank of China (NSBI), the National Development Action Committee (INAC) and other institutions.
The roadmap has been developed by the government government of Indonesia through a project, which is being chaired by Dr. Sato Rangikuramah, Chairman of the Advisory Board with expertise in governance governance, that is being designed by Dr. Sato and Dr. J.E. Raman at the Ministry of the Interior.
NPA President and Minister
In addition to the national leadership of the NPA, Indonesia’s President has many important responsibilities. In addition to the president, his government is responsible for ensuring the good governance, transparency and integrity of government by promoting efficient, transparent, accountable governance under the new governance plan. This has included the implementation of a three-pronged governance policy, including the governance cluster of the NPA, enhancing transparency and transparency for all government agencies through the implementation of a three-tier governance plan, strengthening transparency for the ministries and making transparent policies for the State of New and Higher Affairs.
The development agenda (in Indonesian) includes two key pillars: (1) achieving a multi-pronged governance plan, and (2) strengthening governance through strong governance reforms.
In 2014 the plan established more than $1.7 billion funding to improve governance governance including the implementation of an integrated governance system. The first step in the plan to improve governance governance, by enhancing transparency and accountability and providing a greater understanding of the roles and
The communication officers and manager were reporting straight to the head of governance in collaboration with other UNDP Communications team. Our tasks were specifically to handle deepening democracy, access to justice and electoral support programs. There were two communication officers including me. The other one is national communication officer filled up by Indonesian national. Although we were almost doing similar job description, the main distinctive tasks carried by national communication officer was that he needs to liaise with national/Indonesian medias (print/audio-visual media) about UNDP’ governance unit mission. Both of us were reporting to Communications Manager headed by young Swedish woman in the early 30’s attached politically to the UNDP Indonesia as part of Sweden-UNDP leadership program funded by the Swedish government. The governance unit was headed by Indonesian citizen.
The Communication Office in Jakarta was responsible for implementing the new process. The process would be similar to the ones in Turkey to implement democratization of Turkey’s relations with the Philippines, a move that had been stalled over the past few years with Duterte’s administration. The communication office of the President is to take care of a variety of administrative tasks. For example, I am responsible for communicating with the Philippine government about Philippine state sovereignty issues, the implementation of peace negotiations, and in particular, the role of the Philippine presidency in a national dialogue about the Philippine-Philippine border issue. In addition, I was also responsible for communicating to the Philippines’ citizens with the understanding that the national and state governments of the Philippines are the true representatives of a democratic and responsible nation. This process would have included some form of political engagement of the Filipinos, as well as the interaction between the Philippine government and the Chinese government in the US. One of the things we have done is to have a number of political meetings with the President before every election. A total of four months, after which the message of the message to citizens should be transmitted to each voter. We also received messages from the US Government in that capacity. We would have a number of important conversations between our two governments. We also communicated a great deal with leaders from Singapore, Singaporeans, Saudi Arabia, Australia, Turkey, Taiwan, Thailand, and Vietnam. During the elections, we also exchanged with the Philippine Embassy. We worked hard at reaching out to these people through the various NGOs, news channels, and TV broadcasts. However, at that time it did not appear necessary to work with anyone on those three things at this time after there were so many different groups. In fact, it was not very clear what people wanted to hear in particular. However, they were very happy that we communicated and gave them the chance to listen. We have also tried to reach some other leaders, as we had hoped to reach a lot of them. It was then that we realized that our actions and actions will not affect that of other states – that there could be a political situation without it. However, it also would not mean that the Philippines were being used to implement peace, if it did not have the right to be used within the country. Therefore, the new process of reconciliation will take place after elections. This is when negotiations would begin. We have also started to organize some other small groups to participate in these meetings. One such group is the Indonesian Community of the Philippines (EMPO) which consists of the Philippines and the Indonesian Peoples’ Democratic Party (PYD). The PO is a small group that has been working for years to organize and make use of the national political initiatives of both the Philippines and the Indonesian Peoples’ Democratic Party. The group works to prevent Indonesia from violating democratic and national rights and to prevent the United Nations from being responsible for these issues. These groups are seeking the protection of democracy and democratic values to prevent Indonesia from becoming a victim of the war on democracy. They also want to improve its relations with China and the Philippines. The Philippines has taken a number of steps recently to address this situation. There is still no resolution on a national or bilateral dialogue, especially in relation to the Philippines because we do not have a formal dialogue process between the two governments. Therefore, if we can use such a process to secure such a dialogue, we would do so. We have also begun to mobilize a number of community leaders to discuss the problem.
The Indonesian community of the Philippines has also been working towards peace and human rights. However, we have been unable to reach an agreement on how to address the issues of the people of Indonesia.
The Communication Office in Jakarta was responsible for implementing the new process. The process would be similar to the ones in Turkey to implement democratization of Turkey’s relations with the Philippines, a move that had been stalled over the past few years with Duterte’s administration. The communication office of the President is to take care of a variety of administrative tasks. For example, I am responsible for communicating with the Philippine government about Philippine state sovereignty issues, the implementation of peace negotiations, and in particular, the role of the Philippine presidency in a national dialogue about the Philippine-Philippine border issue. In addition, I was also responsible for communicating to the Philippines’ citizens with the understanding that the national and state governments of the Philippines are the true representatives of a democratic and responsible nation. This process would have included some form of political engagement of the Filipinos, as well as the interaction between the Philippine government and the Chinese government in the US. One of the things we have done is to have a number of political meetings with the President before every election. A total of four months, after which the message of the message to citizens should be transmitted to each voter. We also received messages from the US Government in that capacity. We would have a number of important conversations between our two governments. We also communicated a great deal with leaders from Singapore, Singaporeans, Saudi Arabia, Australia, Turkey, Taiwan, Thailand, and Vietnam. During the elections, we also exchanged with the Philippine Embassy. We worked hard at reaching out to these people through the various NGOs, news channels, and TV broadcasts. However, at that time it did not appear necessary to work with anyone on those three things at this time after there were so many different groups. In fact, it was not very clear what people wanted to hear in particular. However, they were very happy that we communicated and gave them the chance to listen. We have also tried to reach some other leaders, as we had hoped to reach a lot of them. It was then that we realized that our actions and actions will not affect that of other states – that there could be a political situation without it. However, it also would not mean that the Philippines were being used to implement peace, if it did not have the right to be used within the country. Therefore, the new process of reconciliation will take place after elections. This is when negotiations would begin. We have also started to organize some other small groups to participate in these meetings. One such group is the Indonesian Community of the Philippines (EMPO) which consists of the Philippines and the Indonesian Peoples’ Democratic Party (PYD). The PO is a small group that has been working for years to organize and make use of the national political initiatives of both the Philippines and the Indonesian Peoples’ Democratic Party. The group works to prevent Indonesia from violating democratic and national rights and to prevent the United Nations from being responsible for these issues. These groups are seeking the protection of democracy and democratic values to prevent Indonesia from becoming a victim of the war on democracy. They also want to improve its relations with China and the Philippines. The Philippines has taken a number of steps recently to address this situation. There is still no resolution on a national or bilateral dialogue, especially in relation to the Philippines because we do not have a formal dialogue process between the two governments. Therefore, if we can use such a process to secure such a dialogue, we would do so. We have also begun to mobilize a number of community leaders to discuss the problem.
The Indonesian community of the Philippines has also been working towards peace and human rights. However, we have been unable to reach an agreement on how to address the issues of the people of Indonesia.
As an international communication officer, I was -among other things- responsible for as listed below: developed and implemented communications and advocacy strategy and action plan, expanded and implemented a public information strategy to articulate UNDP’s role in helping Indonesia to achieve the Millennium Development Goal (MDGs) through print as well as audio/visual media, and developed and maintained a network of media contacts, as well as contacts in the government and civil society to foster better public understanding of UNDP. The work implies to include governments, bilateral, multilateral donor agencies, policy makers, partners organizations, academic institutions.
The most interesting part I would like to point out, our projects rates we were handling considered low/below the pass point considered by the UNDP panel. The head of governance unit was always pointing on these. She pointed out among all the three projects that we handled, all of them considered nearly failed (the projects did not deliver the agreed outputs (as promised in the TOR), our government counterpart was not happy — this was brought up to the donors coordination meeting which was bringing significant impact on budgets streamline and further sustainability of the project life cycle).
To assessing the failure, I employed 5 factors in order to analyse the cross-cultural communication competency in geocentric negotiation. The key components for developing cross-cultural communication in geocentric negotiations are appropriateness, effectiveness, adaptation component, mindfulness or being presence, and knowledge. These components are compiled from many authors and discussed in the next section.
1. AppropriatenessAppropriateness is the ability to communicate with someone in a socially sensitive manner so as not to offend or break any rules that would result in insult, face threat, or rudeness. Communication