Comments for Chinese Negotiation

Comment on The Whirlpool of US-China Conflict. Part 1: The Drivers by Follow on Twitter: Chinasolved

Follow on Twitter: Chinasolved — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 02:44:31 +0000

Hi Lark — thanks for the input.

I won’t split hairs about who believes what and what medium is equivalent to what, and go straight to your final line.

I am very frightened that you are largely correct. And that’s the point. To paraphrase your comment: “our systems may be so incompatible that negotiation is (practically) impossible”

Comment on The Whirlpool of US-China Conflict. Part 1: The Drivers by lark

lark — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 00:41:25 +0000

You say:
“In Beijing, US commentators and social networks siding with the protesters was likely perceived in much the same way that Washington policy makers would react to a string of Xinhua editorials cheering on Al Qaeda and the Taliban. It not only undermined trust and cooperation – but also empowered right-wing conservatives who felt that China had opened to far too fast.”

You may be right – but if so, that shows our systems are so incompatible that negotiation is not possible.

You say that the appearance of pro-Tibet sentiments in Facebook is equivalent to pro-Al Qaeda sentiments in Xinhua.

But the two forms of media are not comparable.
The US govt does not orchestrate what appears in social,or other, media. What appears in Xinhua is much more closely tied to the position of the Chinese authorities.
It is simply a mistake to conflate these two.

If the Chinese cannot understand that the US govt does not control media in the ways it controls media, we cannot get along.

Comment on The Whirlpool of US-China Conflict. Part 1: The Drivers by uberVU - social comments

uberVU - social comments — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 18:37:00 +0000

Social comments and analytics for this post…

This post was mentioned on Twitter by chinasolved: ChineseNegotiation Post: Drivers of US-China trade conflict. http://ow.ly/12PBz…

Comment on Batna Analysis in China – A Time-Culture Matrix by The Whirlpool of US-China Conflict. Part 1: The Drivers | Chinese Negotiation

Tue, 02 Feb 2010 03:30:04 +0000

[...] Chinese negotiators tend to believe that their BATNA (Best Alternative to No Agreement – otherwise known as ‘Bottom Line’) is enhanced by a [...]

Comment on US-China Variation of Prisoners Dilemma – The Factory Game. by The Whirlpool of US-China Conflict. Part 1: The Drivers | Chinese Negotiation

Tue, 02 Feb 2010 03:21:48 +0000

[...] I’ve done with US & Chinese negotiators in a prisoner’s dilemma-type scenario does not give cause for optimism. China-US negotiation is often characterized by relatively simple, [...]

Comment on Google-China as a case in Lose-Lose Negotiation by uberVU - social comments

uberVU - social comments — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 05:13:44 +0000

Social comments and analytics for this post…

This post was mentioned on Twitter by USChina2010: ChineseNegotiation Post – China-Google as a case of rational lose-lose negotiation. http://ow.ly/108Qy…

Comment on Google-China as a case in Lose-Lose Negotiation by Yixin

Yixin — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 04:40:28 +0000

What was embarassing for Google was that it did bend to the government as much as Baidu, but still couldn’t win in terms of market share. It tried to save face using the excuse of hacking (hard evidence is yet to be provided) and information freedom. Now that it backed down without any compromise from the government, it lost its face totally. Thought people at Google are among the smartest in the world, but in this case they are plain dumb.

Comment on Google-China as a case in Lose-Lose Negotiation by Sam Goodman

Sam Goodman — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 03:14:06 +0000

Great article.

The China-Google Dance is in full swing….

Someone attacked Google in China.
No proof as yet, has been found who specifically is to blame.

Allegations have been made… fingers pointed… feathers ruffled… threats… posturing… Basically it’s been a typical week doing business here in China.

Unless definitive proof is found that the Chinese government was behind the attacks, (my 2 cents) Google ain’t going anywhere. In fact, I won’t be surprised if/when Google issues and apology to China

I, the company Google, apologize to you, the country China. – something like that.

China is like Vegas. It’s the house.
Everyone knows that ‘House Rules’ always favor the house and yet, people still keep coming, hoping to win.

It’s China baby, it’s China…

Comment on Negotiating in China: Basics. BATNA Analysis by Google-China as a case in Lose-Lose Negotiation | Chinese Negotiation

Google-China as a case in Lose-Lose Negotiation | Chinese Negotiation — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 13:25:49 +0000

[...] discovery was a game-changer that significantly constrained Google’s negotiation options. It’s BATNA plummeted, and the only rational course of action was to negotiate to limit its losses and [...]

Comment on A Stakeholder Analysis of Chinese Negotiation by Follow on Twitter: Chinasolved

Follow on Twitter: Chinasolved — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 23:51:40 +0000

Yes, Thom — I agree. When I was in business school (quite some time ago) it was all about the shareholder model. Stakeholder analysis makes much more sense in a multi-faceted, global world.