Germanic vs Turkic Negotiators’ Ethical Propensity and Formal Contracts:The Moderating Role of Trust

2016

Closed access Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.5465/ambpp.2016.15073abstract
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

This study investigates the tendency of negotiators to endorse the signing of formal business contracts in Germanic and Turkic cultural contexts. Theory of culture suggests that people in some cultures would prefer to formalize business contracts in formal documents, while people in other cultures would tend to rely on relationships to secure business agreements and, therefore, would resort less to signing formal documents. A questionnaire, translated from English to German, Turkish, Kyrgyz and Russian, was administered to 679 negotiators in the Germanic countries of Austria, Germany, and Luxembourg and to 745 negotiators in the Turkic countries of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Turkey. Negotiators’ ethical predisposition influenced their preferences toward the signing of formal contracts. This relationship was observed to be moderated by negotiators’ trust propensity levels. From a cross-cultural perspective, Germanic negotiators endorsed the use of formal contracts significantly more than the Turkic negotiators. Theoretical and practical applications are discussed.