Franco-Scandinavian Negotiation

This analysis of the cultural differences in Franco-Scandinavian negotiations is the result of a series of interviews with experienced negotiators from France, Denmark, Sweden and Norway.
In the following pages we shall be looking at ho each side views the other, examining some of the effects of these judgments, and giving advice to French and Scandinavian negotiators on how to minimize misunderstandings and build common ground for negotiating together.
A word about stereotyping: the observations made in this report are the spontaneous responses of people interviewed, based on their experience. If stereotypes emerge, this is because different negotiators have consistently similar reactions toward the other side.
Clearly there are differences among Danes, Swedes and Norwegians, and where these differences were mentioned, we have noted them. Yet the fact that "Scandinavian negotiators" is a recognizable group for the French only emphasizes again the natural tendency to distinguish between "myself and others" but not always to be concerned with differences among these "others". This is also a form of stereotyping that needs to be recognized in order to be managed effectively.
Stereotypes can, however, be very useful. Given their strong influence on the relationship between two negotiators,
knowing the preconceived images that both parties have of each other does put negotiators in a much stronger position to get below the surface of stereotypes and achieve a better mutual understanding.
Previous cross-cultural negotiation studies undertaken by ICM include Franco-British Negotiations (1987) and Franco-American Negotiations (1988).

General Portraits

This first section deals with the spontaneous perceptions the two groups interviewed had of each other. Data is at this stage "raw", and no analytic commentary has been added.

The French Negotiator as viewed by his Scandinavian counterpart.

French negotiators have impressive intellectual abilities, a very high level of general culture and broad academic horizons. They are often very political and like to take a global approach. They are also extremely creative - full of wild plans and lots of ideas - a very positive quality".

Yet this intellectual style has its downside: "negotiators tend to be too self assured and bombastic, driven by an intellectual and cultural pride, expressed in a self-centered and nationalist 'France is the center of the world' attitude." "Despite their education, French negotiators are extremely ill-informed on other, particularly Scandinavian cultures. To them France constitutes 96 % of the world. Everything north of Brussels is a white spot on a French person's inner map. They prefer to negotiate in France, as if Scandinavia were simply too far away. This arrogance is one of the things we most dislike. They seek to impress, convinced of their own intellectual and cultural superiority. This superiority ruins many possibilities of good relationships".

"Furthermore they are extremely nationalistic; always striving for a French solution. They give the impression during negotiations that they are fighting for France - they seem conscious of this, proud of it and very good at it!".

"This arrogance and self-centeredness can conceal the positive aspect of the message they are trying to communicate and thus impede the development of a good business relationship, which is, of course, a shame".

Scandinavian managers are equally frustrated by the complexity of French protocol. Formality is very important to French negotiators, a strong contrast to the relaxed, interpersonal Scandinavian style: "we feel that a lot of time is wasted on unnecessary protocol and rituals."

Furthermore: "There is a great deal of distance between people and hierarchies and during negotiations individual roles are very clear, even down to who is to say what, and when".

"Some people explain French formality by the fact that French negotiators are part of highly rigid hierarchical structures and possess a great respect for authority. Status, prestige and position are clearly the pillars of French organizations along with their complex bureaucratic procedures."

One Swedish manager put it like this: "The French have a totally different organizational structure from us. The Chief Executive is often very dictatorial - almost Napoleonic in his management style".

"Very often a French negotiator cannot make decisions that go beyond the directives they have had from their superior before the negotiation. They seem to be continually guided and controlled by directives from the top".

The Scandinavian Negotiator as viewed by his French counterpart

"Scandinavian negotiators are rigorous, punctual and are perfectly prepared. They turn up with a very precise agenda and stick to it doggedly. There are never any surprises - you do not discuss subjects not on the agenda. They seem to have difficulty in generalizing and accepting anything that is unknown."

"Punctuality is a Nordic symptom and requirement. This point cannot be overstated. Official hours are from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., and you simply do not work after 5 p.m. In addition to this there are always coffee breaks in the morning and in the afternoon where everybody stops working to have their coffee".

"We clearly admire their sense of organization and their talent for finding a quick, concrete and practical solution and making it work. Scandinavians are extremely pragmatic and well organized, concerned with results and with handling things in a practical and efficient way."

One word of caution, however: "Scandinavians seem to have such an implicit faith in their systems that they are completely lost when these systems do not work". This was often attributed by those interviewed to the Scandinavians' all-encompassing state welfare system: cared-for by the system from cradle to grave, Scandinavians tend to duplicate this situation in a business environment.

"One of the most important differences between French and Scandinavian negotiators is French courtesy versus the Scandinavian informality. Scandinavians are very informal , both in negotiations and in daily life. Negotiators can be unsubtle, and lacking in nuance. Their directness can almost seem brutal. To us, Scandinavian negotiators are rather cold and not especially communicative; there is too much seriousness and too little fantasy."

Scandinavian directness however turns to compromise and consensus as soon as there is a risk of conflict. "In spite of the direct and open atmosphere, Scandinavians are not always that honest in conflict situations. Sometimes they do not tell the whole truth because they do not want to make a big fuss about it. Uncomfortable with conflict, they can gloss over problems which can hamper decision-making."

The image of the calm, discreet Scandinavian negotiator can also mask an unpleasant 'know-it-all' attitude towards Latin countries, which the French find insulting : "Some Scandinavians can be very moralizing against people from the south of Europe. I suppose they consider themselves more civilized than us because of their welfare state etc., yet it can be very annoying; a sort of condescending nationalist attitude towards the uncivilized foreigner".

The Swedes are perceived by the French as being the most pragmatic and rigorous of the Scandinavian people. "Extremely focused on details, very systematic, analytical and impressively well prepared - very "professional". Like the Germans they are rational and efficient, highly perfectionist but slow - because of their great attention to details." Another added, "My Swedish counterparts are experts in analysis. Their work is always extremely thorough with every possible detail considered - in other words: "perfect".

To French managers their Swedish counterparts lack personality and charisma. "They are very secretive", one French executive mentioned, "you do not know what they are thinking". "They are too disciplined, and lack spontaneity, are not especially communicative and incapable of opening up intellectually". A marked contrast to the French who, according to one Scandinavian negotiator "like to consider the beginning of the negotiation as a seduction."

The French perceive The Danes and Norwegians to be more similar: more relaxed than the Swedes - "polite, smiling and warm with lots of humor and flexibility."

The French appreciate the Danes' humor, a good defense during discussions. Only the sarcasm and the irony can be misunderstood at times. "They seem very warm, but this is not necessarily honest. They can be extremely sarcastic and ironic which can seem insulting. They are good at repartee and expect you to be just as skilled yourself."

Furthermore, French managers detect a certain softness and tendency to underact, an important trait of the Danish character. This is also called "Janteloven" - "the law of Jante" - or, the idea that you should never think too highly of yourself.

Negotiation Style and Content

The French clearly enjoy debate and tend to regard the negotiation process as an intellectual challenge: something to be won. They are highly skilled in Cartesian argument, a process that begins with an overall picture and then moves toward the concrete issues. Scandinavians, by contrast, conform to Anglo-Saxon negotiation style: they begin with the concrete issues and move towards the general.

Scandinavian negotiators see both positive and negative elements in French debating style: "I admire the French for being so well-spoken. They are excellent communicators, good at persuading. They use it all, verbal and non-verbal; it is almost theatre".

" They think quickly, are well educated and have an ability for long discussions that we Scandinavians lack - also the discussions never remain linked to the negotiation. They often touch upon politics and world economics."

The French and the Scandinavians view the negotiation itself, however, in very different ways:

The French are more oriented towards the context and the process of the negotiation, focusing on form, style and appearance. Personal relations and contacts are key factors; the "get-together" over a meal to get acquainted is crucial. Formality is more likely to be dropped once a deeper relationship has been established. To achieve this, conversation should not focus on the negotiation

Small talk, however, is not as common in Scandinavia, and much less valued. One Scandinavian manager complained: "It always takes more time to get down to business with the French than with other nationalities. First you have to have lunch and here no business is discussed at all. Business is tackled during the coffee break - if you're lucky! "

If French negotiators regard the negotiation as an arena for discussion and debate, Scandinavians are much more concrete, low key and focused on the task itself. A Norwegian executive commented: "The French tend to focus on people and seem to be happier being part of a process than taking part in the results".

"Scandinavians are more result-oriented and intent on achieving their objectives within a certain time frame. Corresponding with social democratic tradition they strive for compromise and consensus."

The French approach can therefore be irritating: comments like "The French are not serious enough. They talk too much and spend too much time at the dinner table" were frequent during interviews with Scandinavians.

It could be said that whilst Scandinavians make a relatively clear distinction between the "task" (the dossier under negotiation) and the "person" (the negotiator), the French prefer to have a simultaneous relationship at both levels. In other words, at the dinner table one could talk about "other things" as well as the dossier under negotiation; in the sauna the dossier would not be mentioned.

Attitude towards Conflict

Scandinavian negotiators, particularly the Swedes, have an inherent aversion to conflict. They will often gloss over or avoid problems when conflicts threaten. This approach is exasperating for French negotiators, many of whom were quick to point out that conflict is, for them, both positive and constructive - a good way of stimulating fruitful debate.

"When the temperature rises they just keep quiet. They say nothing at all. You know what is on their mind, but they don't verbalize it." This desire to "argue things out" is interpreted by the Scandinavians as a threat: "The French tend to be much more outspoken, even down to being aggressive and provocative. That is the Latin temperament".

Yet, the Scandinavians' way of trying to "impose" compromise and consensus over conflict, can be perceived by the French as blocking the negotiations and hampering real understanding. The conflict accelerates. Given these two diametrically opposed cultural approaches, an astute French negotiator should know how to use his aggression intelligently: avoid seeming aggressive in an exchange of ideas in order to demonstrate the validity of his position, or use his aggression to tactfully redirect discussions, while an astute Scandinavian would do well to speak his mind more openly than usual.

Hierarchy, Power, Authority and Decision

According to Scandinavian executives, hierarchy is diminishing in Scandinavia. All three countries have a strong sense of industrial democracy and egalitarianism, and decision-making is much more decentralized than it was, say, 20 years ago. They assert that Scandinavian businesses generally dislike corporate secrecy: managers are invariably informed, aware of company objectives and tend to pull together in one direction. Top and Middle Management have a strong respect for people down the line, and in negotiations will try and endorse the lower manager's proposals.

Conversely, the notion of power is very present in French organizations, and the "trappings" of this very evident: visible hierarchies, status symbols, clear roles and responsibilities, delicate problems of information-sharing.

In the same way, centralization is important to French culture. Concentration at the centre and a unique power command are two traditional elements of organizations. During a negotiation the French party may well have problems deciding on an issue of the negotiation if they feel that it is not in their domain. Because delegation negotiations are less frequent in France than in Scandinavia, these blocked situations are likely to irritate the latter.

"Knowledge is power, and everything takes more time with the French. If we ask an assistant for information, they cannot go directly to the person who has this information, but instead must work their way through the hierarchy. No one seems to want to share information."

Scandinavian executives all assert that prestige, status and position in the hierarchy are much more important to the French, who, during negotiations, quite visibly strive for personal success.

"The French take authority extremely seriously, and try to show off their power in front of each other. They do not like you to come to the meeting in a group. This calls into question who is in charge, and thus creates a bad climate." Trying to reach them by telephone is a good illustration of their views on authority. One French negotiator told us that "In France, if you are difficult to get hold of, that must mean that you are important".

Both sides consider decision-making a problem between the two parties. It is difficult to reach a consensus of opinion on this point, since both sides maintain that it is always they who have to make the effort!

Scandinavian negotiators blame French bureaucracy and hierarchy for prolonging the decision-making process:

"It takes time to reach a final agreement, especially if the decision-maker is not present. In that case the negotiator has to check with his superior all the time, because he doesn't have the authority to make decisions himself - given this, negotiations often take longer than expected."

French negotiators accuse their Scandinavian counterparts of slow decision-making because of their preference for consensus over quick results:

"The Swedes especially have a complex about decision-making...they insist on examining every detail, and because they do not like the 'unknown', they want to be prepared for everything."

Attitude towards Time and Discipline

Punctuality and time-management are acknowledged by French and Scandinavian executives as one of the most important differences between the two groups. "Almost a phobia with them!", according to the French.

"Scandinavians live by strict rules of punctuality. Weekday business visitors arrive five to ten minutes early for appointments. If a foreign visitor arrives on time, he will not be made to wait long. Usually only catastrophies are genuinely accepted as excuses".

To the Scandinavians, "the French are always late - half an hour is the average. They rarely apologize for this, which we find incredible." Swedish negotiators in particular point out the annoying phenomenon of "the French 15 minutes"; where "you are invariably kept waiting for a quarter of an hour at the reception of a French business partner. We have to get used to this, and there is no reason to get angry or irritated. But sometimes we do".

Several of the negotiators interviewed connect French disregard for time with more general Latin business practice. "The French, along with many of their Latin counterparts, have no idea of time management. No agenda, no planning - they often let themselves be interrupted by telephone calls during the meeting - and on top of all that they seem to have no respect for working hours. The time allocated to negotiations and meetings is never sufficient".

For the Scandinavians time management is crucial and greatly respected and some French negotiators appreciated this. One French negotiator remarked: "it is surprisingly easy to get through on the phone to Scandinavian negotiators and make an appointment. Their agendas are extremely well- organized."

On applying the work of E. Hall(1) we could say that the Scandinavians are "monochronic". In other words for them time is linear and continuous with which it is impossible to play without penalizing action. The French, on the other hand, are "polychronic"; their concept of time is three-dimensional and works simultaneously on many levels. One can, therefore, "play" with deadlines, time structures and such like, rather than letting them control us.

Language and Misunderstandings

Negotiations in French can be difficult for Scandinavians because they tend not to master the richness and nuance of the language. Furthermore, the French like to talk. One negotiator observed: "They talk a lot and very quickly and seldom adapt their language to their foreign counterpart. If the Scandinavian negotiator chooses to speak French, he ought to speak it well, or else risks getting lost in French eloquence."

On the same score, if the negotiation takes place in English, not everyone will master the language at the same level. Although both parties are theoretically in the same, neutral position, misunderstandings do occur, as Scandinavian negotiators tend to speak better English than the French, according to both sides.

Common to both sides is the recognition that joint decisions have to be taken on which language should be used, and complicated vocabulary or slang outlawed.

Dress and Social Behavior

For the French, according to those interviewed, "Appearance is extremely important. The French pay significant attention to what they wear, are always elegant and well dressed - and tend to stay that way throughout the meeting".

Scandinavian dress code is far more relaxed. "In Scandinavia it is fine to arrive dressed in a nice sweater. In France it can be very insulting if you do not wear a suit, tie and well polished-shoes. This can cause embarrassment".

Apart from dress, linguistic protocol is troubling for both parties. The French are ill at ease with the Scandinavian tendency for "tutoiement" and the Scandinavians equally unused to the way language is used to express hierarchical difference.

Nature of the Agreement

Scandinavians view French contracts as extremely formal, long and very detailed. The French tendency to try and foresee every situation can be interpreted, especially by the Danes and the Norwegians, at best as "quibbling", at worst as a sign of mistrust. But French negotiators feel it is "naive" of the Scandinavians to make such a reproach.

"The French are unwilling to express a common opinion in writing without being a 100 % sure that everything has been understood correctly. They always try to choose the words so the content will conform to their view of things, and documents are revised many times before they are finally signed".

Furthermore, Scandinavians regret the lack of feed-back from French negotiators, and the "laissez-faire" attitude of the post-negotiation phase. "When you leave, it is up to you to take the initiative to the next meeting - it is up to you to do the organization".

Scandinavians also feel that the French lack initiative in the action phase : "the practical side is missing. You always have to double check with the French. Follow-up, as well as lots of patience are necessities in the post-negotiation phase".

The French agree that Scandinavian negotiators are more pragmatic, action-oriented and less detailed. Only Swedish negotiators are seen as particularly concerned with details. "We always receive very detailed summaries from our Swedish counterparts", a French executive explains, "and it should be pointed out that with the Swedes you usually arrive at a solution, because of their focus on consensus and compromise".

If the French seem persnickety about what they are committing themselves to - the written contract - the Scandinavians are equally sensitive about details concerning implementation and action. This does not mean that the Scandinavians do not value the law or that the French do not act : what is different is its degree of importance or priority given to them, and this is often a source of misunderstanding.

Conclusion: Advice to compatriots

The French and Scandinavian negotiators interviewed had some precise advice for their less-informed compatriots, who might be negotiating with their overseas partners.

These are listed below so that other French or Scandinavian negotiators may benefit from the wider experience of others, and be better equipped to achieve their aims.

One important point: These tips have as much bearing on what the advice-giver sees as his own weak points as on what he identifies as the strong points of the other side. Because they reflect the dynamics of the two, they are specific to French-Scandinavian negotiations and so particularly relevant in that context.

Advice from the French to their Compatriots on Negotiating with the Scandinavians

How to prepare:

Particularly for the Swedes:

How to behave:

How to negotiate:

Particularly for the Swedes:

Particularly for the Danes:

Advice from the Scandinavians to their Compatriots on Negotiating with the French.

How to prepare:

How to behave:

How to negotiate:

Inter Cultural Management Associates (ICM) is a Paris-based consulting firm which since 1983 has helped managers and organizations work effectively across cultural orders, be they national, corporate or functional.

Inter Cultural Management Associates

2, rue de l'Eglise - 92200 Neuilly sur Seine - France

icm@icmassociates.com