Thank you to everyone who has emailed me their thoughts on my March 28 post discussing when and whether to greet clients with a kiss. As one lawyer pointed out in her email to me, the geographic location may determine which greeting is appropriate:
“Whether it’s one, two, three [kisses], more or none, always creates that hesitation when greeting for the first time. Or, it gets even more confusing when you meet the same non-US person in a different country and the rules change again. When I … spent several weeks every month in the Netherlands, the 3 kiss was the standard with my boss, colleagues and clients. But when they came to the US, depending on the setting, we would switch to one or a handshake! Or, when meeting legal colleagues at meetings in the US from different countries, I would have to remember their standard - 3 for the Dutch, 2 for the Argentinians, 1 for the Mexicans, etc.”
Confusing? Perhaps–but at least interesting! As globalization spreads and customs blend across the borders, might a “standard global greeting” evolve? Let’s hope not. If that happens, life will certainly be less exciting.
How does a lawyer properly greet a client? With a handshake…or perhaps a kiss? Well, it depends. To use the title of one book, lawyers working across cultures need to be savvy enough to know whether to Kiss, Bow or Shake Hands when greeting someone.
And yet many lawyers working across cultures know how difficult–and potentially uncomfortable– it can be to greet a client properly. Yesterday’s Wall Street Journal explored this topic in Americans Learn the Global Art of the Cheek Kiss. As the article discusses, choosing the right form of greeting–such as determining whether to kiss once, twice or thrice– can be most complex.
For example, let’s imagine that you, an American lawyer, are meeting a foreign client in a third country which is not native to either of you. Your client may prefer to greet you with his or her native greeting, or opt for yours, or perhaps choose another greeting entirely–such whichever greeting is favored by the local country. Confusing.
Just yesterday I faced this issue when I greeted another international lawyer. Although we were Americans and were lunching in America, we spontaneously greeted each other with a continental style air kiss–and we actually laughed about whether to make it a single or double. Later, when I ran across the WSJ article, I mulled over my earlier encounter and why we–both being Americans–hadn’t opted for the traditional American-style business handshake. I concluded that because we always meet at international business events, we think of each other in an international context. This influenced which greeting we chose.
The WSJ article advises that the more senior party of the pair should determine the style of greeting. This means that the junior person should remain alert to clues (an outstretched hand etc…) about which form of greeting to anticipate.
In my opinion, gender also plays a role. In cross cultural situations, I’ve watched many businessmen–even those senior to me–wait for me, as a female, to initiate the form greeting. Perhaps this is done as a courtesy, or out of a desire not to offend.
So, do your clients expect you to kiss them? Increasingly so, according to the Wall Street Journal, as continental manners spread across the globe. All the more reason to ramp up your cultural intelligence and tune in–from the moment of greeting on–to your clients’ wishes.
Yesterday I was proud to launch the International Department of The Complete Lawyer (an online magazine for lawyers) with my article on how to Avoid Cross Cultural Communication Snafus. Stay tuned for my article in the next edition about how international lawyers must remain professionally versatile and flexible.
Scents: the new client development tool. Well, why not?
This week’s Economist discusses how odors–even faint ones– are proven to influence our judgments about other people. Scents and Sensitivity describes a study in which participants reacted to photos of other people and rated their “likeability” while smelling even undetectable traces of various odors (both pleasant and unpleasant). The undetectable bad odors negatively influenced how the participants felt about the people in the photos, whereas pleasant odors created a positive reaction.
So, if you want other people to like you–especially potential clients–should you alter your scent for a desired response? According to the article, the study shows how scent can be used as a “powerful method of manipulation” in the business context. It suggests that business people might increase the success of their meetings by releasing small amounts of pleasant scent into their conference rooms.
So, could an attorney increase his or her rainmaking by wearing a pleasing scent? Perhaps. If so, how can a lawyer determine which scents will appeal to which potential clients?
A person’s cultural background may impact which scents smell pleasing. To take a common example from the field of cuisine, the smell of juicy steaks likely appeals to beef-loving Americans but repels many Hindu Indian nationals.
Of course, a client’s personal preference will influence what he/she finds appealing, and there is no guaranteed way to know a potential client’s scent preferences–without asking. However, here are some rules of thumb about using perfumes and cologne:
1. Do not wear too much. If you fear that you have doused yourself too enthusiastically, ask a neutral third party (spouse, colleague, hotel concierge etc…) before entering a client gathering. Remove some in the bathroom before entering the event.
2. Women (and men) should avoid overly floral scents at business gatherings. Floral scents suggest femininity; while this is not bad, it may reinforce certain stereotypes. Opt for a pleasing but gender neutral scent (like one produced by Hermes), or at least perfumes that is not excessively floral.
3. As a general rule, scents with hints of citrus are considered pleasing in most cultures.
4. If you will be interacting with people from a culture that is unfamiliar to you, gather advance feedback about appropriate dress–and even scents. Call (anonymously if you wish) embassy personnel or someone else familiar with that culture.
As long as it captivates others, why not add scent to your rainmaking toolkit?
Many of us think that good negotiating requires special talent. Two Harvard Business School professors beg to differ. As Deepak Malhotra and Max H. Bazerman explain in their recent release Negotiation Genius: How to Overcome Obstacles and Achieve Brilliant Results at the Bargaining Table and Beyond, anyone can learn systematic strategies to negotiation success.
The authors describe in detail how to claim and create value in negotiation, how to use strategies of influence, and the like. Lawyers will hearken back to law school when the authors use the case study method as a teaching tool.
Although the book doesn’t delve deeply into cross-cultural negotiation, it does emphasize the importance of building trust between the parties–particularly in the cross-cultural context. The authors also discuss negotiation strategies used by diplomats; high level diplomats recognize the importance of, and gathering relevant data in anticipation of, the future. In contrast, the authors note, most negotiators focus too much on current issues and fail to look forward.
During an email exchange with Deepak Malhotra, he shared some additional thoughts about international negotiations. First, I asked him whether there were any specific resources that he recommended about building cross-cultural negotiation skills. He replied, “I have yet to read a book on cross-cultural negotiation skills that has impressed me. Part of the problem is that there are too many differences across cultures, and often there are many different cultures across industries within the same country. As a result, broad (and even moderately broad) generalizations do not help much. The best resource is talking to people who have negotiated in the part of the world you’re now entering. And, even if you don’t have access to any such person, there’s nothing wrong with having a candid conversation with your counterpart in the negotiation about their (and your) perspectives and expectations.”
Second, I asked him to identify the biggest mistakes that US negotiators make during cross-cultural business negotiations, and how to avoid such mistakes. Deepak Malhotra answered: “For the most part, gone are the days when US negotiators were so ethnocentric that they walked into a negotiation in another country assuming that everyone shares their norms and values. However, two mistakes are still quite frequent. First, many negotiators rely on stereotypes and broad generalizations regarding how ‘people in that country’ negotiate. Many of these beliefs are anchored in decades old anecdotes and folk wisdom that have not been sufficiently updated and are not particularly nuanced. Second, negotiators spend too little time on ‘cultural differences’ other than those that relate to norms and values. For example, too little time is spent understanding structural problems that can arise in a foreign country such as (1) how easy is it to run a business in that country, (2) how strong and reliable are the legal institutions in that country, (3) how much of a role does the government play in business negotiations (e.g., by controlling permits), (4) how reliable is the infrastructure (e.g., roads, communication, etc.) in that country, etc. These elements, when they are not anticipated, can entirely derail otherwise well-conceived deal.”
Great point. As any international business lawyer knows, such “structural problems” often make or break the deal.Many thanks to Deepak Malhotra for sharing his wisdom.
