Good morning. Having looked at five adaptation strategies, I would now like to bring in the role of decision-making processes in different cultures. In fact, we can say that the real purpose of any negotiation itself is to influence wider organizational decision processes so as to produce a meaningful and acceptable "yes". For the intercultural negotiator, awareness of the contrasts in cultures of decision-making is very important as is careful analysis of the other side's typical processes. As we've already seen in discussing Hofstede's work, differences between power distance and individualism-collectivism across cultures are likely to influence team organization and a number of assumptions that are made about negotiation in a given society. Three major types of decision-making process can be identified: top-down processes, consensus-based processes and delegated decision-making processes. Firstly, let's take the top-down decision making process. This may often be driven by the power of a "supreme leader" who can have complete authority to decide almost all matters. He or she may ultimately make the decision unilaterally and generally quickly. However, this supreme leader may not be actually present at the negotiation table or if part of a very large delegation, he or she may not be the spokesperson. Nonetheless, the influence and importance of that person will be very significant for the way negotiators behave. This can be the case in cultures such as Asian countries - China, Taiwan, Korea, Singapore, etc., Mexico, Burkina Faso, Maasai culture. Secondly, we have the consensus-based process. Here it may not be at all apparent who has authority to actually take a decision. Furthermore, in organizations where such processes are common, negotiation will be complex and will take a long time as continuing agreement among the members of a negotiating team or with external stakeholders will be necessary. There is likely to be a focus on building and maintaining good relationships between the parties in such a situation. We might also expect the demands from the other side for information will be frequent and also focused on getting exhaustive detail about proposals, approaches and possible concessions. This can be the case in cultures like the organization of the European Union, in Japan or in African clan cultures such as in Somalia. Finally, we have the typical delegated decision-making process, one found in many Anglo-American and Northern European societies. A delegate or representative is authorized or legitimated by a formal or legal process to speak on behalf of, and in some cases decide for, a figure or group in the background who has ultimate power and authority. The mandate between principal and agent reflects this in the negotiating process. Usually the negotiator will have some leeway to negotiate with the principal both the mandate itself, before the actual negotiation starts, and the acceptability of any agreement reached during and at the end of the negotiating process. It will be a back-and-forth consultation process between agent and principal. Agents will likely be trusted both for their skills and for their integrity. Finally, one caveat. Note that although identifying the players and analyzing their decision-making process is crucial, it may not be enough as many countries have webs of influence that are more powerful than the actual parties making the agreement. Even if those webs do not have the formal authority of official organizations, it is important not to underestimate the power of such informal influences and to factor your understanding of them into one's negotiating approach whenever possible.