HEDGING STRATEGIES FOR NEGOTIATION BY AN IRANIAN AND A MALAYSIAN COMPANY IN PROJECT MEETINGS

This study examines the negotiation dynamic between an Iranian company (IC) and a Malaysian company (MC). The study narrows the investigation to the usage of hedging strategies in problem-solving negotiation interactions that function as negotiation strategies. A collection of five problem-solving negotiation interactions in project meetings were analyzed to identify the hedging strategies applied by the two negotiating parties. This study involves two main theories Taxonomy of Hedging Strategies (indetermination, subjectivization and depersonalization), functions of hedging strategies (mitigating and intensifying), and Types of Negotiation Strategy (integrative and distributive strategies). It was found that indetermination strategy was significantly exercised by MC, while subjectivisation and indetermination strategies were predominantly exercised by IC. Albeit the dominant usages by both parties, there were dual functions of some hedging strategies by IC and MC which are both indetermination and subjetivisation. Both hedging strategies functioned as mitigating and intensifying while depersonalization functioned as merely mitigating for MC and intensifying for IC. For negotiation strategies, the use of hedging strategies by IC was prone intensifying, this led to the gist of distributive strategies while MC was subjected to mitigating, integrative were the substance of the negotiation strategies. Nevertheless, there were dual strategies exercised in certain negotiation interactions which indicated that both hold the purpose of maintaining rapport and directiveness/ dominance in the particular negotiations. These findings revealed that by acknowledging and understanding the usage and functions of hedging strategies for negotiations, both negotiating parties could sufficiently recognize appropriate responses towards the negotiators’ attitudes and eventually produced desirable negotiation processes and outcomes.