Executive SummaryThis study investigates the role of national culture in the formation of the trust that people are likely to extend to exchange partners in business negotiations and, consequently, how the level of such trust influences the likelihood of using certain questionable tactics in intra-and cross-cultural negotiations. Based on survey data collected from businesspeople from Canada, Mexico, and the United States, this article shows that trust is culturally embedded and has a negative relationship with the likelihood of using certain questionable negotiation tactics. The study found that Mexican negotiators are less likely to use questionable negotiation tactics in intracultural negotiations as compared to cross-cultural negotiations. On the other hand, the intended negotiation behaviors of Canadian and U.S. negotiators were not found to vary significantly across intra-and cross-cultural negotiations. The findings of the study underscore the importance of building relationship with exchange partners, especially when such exchange partners come from countries that represent collectivistic, high-context, strong uncertaintyavoidance, and large power-distance cultures.

Trust plays a significant role in business peoples’ choices of negotiating tactics. This study compares the use of generally accepted negotiating tactics with dubious ones. Findings from a sample of Mexican business people indicate that the type of negotiation (intra‐cultural vs cross‐cultural) is predictive of the level of trust that a negotiator will place in an opponent and of the likelihood of using various negotiation tactics.

Purpose This paper aims to examine the causes and consequences of animosity that Sunni Arabs may harbor against Iran and Turkey – two regional powers and key players in the Middle East. Design/methodology/approach Using Jordanians as proxy for Sunni Arab consumers, data were collected from 218 respondents by means of an intercept survey. A systematic random sampling was used in selecting the respondents. Structural equation modeling was used to examine the role of religious/sectarian commitment (Sunni Islamic), ethnic identification (Arab), nationalism, patriotism and internationalism as potential sources of animosity of Sunni Arabs toward Iran and Turkey. Findings The findings show integrative/multiplicative impact of various social attributes on Sunni Arabs’ animosity toward Iran and Turkey and indicate a higher prevalence of animosity toward Iran than toward Turkey among the respondents. The findings also show how animosity decreases the likelihood of buying Iranian and Turkish products by Jordanian consumers. Research limitations/implications This paper, while unearthing interesting relationships among five antecedent variables, consumer animosity and purchase intentions, calls for further research to examine how the relationships between feelings of animosity and willingness to purchase products could be moderated by variables such as world-mindedness and foreign travel. Future researchers should also study how consumer animosity can be reduced. Practical implications The findings provide insights as to how foreign marketers can adjust their marketing strategies in the lucrative Arab market. Social implications The findings call for a more nuanced understanding of the role of religious/sectarian commitment, ethnicity, nationalism, patriotism and internationalism in causing and/or exacerbating animosity and consequently affecting purchase decisions of consumers. Originality/value The study contributes to the existing literature by measuring the hitherto unexamined role of intra-religious sectarian feelings in consumer animosity and purchase decisions and by analyzing the mediating role of consumer animosity between the five antecedent variables and willingness to purchase products from “enemy” countries.

No abstract

No abstract