Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Cross-cultural has become an important factor in national negotiations and in the international business activities of companies. In particular, the United States and China, which are recognized as central countries in various fields such as politics, economy, society, culture and diplomacy, are representative countries of intercultural studies representing the East and the West. Russia, and Canada, it is the third and fourth largest cross-cultural country in the world. The United States and China, which form Cross-cultural and multinational cultures, are the best countries to study cross-cultural studies, and are the country that is the best country to conduct negotiations because it is the nation that is leading the world negotiations. In order to maximize the quality of the research, the questionnaire was prepared by manipulating variables such as Cross-cultural value orientation and cross -cultural ability of Americans and Chinese. In order to carry out this study, Kluckhohn, F. and Strodbeck, FL (1961), G. Hofstede (1980), ET Hall (1976), Lee Je-Hong (2018, e-business Studies), Language and time of scholars such as Lee Je-Hong (2017, Journal of International Trade and Commerce) and Lee Je-Hong (2018, Korea International Commerce Review), and non-verbal communication cultural value types of space concepts. The value of the preceding research, which is considered as time factor, behavior value, communication value, organizational (group) value, authoritative value, objective fair value, uncertainty value, competitive value, enterprising value and tradition and custom value orientation, The United States and Chinese youths, and examine the effects of these factors on the types of negotiations -distributional and collective bargaining - and their impact on negotiation performance. The main objective of this study is to analyze the impacts of cross - cultural changes in these major countries on negotiations and implement Koreas global business negotiation model. The results of this study summarize the differences between Korea, the United States and China. In the previous studies, China shows a type of behavioral and positive cross-culturalism, even though it is a static country. It has a tendency to pursue the value of positive life pattern, competitive, enterprising, active, And the tendency to try to get it shows the trend of changing culture. As a result of the intercultural exchange in the previous studies and the intercultural trends in the present study, the Korean young man is a transcendental cross - cultural figure made up of orders under the hierarchical relationship. In this study, And has a communication value orientation that changes with the tendency. On the other hand, the authoritative value-orientated cross-culturalism is an authoritative and privileged consciousness, and has a Cross-cultural society that emphasizes the hierarchical relationship and social status. The United States has a cross-culturalism centering on individualism, realism, and the family. The results of this study have very low cultural value and are changing into a tradition and custom-oriented cross-cultural trend. Therefore, Korea and the United States have the same effect on the negotiation outcome while the “distributive negotiation” has no effect on the negotiation outcome. This tends to pursue WIN-WIN negotiation through coordination with the other party rather than negotiating a competitive, struggle-winning ROK-US relationship. On the other hand, in recent years, China has shown a tendency to be struggling and militant, not to lose the bargaining power, and on the other hand, it has been negotiating the bidirectional pursuit that pursues mutual benefits through distributive negotiation.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,006 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,006 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,005 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».