“Willkommen in Österreich!” the sign said at the border between Germany and Austria. While looking past the sign out the window, I saw green rolling hills, and they immediately brought to mind the movie I most associate with Austria: The Sound of Music.
I was seated in the passenger seat on a work trip with an Austrian colleague — someone local, someone experienced. We were heading to Salzburg. As the hills opened up in front of us, I smiled and said what felt obvious:
“The hills are alive…”
Silence.
I laughed and tried again.
“…with the sound of music?”
He looked at me, confused.
I assumed he was joking. There was no way someone from Austria didn’t know The Sound of Music. To me—as an American—that movie is Austria. It’s landscape, history, identity.
This must have been a fluke. When we arrived at our hotel, I asked the receptionist about the movie. She smiled and said:
“Oh, that’s an American movie.”
That is when it clicked. What I thought was universal… wasn’t. This realization has shaped how I approach negotiation ever since.
In global animal health, that same gap shows up more often than we like to admit. It appears during pricing conversations, distributor performance discussions, and long-term supply agreements where “alignment” can mean very different things depending on who’s in the room.
We Know IQ. We Talk About EQ. But CQ Is What Decides Outcomes.
In business, we’re comfortable talking about IQ and EQ.
IQ is analytical capability.
EQ is emotional awareness and interpersonal skill.
But in global business dynamics there’s a third capability that is often the difference between progress and friction.
It is Cultural Intelligence (CQ).
Cultural intelligence is the ability to function effectively across different cultural contexts. It goes beyond understanding differences. It requires adjusting your thinking, behavior, and decision-making in real time.
A widely used framework breaks CQ into four components (Ang et al., 2007).
Cognitive CQ is what you know. It is your understanding of cultural norms, business practices, and social expectations.
Metacognitive CQ is how you think about culture. It is the ability to notice assumptions and question them in real time.
Motivational CQ is your drive to engage. It is the willingness to stay curious and adapt rather than snap back to default habits.
Behavioral CQ is what you actually do. It is the ability to adjust communication style, pace, tone, and non-verbal signals.
Negotiation isn’t only about what is said. It is about what is heard.
A recent qualitative study of international B2B negotiators suggests that practitioners emphasize open-mindedness and flexible communication as critical components of cultural intelligence. They emphasized open-mindedness and avoiding stereotypes, paired with flexible communication (Skhiri et al., 2025). In that same study, communication emerged as one of the most frequently cited competencies. (Skhiri et al., 2025).
This matters more than ever in animal health for three reasons.
First, deals are structurally global. Supply chains, regulatory environments, and distributor networks routinely cross borders.
Second, trust is a commercial asset. Many agreements are long-term partnerships, and trust and credibility are built differently across markets.
Third, negotiations are multi-stakeholder and iterative. It is rarely one meeting with one decision-maker. It is rounds of alignment across functions, regions, and roles.
One example that comes to mind:
An animal health company explores an M&A or licensing deal with an overseas partner for a new product. In the meeting, one side proposes terms and hears positive responses such as, “Yes, we understand,” and “This is a good direction.” No one pushes back.
It is easy to mistake that for approval.
In cultures and organizations where hierarchy is strong and “saving face” matters, disagreement is often communicated indirectly, especially in group settings. What sounds like “yes” may mean “we hear you” or “we will take this back.” The real signal is whether you leave with a clear next step, a decision owner, and a timeline.
Takeaway: Treat in-meeting positivity as progress, not commitment. Ask, “Would it help if I summarized where we are? And what’s your usual internal process for confirming this?”
What CQ Looks Like in Practice
CQ is not memorizing facts about countries.
It is noticing when “shared meaning” is not actually shared, then adjusting before the deal slows down. These differences show up in subtle but commercially meaningful ways.
Canada: When “Spring” Isn’t Spring
I once traveled to Canada for a presentation.
I was told: “Just bring a light coat—it’s spring.”
So I packed accordingly.
I landed, stepped outside… and it was snowing.
Same word. Completely different meaning.
In negotiation, this happens constantly:
- “Flexible” means different things
- “Urgent” means different timelines
- “Aligned” means different levels of agreement
The UK: Where Negotiation Starts Before Business
In the UK, I learned quickly that you don’t start with the agenda.
You start with the weather.
And not for 30 seconds. For several minutes.
If you skip it, you risk being perceived as abrupt.
The Netherlands: Directness Is Not Conflict
In the Netherlands, communication is direct.
Clear. Efficient.
It is easy to misread that as aggressive if you are not calibrated for it.
Germany: Discomfort Doesn’t Always Mean Disrespect
Before starting a presentation in Germany, a participant became visibly frustrated and spoke loudly to me in German.
From my cultural lens, it felt confrontational.
Minutes later, he offered me sparkling water and cookies.
Nothing had “gone wrong” from his perspective.
That moment reinforced something I now carry into every negotiation.
Discomfort is not always conflict. It is often cultural difference.
CQ Mini-Playbook: Negotiation Moments That Break (and How to Repair Them)
| Negotiation moment | Common cross-cultural risk | CQ move (what to do) | Example language |
| Opening and rapport | Skipping relationship setup | Match the local “warm-up” norm before driving the agenda | “Before we jump in, I’d love to hear what success looks like on your side.” |
| Exploring needs | Assuming shared definitions (urgent, flexible, alignment) | Ask for operational meaning and constraints | “When you say urgent, what timing are you working toward?” |
| Alignment | Silence interpreted as agreement | Check the decision process and who needs to be consulted | “Is this something you can decide today, or do you prefer to align internally first?” |
| Closing | Different norms for commitment and follow-through | Confirm next steps in the format the counterpart trusts | “What would a clear commitment look like for you: a recap email, a draft agreement, or a follow-up call?” |
Cultural Intelligence Changes Outcomes
Cultural intelligence doesn’t just make interactions smoother. It changes results.
Research suggests:
- Negotiation behaviors are shaped by cultural norms (Gelfand et al., 2011)
- Research shows that negotiation outcomes can vary across cultures depending on context (Shan et al., 2019)
- Communication effectiveness is central to successful outcomes (Skhiri et al., 2025)
A simple way to make this tangible is the individualistic versus collectivistic lens. Most cultures contain both tendencies, and individuals vary widely, but the contrast helps explain why the same behavior can land differently.
In more individualistic contexts (often associated with the U.S. and parts of Western Europe), people are generally taught to prioritize personal autonomy and clarity. In negotiation, that can show up like this:
- Directness is valued
- Speed is prioritized
- Individual accountability is emphasized
In more collectivistic contexts (often associated with parts of Asia, including China and South Korea), people are generally taught to prioritize group harmony and shared accountability. In negotiation, that can show up like this:
- Harmony is prioritized
- Decisions are group-oriented
- Relationship-building precedes outcomes
If you apply the same negotiation style across both, you can be effective in one and ineffective in the other.
The Most Dangerous Assumption in Global Business
The biggest risk is not lack of knowledge.
It is false certainty.
It is assuming your interpretation is shared, your intent is understood, and your norms are universal.
They are not.
How to Build Cultural Intelligence
1) Do a quick pre-brief
Before the meeting, learn three things:
- Communication norms (direct or indirect, formal or informal)
- Decision-making structure (who decides, and how consensus happens)
- Relationship expectations (what “trust-building” looks like in that context)
Whenever I’m traveling, I try to meet with someone local beforehand and ask, “What should I watch for that I could misread?”
2) Use a “tell” when silence shows up
Silence is data, not a verdict. When the room goes quiet, try:
“Would it help if I summarized where we are? And what’s your usual internal process for confirming this?”
3) Check meaning, not just words
If a term can be interpreted multiple ways, ask for the operational definition:
- “When you say urgent, what timing are you working toward?”
- “What does aligned mean on your side? Is it agreement, or agreement plus internal sign-off?”
4) Debrief to close the gap
After the meeting, debrief with a local colleague or partner and ask:
- What did I misread?
- What landed well?
- What should I do differently next time?
5) Adapt delivery, not integrity
Stay authentic. Adjust the way you communicate, the pace of conversation, and how you build trust.
Final Thought
I still think of The Sound of Music when I think of those hills.
But I no longer assume everyone else does.
And that shift—from assumption to awareness—is what cultural intelligence really is.
In today’s global animal health landscape, negotiation is no longer just about strategy.
It is about perspective.
Understanding the deal is not enough. You also have to understand how others see the deal.
REFERENCES:
Ang, S., Van Dyne, L., & Koh, C. (2007). Cultural intelligence: Its measurement and effects on cultural judgment and decision making, cultural adaptation, and task performance. Management and Organization Review, 3(3), 335–371.
Gelfand, M. J., Leslie, L. M., & Fehr, R. (2011). Culture and negotiations. Negotiation Journal, 27(3), 217–243.
Shan, W., Keller, J., & Joseph, D. (2019). Are men better negotiators everywhere? A meta-analysis of how gender differences vary across cultures. Journal of Organizational Behavior.
Skhiri, S., Zaiem, I., Sobaih, A. E., & Edrees, H. N. E. (2025). Cultural intelligence in international B2B negotiations: An exploratory study on the role of intercultural competencies. Journal of Intercultural Communication, 25(3), 36–48.