Cross-cultural differences and the misunderstandings that often arise from them play a powerful role in how businesses build relationships and conduct their commercial and legal affairs. At a time of expansive growth in transnational business, trade, and investment, a lack of knowledge about local culture, values, and customs in business and legal dealings are leading to ever more complex and tense international legal disputes. 

跨文化差异以及由此产生的误解在企业间如何建立合作关系和进行商业往来以及解决法律事务方面发挥着重要作用。在跨国商业、贸易和投资迅速扩张的时期，缺乏对当地文化、价值观和商业及法律交易习俗的了解，导致国际法律纠纷变得越来越复杂和紧张。

As lawyers and arbitrators, it is critical to foster a deeper understanding of how cultural and emotional factors along with behavioral tendencies impact business decisions and the practice of arbitration worldwide. Addressing these issues in the context of business-to-business (B2B) relationships, a recent report by the International Chamber of Commerce, Jus Connect, and McCann Truth Central found that a new set of principles—based on emotional intelligence, cultural awareness, and cultural fluency—is required to create a cross-cultural playbook for arbitration and re-imagining dispute outcomes.

作为律师和仲裁员，加深培养对文化和情感因素以及行为倾向如何影响全球商业决策和仲裁实践的理解，至关重要。国际商会、Jus Connect和麦肯真相研究中心最近发布的一项报告显示，在商业对商业（B2B）的背景下解决这些问题，我们需要基于情商、文化意识和文化流畅性的一套新原则，重新为仲裁创设跨文化手册，并重新构想争议解决结果的可能性。

Global leaders surveyed said that arbitration is still the preferred way to resolve cross-border disputes over litigation. If a contract fails, 60% prefer arbitration to legal proceedings in a court. Overall, arbitration has increased significantly over the past decade, reaching an estimated $80 billion in 2022. Some 37,000 new cases were registered between 2018 and 2022, an increase of nearly 30% between 2013 and 2017. While this represents a mere fraction of the $121 trillion in international trade in 2022, arbitration is growing twice as fast as global trade as clients recognize the speed, efficiency, transparency, and flexibility it offers to resolve disputes compared to traditional litigation.

接受调查的全球领导者表示，相较于诉讼而言，仲裁仍然是解决跨境争议的首选方式。如果合同失败，60%的人更倾向于选择仲裁而不是法院的诉讼程序。总体而言，仲裁案件过去十年中显著增加，至2022年达到了约800亿美元。从2018年至2022年间，受理了大约37000个新案件，与2013年至2017年间相比，增长了近30%。虽然这仅占2022年总国际贸易额12.1万亿美元的一小部分，但仲裁的增长速度是全球贸易增长的两倍，而这正是因为客户认识到与传统诉讼相比，仲裁方式解决争议更具有高速、高效、透明和灵活的优势。

Cultural Miscues 文化误解

In my travels as President of the ICC International Court of Arbitration, I have heard countless stories about the influence of cross-cultural differences on business and legal affairs, including arbitration. And with good reason: every country has unique and often contrasting attitudes about dispute resolution and misunderstanding them can add layers of difficulty during legal proceedings for both general counsel and arbitration lawyers. 

作为国际商会国际仲裁院的主席，我在旅途中听到了数不清的关于跨文化差异如何影响商业和法律事务（包括仲裁）的故事。原因显而易见：每个国家对争议解决都有独特且往往相互抵触的态度，误解这些态度可能会给法律程序中的总法律顾问和仲裁律师增加重重困难。

Based on extensive interviews and quantitative data, the ICC report divides cultural attitudes and approaches into four generalized categories and suggests which countries fit into each one. The Innovative Explorer, for example, including France and Saudi Arabia, seeks collaboration and co-creation, looks for emotional chemistry, and tends to stretch goals. For their part, India and Nigeria can be seen as a Strategic Balancer, eager for collaboration and co-creation, along with emotional chemistry, and ready to stretch goals. 

根据广泛的访谈和定量数据，国际商会报告将文化态度和方法分为四个概括类别，并将每个国家都分到适合的类别中。例如，"创新探索者"（Innovative Explorer），如法国和沙特阿拉伯，寻求合作和共同创造，寻找情感上的化学反应，并倾向于扩展目标。与创新探索者相对的是"战略平衡者"（Strategic Balancer），如印度和尼日利亚，他们渴望合作和共同创造，同时也寻找情感上的化学反应，并准备扩展目标。

Brazil and Mexico are among the countries regarded as a Decisive Custodians, in that they tend to value structure and contracts as part of a more direct, yet discrete approach and in addition, prefer working with senior partners. Finally, as the name indicates, the Pragmatic Realist—including the U.K. and Switzerland—takes a reasoned and practical approach, with an appreciation for clear expectations meeting agendas, and giving parties a second chance.

巴西和墨西哥是被视为"果断守护者"（Decisive Custodians）的国家，它们倾向于重视商业结构与契约，作为更直接但谨慎的方法，更喜欢与高级合伙伙伴合作。最后，正如其名所示，"务实现实主义者"（Pragmatic Realist）——包括英国和瑞士——采取合理且实际的方法，喜欢具有明确期望的会议议程，并给予各方第二次机会。

These attitudes are reflected in the different approaches that countries have toward contracts. Some want a clear scope, set in stone. Others put more focus on outcomes and fluidity in delivery. For instance, while Mexico and Brazil prefer structured approaches in contract agreements, India and Saudi Arabia are open to collaboration and co-creation in a scope of work. France and China prefer to stretch sometimes-unrealistic goals, but India and Nigeria, want realistic and achievable ones. 

这些态度反映在各国对契约的不同处理方式上。一些国家希望有一个清晰的定义范围，一成不变。其他国家则更注重结果和交付的灵活性。例如，尽管墨西哥和巴西在合同协议中更喜欢成体系的方法，印度和沙特阿拉伯则对工作范围内的合作和共同创造持开放态度。法国和中国更倾向于设定有时不切实际的目标，但印度和尼日利亚则希望目标是切实的和可实现的。

Digging deeper into the analysis shows that in some ways, the U.S. has a lot in common with Brazil and China when considering the role of hierarchy and discretion in a business situation. If someone in business makes a mistake, Americans prefer to promptly resolve disputes, even if a party might get offended and are also unlikely to copy their boss on an email. 

深入分析表明，在某些方面，美国在考虑商业环境中的等级制度和自由裁量权作用时，与巴西和中国有很多共同点。如果商业中有人犯了错误，美国人更倾向于立即解决争议，即使这可能会冒犯到一方，而且被冒犯的一方也不大可能将电子邮件抄并把纠纷报告给他们的老板。

These categories help explain many business decisions and actions and can guide teams to recognize and overcome cultural differences. But they don’t always tell the whole story: cultural nuances add even more complexity to cross-border business and legal dealings. 

这些分类有助于解释许多商业决策和行动，并可以指导团队识别和克服文化差异。但它们并不总是能涵盖所有的情况：文化细微差别为跨境商业和法律交易增添了更多复杂性。

The U.S., for example, can be described as a chameleon or shapeshifter that doesn’t always neatly fit any descriptor. In my experience, U.S. business representatives will typically revise their approach depending on what the customer or counterparty needs. This flexibility is likely due to the presence of diverse and multicultural U.S. business teams compared to some other countries. As one senior arbitrator said in the report, “In the U.S., the common denominator is understanding what the customer needs.”

譬如，美国可以被描述为一个白色龙或变形者，并不总是完全符合任何类别。根据我的经验，美国商业代表通常会根据客户或对手方的需求调整他们的方法。这种灵活性很可能是由于与其他国家的一些团队相比美国拥有商业团队的多样性和多元文化背景。正如报告中一位资深仲裁员所说：“在美国，共同点是理解客户的需求。”

Small Behavior, Big Impact 小行为，大影响

Mapping the world by culture rather than geographic positioning offers valuable insights that can improve cultural fluency and ensure that geography alone does not influence expectations and approaches. The report showed how small behaviors point to larger cultural priorities. Teams from France and Saudi Arabia don’t necessarily need an agenda to attend a meeting, but those from India and Nigeria would usually prefer a detailed agenda. Acknowledging these cultural differences, however small and seemingly inconsequential, provides a framework for anticipating and resolving friction and helping teams adapt. 

通过文化而非地理位置来绘制世界地图，有利于提高文化交流并确保地理位置本身不会影响到人们的期望和方法。该报告展示了微小的行为如何指向更大的文化优先事项。来自法国和沙特阿拉伯的团队开会之前不一定需要设定议程，但来自印度和尼日利亚的团队通常会更倾向于有一个详细的议程。承认这些文化差异，无论多么微小或看似无关紧要，为预见和解决摩擦并帮助团队适应提供了一个框架。

One of the most interesting aspects of the study is that business teams and leaders say they want lawyers involved earlier in the B2B process—and more deeply integrated into the journey—with a focus on win-win outcomes. This is consistent with the changing role of in-house counsel, particularly in the U.S., where in house counsel work more closely with business teams to develop strategy and structure the deal. Given the growing complexity of today’s global regulatory environment, business teams can no longer negotiate the deal first and then bring the terms to the in-house team to document. 

这项研究最有趣的一个方面是，商业团队和领导者表示他们希望律师更早地参与到商业交易流程中，并更深入地融入整个过程，重点是实现双赢的结果。这与内部法律顾问角色的变化是一致的，尤其是在美国，内部法律顾问更密切地与商业团队合作，以制定战略和构建交易。鉴于当今全球监管环境的日益复杂性，不能再仅由商业团队先行谈判，然后将谈判中达成的条款带给内部法律团队来起草。

While the study focused on cultural differences, it also found a commonality across cultures: a growing preference for non-legal dispute resolution. Some 77% favored an amicable, interest-based resolution—through internal or contract review, or direct negotiations between legal teams—compared to 52% favoring a rights-based resolution using arbitration or legal proceedings in a court. Only about one-third chose a so-called power-based resolution, such as a canceled contract, a report to a regulator, a post on social media, or a leak to the press. 

虽然研究关注文化差异，但它也发现了一个跨文化的共性：越来越倾向于非法律争议解决方式。大约77%的人更倾向于通过内部或合同审查，或法律团队之间的直接谈判来实现友好的、基于利益的解决方案，相比之下，52%的人更倾向于通过仲裁或法院法律程序来实现基于权利的解决方案。只有大约三分之一的人选择了所谓的基于权力的解决方案，如取消合同、向监管机构报告、在社交媒体上发帖或向媒体泄露信息。

Key Truths 基本真相

Understanding the diverse world of business culture reveals several truths about B2B relationships. One is that emotion and culture have a significant impact on business—perhaps more than many realize—because the B2B journey comprises the human experience. Contrary to the commonly held perceptions that B2B interactions are largely transactional or purely functional, and free of emotions, the report found that they are emotionally charged, from initial engagement with parties and contracts to long-term partnerships.

理解商业文化的多样性揭示了商业关系的几个真相。其中之一是情感和文化对商业有重大影响——可能比许多人意识到的还要大——因为商业交往过程包含了人类体验。与人们普遍认为的商业互动主要是交易性的或纯粹功能性的，并且没有情感的看法相反，报告发现它们从与各方和合同的最初接触，到长期合作伙伴关系，都是充满情感的。

I have experienced this firsthand when representing a multinational company in a very complex arbitration involving the calculation of damages. I needed to prepare the CEO for cross-examination. Yet his analysis was not entirely data-driven decision-making: emotions were also a big part of his thinking. When describing his approach and his meeting with his CEO counterpart, he just kept telling me, “This is so emotional.” 

在涉及损害赔偿计算的非常复杂的仲裁案件中代表一家跨国公司时，我亲身体验过这一点。我需要为首席执行官做好交叉审问的准备，然而他的分析并不完全是数据驱动的决策：情感也是他思考的一个重要部分。在描述他的方法和他与首席执行官的会面时，他一直对我说：“这太情绪化了。”

Another truth is that by effectively navigating cultural differences and overcoming communication barriers, we can improve business relationships. In this context, business attitudes toward particulars such as contracts and meeting styles reflect cultural priorities and offer relevant cultural cues. At first, these may appear to be minor details but unveil deeper cultural attitudes concerning hierarchy, orderliness, adaptability, and creativity. 

另一个真相是，通过有效地驾驭文化差异并克服沟通障碍，我们可以改善商业关系。在这种情况下，商业对合同和会议风格等细节的态度反映了文化优先事项，并提供了相关的文化线索。起初，这些可能看起来是次要的细节，但它们揭示了关于等级制度、有序性、适应性和创造力的更深层次的文化态度。

When I was in China earlier this year, I was surprised by the number of back-channel conversations that took place to determine how many people we could bring to a meeting and the level of seniority so that the Chinese delegation would have the same. There were also discussions about attire—including whether men should wear a tie—so that nobody would feel out of place. 

今年早些时候我在中国时，我对中国方面进行的众多私下对话感到惊讶，这些对话的目的是确定我们可以带多少人参加会议以及他们的级别，以便中国代表团能有相同的人数和级别。还有关于着装的讨论——包括男士是否应该打领带——以确保没有人感到不自在。

Cross-Cultural Playbook 跨文化手册

With these truths in mind, a new cross-cultural playbook for global arbitration should include the following actions. First, integrate legal teams as early as possible into the process and keep them engaged via partnerships with business teams. Train teams to understand emotional intelligence and be more culturally aware so they can become more adept at relationship building and managing shifting emotions during the B2B journey. Ensure teams can interpret subtle behavioral and cultural cues to make informed decisions and improve communications. Equally important, prioritize direct negotiation channels for dispute resolution, reserving legal action for failed negotiations. 

考虑到这些真相，全球仲裁的跨文化新手册应包括以下行动。首先，尽可能早地将法律团队整合到工作流程中，并通过与商业团队的伙伴关系保障他们的持续参与。培训团队了解情商并增强文化意识，这样他们就能在商业过程中更擅长建立关系和管理变化的情感。确保团队能够解读微妙的行为和文化线索，做出明智的决策并改善沟通。同样重要的是，优先考虑直接谈判渠道解决争议，将法律行动保留为谈判失败后的选项。

More than ever, we must emphasize the role of emotion and human interaction in business and how important it is in building trust: the report noted that half of all B2B disputes are likely caused by the breakdown of human interaction rather than solely by contractual issues. With heightened sensitivity to cultural differences, we can better understand the complexities of the B2B journey, minimize business and legal disputes, and successfully apply these truths to resolving conflicts through arbitration. 

我们比以往任何时候都更加需要强调情感和人际互动在商业中的作用，以及它们在建立信任方面的重要性：报告指出，一半的商业争议可能由人际交往的破裂而非仅仅是合同问题引起。通过提高对文化差异的敏感性，我们可以更好地理解商业过程的复杂性，最大化减少商业和法律争议，并成功地将这些真相应用于通过仲裁解决冲突。