Germany is more of a doing country. They are really strict when it comes to deadlines and schedules. Tasks are more important then relationships’ in most cases. People are supposed to have a personal opinion on the things that goes on. Vietnam is a Being country. In this country the position is important so the respect is given to the people above in this country relationships are made before doing business. In this case, Mr. Kollman who is in line with the country is a doing person. He sees the task and schedule more important then the relationship between thim and Mr Dinh. He didn’t care about the relationship and only the business. Mr. Dinh is more of a being person he wants to first get to know the CEO then afterwards do business with the person. Mr.Kollman is the type of person to get irritated if things do not goes his way.

 

German is the monochronic culture, as time is considered very important. Naturally, they have urgency when it comes to doing the best amount of work and using there time wisely. If the work is not well done they feel that they haven’t accomplished anything. They stress the use of project planners, detailed schedules, and timelines. 

Vietnam is the polychronic culture. People are the Vietnamese’s main concern they have a movement to build really good relationships. Issues are based on the relationship rather than the task and objectives. They tend to take time a little lightly. They appreciate punctuality but may not return with it. There is no sense in rushing things because there is time.

Mr. Kollman is in line with the German culture, and also Mr. Dinh with the Vietnamese culture. As polychronic, Mr. Kollman expected Mr. Dinh to respect his time, such as be in communication range and contact of the business to save his time. In difference, Mr. Dinh, a Vietnamese, seen the time as less important than the contract, he did not made any further contact with the German company nor have a set date of visit. Mr. Dinh did not take urgency in contacting the German company.

Vietnam has the low uncertainty avoidance. They are more relaxed, focusing more on making it perfect instead of just following rules. In Vietnam and other countries with low uncertainty avoidance, people believe there should be rules only if the rules are unclear or do not work they should be forsaken or new. Schedules are bendable, hard work is only needed when necessary.

Germany is the uncertainty avoidant countries; there is a slight preference for Uncertainty Avoidance. Presenting or planning: the systematic impression has to be given in order to proceed. Information is important to see whether the plan that needs to be completed is well thought out and executed.

Because of the uncertainty the Vietnamese is uncertain on whether to make the contract sealed. With this contract there is no date set for them to meet this occurred because on how the Vietnamese likes to run things. For the Vietnamese is having the business become a success with the German company. The date and time does not matter to the Vietnamese people. The date, time and communications is the key to the contract. But Mr. Dinh didn’t mind having no one of that but that made Mr. Kollman really angry.

 

With the power distance in Vietnam it is really high and the person who has a high position is in charge and there is no saying they have to follow whatever he says and do everything.

When it comes to Germany the power distance is low everything that happens has to be taken in account from the management.

When it comes to Mr. Phillip Kollman is the CEO of the company and the power distance is low and that says that he is allowed to make the decisions and choices for his company and that’s his objectives. While Mr. Dinh is the representative of the company so he does not have the amount of power like Mr.Kolman And he is not considered the make the decisions for the company. And the contract is to be sealed by the Vietnamese president not Mr. Dinh and Mr.Kollman did not know that about their culture and that made him irritated.

 

 

Germany is known for being individual. It is believed that being individual is really good. The employee has their own personal preferences and they choose what they want to do. While Vietnam loyalty is a huge thing in this country. In this country strong relationships goes over loyalty. Other member takes care of other members if they are in need help.

In this case both Mr.Kollman and Mr. Dinh was following the way there culture shows. Mr.Kollman is a German man and a person that cares for himself. He has the power to decide what he wants his company to do and which action it should take. Where Mr. Dinh can only follow what his company wants to do he being the representative he does not have the power to control the company. Only the president is allowed the make the decisions and choices the company makes.

 

 

The best way to reconcile this conflict is avoiding. This style is straightforward and communicative. When they both ignore the problems they having and just focus on the business becoming successful. Mr.Kolmann can ignore the problem they are having with the contract. And this can cause a movement for the business with the Vietnamese. And this would cause the main problem to be solved.

 

The most effective for this to work is collaborating. Both of the men can try to address the problem and solve it. Mr.Kollman did have few times where he visited Vietnam and other Asian countries so he can try getting used to their culture. Mr. Dinh studied in Europe so he could plan a meeting with his president and talk to him explaining him the contract and stating the benefits they will receive and this would help resolve the problem.

 

Accommodating- Preserves harmony, issues is more important to other persons, fitting in with someone's wishes or demands in a helpful way.

 

A few months ago an incident occurred concerning one of my close friends with his car. The conflict involved a minor road accident: my friend and I were in the car. While he was driving, he was intercepted by another vehicle when they took an illegal turn. This resulted in the bumper of his car being totaled along with some minor scratches on the car. The police was involved at the scene and upon assurance of both parties having a valid drivers licenses and registration documents, the accident situation was considered. As a good friend I accommodated him because I supported him and I knew he was not wrong and the driver that took the turn was at fault. I tried to satisfy his needs first which was getting him proven true and not at fault and after the conflict was solved by the cops it was said the driver that took the turn was proven wrong and the conflict was ended and my friend car was paid by the other driver.