The primary factor to conceptualize would be the fact that every country pursues business differently. Laws affect the ways in which business is conducted from region to region and country to country. Negotiations are never conducted exactly as they would be where you have pursued such actions in any city, in any state in whichever country from which you originate. Knowledge and understanding of how others conduct business is an incredible advantage toward the understanding of global managerial economic situations. For example, where the deal is always the single most important consideration to Americans, the details and the way those details are ironed out would be more important for Europeans and Asians. This is where cultures clash in the board room. Something many who are experienced in global economic management would state unequivocally.
David C. Korten in his discussion with the National Council of Churches explains that "We presently live under two competing systems of global governance: The Bretton Woods institutions and the United Nations. The former is primarily aligned with the corporate interest and the latter is primarily aligned with the human and natural interest." (Korten, David. C.; Global Economics; June 2003.) The problem with these competing systems of global economic governance is that they never meet in the middle.