The book provides a practical and innovative framework for negotiating deals and leading organizations in a multicultural business environment. The 4Ps Framework: Advanced Negotiation and Influence Strategies for Global Effectiveness is about becoming better negotiators and leaders in a global setting. The book is intended for managers, graduates, and business students who are already, or expect to be, negotiating and influencing across cultures. The rationale behind this book is the author's dissatisfaction with the current literature on international negotiation and influence. Present research in cross-cultural management, communication, negotiation, leadership, and influence, doesn't apply to real-world situations. And this is for seven main reasons: Reason 1: US bias in current research. More than 90% of research on negotiation and influence is based on less than 10% of humankind. Western, and above all US, ethnocentrism confines and biases our understanding of negotiation and influence elements and processes. Reason 2: Theories based on rational negotiators. Most negotiation and influence models are based on the expected utility theory, fabricated on negotiators acting as rational players, and game theory frameworks. Reason 3: The use of nations as units for studying cultures. Most cross-cultural negotiation and influence books still adopt the term culture as a synonym of nation. Nations are not the best entities for studying cultures. Geographic boundaries are often just artificial and unnatural divisions. Nationality and culture are connected, but any generalization must take into account within-nation variances. Reason 4: Abuse of the notion of culture in explaining international negotiation failures and cross-cultural communication misunderstandings. Many scholars agree that culture is just an artificial, abstract, and purely analytic concept. The problem is that culture is often adopted as a justification whenever differences in behavior among people from different parts of the globe must be explained. Reason 5: The concept of culture as a static framework. Current models discount cultural change over time, even though change is occurring rapidly in many countries (e.g., the fast move from collectivism to individualism in the major cities of emerging economies). Reason 6: Cross-cultural negotiation and influence theories based on questionable data. The use of data from simulations involving international managers enrolled in MBA programs in the United States raises an interesting question in cross-culture literature: Can these individuals be regarded as a relevant and illustrative sample of managerial behavior in different cultures? Reason 7: Concepts such as power, interests, and, above all, best alternative to a negotiated agreement (BATNA) take on different implications in an international context. Understanding people's interests, other than money, is strategic because interests motivate individuals and affect their behavior. Interests differ from individual to individual, and they are strongly influenced by culture, context, and circumstances. Most of the negotiation literature focuses on the concept of BATNA, the best alternative each side has if no agreement can be reached between the parties. However, the concept of BATNA doesn't apply straightforwardly to complex international negotiations. Committing to only one course of action if the negotiation ends without an agreement could present a risk in multiparty, multidimensional, and unpredictable international negotiations held in a volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous (VUCA) world. A better strategy calls for identification of multiple feasible alternatives (MATNAs).