In one of the most frequently cited examples of international negotiation Apple CEO Timothy D. Cook made an unusual and widely noted move in April 2013: he publicly apologized to Chinese customers for Apple’s warranty practices and promised corrective action, according to The New York Times.
At the time, such a direct apology from the head of a major U.S. corporation—particularly one not legally compelled—stood out as a strategic response to escalating public criticism in China.
Claim your FREE copy: International Negotiations
Claim your copy of International Negotiations: Cross-Cultural Communication Skills for International Business Executives from the Program on Negotiation at Harvard Law School.
Apologies in China
The controversy erupted on March 15, 2013—International Consumers’ Day in China—when the country’s largest state-run television network criticized Apple for offering iPhone customers in China shorter warranty coverage than in other markets and for charging fees to replace defective iPhone back covers.
Given Apple’s immense popularity in China, the criticism quickly gained traction. Other state media outlets joined in, public frustration grew, and speculation mounted that the complaints might be part of a broader effort to favor domestic competitors.
Initially, Apple remained silent. But as pressure intensified, Cook issued an open letter—published in Chinese—in which he acknowledged that Apple’s lack of communication had created the impression that “Apple is arrogant and doesn’t care or value consumers’ feedback.” He added, “We sincerely apologize for any concern or misunderstanding this has brought to the customers,” and pledged changes to Apple’s warranty and repair policies.
The apology marked a notable departure from the company’s typical communication strategy and was widely interpreted as an effort to repair trust with Chinese consumers and regulators alike.
Why Apologies Matter in International Negotiation
Research helps explain why Cook’s apology proved to be such a powerful move. In a series of experiments, William W. Maddux of INSEAD and his colleagues examined how people in different cultures respond to apologies.
Their findings suggest that in collectivist cultures, such as China and Japan, apologies can be especially effective at easing tensions in international negotiation—even when the party apologizing is not clearly at fault. In these contexts, an apology serves not only as an expression of regret but also as a signal of respect, accountability, and willingness to restore harmony.
By contrast, negotiators from more individualistic cultures often view apologies primarily through a lens of blame and liability, which can make them hesitant to apologize.
As this case illustrates, a thoughtfully delivered apology can restore dignity and trust in ways that financial compensation alone often cannot. In cross-cultural negotiations, understanding when and how to apologize can be as important as understanding the terms of the deal itself.
Do you have experience in international negotiation? What can you add that we may have missed?
Claim your FREE copy: International Negotiations
Claim your copy of International Negotiations: Cross-Cultural Communication Skills for International Business Executives from the Program on Negotiation at Harvard Law School.
Related Article: Dispute Resolution in China – Apple Apologizes for Warranty Policies – What lead to the world’s premier technology company, Apple, apologizing to its customers in the People’s Republic of China.
