Distributive and Integrative Negotiation

Distributive Negotiation

Distributive Negotiation refers to a competitive negotiation strategy which is used when the parties seek to distribute a fixed resource such as money, assets, etc. between themselves. It is also known as zero-sum, or win-lose negotiation, in the sense that the parties to negotiation try to claim the maximum share for themselves and due to which when one party wins or reaches its goals and the other one loses.

The term distributive means a giving out or a scattering of value. By the nature of the business, there is a limited amount of what’s being distributed or divided. So, this type of negotiation is often referred to as “The Fixed Pie.” There is only so much to go around, and the proportion to be distributed is limited and variable.

Distributive negotiation is chosen by competitive communicators when there is lack of mutual trust and cooperation. It is often considered as the best approach to negotiating.

Integrative Negotiation

Integrative Negotiation implies a collaborative negotiation strategy, in which parties seek a win-win solution to settle the conflict.

Integrative negotiations need a more developed type of business negotiation skills. For this reason, we typically start our negotiation skills training with simple distributive bargaining role-plays. We then build up to more complex team-based integrative negotiation role-plays.

The word integrative means to join several parts into a whole. Integration implies cooperation, or a joining of forces, to achieve something together. It usually involves a higher degree of trust and a forming of a relationship. Both teams want to walk away feeling they’ve achieved something that has value. Ideally, this means each team achieving what they want.

In the real world of business, the results often tilt in favour of one side over the other. This is because it’s unlikely that both sides will come to the table at equal strength when talks begin.

Nonetheless, there are many advantages when both teams take a cooperative approach. Skilful mutual problem-solving generally involves some form of making value-for-value concessions. This is usually in conjunction with creative problem-solving.

Difference Between Distributive and Integrative Bargaining

The primary difference between these two bargaining strategies is that in distributive bargaining, you don’t take the other party’s needs into consideration when making a deal. You are simply concerned with losing less than the other party, and all your focus is on getting a better deal than the other side.

In contrast, integrative bargaining begins with the assumption that both parties need to feel as if they gave up an equal amount or that they compromised equally to complete a deal. Distributive bargaining is often filled with conflict, because both parties maintain an intractable position in their attempt to lose less than the other side. Integrative bargaining is typically less fraught with tension, as both sides enter the negotiation with the willingness to compromise to achieve a consensus.