Distributive and Integrative Negotiations: A Comparative Analysis

This essay provides a comparative analysis of distributive and integrative negotiation strategies within business contexts. It defines distributive bargaining as a win-lose approach suitable for fixed resources, while integrative negotiation aims for win-win outcomes involving multiple issues. The essay argues for the superiority of integrative negotiation in resolving conflicts and fostering long-term relationships. It discusses the challenges in achieving integrative negotiation, such as the need for trust, honesty, and consideration of all parties' interests, often requiring more time and effort. Examples like purchasing a used laptop or car illustrate these negotiation types, highlighting the importance of meeting the needs of all involved parties for successful outcomes. The essay concludes by referencing academic sources that further explore these negotiation dynamics.

Running Head: DISTRIBUTIVE AND INTEGRATING NEGOTIATIONS. 1
Distributive and Integrative Negotiations.
Name.
Course Details.
Instructor’s Details.
Institution Affiliations.
Date.

DISTRIBUTIVE AND INTEGRATIVE NEGOTIATIONS. 2
Distributive Bargaining and Integrative Negotiation.
In the business interactions we undertake in our daily lives, we do get to negotiate.
Negotiations are of two types; Distributive bargaining or integrative negotiation. Distributive
bargaining is a bargaining strategy in which one of the two parties in the bargain loses while
another wins. It is used in distributing fixed resources such as money or an asset. In such
situations, the appropriate bargaining method is the distributive type of bargaining
(Hüffmeier, Freund, Zerres, Backhaus, and Hertel, 2014).
Integrative negotiation is a bargaining strategy in which both parties involved in the
bargain get to win. Both the parties are in a ‘win-win situation.' In integrative negotiation,
there will be more than one issue that is brought to the table for negotiation (Morley and
Stephenson, 2015).
The best way of bargaining between the two types of bargaining is the integrative
negotiation. Integrative negotiation is the best because it serves to solve conflicts between the
parties while distributive bargaining only makes the conflict more intense between parties.
An example of a bargaining agreement I have ever been through is when I purchased a used
laptop. The owner was willing to sell it since the laptop screen did not meet his required
specifications. On the other hand, I was willing to buy the laptop at a convenient price since I
had a liking for the laptop. In our case, the situation was a win-win since both of us were
satisfied.

DISTRIBUTIVE AND INTEGRATIVE NEGOTIATIONS. 3
Why Integrative Negotiation Is Difficult to Achieve.
Integrative negotiation is one in which both parties get to win. Integrative negotiation,
however, is difficult to achieve in a bargaining situation. The difficulty arises because the
interests of the parties have to be considered to get to an amicable agreement. The solutions
to be reached at having to satisfy all the parties at both ends of the bargain (Stoshikj, 2014).
In integrative negotiation, the relationships between the individual parties must be
considered, and it, therefore, requires both parties to be honest and cooperate in the bargain.
The process of integrative negotiation also does take longer taking into consideration the fact
that the parties will work for a long time, probably even years (Peng, Dunn, and Conlon,
2015).
An instance in which I experienced integrative negotiation could be in case one decides
to purchase a used car from another person. In this instance, both parties will have their needs
met at the end of the deal. In the negotiation, however, it would take the people a long time to
build trust, get to know whether the car is in good condition and get to transact the sale of the
car. The transaction will also take longer given the legal changes of ownership of the car have
to be made.

DISTRIBUTIVE AND INTEGRATIVE NEGOTIATIONS. 4
References.
Hüffmeier, J., Freund, P. A., Zerres, A., Backhaus, K., & Hertel, G. (2014). Being tough or
being nice? A meta-analysis on the impact of hard-and Softline strategies in
distributive negotiations. Journal of Management, 40(3), 866-892.
Morley, I., & Stephenson, G. (2015). The social psychology of bargaining. Psychology Press.
Peng, A. C., Dunn, J., & Conlon, D. E. (2015). When vigilance prevails: The effect of
regulatory focus and accountability on integrative negotiation
outcomes. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 126,
77-87.
Stoshikj, M. (2014). Integrative and distributive negotiations and negotiation
behavior. Journal of Service Science Research.