Distrbutive v. Integrative Negotiation

A major discussion point in Chapter 13 is distributive and integrative negotiation. In the class exercise that we performed in class today, we were placed into a distributive negotiation setting, and failed to complete the win-lose result. There is no way to predict, however, the outcomes had we been placed in an integrative negotiation setting.

"Negotiators Who Give Too Much: Unmitigated Communion, Relational Anxieties, and Economic Costs in Distributive and Integrative Bargaining" discusses the pros and cons to both approaches. In the article, Amanatullah et. al. describe that distributive negotiation settings may prompt negotiators to put a strain on some relationships if necessary to avoid impasses, while integrative negotiation settings may decrease the success in maximizing the joint gain of both parties in order to satisfy the relationships.

So what method should be used? In the organizational setting, we are encouraged to turn conflicts into win-win situations, but I believe that much more needs to be done before we can simply settle at the first agreement we see. We need a mixture of both distributive and integrative negotiation to be truly successful.

Source: Amanatullah, Emily T., Michael W. Morris, and Jared R. Curhan. "Negotiators Who Give Too Much: Unmitigated Communion, Relational Anxieties, and Economic Costs in Distributive and Integrative Bargaining." Journal of Personality & Social Psychology 95.3 (2008): 723-738. Academic Search Complete. EBSCO. Web. 5 Apr. 2010.