neg4 - Integrative Bargaining Dr. Bruce Fortado MAN 4441...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Integrative Bargaining Dr. Bruce Fortado MAN 4441 University of North Florida Integrative bargaining is often depicted as having a better solution for both sides , and the process is described as problem solving or “win-win .” One can find ambiguous statements in the literature. A one point, a group of authors talk about adhering to a set of assumptions that lead people to search for win-win solutions and usually find them. If one failed to settle a matter, they argue you simply did not pursue integrative methods hard enough. In later passages, the same authors say pure integrative solutions are rare. Most situations are “mixed motive,” containing some elements that require distributive bargaining and others that require integrative. As a general rule, conflict and competitiveness drive out cooperation and trust, making it more difficult for the parties to find common ground. How can one reconcile or make sense of such conflicting remarks? What stage of the process are we talking about? Before talks get underway, one still must prepare for all contingencies. Do people simply label the situation afterwards? If both are happy, it must have been integrative? Has one side simply agreed to lose? Are we talking about (1) goals, (2) tactics, or (3) outcomes? You really should be talking about goals or at least the tactics used, not a post hoc labeling based on how people feel about the outcomes and the process. The introductory lecture covered the Dual Concerns model, that showed it is not simply a matter of a negotiation being integrative or distributive. This model also considered avoiding, yielding and forcing. Nevertheless, much of the literature reduces matters to either distributive or integrative. Obstacles to Integrative Bargaining * The history of the relationship = When an animosity has developed, one will have a very difficult time changing the parties’ interaction pattern. When one side tries to heal a relationship, and the other side snubs them, the overture is unlikely to be repeated. People form conclusions about what others are like, and they tend to respond in kind (trust begets trust, and mistrust begets mistrust). * An inability to open one’s mind to other views/possibilities = This can result from different training and past experiences, which lead people to define problems in a certain way. Differences in data sources can also lead people to different conclusions. It is quite possible for people to see their own view as the sole and true view. At this point, one must choose between either one position or the other. * Fear of the other party taking advantage of you = Most negotiations have both integrative and distributive aspects. This fosters caution that inhibits integrative bargaining. * The situation is so complex it is simpler to view it in win-lose terms
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Page1 / 7

neg4 - Integrative Bargaining Dr. Bruce Fortado MAN 4441...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online