Integrative Bargaining Discuss two of the following statements: Discuss the diff

ID: 2495121 • Letter: I

Question

Integrative Bargaining

Discuss two of the following statements:

Discuss the differences between integrative and distributive bargaining and the conditions in which either or both are used in the negotiation process.

Describe Thompson’s Pyramid Model and its relationship to parties in bargaining situations, and why it is useful to the integrative bargaining process.

Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the Categorization and Interest-Based Bargaining (IBB) Methods and which method you would be more likely to use in a negotiating situation and why.

Discuss the purpose that Full, Open-Throttle Negotiations (FOTN) serves in bargaining; why recognition of establishing value for the long-term relationship is a positive approach to beginning the negotiations process; and asking circular questions and packaging issues are helpful in the negotiations.

Explain why Mary Parker Follet’s example of two sisters cutting an orange in half is a classic model of poor integrative negotiations.

Explanation / Answer

1.It creates win-win situation for all parties.

2. It is collaborative in nature.

3.All parties negotiates on friendly terms.

4.It works as a conflict managment tool.

5.It focus on mutual interest.

1.It creates win- lose situation. some parties stand at advantage and other lose.

2.It is competitive in nature.

3.Every party view each other as competitors.

4.It intensifies the conflicts.

5.Every negotiator focus on meeting its personal interest.

we encounter distributive bargaining while buying a car, asking for discounts. Integrative bargainig happens on an on going basis, like agreeing to let our children go to bed a n hour late in exchange for mowing the lawn.

According toThompson Pyramaid model, integrative bargaining can be described as both a process and outcome of bargaining. The parties involved seek to integrate their interest and therefore produce negotiated outcome that exceeds those normally achieved through distributive bargaining.

In model, there are three levels. Level 1- agreements are those in which both parties achieve an outcome that is better than their reservation point. Level 2- agreement produce an outcome that is even better for both parties than level 1 agreement , possibly by introducing a new issue for which fboth parties have similar objective. Level 3- agreements are whose in which it is impossible to improve the outcome from the perspective of both parties, or in which any change that could benefit one party would harm the other party. It is also known as pareto optimal.

Difference between Integrative and distributive bargaining Integrative Distributive