Distributive bargaining is a very important negotiation skill. Used as the core of the core of an negotiation, distributive bargaining is defined as, “a negotiation method in which two parties strive to divide a fixed pool of resources, often money, each party trying to maximize its share of the distribution” (Michael R. Carrell, 2008). Within the distributive bargaining process, the two parties involved have to negotiate over a set of assets in which one person looses and the other gains. This is why Distributive bargaining is also called Zero-sum. Carroll explains that distributive bargaining is called a zero-sum process because one party looses whatever amount is gained by the other” (Michael R. Carrell, 2008). The dynamic of a win-lose bargaining situation can cause negotiations to be exceedingly tense and volatile because only one side will gain at the end of these type of negotiations. This makes the concept of distributive bargaining controversial. Michael Wheeler, the author of the article, Three cheers for teaching distributive bargaining, discusses how many professors at an academy of management conference disapproved of distributive bargaining negotiation tactics. Wheeler explains, a huge majority of the attendees disapproved of exposing their impressionable pupils to the reality that in some negotiations, more for one party means less for the other” (Wheeler, 2012). The reluctance to teach the distributive bargaining tactic may be due to the fact that most teachings on negotiation skills are centered around the notion of all parties coming out of a deal with something they want. Negotiations are supposed to begin in a positive way in which the negotiators consider the needs and wants of the others involved and their... ... middle of paper ... ...n purchase a home at the price more compatible with the buyers budget. References Michael R. Carrell, C. H. (2008). Negotiating Essentials: Theory, Skills, and Practices. New Jersey: Pearson. Venter, D. (2014). Framing-An Important Negotiation Tool. Retrieved from www.calumcoburn.co.uk: http://www.calumcoburn.co.uk/articles/articles-framing/ Wheeler, M. (2012). Three cheers for teaching distributive bargaining. Negotiation Journal, 73-78. William Goetzmann, a. L. (2006). Estimating House Price Indexes in the Presence of Seller Reservation Prices. Review Of Economics and Statistics. pp. 100-112. www.acq.osd.mi. (2014). Bargaining Tactics. Retrieved from www.acq.osd.mi: http://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/cpf/docs/contract_pricing_finance_guide/vol5_ch7.pdf
Lewicki, J. R., Barry, B., & Saunders, M. D. (2011). Essentials of negotiation (5th ed.). New
Fisher, R., Ury, W., & Patton, B. (1981). Getting to yes: Negotiating agreement without giving in. New York, NY: Penguin Books.
Fisher, Roger, William Ury, and Bruce Patton. Getting to yes: negotiating agreement without giving in. 2nd ed. New York, N.Y.: Penguin Books, 1991. Print.
Negotiations styles are scholastically recognized as being broken down into two general categories and those are distributive bargaining styles and integrative negotiation styles. Distributive bargaining styles of negotiation are understood to be a competitive type of negotiation. “Distributive bargaining, also known as positional bargaining, negotiating zero-sum, competitive negotiation, or win-lose negotiation, is a type or style of negotiation in which the parties compete for the distribution of a fixed amount of value” (Business Blog Reviews, 2011). This type of negotiation skill or style approach might be best represented in professional areas such as the stock market where there is a fixed goal in mind or even in a garage sale negotiation where the owner would have a specific value of which he/she would not go below. In contrast, an integrative negotiation approach/style is that of cooperative bargaining, or win-win types ...
Integrative bargaining strategies contrast heavily to that of distributive as Integrative involves what is essentially a joint initiative attempting to find a
Lewicki, R. J., Saunders, D. M., & Barry, B. (2005). Negotiation, Fifth Ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Irwin.
Whether or not we are aware of it, each of us is faced with an abundance of conflict each and every day. From the division of chores within a household, to asking one’s boss for a raise, we’ve all learned the basic skills of negotiation. A national bestseller, Getting to Yes, introduces the method of principled negotiation, a form of alternative dispute resolutions as opposed to the common method of positional bargaining. Within the book, four basic elements of principled negotiation are stressed; separate the people from the problem, focus on interests instead of positions, invest options for mutual gain, and insist on using objective criteria. Following this section of the book are suggestions for problems that may occur and finally a conclusion. In this journal entry I will be taking a closer look at each of the elements, and critically analyse the content; ultimately, I aim to briefly bring forth the pros and cons of Getting to Yes.
The most common negotiation that was used several times was voting for the majority just to get it over and done with. A few examples would ...
Lewicki, R. J., Saunders, D. M., & Barry, B. (2010). Negotiation: Readings, exercises, and cases. New York: McGraw-Hill Irwin
Lewicki, R., Saunders, D.M., Barry B., (2010) Negotiation: Readings, Exercises, and Cases. 6th Ed. McGraw-Hill Irwin. New York, NY
During this course, I have learned a lot about negotiating. We learned about almost every negotiating technique there is. We learned about cross-cultural negotiations, body language, Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement (BATNA), variables in negotiating, and many more. Before this course, I did not know that much about negotiating. I thought that negotiating was just about trading or convincing someone to give you what you want and you did not care about the other side, resulting in a win-lose. I now know that negotiating is about getting what you want, but also giving the other side what they want as well to result in a win-win. This paper is about how I am going to improve my negotiating skills over the next six months. In order for me to improve my negotiating skills, I believe I need to improve the following skills- my body language, communication, planning, and my interpersonal communications. By improving those skills, I can become an effective negotiator.
Negotiation has been used as a vital communication tool not only in business but also in social intercourse. It helps people make common agreement and avoid conflict. So we need to use the tactics which we learned from this course and books to do more practice, only in this way we can gain advantages in negotiation.
We highballed our prices per channels and they lowballed their prices per channel. I am still shocked that the other team did not use our math error to more of their advantage and be really distributive in nature. I do feel like when the math error was made the other side was a bit more aggressive in behavior. Both of these tactics are discussed as distributive tactics in the Common Negotiations Techniques reading. But underlying the distributive strategy was some integrative tactics. Both sides probed the other side for their beliefs on why we stood by prices or why we wanted the nonspecific compensation like the PR included in the deal. But even though integrative techniques appeared now and again, most of the negotiation was distributive in
Lewicki, R. J., Barry, B., & Saunders, D. M. (2007). Essentials of Negotiation. New York: McGraw-Hill/ Irwin.
Living in a fancy new development, Chris is concerned that his new business will prevent him from taking care of his lawn, which has strict requirements under neighborhood rules. Not wanted to upset his neighbors, Chris decides to hire Matt to cut his grass. In a distributive bargaining approach, each negotiator’s objective is in direct conflict with the other. Looking at our situation, each party is concerned about the final price and has a limited number of resources.