Examples Of Integrative Negotiation

1394 Words3 Pages

Negotiation
Negotiation is meeting between one or more people having chit chat with each other about an outcome of the problems or solution to the problems, because each and every one different ideas and different comments. Its main aim is to solve the problem, by getting different ideas from the individual and from the group of people, because individuals various interests . it will keeping or collecting all these ideas together .the main part is all the people who are participants who are participating must trust each other ,that the reason it is so successful .
Negotiation will in the daily life but we care it. Negotiation will occurs in each and every places like government offices , business , organizations, in the cases it mainly …show more content…

Integrative negotiation
Integrative negotiation is often referred to as ‘win-win’ and typically entails two or more issues to be negotiated. It often involves an agreement process that better integrates the aims and goals of all the involved negotiating parties through creative and collaborative problem solving. Relationship is usually more important, with more complex issues being negotiated than with Distributive Negotiation. Integrative negotiation is the process of defining these goals and engaging in a process that permits both parties to maximize their objectives.
Integrative negotiation often involves a higher degree of trust and the forming of a relationship. It can also involve creative problem-solving that aims to achieve mutual gains. It is also sometimes called win-win …show more content…

Bad faith is a concept in negotiation theory whereby parties pretend to reason to reach settlement, but have no intention to do so, for example, one political party may pretend to negotiate, with no intention to compromise, for political effect. Bad faith negotiations are often used in political science and political psychology to refer to negotiating strategies in which there is no real intention to reach compromise, or a model of information processing. The "inherent bad faith model" of information processing is a theory in political psychology that was first put forth by Ole Holsti to explain the relationship between John Foster Dulles' beliefs and his model of information processing. It is the most widely studied model of one's opponent. A state is presumed implacably hostile, and contra-indicators of this are ignored. They are dismissed as propaganda ploys or signs of weakness. Examples are John Foster Dulles' position regarding the Soviet Union, or Hamas's position on the state of

Open Document