Integrative Negotiation Paper Example

724 Words2 Pages

If the paperclip trade-up has taught me anything about negotiations it that the other party has to be interested in what you are offering. Throughout the semester we were asked to take objects of lower value, and exchange them for objects of higher value. Basing the negotiation off of monetary value leads to a zero-sum negotiation that is difficult to close. How would you convince someone to take lower value item if there was nothing else to offer? The answer lies in the creation of a value added negotiation.
Negotiation by Harvard Business Essentials describes negotiations as having two primary types, distributive, and integrative (Harvard Business Essentials, 2003, p. 2). In distributive negotiation parties contend over a fixed amount of value; when one takes more, the other takes less. In integrative negotiation both parties are trying to find a maximum value between each other with the goal of creating maximum benefit for both parties. Through the paperclip trade up I have learned that many negotiations are a blend of distribution and integration. While I look to maximize my benefit, I also need to maintain and create a relationship with the other party.
Creating relationships is a key part of integrative …show more content…

Once I had built a relationship based on an intrinsic negotiation, I would be able to return to the well again with a new object, and a trade would be accepted. By understanding and explaining my goals of trading an object of lower value for an object of higher value I was building trust. The other party had little reason to doubt my position, and they were able to talk freely about the objects they were willing to trade. As Negotiations warns, if I had pushed for extreme value creation other parties would would be less willing to participate in future negotiations (Harvard Business Essentials, 2003, p.

Open Document