INTEGRATIVE NEGOTIATIONS

Integrative Negotiations

Integrative Negotiations

Introduction

The integrative negotiations method was basically initiated in area of group negotiations and industry negotiations in 1970s. Since then it has emerged into very popular method of negotiations. Integrative negotiation is joint technique to negotiation or conflict resolution. It is frequently referred to as joint-benefits or win-win technique. Integrative negotiations broadly defined as negotiating procedure where participants engaged, strive to integrate their benefits as successfully as probable in final contract. (Carrell, 2007)Integrative negotiators usually strive to reach 2 objectives: (1) to make as more value as probable for 2 sides, and (2) to proclaim the most plausible value for their own benefits. Integrative method does not want negotiators to surrender to demands made by other participant or to sacrifice any of their own aims. It does want participants to look for innovative alternatives and not just to concentrate on trading concessions. Integrative negotiations usually wants existence of numerous problems to be bargained— that enables negotiators to find shared ground on few problems, exchange places on few problems, and allocation negotiations on few problems. (Peter, 2003)

Integrative Negotiation Expertise's

Expertise 1: Discover major constituents of integrative negotiations procedure—including sharing benefits, creating and proclaiming value, joint-gain aims, and valuing enduring association with other participant.

Expertise 2: Discover the way of implement five rules of categorization method to integrative negotiations circumstance.

Expertise 3: Recognize that important 1st rule is to identify every problem and concentrate on benefits of participants engaged in negotiation procedure.

Expertise 4: Discover to establish different kinds of asks that used to advance negotiations, and to practice active listening.

Expertise 5: Consume technique of packaging when negotiations engage several problems that should be resolved.

Expertise 6: Consider implementing concepts of benefit-based negotiations to negotiation circumstance, counting brainstorm to make new alternatives and shared decision making. (Carrell, 2004)

Thompson's Pyramid Model

Integrative negotiation, as said by negotiation specialist Leigh Thompson of Northwestern University, explained as 2 procedure and outcome of negotiation. Participants engaged look for integrate their benefits and hence produce bargained outcomes that surpass the ones usually reached by allocation negotiations. Thompson proposes pyramid model of integrative contracts, as explained in Figure. (see appendix)



In model, Stage 1 contracts are the ones where 2 participants reach outcome that is better than their reluctance point. Stage 2 contracts produce outcome that is even better for 2 participants than Stage 1 contracts, probably by introducing new matter for that 2 participants have similar aim. Finally, Stage 3 contracts are the ones for that it is improbable to enhance outcome from viewpoint of 2 participants, a where any change that would benefit a participant would harm other participant. Participants ideally look for every Stage 3 contracts, and hence “leave nothing on table.” Integrative negotiators do not stop at Stage 1; they look for advantages of greater, jointly gainful Stages 2 and 3. In reality it is further possibly that negotiators can reach Stage 1 contracts where 2 participants surpass their reluctance points and BATNAs or, by establishment of new alternatives, that they can negotiate Stage 2 contracts ...