1. Strategy and Tactics of Integrative Negotiation 整合型谈判
CHAPTER 3
Strategy and Tactics of Integrative Negotiation
整合型谈判
(expanding the pie 增大蛋糕)
Approach: a comparative view

2. Negotiations As Joint Problem Solving
In an integrative bargaining situation, “it may be
possible for the negotiators to enlarge the pie before
cutting it. In order to squeeze out potential joint
gains, the negotiators must do some joint problem
solving” (Raiffa, 1982)

3. Pareto Efficient Frontier
“An agreement is defined as Pareto efficient when
there is no other agreement that would make any
party better off without decreasing the outcomes to
any other party.”
“With any Pareto inefficient agreement, there exists an
alternative that would benefit at least one party without injuring any party.” (Neale & Bazerman, 1991)
Your goal as a negotiator to reach Pareto optimality
in a negotiated agreement.
Q: why don’t most outcomes end up on the frontier?

4. Pareto Efficient Frontier

5. The Negotiator’s (Prisoner’s dilemma)
The non-separability of integrative and distributive negotiations
“Value that has been created must be claimed” (Lax & Sebenius, 1986)
But tactics that claim value can impede its creation

6. Pareto Efficient Frontier

7. Scoring Systems
Develop one. Use it!
Why?
“Quantitative information helps the recipient of that information”
(Raiffa, 1982)
Consider and quantify all issues
Aids in determining overall reservation price
Allows you to compare package deals, multiple offers, etc.
Quick assessment of trade-offs, concessions, and the like

8. Distributive vs. Integrative Negotiations
Involve only one issue
Simply dividing the pie
“Almost strictly opposing interests” – each party is attempting to maximize his/her share of the fixed-pie payoff
Involves fixed-sum games – one person’s gain is another person’s loss (win-lose situation)
Integrative
Involve multiple issues
Opportunity for enlarging the pie
Can increase the benefits available to each side by “capitalizing on differences in parties’ preferences”
Always involves distributive component

9. Tools and Strategies Scoring Systems Interests vs. Positions
Package Deals
Sharing Information

10. Scoring Systems Develop one.Use it! Why?
“Quantitative information helps the recipient of that information”
(Raiffa, 1982)
Consider and quantify all issues
Aids in determining overall reservation price
Allows you to compare package deals, multiple offers, etc.
Quick assessment of trade-offs, concessions, and the like

11. Sample Scoring System Issue Weighted
Issue Option Values Weights (W) Options Values (V) (W*V)
50% $200,
$190,
$180,
$170,
30% London
New York
Tokyo
S ingapore 30 9
Siberia 0 0
20% 4 weeks
3 weeks
2 weeks 35 7
100%
Issue
1 Compensation
2 L ocation
3 Vacation

12. Sample Scoring System Issue 1 Compensation Weights (W) 50% Weighted
Option Values Options Values (V) (W*V)
$200,
$190,
$180,
$170,
London
New York
Tokyo
S ingapore 30 9
Siberia 0 0
4 weeks
3 weeks
2 weeks 35 7
Issue 1
Compensation
Weights (W)
50%
2 L ocation
30%
3 Vacation
20%
100%

13. Sample Scoring System Weighted Option Values Values (V) (W*V) 100 50
100 50
80 40
50 25
30 15
100 30
60 18
30 9
0 0
100 20
90 18
35 7
Issue Weights (W)
50%
Issue
1 Compensation
Opti ons
$200,000
$190,000
$180,000
$170,000
2 L ocation
30%
London New York Tokyo
Singapore Siberia
3 Vacation
20%
4 weeks
3 weeks
2 weeks
100%

14. Sample Scoring System 1 2 3 Issue Issue Weights (W) Options
Option Values (V) 1
Compensation
50%
$200,000
100
$190,000 80
$180,000 50
$170,000 30 2
Location
30%
London
New York 60
Tokyo
Singapore
Siberi a 3
Vacation
20%
4 weeks
3 weeks 90
Weighted Values (W*V) 50 40 25 15 30 18 9 20 7
2 weeks 35
100%

15. Sample Scoring System Issue Option Weighted Values Weights (W) Options
Values (V)
(W*V) 1
Compensation
50%
$200,000
100 50
$190,000 80 40
$180,000 25
$170,000 30 15 2
L ocation
30%
L ondon
New York 60 18
Tokyo
S ingapore 9
S iberia 3
Vacation
20%
4 weeks 20
3 weeks 90
2 eeks 35 7
100%

16. Good scoring systems are…
Complete
All important issues are identified and quantified
Measurable
Provides a common metric for comparing qualitatively different issues
Operational
Can be used to sort out specifics re what sets of alternatives are preferable to others
Allow for someone else to negotiate on your behalf
Useful
Easily allows to translate qualitative issues to quantitative ones
Keep your scoring system flexible and dynamics, you may want to add issues or outcomes during the negotiation.

17. Computers and Spreadsheets
Advantages
Quickly and efficiently track the effect of changes in information (if you have a clearly thought-out scoring system)
Save time and mental resources (think while the other side punches the calculator…)
Disadvantages
Can get drawn into interacting with your computer instead of your counterpart
You can lose flexibility – letting your tool drive, rather than facilitate, the process
 Don’t let your scoring system control you

18. Interests vs. Positions
“Your position is something you have decided upon.Your interests are what caused you to so decide.”
“Interests define the problem.”
“For every possible interest there usually exist several possible positions that could satisfy it.”
“When you look behind opposed positions for the motivating interests, you can often find an alternative position which meets not only your interests but theirs as well.”
(Fisher, Ury, & Patton, 1991)

19. So…. Separate Positions from Interests
-­Positions are prone to ego-involvement
-­Positions endanger ongoing relationship
Focus on Interests, not Positions
-­Interests may differ
-­ Risk and time preferences may differ
-­Expectations may differ

20. Issue by Issue vs. Package Deals?
Becomes a sequential distributive negotiation
More contentious–impasse more frequent
Takes longer
Package deals understanding interests and priorities
Finding issues to trade off – give them what they want and get what you want in return
Flexibility (real and perceived)
Improves outcomes and efficiency
Exception

21. Getting Information for Integrative Agreements
Build trust and share information
Ask diagnostic questions to understand priorities and interests
Listen to the answers
Don’t be afraid to rephrase questions and to seek clarifications (ask why and why not)
Ask about preferences for different scenarios (generate more options)
Give away some information about preferences and priorities
Make package (multi-issue) offers

22. What information should I share?
Give away some information
--Priorities among issues(i.e., rank ordering)
DO NOT reveal your preferences for specific alternatives on particular issues (or your reservation price)
Honest on priorities
Negotiator’s individual gain not hindered by revealing priorities among issues (i.e., rank ordering)
If both sides strategically misrepresent their value tradeoffs, then inefficient contracts will often result

23. How flexible should I be?
“Firm with respect to one’s ends (i.e., one’s interests)
… flexible with respect to the means to these ends, continually seeking new alternatives until a mutually acceptable one can be found.”
(Pruitt, 1983)
Think creatively about possible alternatives–do not search for a single answer

24. Negotiator Toolbox: Integrative Negotiation Strategies
Prepare a scoring system
--Analyze issues, BATNAs, and reservation prices---think about interests underlying positions
Use the negotiations to collect information about integrative possibilities
Make a proposal incorporating all issues
Ask what is wrong with your proposal
Ask diagnostic questions and listen; don’t argue
Build trust and be cooperative---share integrative information (do not disclose your reservation price)
Trade off when there are differences in preferences
Be firm on interests, but open to options