In: Operations Management
1.)Distributive bargaining is sometimes referred to as "win-lose bargaining." Where does this label come from? How can it be misleading? Also, some people casually characterize any negotiate settlement as "a win-win." Why is this accurate in layperson's terms but inaccurate in light of how negotiation experts use the term win-win?
2.)Why is it difficult for labor negotiators to switch from traditional to integrative bargaining? What recommendations would you make for negotiators trying to make this switch? Why is it more difficult for union negotiators to make this change compared to company negotiators.
Question 1
Distributive bargaining and the origin of its label "win-lose bargaining".
Distributive bargaining is a type of negotiation where the parties to it want to sort out some issues by dividing something. It is mainly related to the division of fixed resources where there is no scope for increasing it further. Sometimes this division may be unfair to one of the parties that are popularly understood as the gain of one party will be equal to the loss of another party, this is why the term "win-lose bargaining" originated. But it is a misleading term because distributive bargaining can be fair towards both parties also. It only means that it is concerned with a fixed resource that needs to be divided. As we can not increase the resources it is very difficult to divide it with ease means one party might get a share which is more than the other party. The major criticism of distributive bargaining is that it leads to focusing more on differences among the parties than consensus.
Win-win bargaining
There is a tendency to characterize any negotiation as a win-win. It may be accurate from the perspective of a layman but win-win could be different for a negotiation expert. Experts call the win-win negotiation as an integrative negotiated agreement. In theory, win-win negotiation means nothing is left on the table once negotiation between two parties is over which may be somewhat impractical in reality. In the case of a typical in-win negotiation situation parties to the negotiation might have reached a peak level after considering the interest of both the parties that means that the negotiation can not be improved further.
Please give Up-vote if you like the answer. Thank you.