Definition of Distributive Negotiation

Distributive Negotiation refers to a competitive negotiation strategy which is used when the parties seek
to distribute a fixed resource such as money, assets, etc. between themselves. It is also known as zero-
sum, or win-lose negotiation, in the sense that the parties to negotiation try to claim the maximum
share for themselves and due to which when one party wins or reaches its goals and the other one
loses.

Distributive negotiation is chosen by competitive communicators when there is lack of mutual trust and
cooperation. It is often considered as the best approach to negotiating.

https://keydifferences.com/difference-between-distributive-and-integrative-
negotiation.html#:~:text=Distributive%20Negotiation%20is%20the%20negotiation,to%20be%20divided
%20between%20parties.

Distributive Bargaining Elements

There are some instances in which you are negotiating for what are known as fixed resources, which
typically means the price of a product or service. In these situations, you may need to adopt a
distributive bargaining strategy, which is based on the idea that your gain means the other party’s loss.
In other words, your goal is to negotiate in such a way that when you reach an agreement, you have
given up less than the other party. Your goal is to win as much as you can during the negotiation, and,
typically, that means that the other party has to give up something.

There is not enough for everyone to get what they want, so when one side gets something, the other
side loses something. For example, let’s say a vendor’s “walk-away” price for a service is $5,000, but
your “walk away” price is $4,800. Your goal is to get the vendor as close to your walk away price as
possible without blowing the deal. If you get that vendor to agree to $4750, that vendor loses $250 and
you lose $50, which means you gave up less than the other party.

https://smallbusiness.chron.com/differences-between-distributive-bargaining-integrative-bargaining-
11582.html

Distributive negotiation involves haggling over a fixed amount of value—that is, slicing up the pie. In a
distributive negotiation, there is likely only one issue at stake, typically price. When you are negotiating
with a merchant in a foreign bazaar, or over a used car closer to home, you are generally involved in a
distributive negotiation, as it may be difficult to add issues other than price to the mix.

https://www.pon.harvard.edu/daily/negotiation-skills-daily/what-is-distributive-negotiation/

This strategy is also popular as ‘the fixed pie strategy’, since this involves allocating shares of a finite
resource among the negotiators. With limited resources for the taking, every negotiating party views
every other party as an adversary and this is well reflected in the debate over the allocation of shares.
Every party tries to put its best foot forward to grab a bigger chunk of the resources. Along with that, it’s
important for the negotiating teams to have a good idea of the competitive position of the other
negotiators. This will help when the actual debate on who should get how much begins. In essence, this
negotiation strategy requires acting defensive and reserved.
https://www.brighthubpm.com/methods-strategies/114091-comparing-distributive-and-integrative-
negotiation-strategies/

What is Distributive Bargaining?

Distributive bargaining, also called "claiming value," "zero-sum," or "win-lose" bargaining, is a

competitive negotiation strategy that is used to decide how to distribute a fixed resource, such as
money. The parties assume that there is not enough to go around, and they cannot "expand the pie," so
the more one side gets, the less the other side gets.

Why Is Distributive Bargaining Important?

Distributive bargaining is important because there are some disputes that cannot be solved in any other
way -- they are inherently zero-sum. If the stakes are high, such conflicts can be very resistant to
resolution. For example, if budgets in a government agency must be cut 30 percent, and people's jobs
are at stake, a decision about what to cut is likely to be very difficult. If the cuts are small enough that
the impact on employees will be minor, however, such distributive decisions can be made more easily.

Even in cooperative negotiations, distributive bargaining will come into play. Distributive bargaining and
integrative bargaining are not mutually exclusive negotiation strategies. Integrative bargaining is a good
way to make the pie (joint value) as large as it can possibly be, but ultimately the parties must distribute
the value that was created. If they are able to expand the pie enough, distribution is easy. If there is still
not enough to give each side what it wants, however, distributive negotiation will be more difficult.[1]

https://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/distributive_bargaining

Distributive bargaining, according to the University of Colorado Boulder, is the approach to bargaining
(or negotiation) that is used when the parties are trying to divide something up or distribute something.
Distributive bargaining can never really be “fair”. Its premise is that one party will always get more than
another, and that is exactly the mindset both parties will enter negotiations with. Distributive bargaining
tactics rarely assume the pie will be divided in half. Common tactics therefore include ”trying to gain an
advantage by insisting on negotiating on one's own home ground; having more negotiators than the
other side, using tricks and deception to try to get the other side to concede more than you concede;
making threats or issuing ultimatums; generally trying to force the other side to give in by overpowering
them or outsmarting them, not by discussing the problem as an equal…The goal in distributive
bargaining is not to assure both sides win, but rather that one side (your side) wins as much as it can,
which generally means that the other side will lose, or at least get less than it had wanted.”
("Distributive Bargaining", 2018). In fact, by driving a hard bargain it’s possible to win the battle and lose
the war. If one party gains too strong a position for themselves, they may sometimes place their
opponent in an untenable position. (Neale, 2004).. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/integrative-
bargaining-versus-distributive-vedant-prusty

What are Distributive Negotiations?

The interests or objectives of the parties are the same and are mutually exclusive. As such, it is a
competitive (win-lose) situation. Any value claimed by one party in the negotiation is at the expense of
the other party. This scenario generally is very competitive and does not foster cooperative behavior.
https://thebusinessprofessor.com/en_US/communications-negotiations/integrative-distributive-and-
compatible-bargaining

What is a Distributive Negotiation?

A distributive negotiation is a situation in which interests or objectives of the parties are the same and
are mutually exclusive. These situations are characterized by a finite or fixed amount of resources. The
interest(s) or objective(s) of the other party are in direct conflict with yours.

https://thebusinessprofessor.com/en_US/communications-negotiations/distributive-negotiation

The distributive (or positional) negotiation strategy treats the negotiation process as
positionalbargaining, in which each party tries to maximize its share of payoffs, which are perceived as
afixed sum (Patton, 2015; Pruitt & Rubin, 1986). Accordingly, negotiators assume they mustdistribute a
fixed value, so one party will lose and the other will win (the so-called win–lose,zero–sum, or fixed–pie
configuration). This focus on distributing value implies inefficiencies, dis-torts the negotiation
relationship, and complicates creating value in the negotiation (Brett &Thompson, 2016)

(PDF) Distributive/Integrative Negotiation Strategies in International Contexts: A Comparative Study.

Available from:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/334869326_DistributiveIntegrative_Negotiation_Strategies_i
n_International_Contexts_A_Comparative_Study [accessed May 21 2022].

the distributive process consists primarily of concession making, the meaning of “flexibility” is not
always the same: in distributive negotiations, it means “readiness to make concessions”

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0002716295542001004

What Is Distributive Negotiation?

Distributive negotiation is a type of negotiation in which parties bargain for shares of a fixed resource.
Also known as distributive bargaining, it can be used in labor negotiations, sales, and in any problem-
solving scenario where people are trying to divvy up things of value. Distributive negotiations can take
place between two people, or they can be multiparty negotiations where more than one entity seeks a
slice of the pie.

https://www.masterclass.com/articles/distributive-negotiation#what-is-distributive-negotiation

What is Distributive Negotiation?

Distributive negotiation is the process of dividing up the pie of value in negotiation. Distributive
negotiation can be thought of as haggling—the back-and-forth exchange of offers, typically price offers,
which the late Harvard professor Howard Raiffa referred to as the “negotiation dance.”

https://www.pon.harvard.edu/daily/dealmaking-daily/what-is-distributive-negotiation-strategies/

Distributive bargaining. This type of bargaining emphasizes the importance of maximizing individual

gains and minimizing losses. It adopts a “fixed” pie approach where resources are viewed as being
limited
and it becomes important to claim one’s rightful share of the pie. Distributive bargaining is competitive

with each bargainer taking positions to achieve victory over the other side. Distributive bargainers tend
to

use the following kinds of strategies and tactics:

• Distributive bargainers try to keep the opposing side from gaining information about their position or

“bottom-line” while trying to collect information about the resistance point of the other party.

• Distributive bargainers misrepresent and withhold information as well as make exaggerated

statements about their positions in order to mislead people about their true objectives.

• Distributive bargainers may use bluffs, threats, and manipulation to reduce the options of the other
party.

• Distributive bargainers use threats, putdowns, demands, and blame statements.

• Distributive bargainers develop their position by using more and more facts to build the case for the

validity of their proposals.

While we may aspire to use an integrative bargaining approach, there are times when a distributive

approach may be more useful to achieve our desired outcomes. Use a distributive approach:

• When your interests and the other party’s clearly conflict.

• When the other party insists on taking a win-lose approach.

• When you do not need a long-term harmonious relationship.

• When you are powerful enough to prevail.

• When short-term goals are more important

Hard positional bargaining emphasizes the importance of getting what you want by playing hard-ball

and being tough on the other person during a negotiation. Hard positional bargaining is characterized by

the following characteristics:

• Participants are adversaries.

• The goal is victory.

• Demand concessions as a condition of the relationship.

• Be hard on the problem and the people.

• Distrust others.

• Dig in to your position.

• Make threats.

• Mislead as to your bottom line.

• Demand one-sided gains as the price of agreement.

• Search for the single answer: the one you will accept.

• Insist on your position.

• Try to win a contest of will.

• Apply pressure

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/57a08b4540f0b652dd000bca/Negotiationweb.pdf

Hard ball tactiques

• Good Cop/Bad Cop

• Lowball/Highball

• Bogey (playing up an issue of little importance)

• The Nibble (asking for a number of small concessions to closing the deal)

• Chicken

• Intimidation

• Aggressive Behavior

• Snow Job (overwhelm the other party with information)

Tactics used – aggressive, manipulative and domineering.

Example ; Lawyers, sales person, business leaders, politicians.

Goal – best possible results for one party.

It is from miss notes