With limited resources for the taking. Every party tries to put its best foot forward to grab a bigger chunk of the resources. every negotiating party views every other party as an adversary and this is well reflected in the debate over the allocation of shares.Distributive Negotiation Strategy  This strategy involves allocating shares of a finite resource among the negotiators. .

 Distributive bargaining. is a win-lose" competitive negotiation strategy that is used to decide how to distribute a fixed resource. also called "claiming value. . such as money." or "zero"win-lose" bargaining." "zero-sum.

each party . Since this negotiation strategy is based on common interests and joint efforts of all the parties involved in the negotiation. rather all efforts are directed at increasing the total payoff through mutual cooperation. The negotiators do not build up on how much they will receive.Integrative Negotiation Strategy  This is quite a contrast to the above strategy as this involves a joint initiative that will prove beneficial to all the negotiating parties.

Distributive vs.  Distributive . acting as allies to one another. while integrative negotiation is collaborative in nature and all the parties negotiate on friendly terms.  Distributive negotiation is competitive in nature and requires that every party views every other party as a competitor. integrative negotiation creates a win-win situation winfor all the parties. On the other hand. Integrative Negotiation Strategies negotiation ends up in a winwin-lose situation where some parties stand at an advantage and the others lose out.

regardless of the loss the others may have to face. whereas distributive negotiation intensifies the conflicts further. In contrast. integrative negotiation focuses on mutual interests of all the parties and thus.  In distributive negotiation every negotiator focuses on meeting his personal interests. comes up with constructive solutions that will be beneficial for all.  Integrative .negotiation works as a conflict management tool.

bargaining. Once they figure out what each of them wants.Example  The difference between integrative and distributive approaches to bargaining is best explained by the classic example of the fight between a boy and his elder sister for one orange. and in a distributive approach. Both want the orange. while the elder sister wants the orange skin as one of the ingredients for a cake she is baking. In the latter case. if they talk to each other. both get what they really want. However. the boy gets to eat the whole orange while the elder sister gets to use the skin from the orange. . settle for one half of the orange each. they figure out that the boy wants to eat the whole orange and has no need for the orange skin. without taking away anything from each other: this is integrative bargaining.