Positional bargaining

Definition

Positional bargaining is a negotiation strategy where each party takes a position, argues for it, and makes concessions to reach an agreement. This approach often leads to a competitive atmosphere as each side focuses on claiming value rather than collaborating to create mutual benefits. Positional bargaining can result in a fixed pie mentality, impacting how parties approach problem-solving and conflict resolution.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

1. Positional bargaining often leads to a win-lose scenario, where one party's gain comes at the expense of the other, reinforcing adversarial relationships.
2. This method can create barriers to effective communication and collaboration, as each side becomes entrenched in their positions.
3. It is common in situations where parties lack trust or are unfamiliar with each other, leading them to protect their interests defensively.
4. Positional bargaining can lead to suboptimal outcomes because it limits creative problem-solving and may overlook potential areas for joint gain.
5. Successful negotiators often shift from positional bargaining to integrative strategies to enhance cooperation and achieve better results.

Review Questions

• How does positional bargaining impact the overall dynamics of negotiation between two parties?
  • Positional bargaining creates a competitive atmosphere where each party focuses on defending their stance and making concessions. This can lead to a win-lose outcome, damaging relationships and preventing collaboration. As both sides become entrenched in their positions, they may miss opportunities for creative solutions that could benefit both parties, thus hindering effective negotiation dynamics.
• What are the advantages and disadvantages of using positional bargaining compared to integrative bargaining in negotiations?
  • The main advantage of positional bargaining is its simplicity, as it provides a clear framework for negotiating when parties are focused on their individual gains. However, its disadvantages include potential adversarial relationships, limited communication, and missed opportunities for collaborative solutions found in integrative bargaining. Integrative approaches foster cooperation and creativity, allowing parties to work together towards mutually beneficial outcomes instead of competing over fixed resources.
• Evaluate the implications of relying solely on positional bargaining in negotiations and suggest strategies to move toward more collaborative approaches.
  • Relying solely on positional bargaining can lead to negative consequences like damaged relationships and suboptimal agreements due to the fixed pie mentality. This rigid approach can stifle communication and limit the exploration of creative solutions. To move towards more collaborative strategies, negotiators should focus on building trust, identifying common interests, and employing techniques from integrative bargaining. This can involve open dialogue about underlying needs and interests rather than just defending positions, fostering a cooperative environment that promotes better outcomes for all involved.

Related terms

Distributive Bargaining:

A negotiation strategy that focuses on dividing a fixed amount of resources or value, often characterized by competitive tactics where one party's gain is another's loss.

Integrative Bargaining:

A negotiation approach that seeks win-win solutions by collaborating to find mutually beneficial outcomes and expanding the available resources.

BATNA:

Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement, which represents the best option available to a negotiator if negotiations fail, influencing their bargaining power.