In any negotiation training class, the concepts of “distributive “bargaining and “integrative” bargaining are invariably discussed. The former is viewed as a form of “competitive” bargaining in which for every gain that one party makes, the other party loses. It is a “zero sum” game in which a “fixed” pie is divided up.
In contrast is “integrative” bargaining in which the parties seek to find mutual gain by addressing each party’s needs and interests. They seek to cooperate by “expanding” the pie.
Typically, we think of these two concepts- competition and cooperation- as polar opposites. We will have one or the other but never both together. Well, in my attempt to be an active member of a book club, I am learning differently. In his book entitled , The Conflict Paradox ( ABA and Jossey- Bass, 2014), Bernard Mayer suggests that these concepts work in tandem; “… effective cooperation is motivated by competition, and… competition requires some form of cooperation.” (Id. at 26.)
Read original article

