Integrative and distributive negotiation strategies are a key paradigm of practice, teaching, and research. Are these US formulated negotiation prototypes valid in the rest of the world? We analyze a sample of 214 foreigners who detailed the negotiation behavior they faced in Italy (134) and in the United States (80). Implementing Latent Class Analysis, we identify three clusters of negotiation prototypes: one is distributive and two are integrative. Country is clearly a predictor of clusters’ membership and there are relevant differences in the negotiation strategies between the two cultural groups. Most North American negotiators adopt an integrative strategy, using objectivity, technical criteria and avoiding haggling, even though they are impersonal and less oriented to explore the interests of the counterpart. Italian negotiators are fairly equally distributed between a distributive and an integrative negotiation prototype. The distributive one is the classical type, who conceives the negotiation as a zero-sum game and undertakes a bargaining process. The other one shows some of the typical traits of the integrative negotiation strategy, being oriented to explore interests and to create mutual value within a colleagueship process, but is also expressing and dealing with emotions during the negotiation, a controversial subject of research and practice.

AOM Annual Meeting Proceedings 2019, AOM Boston 2019
Academy of Management Proceedings
Incae Business School

Ogliastri, E, & Benetti, S. (2019). Distributive/Integrative Negotiation Strategies in International Contexts: A Comparative Study. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2019(1). doi:10.5465/AMBPP.2019.17660abstract