Short answer: Integrative bargaining is a negotiation strategy focused on uncovering shared and differing interests to create value for both sides—rather than simply dividing a fixed pie.
Imagine you’re buying a used car from its original owner. Naturally, you want the best possible deal for your money, while the seller hopes to earn the highest return. After some back-and-forth bargaining, you finally settle on a price that feels acceptable.
But what if the outcome could have been even better for both of you?
By applying the principles of integrative bargaining—exploring underlying interests, sharing selective information, and identifying creative tradeoffs—you might have uncovered additional value that left both parties more satisfied with the deal.
This shift—from claiming value to creating value—is at the heart of integrative negotiation.
Claim your FREE copy: Negotiation Skills
Build powerful negotiation skills and become a better dealmaker and leader. Download our FREE special report, Negotiation Skills: Negotiation Strategies and Negotiation Techniques to Help You Become a Better Negotiator, from the Program on Negotiation at Harvard Law School.
Distributive vs. Integrative Bargaining: What’s the Difference?
The used-car example reflects a common approach in transactional negotiations: hold your cards close and share as little information as needed to achieve your goal. This is known as distributive bargaining, or win-lose negotiation, where parties compete over a fixed amount of value.
By contrast, integrative bargaining (often called win-win negotiation) seeks to expand the pie before dividing it.
An article by Katie Johnston for Harvard Business School, “The Art of Haggling,” describes this distinction clearly. Meanwhile, Getting to Yes by Roger Fisher and William Ury—both founders of the Program on Negotiation at Harvard Law School—advocates for an integrative approach grounded in interests rather than positions.
Instead of arguing over price alone, integrative negotiators ask:
- Why is this important to you?
- What constraints are you facing?
- Where might our interests differ in a way that allows tradeoffs?
In the car example, perhaps:
- The seller values a quick closing more than price.
- You value extended maintenance records and flexible payment timing.
- A creative agreement (slightly higher price, faster closing, flexible payment terms) leaves both parties better off.
How Integrative Bargaining Works in Practice
Michael Wheeler of Harvard Business School encourages negotiators to imagine what would happen if both sides revealed key interests at the outset of negotiation.
Many situations that appear purely win-lose can, with careful questioning and listening, become opportunities for mutual gain.
Core Elements of Integrative Negotiation
- Focus on interests, not positions.
Positions are demands (“$12,000 for the car”). Interests explain why (“I need funds quickly for a move”). - Share information strategically.
Integrative bargaining requires openness—but not naïveté. Trust-building matters. - Invent options for mutual gain.
Look beyond a single issue (like price) and introduce additional variables. - Use objective criteria.
Market value, comparable sales, or independent standards reduce emotional bias. - Balance value creation and value claiming.
As Wheeler puts it, negotiation often means “riding two different horses at the same time.”
The Risks and Limits of Integrative Bargaining
Integrative negotiation is not blind trust.
Negotiators are often cautious about revealing too much information—and for good reason. If the other side is purely distributive, over-disclosure can weaken your position.
Wheeler cautions:
“Sometimes getting 70 percent of the small pie might be better than getting 50 percent of a marginally larger one.”
In other words, value creation must be paired with strategic value claiming.
Integrative bargaining works best when:
- There is potential for an ongoing relationship.
- Multiple issues are on the table.
- Both parties have incentives to collaborate.
- Trust can be built incrementally.
An emphasis on relationship-building marks integrative bargaining as oriented toward long-term negotiation strategy—not just immediate gain.
Real-World Applications of Integrative Bargaining
Integrative negotiation is widely taught in business, law, public policy, and international diplomacy. It is particularly powerful in:
- Salary negotiations
- Business partnerships
- Mergers and acquisitions
- Vendor contracts
- Cross-cultural negotiations
- Labor-management discussions
Whether negotiating compensation, closing a real estate deal, or structuring a business agreement, expanding the pie often creates outcomes that endure.
Frequently Asked Questions About Integrative Bargaining
- What is integrative bargaining in simple terms?
Integrative bargaining is a negotiation strategy where parties collaborate to create additional value by uncovering underlying interests and crafting mutually beneficial agreements.
- How is integrative bargaining different from distributive bargaining?
Distributive bargaining focuses on dividing a fixed amount of value (win-lose). Integrative bargaining focuses on expanding the value available before dividing it (win-win).
- When should you use integrative negotiation?
It is most effective when there are multiple issues involved, potential for long-term relationships, and opportunities for tradeoffs.
- Is integrative bargaining always the best strategy?
No. If the other party refuses to collaborate or if the negotiation is purely one-time and single-issue, a more distributive strategy may be appropriate.
- Does integrative bargaining require full transparency?
Not full transparency—but selective, strategic sharing of interests to build trust and uncover tradeoffs.
Final Thoughts: Creating and Claiming Value
Negotiation is rarely a choice between cooperation and competition. The most effective negotiators understand that it is both.
Integrative bargaining invites us to look beyond surface demands and explore deeper motivations. But it also reminds us to protect our interests thoughtfully.
The art of negotiation lies not in choosing one approach over the other—but in knowing when and how to balance the two.
How have you used integrative bargaining in your negotiations? Share your experience in the comments.
Claim your FREE copy: Negotiation Skills
Build powerful negotiation skills and become a better dealmaker and leader. Download our FREE special report, Negotiation Skills: Negotiation Strategies and Negotiation Techniques to Help You Become a Better Negotiator, from the Program on Negotiation at Harvard Law School.
I am a full time circuit civil mediator in South Florida. I have often wondered why some of the best trial lawyers in America need my help to settle their cases without trial. As I reflect on your article above, it occurs to me that the mediation process is a perfect vehicle to transform a negation from positional to integrative.
I was looking for the same!
It is impossible with the car negotiation I think. May be in a car dealer: talking about interests will get to: I want a car that is comfortable to sit in, looks good, never delivers me too late, never fails me. Then the dealer would nog only sell the car, but also the navigation, the maintenance. In an attractive package for the buyer, so both win. Further more, this buyer is now a regular customer of the garage, so can buy more for the car later on (winter tires, new audio), AND will become an ambassador for the dealer. This is how I see integrative negotiation.
Regarding the car example where you ask how much better could the deal have been for both sides if they’d used integrative bargaining? I don”t know as a read the rest of the article looking for an example in the car scenario. Did I miss it ?
I enjoyed this idea and form of negotiation very much. I think the only people that would have a problem with this would be greedy. The “pie” is huge, there is certainly enough for everyone to get a fair share that pleases them.