Integrative Strategy and Insight

Integrative strategy is intended to maximize joint gains. Two related routes to integrative agreements have received the most attention. The first, called “bridging” (Pruitt, 1981), originates from Follett’s (1940) description of the creative process by which negotiators reframe issues and generate new options for agreement.

Negotiation strategies used to reach inte­grative agreement via logrolling have received substantial research attention (Pruitt & Lewis, 1975; Weingart et al., 1990). The earliest behavioral research on logrolling documented that negotiators could reach logrolling agree­ments if they combined high and relatively rigid aspirations for individual gain with a flexible problem-solving orientation aimed at identifying a mutually acceptable agreement (Pruitt & Lewis, 1977).

Specifically, Pruitt and colleagues identified two sets of behaviors that lead to integra­tive, logrolling agreements: heuristic trial and error and information exchange (Carnevale et al., 1979; Kimmel et al., 1980; Lewis & Fry, 1977; Pruitt, 1981; Pruitt & Lewis, 1975; Schulz & Pruitt, 1978). Heuristic trial and error is the process by which parties trade multi-issue offers until the offers no longer increase one party’s gains without harming the other (Pruitt & Lewis, 1975). Information sharing, at least in Western cultures, involves a process of asking questions and providing answers (hence, “Q&A”; Adair & Brett, 2005; Kimmel et al., 1980; Olekalns & Smith, 2003; Pruitt & Lewis, 1975; Weingart et al., 1990). “Questions” are interrogative statements to elicit information sharing, and “answers” con­note information sharing about preferences, priorities, and interests (Weingart et al., 1990; Weingart et al., 2007).

Early behavioral research identified an important link between Q&A and joint gains, calling it “insight” (Thompson & Hastie, 1990; Weingart et al., 1990). Insight is the understanding that an opportunity exists to benefit both negotiators (Brett, Shapiro, & Lytle, 1998; Olekalns & Smith, 2003, 2005; Pruitt, 1981; Thompson, 1991; Thompson & Hastie, 1990). Q&A helps reveal informa­tion that leads to insights about bridging or logrolling opportunities, which in turn lead to joint gains.

Bridging and logrolling require slightly different kinds of insight. Follett (1940) illus­trated bridging with the example of two sisters, each of whom wants the entire, single orange left on the kitchen table. Their “wants” are their positions, and the immediate solu­tion is to halve the orange. However, if the sisters transcend positions by discussing their interests—one sister wants the juice, while the other wants the rind—they discover that a bridging opportunity exists. A new solution can fulfill 100% of each sister’s underlying interests. Insights that lead to bridging fre­quently arise when negotiators decompose a single, seemingly incompatible issue into mul­tiple, more compatible issues (i.e., by revealing that the pie is not “fixed”).

Logrolling occurs when parties initially hold a “fixed pie” view of all issues in a multi-issue negotiation (e.g., the two, hungry sisters negotiate the division of an apple, a pear, and a banana, where each wants all of them to some extent). The apparent solution would be a “fair” 50/50 split of all three fruits. However, this solution is only optimal if the two sisters value the three fruits exactly the same. Recognizing that they have divergent preferences among the issues (i.e., reaching insight) could lead the parties to a value­creating solution. For example, if both sisters like bananas, but one likes apples better than pears, while the other prefers pears to apples, then a trade-off is possible. They can split the banana and give the full apple and pear to their respective adherents. More generally, logrolling requires each party to make a con­cession on an issue of low value to themselves but high value to the counterpart, in exchange for the same. Thus, each party gets a bigger share of what is more important and a lesser share of what is less important. This fulfill­ment of preferences creates value, relative to suboptimal solutions like cutting the three fruits in half. Overall, behaviors that promote insight lead to logrolling and joint gains.