Negotiation Models: Types, Examples, and How to Use Them

Every negotiation looks different. Some involve tough price battles, others require building long-term partnerships, and many fall somewhere in between. The negotiation model you choose shapes how the conversation unfolds and what kind of outcome you reach.

In this article, we’ll break down the most common types of negotiation, explain how each one works, and show you how to choose the model that best fits your goals.

What Are Negotiation Models?

Negotiation models are structured approaches to conversations where value, resources, or agreements are at stake. They describe how people prepare, communicate, and make decisions in situations that involve give-and-take.

Each model reflects a different mindset. Some focus on competition, others on collaboration, and some on compromise. Understanding these models helps you see the pattern behind a conversation and gives you the option to adjust your approach for a better outcome.

Types of Negotiation Models

As already established in this article, different situations call for different approaches. Knowing the main models of negotiation helps you adapt your style, protect value, and strengthen relationships. Here’s how the most common ones work in practice:

Distributive Negotiation (Win-Lose Model)

This model treats the negotiation as a battle over a fixed resource, where one side gains only if the other side loses. Imagine a supplier and a buyer locked in talks over unit price. If the buyer pushes the price down, the supplier’s margin shrinks. Deals shaped by this model often feel transactional, and while they can secure short-term wins, they risk damaging trust if used too often.

Integrative Negotiation (Win-Win Model)

Rather than fighting over a limited pie, the win-win model looks for ways to make the pie bigger. For example, a client might agree to a longer contract term in exchange for discounted rates, providing the vendor with stability and the client with cost savings. Integrative negotiation requires openness and creativity, but when done well, it strengthens relationships and creates results both sides can live with.

Compromise Model

The compromise model seeks a middle ground, where both sides make concessions to reach a mutually beneficial agreement. Consider two department heads debating budget allocation. Instead of prolonging the dispute, they agree to split the increase evenly. 

The strength of this model lies in its ability to end stalemates and provide a path to agreement. However, it’s not without its downsides. When both parties give up something, there’s a risk that neither side feels completely satisfied. If you feel you’re always compromising, it's easy to feel as though you’re losing out on the bigger picture. Compromise is useful, but it requires careful handling to ensure that both sides feel heard and valued.

Avoidance Model

Sometimes people choose not to engage in negotiation at all. Avoidance might mean delaying a conversation or stepping back entirely. A manager who postpones salary discussions until the next performance review is applying this model. It can prevent conflict in the short run, but risks allowing issues to resurface later with more intensity.

Competition Model

This approach is driven by assertiveness and the pursuit of one side’s goals, often at the expense of the other. Picture two companies negotiating the terms of a merger. Each pushes aggressively for favorable terms, knowing the outcome will have a lasting impact. 

The competition model requires sharp skills, a thorough understanding of what you want, and meticulous preparation. If you’re using this model, it’s essential to stay professional and strategic, focusing on facts, leverage, and timing. This style can easily sour relationships if not managed carefully. It works well when the negotiation's outcome matters more than keeping things amicable long-term.

Accommodation Model

The accommodation model prioritizes the relationship over immediate results. A business leader might agree to a minor concession in a contract simply to preserve goodwill with a long-standing partner. 

This approach can be useful when the stakes aren’t particularly high for you, but they are for the other person. It’s a way to show goodwill and build trust, especially in ongoing relationships. That said, it’s not ideal for every situation. Overuse can lead to resentment if you constantly feel like your own needs are being sidelined. It works best when used occasionally, as a gesture of support rather than a default approach.

Beyond the Basics: The Mutual Gains Approach

The models we’ve covered so far focus on dividing value, creating balance, or preserving relationships. The Mutual Gains Approach takes things further by treating negotiation as a chance to solve problems together rather than just manage conflict.

This model asks both sides to first map their interests, then work creatively to expand the set of options before deciding on a final agreement. For example, two companies negotiating a partnership might begin by identifying what each values most. Is it a steady supply, predictable revenue, or faster delivery? They identify these first before exploring multiple ways to achieve those goals at the same time.

How to Choose the Right Negotiation Model

The most effective negotiators adapt their approach to the situation in front of them. Goals, relationships, and stakes all influence which model will work best.

Distributive negotiation is suitable when a one-off contract focuses solely on price. Integrative or mutual gains models are more effective for long-term partnerships where both parties seek lasting value. Compromise can resolve smaller issues quickly, while competition sometimes becomes necessary in high-stakes, zero-sum scenarios.

Now, you should know that context plays a big role. Cross-cultural conversations often require more accommodation, while internal team conflicts benefit from strategies that emphasize shared interests. Flexibility is very important here because shifting from one model to another mid-discussion can preserve both value and trust.

Tools like BATNA and decision trees provide extra support. They help negotiators clarify their best alternatives, weigh risks, and stay focused on facts instead of reacting emotionally. Combining these tools with the right model creates a balanced strategy that leads to stronger outcomes.

Build Skills That Fit Any Negotiation

No single negotiation model works in every situation. Some deals call for assertiveness, others reward collaboration, and many fall somewhere in between. The key is knowing which model to lean on, and when to switch, so you protect value without losing trust.

Our training programs give teams the tools to practice different models, spot blind spots with the Silhouette Profiler, and adapt strategies under pressure. With the right preparation, managers and teams can move through any conversation with confidence and clarity.

Schedule a consultation now to equip your team with negotiation skills that last.

‍