David Honig — Trumps's style of "distributive bargaining"

Distributive bargaining is win-lose aka zero-sum. Integrative bargaining is win-win aka compromise.

Distributive bargaining is based on the assumption of conflict between the interest of the parties in dividing a fixed pie, while integrative bargaining is about cooperation on common interests and compromise on other interests to grow the pie.

Trump's bargaining style based on his business background is distributive and based on competition, where there is a winner and a loser at the striking of the bargain. 

The Chinese style of bargaining is integrative and aims at satisfying the interest of all by cooperation in a more open-ended arrangement.

Not a great analysis of Trump's m.o. but worth a read if there's time. It's short, and it's a hot topic now.

Some see Trump's style as simplistic for the international situation and others as being 5-D chess that only Trump can understand.

My view is that Trump is a lot better negotiator in this regard than the opposing side gives him credit for, but I also think that he tends to look at international deals in terms of particulars, so he can claim a win in each case. But the international chess board is more complicated than that. It's like playing chess with the intention of never losing even a pawn in the game. But Trump also knows when to hold 'em and when to fold 'em. The game consists of many hands.

Geopolitika
Trumps's style of "distributive bargaining"

David Honig

Gregory Beyer — Why Business Leaders Are Obsessed With Sun Tzu's Ancient Military Guide, "The Art of War"

Is business competition well-modeled on warfare? Apparently a lot of leaders think so.

Rick Wartzman, executive director of The Drucker Institute, wrote last year in Forbes, “Ask businesspeople to peg the writer whose thinking is most clearly reflected in both military and corporate circles, and odds are that you’ll hear the name Sun Tzu.” CEO.com includes the book on its list of Leadership Books To Read Before You Die.
For business leaders, reading The Art of War is a rite of passage; quoting from it is de rigueur. The publishing industry routinely markets the book as a military/business text, with blurbs from CEOs and testimonials from trade publications. Sun Tzu’s principles have been applied to every conceivable agenda....

Game theory, too.

Does anyone else find it odd that business leaders routinely structure the game as zero-sum and not win-win? And therefore often adopt the principle of "doing whatever it takes," i.e., "the end justifies the means"aka "nice guys finish last."

The Huffington Post
Why Business Leaders Are Obsessed With Sun Tzu's Ancient Military Guide, "The Art of War"
Gregory Beyer

P.A.P.-Blog — Human Rights, Pareto Improvements, and a Difference Principle

Human rights activism is rarely zero-sum, in the sense that we can only improve the rights protection of some through the imposition of an equal loss on others.

P.A.P.-Blog // Human Rights Etc

Human Rights, Pareto Improvements, and a Difference Principle