To date, negotiation research in two-party situations has largely focused on single issues or on multiple issues bargained simultaneously. In this paper, we develop, from a behavioral perspective, a conceptual framework and an associated set of propositions concerning the influence and interaction of a number of factors on agenda setting. We examine the consequences of negotiating multiple issues sequentially as opposed to discussing them simultaneously. Specifically, we posit ( a ) conditions under which sequential versus simultaneous negotiations are advantageous, ( b ) conditions that promote and inhibit integrative agreements between parties involved in sequential negotiations, and ( c ) conditions that foster greater utility and timeliness to the negotiating parties. In addition, directions for future research and methodological guidelines for testing the propositions are discussed.