Most of the research on bargaining has focused on individuals bargaining against other individuals. This paper discusses two experiments in which the bargaining processes and outcomes of bargaining teams were compared to those of individual bargainers. Individuals bargained against a single other in the first experiment, while a two-person team bargained against a single other in the second experiment. The bargaining issues were defined by a set of continuous profit graphs that had three levels of slope: steep, medium, and shallow. In each experiment, a design was used whereby each of 18 same-sex bargaining units reached nine decisions based on a factorial presentation of the three profit slopes. Results indicated no significant differences between teams and individuals in either the obtained outcomes or the bargaining process. The paper concludes that for collective bargaining, the characteristics of an individual bargaining representative may be more crucial than the size of a bargaining team. (Author)