LDR-203S: Collaborative Problem Solving

Metacognition

"Thinking about thinking" or the ability to evaluate a cognitive task to determine how best to accomplish it, and then to monitor and adjust one's performance on that task

4 common steps in effective problem solving

-Define the problem; create a problem statement -Generate alternative solutions; come up with possible ways to solve a problem -Select an effective solution; pick a solution that will solve the problem effectively -Implement solution and monitor; apply the solution selected and watch to see if it solves the problem

metacognition examples

-summon your prior knowledge -think aloud -ask yourself questions "what is confusing about this topi" -use writing -organize your thoughts -take notes from memory as you're reading (engages recall) -review your exams and analyze why you missed something -take a timeout -test yourself -

biases

A bias is a tendency, inclination, or prejudice toward or against something or someone. Some biases are positive and helpful — like choosing to only eat foods that are considered healthy or staying away from someone who has knowingly caused harm. How can biases impact the problem solving process? If you have a bias towards something, it could impact the solution you select. For example, if you have a bias towards your Airmen you would select a solution that would benefit them, even if that solution isn't the best one.

Readiness/Ripeness

Ability, willingness, and timing of negotiation.

adaptive thinking

Adaptive thinking refers to the cognitive behavior one demonstrates when confronted by unanticipated circumstances during the execution of a planned activity (e.g. military operations, emergencies). Developing adaptive thinking does not occur in controlled, predictable, or calm reflective environments. Rather, it occurs in complex, challenging, and often stressful situations and requires deliberate practice and repetition. Deliberate practice differs from simply exercising a skill or ability since it involves the following: Repetition focused feedback immediacy focus on weaknesses

immediacy

After feedback is provided on task performance, there is an immediate repetition so the task can be performed more in accordance with expert norms.

root cause analysis

All too often, Air Force leaders find themselves addressing problems that have already been "solved" on numerous occasions. This is usually due to problem-solving efforts directed at the symptoms of a problem rather than at the root cause of the problem. If an aircraft is constantly breaking down and becomes non-mission capable, should you: reduce the aircraft usage, improve repair cycle time, improve the quality of replacement parts, improve the aircraft design, or improve the aircraft design process? Clearly, each step becomes increasingly difficult, but each step also has a greater impact in preventing the recurrence of the problem. Root Cause Analysis is a tradeoff between digging as deeply as possible and finding the deepest point that's still within your sphere of influence. There are several tools that can assist you with determining the "true" root cause. Take a look at two specific tools.

Lying

Always avoid dealing with someone who is not bargaining in good faith - you should evade. What does it take to rebuild trust when you've been lied to? Even when dealing with this tactic, it's important for you to remain truthful. You can counter with a statement similar to the following: "The way things have been going the last week or so, I'm confused. Could you explain exactly what is going on? It's hard for me to work with you if I don't have the facts."

CNS - Interest

Assess the position. Why do you think the position from step one is the one you need? Estimate why you think your counterpart desires his/her position.

Trust in a Person (TIPO) (Negotiation)

At the most basic level, personal trust is established between two people and is "interpersonal" in nature. Personal trust stands alone. It is not reliant on any institution or third-party. Personal trust can be assumed or it can be earned through proving oneself to be trustworthy in actions and in words.

Intimidation/Aggressive Behavior

Attempting to force the other negotiator to agree by means of emotional ploy, this tactic usually uses anger or fear. Change the game from hard bargaining to interest based negotiation and use active listening by rephrasing their demands as interests. If they are being rude, you can call them on it. If this hardball tactic continues, you may have to evade or insist on your position.

Aspiration Point

Best outcome negotiator hopes to receive.

brainstorming

Brainstorming is a technique designed to stimulate a chain reaction of ideas relating to a problem. Brainstorming can assist you and others in building a variety of ideas in a short time about a specific problem or topic. To gain the most from a brainstorming session, use the following rules and techniques:

analytical thinking2

Cause and Effect Complexity Similarities and Differences Possible Solutions and Alternatives Associations and Disconnections Steps within a Process Relationships Between All Parts Trends Sequence of Events Examples 5 W's: Who, What, When, Where, Why Analytical thinking is time consuming and requires attention to detail. During times of quick reaction or with time sensitive issues, it is not recommended to use analytical thinking to solve a problem. As an NCO and leader, it is essential to know when to consider taking your time to solve the problem or when to make the call when an issue is time sensitive.

focus on weaknesses

Deliberate practice can be tailored to the individual and focused on areas of weakness. During "train as you fight" performances the individual will avoid situations in which he knows he is weak, and rightly so as there is a desire to do one's best.

Task Orientation

Depending on the stakes and situation, this approach places more importance on reaching an outcome, solution, or resolution. High task orientation means we are very motivated to resolve a problem or respond to a critical situation. On the other hand, low task orientation means we do not wish (or need) to resolve the situation at this time. Perhaps we are satisfied with the current situation or status quo or it may be that we do not agree with any of the proposed solutions. It could be that we do not understand the problem completely and need additional time to gather more information. Whatever the case, it is vital that we consider connections between the task and the people involved.

CNS - BATNA (Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement)

Determine your BATNA (Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement) and what motivates you to engage in negotiations and estimate your counterpart's BATNA. A BATNA is an alternative that, should negotiations fail, you are willing and able to execute without the opposite negotiator's participation or permission. Understanding your BATNA and the opposite's BATNA will help you determine when or if you should walk away from the negotiation table. In order to formulate a practical BATNA, you must have both the resources and the will to execute this alternative on your own without any assistance.

categories of negotiation

Distributive and Integrative

distributive

Distributive negotiations are usually over a single issue and considered win-lose. This category assumes resources are limited and this approach to negotiating could be used when attempting to divide, divvy, or distribute something. Conflict is almost inevitable, and competition rather than cooperation will likely guide the negotiations. Negotiators will meet to exchange proposals, offers, and counter-offers. However, it's important for you to understand if your opposite is using distributive negotiations and how to counter their efforts.

Effectiveness

Does the solution actually address and fix the problem?

Second and Third Order Effects (2nd and 3rd)

Every decision has 2nd and 3rd order effects...or consequences to that decision, i.e., outcomes that are different than the first desired outcome yet are directly related to the initial decision. They are most often separated by time and space from the perspective of the decision.

Task and People Orientation

Every negotiation involves some sort of task and the interaction of two or more people or groups of people (parties). These form the "framework" used to visualize and understand the differences between the five styles we commonly use to negotiate. An additional step in selecting a negotiation style that is most appropriate for the situation is determining whether the task or the people or both are important.

fish bone diagram

Fish Bone Diagram (i.e., cause and effect diagram) is a diagram used to depict the relationship between specific categories of process inputs and the undesirable output. This technique aids in identifying potential causes to a problem.

Power (TIPO) (Negotiation)

In a negotiation you can apply "power over" or "power with" your opposite. Power over is used to gain an advantage, such as pulling rank. Power with improves the opportunity for a mutually satisfied outcome for all negotiators involved. Take a moment and briefly review the position and personal powers: Position Powers Provide you the authority to make decisions, requests, and issue lawful orders based on your position. The following are the types of position power: Coercive - Deals with the leader's perceived ability to provide sanctions, punishment, or consequences for not performing. Reward - Deals with the leader's perceived ability to provide rewards and incentives that people like. Connection - This power pertains to who you know. This can erode if you use it as a primary source of influence. Legitimate - This is based on one's rank, position, or level of authority. Although you may be able to use this "power over" your opposite, consider the relationship and only use this power when your intentions are legal, ethical, and appropriate. Although all types of power are valuable tools in negotiations, don't threaten or inflict undue punishments or promise rewards you cannot deliver. Personal Powers These three personal powers are largely based on leadership traits. Followers respect and are committed to a leader with personal power, making them valuable tools in negotiations. Referent (Charisma) - This power affords the opportunity to encourage, motivate, and inspire others. Information - Access to secure data systems, leadership meetings, briefings, even gossip, increases your information power base. Some tend to withhold information from others so they maintain the advantage and the informational "higher hand." Expert - It suggests that you gain power and the ability to influence through your education, experience, and job knowledge. How you use and share this power base can improve or reduce trust, and ultimately influence the outcome of your negotiations.

What is the Situation (current and future consequences)

In a worst-case scenario like an emergency, you may only have a few seconds to act or make a decision. If there is no time to make an informed decision, you may have to "flex" your position power to at least impose a short-term solution. On the other hand, if time is not an issue and all parties are willing, you can take your time, gather more information, and seek more appropriate options.

complex domain

In the complex domain, the cause and effect relationship is so intertwined that things only make sense in hindsight...after the situation has occurred and maybe even worked itself out. Right answers can't be flushed out initially...they aren't readily available. It's like the difference between, say, a car and the Brazilian rainforest. Cars are complicated machines, but an expert mechanic can take one apart and reassemble it without changing a thing. The car is static, and the whole is the sum of its parts. The rainforest, on the other hand, is a complex environment...always in constant flux — a species becomes extinct, weather patterns change, an agricultural project reroutes a water source — and the whole is far more than the sum of its parts. This is the domain of "unknown unknowns" (you don't know what you don't know). Cause and effect evident only in hindsight unknown unknowns probe, sense, respond

complicated domain

In the complicated domain, there is a relationship between cause and effect; however, not everyone may be able to see it, so analysis or expertise is required. This domain may contain multiple right answers, many of which may be excellent. Therefore, good practice (as opposed to best practice) is more appropriate. This is the domain of "known unknowns" (there are things you know you don't know). Leaders in the complicated domain must sense (figure out what's going on), analyze (examine the facts), and respond. This approach is not easy and often requires expertise to analyze the situation. An example of a complicated problem could be your car has a knocking noise coming from the engine (sense). You don't know what's causing the noise so you take it to a few mechanics to get expert advice (analyze). Each mechanic can tell you a different way to fix the noise, all of which are viable solutions. So you decide to go with the cheapest solution (respond). Known unknowns Sense, Analyze, Respond

CNS - Positions

In this final step, the best idea from all presented is selected by all negotiating parties.

CNS - Solutions

In this final step, the best idea from all presented is selected by all negotiating parties.

the who

Is it a subordinate, peer, supervisor, someone from another unit, service branch, or another country? When dealing with supervisors and peers, insisting may not be appropriate as our opposite may have more position power than us. For instance, it's doubtful any of us could force our commander to act in a given situation. Therefore, cooperating, settling, or complying may be more appropriate. On the other hand, if we have position power, and time is short, insisting may be the most appropriate style. Understanding "who" we are dealing with and the importance of the relationship can help us decide the best negotiation strategy to use.

Viable

Is the solution capable of working successfully?

3Ms and a P

Materials Methods Machines People

implementing and monitoring the solution

Once action has been initiated, it must be supervised and monitored to ensure the solution is actually working as planned. Monitoring enables you to identify whether or not the results being achieved are fixing the problem, and if not, why not. A decision can then be made on the action required to continue monitoring the implemented solution, make some tweaks, or start from scratch.

Options (TIPO) (Negotiation)

Options are just different ways to potentially solve the problem. Option building requires two elements: Define the problem that needs solving Identify possible resources (information, power, time, people, money, etc.) that may be available.

Stages of Implementation

Planning and preparing to implement the solution Implementing and monitoring the solution Reviewing and analyzing the success of the solution

4Ps

Policies Procedures People Plant

Trust in a Process (TIPO) (Negotiation)

Process trust exists when you have faith in a governing institution and believe that it supports your negotiations. You trust that these processes promote outcomes that are justified (fair and impartial), legal, ethically acceptable, and also satisfy the interests (What you need. It is the underlying reason behind your position) of both negotiators.

readiness

Readiness is the capacity of parties to decide it is in their best interest to negotiate an agreement rather than to continue a dispute. Even when both parties decide to negotiate, failure to deal sensitively with each other can jeopardize negotiations. When preparing to negotiate, use these questions to examine your readiness: Are these issues negotiable? Am I willing to make compromises and give some things up? Do I want to resolve these issues equitably? Am I willing to work to keep the channels of communication open? If any of the principal negotiators are not ready to negotiate, progress comes to a halt and conflict may reemerge. Although you may be ready to negotiate, the situation itself may or may not be ripe for negotiation.

Systems of thinking

S1 - reactive thinking S2- reflective thinking

generating solutions

Solutions...there could be many solutions to fix the problem. But how do you know which one is the best? Most practical? When generating alternate solutions, the first thing to keep in mind is...the more the better. During this phase, there are no "dumb" or wrong solutions. Throw out as many as you and your team can come up with. The idea is to not stifle creativity and come up with as many as you can. You'll whittle the solutions list down later.

Demand

Statement of terms with no room for adjustment. Take it or leave it.

Brainstorming Session Techniques

Structured Approach - This approach means soliciting one idea at a time from each person on the team. Participants in the brainstorming session should refrain from commenting until the person facilitating the forum extends the opportunity. If the participants don't have a comment to share, they should say, "Pass." The session ends when everyone says, "Pass." Unstructured Approach (i.e., also called free-form brainstorming) - The unstructured approach allows team members to call out ideas as they come to mind. No one takes turns and the session ends when the team feels it has exhausted all ideas. Silent Approach - The silent approach is used when you want team members to write ideas on small slips of paper. Then, you collect the papers and jot down the ideas for all to see. One big advantage of a silent approach is it makes sure everybody is given the opportunity to have their thoughts and ideas thoroughly considered by the group. This avoids the loudest or most extroverted people unintentionally dominating the sessions.

4Ss

Surroundings Suppliers Systems Skills

CNS - Brainstorming

Suspend judgement and develop a list of ideas and/or option proposals. Note: Set ground rules that this is only a brainstorm and no party is committed to any option put forward. If you cannot come to any kind of agreement in this step, then you may need to go back and start again with positions.

System 1 thinking (S1)

System 1 thinking is a vital decision-making tool that operates in the background of your mind. It aids you in supporting daily activities and making quick decisions. This type of thinking relies heavily on situational cues, prominent memories, trial and error, and heuristic thinking (e.g., discovering solutions for self) to arrive quickly and confidently at judgments.

System 2 thinking (S2)

System 2 thinking, or reflective thinking, is broad and informed problem-solving and deliberate decision making. It is useful for judgments in unfamiliar situations, for processing abstract concepts, and for deliberating when there is time for planning and more comprehensive consideration. Argument making is often part of the deliberation process when making System 2 thinking decisions

focused feedback

Task performance is evaluated by the coach or learner during performance. There is a focus on the critical parts of how one does the task and constructive criticism is provided at regular intervals.

Repetition

Task performance occurs repetitively rather than at its naturally occurring frequency. A goal of deliberate practice is to develop habits that operate expertly and automatically. If appropriate situations occur relatively infrequently or are widely spaced apart while performing "as you fight" they will not become readily habitual.

Cooperative Negotiation Strategy (CNS)

The CNS reflects high interest in people and task orientation. This strategy depends heavily on each party's collaborative efforts and desire to achieve a mutually satisfactory outcome. When we cooperate with others, we generate options that are valued by all parties and the solutions are usually better than what we could have created on our own. When applying the CNS, you trade positions (what you want) for interests (why you want it) and find complementary differences and similarities that can help everyone move toward a mutually satisfying agreement. Additionally, it allows you to choose negotiation strategies which may guide your actions to settle, insist, comply or evade. The first three steps of the CNS process help you plan for the negotiation. The last two steps of the CNS process will help you execute the negotiation. CNS rests on a skill set that includes open communications, active listening, and critical thinking. These skills are needed for parties to understand perceptions of events, priorities, concerns, fears, and any other piece of information that helps in the search for viable solutions.

Zone of Possible Agreement (ZOPA)

The area of overlap between each party's bargaining range.

Evade Strategy ("Not now, maybe later?")

The evade strategy reflects low interest in people orientation or task orientation. The negotiator seeks to avoid engagement or negotiations.

integrative

The integrative category doesn't see resources as necessarily fixed and should be approached as a win-win situation. Integrative negotiations still acknowledge that resources must be distributed (there is value to claim at some point in any negotiation). Conflict is not seen as inevitable; there is the possibility for mutually beneficial, "value creating," cooperation. Negotiators see their opposites as partners in the process. Information and power are actively shared between the disputants. This approach can be executed through the Cooperative Negotiation Strategy. The cooperative negotiator is concerned with maximizing absolute gains while simultaneously meeting the counterpart's interests, rather than maximizing their relative gains over the other negotiator. As a general rule, except in cases of an emergency, military negotiators achieve better solutions by utilizing the integrative category. One technique to use during integrative negotiations is asking open-ended questions regarding the other negotiator's interests, concerns, and circumstances. Agreements reached by integrative means will be more sustainable and will tend to enhance relationships, whereas distributive negotiation tends to degrade relationships.

Highball/Lowball

The other side sets a very high demand (A statement of terms with no room for adjustment. This position embodies the most precise use of a "take it or leave it" option) and then offers a concession, and you feel obligated to respond with a concession. This sets you up to feel you are getting a fair deal, since the other negotiator will likely say something like "let's split the difference" from an overly high price. Counter this by refusing to negotiate unless they give you a more realistic opening offer, or by countering with a Highball/Lowball of your own.

Opposite

The person or group you are engaged in negotiations.

Bargaining Range

The range between one party's aspiration point and reservation point.

Simple Domain

The simple (obvious) domain is characterized by stability and clear cause-and-effect relationships that are seen by everyone and are always going to be the same. Often, the one right answer is self-evident and undisputed since patterns are recognizable (if you do X, you're always going to get Y). Known-Knowns Sense, Categorize, Respond

What are the Stakes (what do you stand to gain or lose)

The stakes in a negotiated situation are what you stand (or are willing) to lose if negotiations go awry. If the issue is unimportant (the stakes are low), you could evade it or even comply with the other party. Conversely, if the issue is critical to you (the stakes are high), insisting or cooperating may be appropriate. Even evading may be the right choice at first in order to allow time to gather enough information to better understand the issue and to consider all options

Task Orientation/People Orientation

The task is more critical than the relationship we have with the people involved. Alternatively, building or maintaining relationships with people is more important than the task.

People Orientation

This approach centers on the relationship that exists between the individuals or groups involved. In some situations, developing or maintaining the relationship is more important than the task at hand. With people orientation, the time spent on cultivating the relationship is in direct correlation with the amount of power our opposites feel they need as well as how much power we feel we need to accomplish the task.

Exploding Offer

This offer is only good for 24 hours, or while supplies last. Counter this by asking for more time or offer an option that is close to your aspiration point.

Settle Strategy ("Let's split the difference and call it a day.")

This strategy is used when task and people orientation are similar or equal and there is a desire to develop a compromising solution. Use this style when there is little chance of getting everything you want but a solution is necessary.

Insist Strategy ("My way or the highway.")

This strategy reflects low interest in people orientation, but high interest in task orientation. Use this assertive "winner-takes-all" task-oriented style when obtaining your objective is paramount, regardless of the cost to the opposite's interests or to the relationship.

Comply Strategy ("We will do it your way.")

This strategy reflects low interest in task orientation and high interest in people orientation. The negotiator is concerned with establishing, preserving, or improving his/her reputation or relationship. Use this passive strategy when preservation of the relationship between you and the other party is more important than the task.

Snow Job

This tactic aims to overwhelm you with too many details; one person can only absorb so much. It becomes extremely difficult to determine what is real, important, and a distraction. Wear the opponent down by making him or her explain each element.

evolutionary innovation

This type of innovation focuses on identifying ideas that represent something "distinctly new and improved." An example of an Evolutionary Innovation is the introduction of automatic banking machines that transformed the way banks viewed their staffing needs and shifted banking from set hours to banking at any hour. Evolutionary Innovation requires the team to look more broadly than cost-savings initiatives and see the "bigger picture" of what is really needed in the organization. Instead of duplicating what already exists, the team must look for new ways to bring value to the organization and its customers through new and improved products, services, and processes which can change the way customers relate to the organization or the way work is processed within the organization.

efficiency innovation

This type of innovation focuses on identifying new ideas for improving what already exists. This approach requires minimal investment since the team is building on the past and only looking for small changes to what is currently being done. These innovations are lower-impact improvements or adaptations of an organization's existing products, services, programs, or processes. The strategy for Efficiency Innovation is usually to cut costs, reduce cycle time, improve quality, offset a competitor's move, or attract new customers. Typically, only small gains are realized.

revolutionary innovation

This type of innovation focuses on radically new and better ideas that may dismantle the existing structure of the organization. For example, McDonald's fast-food approach changed the restaurant business. Disney's unique characters and interactive theme parks changed the entertainment business. MP3 technology revolutionized the music sales industry.

Ripeness

Timing is critical to successful negotiations. Conflict scholars and negotiators often use the concept of ripeness. After determining whether you are ready for negotiation, use these questions to test whether the situation is ripe for negotiation: Are all the parties interested in negotiation? If not, why is one or more of the parties reluctant? Do all parties know their alternatives to a negotiated settlement? Are the issues negotiable?

trust

Trust is the foundation of relationships with others and faith in a system. There are two major categories of trust: Trust in a Person and Trust in a Process.

TIPO Model

Trust, Information, Power, Options TIPO identifies how trust influences your use of information and how power affects the way you develop options or solutions to solve or resolve a current problem, conflict, or situation. Within each negotiation are variables that influence the outcome of your efforts. They are trust, information, power, and ultimately the available options. Analyzing these variables while preparing for negotiations, or while negotiating, should assist in selecting the most effective negotiation strategy of your own to reach a mutually-satisfying outcome.

Interest

What you need. Underlying reason behind your position.

Position

What you want, not what you need.

Reviewing and analyzing the success of the solution

When the plan has been completed and the solution implemented it is important to measure and analyze its success. This tells you whether the solution has been effective in solving the problem and possibly how useful it will be in solving similar problems in the future. There are three stages: -Measure the success of the solution by comparing the outcome of the action with the expected results -Analyze any discrepancy to identify the reasons for it -Take further action if necessary

analytical thinking

When you think analytically, you are examining and thinking comprehensively about the different parts or details of something, in order to understand or explain it. However, you must realize that analytical thought is not simply left brain, logical activity. It's a whole-brain, purposeful, and necessary approach for developing ideas. For instance, when analyzing a concept, object, or problem, you may be required to consider the following:

Information (TIPO) (Negotiation)

When you trust your opposite (the person or group with whom you are engaged in negotiations, sometimes called the negotiation partner) you believe the information they present is truthful and accurate. As a result, you should feel more comfortable sharing information which can lead to better discussions, more effective brainstorming sessions, and a shared selection of options that are good for all involved.

Good Cop/Bad Cop

While working as a team, one opposite is sympathetic to your interests and position, while another is aggressive and insists on their aspiration point. When faced with a case like this, counter it by naming it for what it is; "You two aren't playing the old Good Cop/Bad Cop routine are you? I can see what you are doing..."

Feasible

Will the solution fix the problem conveniently and be financially stable?

Integrative and Distributive Negotiation

Win-win situation or win-lose with hardball tactics.

brainstorming session rules

Withhold Judgment - The first and foremost rule is to withhold judgment of any sort. Initiate no evaluation, criticism, or judgment about any idea until the brainstorming session is complete. Encourage Freewheeling - The second rule of brainstorming is to encourage the freewheeling of ideas. This enables all individuals to make a contribution. Once ideas begin flowing, the leader allows the group to continue deliberating with little or no guidance. Remember, you aren't judging ideas at this phase of the brainstorming session. Aim for Quantity, Not Quality - Once ideas are flowing, write down the input of each participant and aim for quantity, not quality. Some ideas might appear silly; however, thoughtful consideration toward others' ideas will more than likely result in information that can be applied to current and future situations. Hitchhike (i.e., piggyback) Ideas - The last rule in brainstorming allows an idea to piggyback or hitchhike on another idea. In a brainstorming session, one member of the group suggests an idea. This idea triggers a thought in the mind of another and the process continues until you have a series of ideas prompted by one original thought or idea.

Nibble

You are about to sign, and then the opposite demands a little something extra at the end to close the deal. This person measures success by winning, by beating the other person, and by getting what they wanted. You should stand ready with a little something extra of your own to demand. If they do not comply with your nibble, you could insist on the original deal or evade the negotiation.

Reservation Point

Your bottom line in the negotiation.

the five why method

aids in determining the cause-effect relationships in a problem or a failure event." The Five-Why Method has proven very useful when the real cause of a problem is layered in ambiguity and/or the issue is unclear. This particular method is, by far, one of the simplest investigative tools to use without requiring the employment of a statistical analysis approach. By repeatedly asking the question 'Why?' we're able to peel away the more obvious layers of an issue (i.e., the symptoms), thus revealing the true root cause. -Why does a problem exist? -Why should we build versus modify or eradicate the existing problem? -Why, in measurable terms, are the preventive strategies or newly developed solutions operable or inoperable? -Why are we postured for continuous favorable returns? -Why aren't we positioned for mission effectiveness in the future?

negotiation concepts

aspiration point bargaining range best alternative to a negotiated agreement (BATNA) demand interest opposite position reservation point zone of possible agreement (ZOPA) task orientation/people orientation readiness/ripeness integrative and distributive negotiation

chaotic domain

domain of novel practices In the chaotic domain, searching for right answers would be pointless: The relationships between cause and effect are impossible to determine because they shift constantly and no manageable patterns exist — only turbulence. This is the domain of "unknowables". Here, a leader's immediate job is not to discover patterns but to 'stop the bleeding'...stabilize the environment. A leader must first act to establish order, then sense figuring out where stability is and where it's not, and then respond by working to change the situation from a chaotic one to a complex one, where the identification of emerging patterns can both help prevent future crises and discern new opportunities (see the complex domain). Communication is mostly directive in nature; there's simply no time to ask for input. Unknowable Possibly no right answers High anxiety and tension Look for what works instead of the "right" answer Take immediate action to reestablish order act, sense, respond

trimming solutions

effectiveness viable feasible

hardball tactics

good cop/bad cop highball/lowball exploding offer intimidation/aggressive behavior nibble snow job

Decision Analysis Matrix

is a useful technique to use for making a decision. It's particularly powerful where you have a number of good alternatives to choose from, and many different factors to take into account. This makes it a great technique to use in almost any important decision where there isn't a clear and obvious preferred option. Being able to use the Decision Analysis Matrix means you can take decisions confidently and rationally, at a time when other people might be struggling to make a decision. The Decision Analysis Matrix tool works by listing your possible solutions as rows on a table, and the factors you want to consider as columns. You then score each solution/factor combination, weight this score by the relative importance of the factor and add these scores up to give an overall score for each option. While it sounds complex, this technique is actually quite easy to use. Here's a quick visual example:

Planning and preparation

is key to successful implementation. The more important the problem, or the more complex the actions required to solve it, the more thorough your planning and preparation needs to be to ensure success.

Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement (BATNA)

should negotiations fail, an option you can and are willing and able to execute without the opposite negotiator's participation or permission.

Cynefin Framework

simple domain complicated domain complex domain chaotic domain

Implementation

the culmination of all your work in solving a problem and requires careful attention to detail. There are three basic stages involved:

problem framing

the process of describing and interpreting a stated problem to arrive at a problem statement define the problem and consider different perspectives Problem framing should be part of the "Define the problem" step Framing can lead to a problem statement and solution that may not address the original stated problem...instead it proposes a different understanding of the problem