Manual para maestros.

IZVX]ZghBVcjVa

>ciZgcVi^dcVaLViZgXdjghZh$G^kZg7Vh^ch>cXajY^c\AVl!CZ\di^Vi^dc!8dc[a^Xi

GZhdaji^dcVcYH^bjaVi^dcIgV^c^c\:mZgX^hZh

Cover Photograph: Bob Berwyn

IZVX]ZghBVcjVa

EgZeVgZY[dg;6DWnG^X]VgY@naZEV^haZnJc^kZgh^ind[7g^i^h]8dajbW^V!KVcXdjkZg!8VcVYV

;6D'%%-

>ciZgcVi^dcVaLViZgXdjghZh$G^kZg7Vh^ch>cXajY^c\AVl!CZ\di^Vi^dc!8dc[a^Xi

GZhdaji^dcVcYH^bjaVi^dcIgV^c^c\:mZgX^hZh

AcknowledgmentsThe initiative which led to the development of these training materials grew out of discussions with Stefano Burchi and Kerstin Mechlem, legal officers of the Development Law Service, Legal Office, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) on the occasion of the Program for the Regional Workshop on International Water Law and Nego-tiation Skills for Sharing Transboundary Resources in Bujumbura, Burundi in the Spring of 2006. Thank you Stefano and Kerstin for your support and encouragement.

Special thanks also to Bart Hilhorst and Jake Burke of FAO and the SVP Coordination Project and Information Products for Nile Basin Water Resources Management GCP/INT/945/ITA who also tremendously supported and encouraged the production of these training materials.

FAO Water Teachers Manual

Table of Contents1 Setting the Scene . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.1 General Debriefing Instructions ........................................................................................................................... 21.2 The Four Step Debriefing Process ....................................................................................................................... 2

2 Exercises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42.1 Exercise # 1 Thumb Wrestling ............................................................................................................................. 42.2 Exercise # 2 Warped Juggle ................................................................................................................................. 62.3 Exercise # 3 Toothpick Teaser ............................................................................................................................ 102.4 Exercise # 4 Paper Tear ..................................................................................................................................... 11

3 Model Answer to Simulation Exercise #1 to Stimulate Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133.1 Claim in Favour of Upstream ............................................................................................................................. 133.2 Claim in Favour of Downstream ......................................................................................................................... 143.3 Tips for Coaching Negotiation Simulations ....................................................................................................... 15

4 Tree Exercise #2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174.1 Neighbour 1 Only ................................................................................................................................................ 174.2 Neighbour 2 Only ................................................................................................................................................ 17

5 Positions vs . Interests Exercise #3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

6 Prisoners Dilemma Exercise #4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

7 Simulation Exercise #5 Vancouver River Part II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227.1 Confidential Instructions for Stripes Foreign Minister for Downstream ........................................................ 227.2 Confidential Instructions for Dots of Downstream ............................................................................................ 247.3 Confidential Instructions for Dashes, International Legal Advisor to Downstream ......................................... 267.4 Confidential Instructions for Red, Foreign Minister of Upstream ..................................................................... 287.5 Confidential Instructions for White, Deputy Minister for Upstream ................................................................. 307.6 Confidential Instructions for Blue, International Law Advisor to Upstream .................................................... 327.7 Preparation Sheets ............................................................................................................................................. 34

8 Simulation Exercise #6 The Elinehtton River Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 368.1 Confidential Instructions to A ............................................................................................................................. 368.2 Confidential Instructions to B............................................................................................................................. 368.3 Confidential Instructions to C ............................................................................................................................. 378.4 Confidential Instructions to D............................................................................................................................. 378.5 Debriefing Instructions for Elinehtton Simulation Exercise #5 ........................................................................ 38


Setting the SceneCreatng a comfortable envronment for the study of nternatonal water law and conflct resoluton n whch partcpants can explore ther behavours s crtcal. The followng are not hard and fast rules but rather salent factors we have found help to create a safe envronment conducve to learnng. These factors nclude both before the sesson and after the sesson suggestons as follows:

Before the Sessions:

Consder group sze.

Eght to twelve s an deal sze for all members of the group to be heard, partcpate and to produce useful group

dynamcs.

Share the ntent of your work openly.

Share the underpnnngs of your desgn: you wll be combnng experental and ddactc approaches to reach

multple learnng styles.

Pay attenton to the seatng arrangement.

Crcles and half moons tend to optmze the level of engagement.

Create clear, open communcatons about the sesson.

What can partcpants expect? Who wll be there? Should they wear comfortable clothes?

Consder dverse backgrounds.

You may fnd that some of the exercses do not translate drectly to dfferent cultures. Try a test run wth a res-

dent wthn the envronment n whch you wll be workng.

During the Sessions:

Encourage communcaton.

Ask the partcpants to slow down the pace of conversaton and to speak authentcally from the heart and from

the head.

Use a check n.

Gve people a chance to ntroduce themselves (or each other) and become more present by acknowledgng

where ther heads are at that moment. A good queston to ask s What do you need to take care of or let go

of to be fully present?

Provde partcpants wth optons.

No one s requred to partcpate or speak n a debref. Slence or passng should be proposed, acceptable and

always an opton. No one should be pressed to talk or dsclose more than they feel s approprate.

The purposes of these exercises are to:

Rase awareness of habtual patterns of thnkng

Become aware of how the way we habtually thnk mpacts reflectve thnkng

Lmber up

Focus on developng the observer n ourselves

Settng the Scene

Internatonal Watercourses/Rver Basns ncludng Law, Negotaton, Conflct Resoluton and Smulaton Tranng Exercses

The outcomes of these exercses should nclude an enhanced ablty to understand our own thnkng processes and reflec-ton on how often automatc thought processes can obstruct learnng, communcaton and systems thnkng.

We advse usng these exercses sparngly to jump-start a learnng experence or to punctuate key nsghts. Strngng several exercses together wll not consttute a coherent experence for partcpants. Rather we suggest you nterweave thoughtful lectures, vdeos, case dscussons and small group conversatons together wth these exercses.

Often your choce of exercse wll be dctated by the condtons of play number of partcpants, length of tme avalable, attrbutes of the workshop space and avalablty of equpment.

Exercses for the Teachers Package were created to accompany the Draft Tranng Manual for Internatonal Water-courses. Ths document contans general debrefng nstructons together wth everythng you need to know to mplement four specfc exercses as follows:

1 .1 General Debriefing InstructionsThere are many methods to begn a successful debref of the exercses n ths manual ncludng the negotaton smula-ton exercse.

We have found the followng four step process to be an effectve and memorable procedure to debref. By debref we mean a process of guded dscusson and reflecton mmedately followng a groups exercse experence.

The objectves of the four step process nclude organzng the debref nto clear and smple steps and helpng learners to develop a methodcal and thorough approach to debrefng.

1 .2 The Four Step Debriefing Process

Step # 1: Tell the Story

After every exercse and smulaton, ask the group to tell the story. What happened? What dd they see? What dd they feel? What dd they experence? Consder recordng some key ponts from ther comments on a flp chart or overhead.For example, askng the queston what happened? often elcts responses such as we ddnt have a plan at frst but later we fgured t out after a few tres, or we wanted to get better each tme, or at frst we were not lstenng to each other, or ntally we dd not take nto account the dfferent abltes of our group members.

Step # 2: Graph the Variables

Try to depct the behavour of selected varables over tme (e.g. team learnng) wth a graph. Ths s an mportant step toward explanng and eventually tryng to understand group dynamcs. For example, you mght try to plot team learnng versus tme.

Settng the Scene


Settng the Scene

Step # 3 : Try to Draw a Causal Loop Diagram

In a causal loop dagram we connect cause and effect relatonshps between selected varables. A causal loop dagram s essental as ts helps to answer the mportant queston: what structure could be causng the behavour we have observed?

Here s a smple causal loop dagram:

Step # 4: Identify Lessons Learned

What are the nsghts the group has ganed form the exercse? What structures (or n real lfe, what polces) would the group change to mprove results? Where s the area of hghest leverage?

Pressure toImprove

Team Learning

Actualperformance

Time SpentDiscussing New

Ideas

Skill ofApproach

Pressure toImprove

Team Learning

Actualperformance

Time SpentDiscussing New

Ideas

Skill ofApproach


Exercises2 .1 Exercise # 1 Thumb Wrestling

Ths exercse uses a well-known chldrens game (thumb wrestlng) to provoke rch dscussons about collectvely held mental models of competton and collaboraton. I lke t because t rases awareness of the barrers and enablers to collaboratve competton.

From my experence, talkng abstractly about the propertes of men-tal models n a lecture format s a losng proposton.

Eyes glaze over, arms fold, sde conversatons sprng up. But when you engage a group n an experence lke thumb wrestlng, through whch they can have fun and be students of ther own behavour, then youve created a potentally powerful learnng experence.

Purpose:

To show, n real tme, how our mental models (e.g., our deeply ngraned belefs, myths, stores about how the

world works) are often transparent and drectly affect the actons we take.

To practce the art of seeng nterdependences and unntended consequences.

Outcomes:

To expose and explore our mplct assumptons about competton and collaboraton.

A real-tme experence of collectvely held mental models (e.g., to have to compete to wn).

Context:

A context for dscussng how our mental models or lenses process the nformaton we take n and act on

It s one thng to talk about our mental models and another to see them n acton. In the case of ths exercse, thumb wrestlng gently and humorously exposes our mental models about wrestlng, games n general, and more mportantly, wnnng, losng and the potental for wn-wn stuatons. My colleagues and I have used ths exercse n several ways: to ntroduce the concept of mental models, as a wonderfully effectve practce feld for explorng the characterstcs of men-tal models, and as an experental ntroducton to conceptual models of thnkng processes.

To Run This Exercise:

Number of Participants: Any even number. If there s an odd number, the leader may want to partcpate.Time: 0 to 0 mnutes (dependng on length of debref).Space: No requrements.Equipment: None. (Unless you want to gve a prze, such as candy, to the wnners).Set-up: Partcpants sttng n chars wth or wthout a table.

Exercses


Instructions

Step 1: Ask partcpants to fnd a partner, preferably by turnng to the person sttng or standng next to them. If there s an uneven number, the leader may partcpate.

Step 2: Once everyone s pared, ask the group f they have ever thumb wrestled before. From my experence, more than half have spent long car trps dong ths wth a sblng n the back seat. Demonstrate for those who dont know what thumb wrestlng s. Have the pars grasp fngers as shown n the followng llustraton.

Step 3: Explan that the goal s to collect as many ponts as you can n one mnute. Important: Be careful not to set the partners up explctly as compettors.

I lke to nclude a frst and second prze (.e. a bg and a small bag of M&M candes, especally f I do the exercse n the late afternoon). To get a pont, one partner pns the thumb of the other partner (see llustraton below).

Step 4: Before begnnng, ask each par to warm up by tappng ther thumbs back and forth three tmes, then when the leader says go, begn the thumb wrestlng.

Step 5: After one mnute, stop the game (There wll probably be a lot of laughter and jokng, so go wth t and have fun).

Debrief

Ask the partners how many ponts theyve ganed. You wll hear numbers that tend to hover between one and fve, wth the occasonal par who manages to get 0 or 0. If you have a par wth a hgh score, ask how they dd t. The answer wll most lkely be that they cooperated, one person allowng hs or her thumb to be pnned by the other multple tmes, and then swtchng. Usng ths method, the partners have a much better chance of wnnng.

Exercses


My debref questons are focused on brngng the group through a what f exploraton: what f we dd the same exercse usng the lens of a systems thnker?For example as a systems thnker, we mght:

Consder mental models: what were our mental models about Thumb Wrestlng? Typcal answers: one person

wns and one person loses.

Look for unntended consequences: n ths nstance, straght competton creates an unntended consequence:

you both lose.

Look for nterdependences: how can we shft our focus to see varous forms of nterdependence? For example,

nstead of lookng at each other as two adversaral thumb wrestlers, how can we shft our focus to another,

hgher leverage form of relatonshp, .e., collaboraton?

2 .2 Exercise # 2 Warped Juggle

You wouldnt thnk that a group of adults tossng koosh balls, stuffed anmals and the occasonal rubber chcken would add up to a powerful learnng experence.

Ths one does and t s tred and true. It provdes a real-tme experence of common system archetypes, and an opportu-nty to explore our automatc and often transparent process of makng assumptons.

After the group has met the challenge posed by the exer-cse, they have an opportunty to become students of ther own behavor as they retrace ther actons through group dscus-son and, f approprate, causal loop dagrammng.

Purpose:

To work wth one or more systems archetypes,

ncludng Lmts to Success.

To explore the automatc nature of our assumpton-

makng process.

To experence the power of collectve

mental models.

Outcomes:

Use and examne the creatve process for alternate solutons.

Draw a loop dagram to map the groups process.

Extrapolate to other stuatons n whch explorng assumptons and lookng for alternatve models are useful or

crtcal.

Surface one or more assumptons about team learnng and problem-solvng.

Exercses


Ths exercse s partcularly good as an entree to the topc of mental models, as t allows partcpants to dscover from experence ther own processes of assumpton makng.

Tradtonally used as a team buldng exercse, t s also deal for consderng the parallel processes of team problem solvng and team learnng.

To run this exercise:

Number of people: Mn: ; Max: 0; deal 8-. Time: 0 to mnutes (dependng on the length of debref).Space: Clear away all furnture to create a space large enough for the group to stand shoulder-to-shoulder n a crcle. Ths exercse can be conducted almost anywhere: n a boardroom, on a lawn, n a corrdor.Equipment: Three tossable objects (.e. tenns balls, koosh balls, oranges, stuffed anmals, rubber chcken). Note: tenns balls can be dffcult to catch.Set up: Have the three tossable objects on hand. If possble show only one object at frst, hdng the other two n your pockets.

Instructions

Step 1: Gather the group nto a crcle, wth you as a partcpatng facltator. Show one of the objects and begn by tossng t to another member of the crcle (but not to the person standng next to you). It s mportant to use a gentle underhanded toss. Ths s not an exercse that should requre expert catchng sklls. Slow the pace of the toss f necessary so everyone s comfortable wth tossng and catchng the objects.

Step 2: The person recevng the object tosses t to someone else who has yet to touch t. When all members of the group have touched the object, t s tossed back to the facltator. The sequence s repeated wth each person rememberng to whom he or she tossed the object and from whom t was receved. When the group has sequental tossng of one object down, you can then ntroduce two more objects to the tossng.

Step 3: The facltator asks the group to estmate how long t wll take to toss all three objects n the sequence the group has establshed. Before comng to a consensus on the tme, you should state that there are only two rules: ) everyone must touch the objects once, and ) they must be touched n the same (human) sequence.

When partcpants ask for clarfcaton on the rules, t s mportant that you state there are only two (as outlned above). When partcpants begn to ask how they mght bend the rules, the two rules should be your standard response. Also, I ask f anyone has done ths exercse before. If they have, ask them to partcpate, but not to offer the soluton.

Step 4: Come to a consensus on the tme and then, wth one of the partcpants actng as a tmer (a dgtal watch s pre-ferred), try the sequence agan. When all three objects are returned to the facltator, he or she calls stop and asks the person wth the watch what the tme was. Whatever tme they end up wth (typcally the frst effort s close to a mnute), you then challenge them to cut that tme n half. (To have some fun, I sometmes spur groups on by sayng ther major compettor has done t n X seconds less). The exercse s complete when the partcpants feel they have done t n the fastest tme possble, usually n a second or two.

Possible Solution

Group members wll fgure out that they should stand next to the person to whom they are tossng the object. A shufflng then ensues untl each s able to pass the object to the person next to them, rather than tossng t across the room.

Exercses

8 Internatonal Watercourses/Rver Basns ncludng Law, Negotaton, Conflct Resoluton and Smulaton Tranng Exercses

Variations

If group members are new to each other, ask each person to call out the name of the person to whom they are throwng the object. The person to whom the object s thrown, receves t, sayng, Thank you, Ann, and then tosses t to the next person, sayng hs or her name.

You may offer a member or members of the group the role of observer. Another way to phrase ths s, we need a TQM person, any volunteers? Take ths person asde and ask hm or her to asses the groups process: what happened when someone had a contrary dea? How dd the group solve the problem? What patterns of behavor dd you observe?

Debrief

What typcally happens s that ntal efforts lead to mproved performance. Over tme (usually wthn the frst to 0 mnutes), the group cuts the tme down from 0 seconds to 0 or seconds but then they encounter a lmt. Ths lmt often causes the performance to slow down or even stop, even though efforts to solve the problem may be ncreasng. An example of ncreasng efforts mght be that the group decdes to squeeze n tghter together or to throw the ball faster (whch actually causes more errors and more delays). At ths juncture, the opportuntes are rch for ganng nsghts nto ndvdual and group behavor patterns wthn complex systems.

One way to do ths s through the use of causal loop dagrammng. Ask the group to dentfy the key varables n ther experence (e.g., teamwork, tme pressure, mprovements, etc.) and begn, usng a flp chart or overhead, to map the relatonshps between the varables. Here s a sample dagram:

Expected orDesired Time

Pressure toImprove

Time spent onDiscussion ofnew Ideas

TeamLearning

Best Time ofthe Group

Skill ofApproach

Openness to change

TeamAlignment

Teams Ability toTranslateConcreteKnowledge intoChange

Exercses


If the group has been exposed to the systems archetypes, ask f they see any such archetype n ther own problem-solv-ng process. The Lmts to Success archetype, for example, typcally nvolves a constrant:

Ask what they thnk the constrants were. In Warped Juggle, the constrant s very often the groups assumpton that there are more rules than those stated by the facltator. What s the lmtng acton?

The lmtng acton here can be that partcpants hammer away at the same approach, wthout stoppng to reflect on ther assumptons, hear other deas or consder other optons.

Transference to professonal and personal experences: the group experenced how mmedate success can produce subtle constrants, partcularly n the thnkng of ndvduals and groups. You mght ask: what knds of nherent pressures and constrants are accumulatng n your organzaton as a result of ts success?

As a facltator, you can also pont out that the way n whch we receve nformaton affects the assumptons we make about that nformaton. In ths exercse, the facltator begns by tossng the ball across the crcle. Partcpants assume that they too have to toss the ball, even though there are no requrements n the rules to do so. The fastest tmes are actually acheved by not tossng the objects.

Voices from the Field

Even though the two rules were spoken and wrtten, one group contnued for most of the allotted tme tossng the ball as had been demonstrated n the begnnng. They mproved greatly over tme and had a lot of fun and they never redesgned ther structure to meet the constrants n a more effcent way as dd other groups. In the debref, they owned that was true of ther unt at work. In servce they experenced great team sprt and enjoyment and not a lot of nnovaton, examnng of mental models or rethnkng processes.

Another group mmedately understood that ther structure could be redesgned, tred the frst way, and then spent up untl the very last mnute plannng, and managed to accomplsh the task n fve seconds. But even ths great tme* brought some dscomfort wth the process: there were only a few vocal planners, lots of deas were dsregarded, and there was not much experental learnng. Many felt out of the creatve loop. In the debref, they talked about how n ther unt there were a few super planners and many quet complanng complers whch, overtme, produced wthholdng of resources and dependency on a few. Consderng systems thnkng, the group talked of an awareness that short term success may

actually have the unntended consequence of blockng future learnng and greater effectveness.

Exercses


2 .3 Exercise #3 Toothpick TeaserThe Toothpck Teaser exercse helps us to explore aunversal phenomenon: when gven data, whether t s a symptom of a problem to be solved or a schedule to be adjusted, the way the data s presented to us affects the possble questons we ask and solutons we see.

Ths s true unless we are hghly conscous of our own mental models and assumptons. More than a smple thnkng-out-of-the-box actvty, ths exer-cse helps us to collectvely reflect on our nstnctve approaches to problem defnton and problem solv-ng.

Purpose:

To encourage partcpants to look at all of the factors nfluencng ther ablty to learn and solve problems, especally the means by whch a challenge or problem s presented.

Outcomes:

A mental massage, stretchng our brans to thnk beyond our current mental models. An mproved understandng of personal problem solvng approaches.

an ncreased awareness of the power of examnng the manner n whch data s presented pror to problem solvng

Context

To some, ths wll look and feel lke a tradtonal bran teaser, so be ready for a few groans. I usually have a good laugh wth the group and note that later we mght talk about those groans, whch are a good source for metal model exploraton.I often fnd myself pullng out the box of toothpcks when I want to make the connecton between examnng mental models and mproved problem defnton and problem solvng. An excerpt of my conversaton wth a group mght sound somethng lke ths:

Its far to say that we all solve problems from certan understandng and past experences. The problems themselves are often not complex and there are many tools out there to help problem solve. The complex ssues are our understand-ngs, or our mental models. And what we often forget to do n terms of problem solvng s to go back and reflect on our orgnal understandngs.

When we cycle back and forth between problem/soluton, we are on what Danel Km calls the problem solvng tread-mll:

PROBLEM SOLUTION

In the toothpck exercse, most of us mmedately launch nto solvng the problem (I dd the frst tme), wthout consder-ng the mental models we have about the problem or the way n whch the problem was presented to us. I consder ths a mn-practce feld n whch we can practce the lfe long art of consstently reflectng on our metal models.

Exercses


To Run this Exercise

Any number wll work. Wth large groups ( or more) you may want to have partcpants work n parsApproxmately mnutes to explan; to 0 mnutes to doFloor or table upon whch to place the toothpcks toothpcks or match stcks per personIf you can set up the room n advance, put toothpcks flat on the table n front of each person

Instructions

If advance preparaton wasnt possble, place a box of toothpcks wthn reach of each person. Ask partcpants to each take toothpcks and place them flat on the table. Usng all toothpcks, ask them to create four equal sded trangles.

Possible Solution

One soluton requres the person to thnk outsde the box and to break out of the one dmensonal mode. Lay three toothpcks flat on the table to form one trangle. Use the remanng three toothpcks to create three new trangles by buldng a teepee-lke structure.

Debrief

Partcpants are, n a way, set-up because I have them place the toothpcks flat on the table n front of them. The solu-tons requres them to thnk n -D. Part of the obstacle becomes the way the challenge s presented. (Warped Juggle requres a smlar thnkng process.)

Some questons I ask:How dd I set you up when I nstructed you to put the toothpcks flat on the table?If you had a partner, n what way dd he or she encourage or dscourage out of the box thnkng?

2 .4 Exercise #4 Paper TearWhen stakeholders come together n a group, they frequently dscover they have dfferent perceptons of what s gong on. Ths s especally true when the group comes together to understand and ntervene n a complex system. As dvergent perspectves become evdent, there s a tendency to ncrease the frequency and/or the volume wth whch we express our own thoughts.

What we probably should do s try to empathze more wth the lstener and dscern what they are understandng and what mght be the sources of msunderstandng. We assume that f we do an eloquent job of descrbng our thoughts the hearers wll end up wth the same mages n ther mnds. Ths smple exercse shows quckly how unfounded ths assumpton really s, even when the hearer shares your goals and has strong ncentve to understand your meanng.

Purpose:

To make the dstncton between hearng (the bologcal process of assmlatng sound waves) and lstenng (addng

our nterpretatons of what s sad).

To demonstrate the mportance of effectve communcaton sklls and lstenng sklls .

Outcomes:

Heghtened lstenng and communcaton sklls.

In created awareness and apprecaton of the multple nterpretatons that can be obtaned form the same mes-

sage.

2Exercses


To run this exercise:

Number of people: Mn: 0. Max: 0; deal 0-0. Time: to 0 mnutes (dependng on the length of debref).Space: None.Equipment: sheets of 8. x nch paper for each person.Set up: Pass the paper around the room and ask each partcpant to take sheets. Keep one sheet for yourself.

Instructions

Step 1: Do not start untl everyone has a sheet of paper n ther hands. Have partcpants st someplace where they can hear you.

Step 2: Tell partcpants the rules: There s no talkng. Partcpants must close ther eyes (or wear a blndfold) and then do exactly what the facltator says to do. State that the goal s for everyone to produce dentcal patterns wth ther peces of paper.

Step 3: The facltator reads the followng nstructons slowly and dstnctly: fold your paper n half and tear off the bottom rght corner of the paper. (Pause and allow the group to try ths). Fold the paper n half agan and tear off the upper rght hand corner. (Pause). Fold the paper n half agan and tear off the lower left hand corner. (Pause). Open your eyes, unfold your paper and hold t out for the group to see.

Step 4: Partcpants look at what they have produced and what other have produced n comparson.

Step 5: Ask partcpants to form groups of three. Have them repeat the exercse wth these nstructons

Tell them to pck two people to be the lsteners (wth eyes closed or backs turned to the communcator) and the

other person to be the communcator. Ask them to repeat the exercse wth the communcator gvng the lsten-

ers nstructons on how to fold and tear the paper. The communcator does not have to gve exactly the same

nstructons you gave the frst tme. But he or she does have to go through at least three steps each nvolvng a

fold and a tear. After they have completed the exercse ask the lsteners to compare ther sheets of paper. Are

they smlar? The majorty wll be dfferent.

Ask them to now swtch roles. Ths tme allow the lstener to talk. Proceed as prevously.

After they have fnshed ask them to dscuss what they have notced about ther lstenng and communcaton abltes. What dd they notce n the three attempts? Dd they become more accurate? If so why?

Debrief

Usually each partcpant creates one of four or fve dfferent shapes out of ther paper. Partcpants are lkely to be sur-prsed by the dfferent nterpretatons of the same smple message.

Ask partcpants to try to descrbe ther experence. How would they descrbe ther lstenng sklls? How effectvely dd they communcate? What would have happened f they asked more questons before the exercse began? What would be an analogy of ths experence n a real organzaton?

Ask the group to consder where they experenced or saw less dramatc but smlar examples of error n communcaton that lead to unwanted results. What s ther work envronment lke? In general how are questons perceved? Are they encouraged or dscouraged?

The mportant pont here s that even at tmes when we thnk we are lstenng or communcatng clearly, errors may stll occur due to msnterpretng what someone has sad or someone msnterpretng what we say. By mprovng our communcaton and lstenng sklls, we mprove our ablty to thnk systematcally and n group settngs partcularly to functon as a team.

Exercses


Model Answer to Simulation Exercise #1 to stimulate discussion:Vancouver River Part I3 .1 Claim in Favour of Upstream

CLAIM THAT UPSTREAM MAY LAWFULLY DIMINISH THE QUANTITY AND QUALITY OF THE FLOW OF THE VANCOUVER RIVER TO DOWNSTREAM.

A . Absent a treaty to the contrary, an upper rparan state under the Harmon Doctrne, has exclusve and absolute sov-eregnty over waters found wthn ts terrtory.

) Upstream s an upper rparan state, wth affected waters lyng entrely wthn Upstream terrtory and wthout any known treaty precludng Upstreams water usage. Accordngly, Upstream may affect the quantty and qualty of the Vancouver Rver waters n any way that n ts wsdom t may desre, consstent wth the full utlzaton rghts t s authorzed under customary nternatonal law.

B . Alternatvely, customary nternatonal law, as evdenced by the UN Law of the Non-Navgatonal Uses of Inter-natonal Watercourses, allows a basn state reasonable and equtable utlzaton of the waters of transboundary rvers such as the Vancouver Rver wth a vew to attanng optmal utlzaton . . . and benefts therefrom.

) Upstream s a basn state and ts use of the Vancouver Rver for hydroelectrc power generaton and the develop-ment of green belts s benefcal to ts people and to the geophyscal condton of ts terrtory.

a) Upstreams water use need not be the most effcent use avalable (especally gven Upstreams crcum-stance of economc underdevelopment), only a benefcal use and wth a vew to attanng optmal utlza-ton.

) Reasonable and equtable utlzaton, accordng to the UN Conventon s determned by weghng a varety of relevant factors; the weght to be gven each factor s determned by weghng ther mportance to one another.

a) The generaton of electrcty and the creaton of green belts are crtcal to Upstreams economc develop-ment and, n any event, more mportant than the alleged margnal deteroraton of Downstreams depen-dency on the Vancouver Rver.

b) Downstream s n no way nhbted from dversfyng technques of food producton n the Vancouver Rver delta and therefore s capable of mtgatng any detary losses t mght sustan as a result of Upstreams use of the Vancouver Rver.

c) Downstream s n no way nhbted from undertakng ts own ant-desertfcaton projects and, n any event, opportuntes for jont rrgaton projects, ncludng projects desgned to recover arable land lost to decert-fcaton, are lkely to arse once ths dspute s settled.

d) The problems now occurrng are most lkely temporary.e) The dam s an exstng reasonable use that s enttled to sgnfcant weght when consderng all factors.

C . In any event, the prncple of equtable utlzaton does not prohbt polluton altogether.) Polluton s an unavodable by-product of Upstreams lawful and benefcal use of the Vancouver Rver and there-

fore to be tolerated.a) Use of pestcdes s a necessary and recognzed practce for ncreasng crop yelds.b) Increased salnty from reclamaton of ard land s an unavodable by-product of necessary rrgaton proj-

ects.) Accordng to the UN Conventon, polluton s not unlawful unless t causes njury to the downstream rpar-

an state, and such a standard s both ambguous and overbroad (and therefore unenforceable) n that any use of waterways wll arguably cause some changes that can be construed to consttute substantal harm.

2Model Answer to Smulaton Exercse #


a) Downstreams clamed harm from pestcde run-off and ncreased salnzaton of the Vancouver Rver does not rse to the level of substantal njury because t nether nterferes wth Downstreams exstng use of the water nor poses a rsk to human lfe.

) On fnal analyss, Upstream has no responsblty to remedy the clamed polluton because to do so would deprve of t of ts equtable use of water for rrgaton to reduce decertfcaton.

D . Downstreams relance upon varous nternatonal envronmental declaratons are to no aval, because these com-muncatons are purely hortatory, expressng aspratonal goals rather than actonable rghts.

E . Ths reflects the general vew that developng states such as Upstream, because of the dffcult natural and economc condtons they confront, cannot be expected to meet strct envronmental standards n ther development but only the requrement to avod substantal negatve mpacts on the envronment.

3 .2 Claim in Favour of Downstream

CLAIM THAT UPSTREAM MAY NOT LAWFULLY DIMINISH THE QUANTITY AND QUALITY OF THE FLOW OF THE VANCOU-VER RIVER TO DOWNSTREAM

A . The Harmon Doctrne (of total soveregnty of upper rparan states over transboundary rvers) upon whch Upstream reles s outmoded and, n fact, s no longer an accurate reflecton of customary nternatonal law as evdenced n state practce.

) Although espoused by both the Unted States (n dealngs wth Mexco) and, more recently, Inda, the Harmon Doctrne has never had a wde followng among states and, n fact, t has been rejected by almost all states that have had occason to take a poston n relaton to t.

a) The Harmon Doctrne has been consstently modfed by treates: there are now over 00 treates n effect that regulate the use of transboundary waters n a manner that demonstrates that lower rparan states have rghts as well.

B . Whle customary nternatonal law, as reflected n the UN Conventon, provdes that each basn state s guaran-teed reasonable and equtable utlzaton of transboundary rvers, such utlzaton must be of a sort that creates no apprecable or substantal harm to the rghts of other watercourse states, and wth a vew toward benefcal and optmal utlzaton whch precludes wasteful uses.

) The prncple of reasonable and equtable use s now a prncple of customary nternatonal law and Upstream has volated that prncple by vrtue of ts havng caused and contnung to cause substantal harm to Down-streams dependency on the Vancouver Rver.

a) The uses to whch Upstream has put the dverted water are ncompatble wth Downstreams pre-exstng uses of fshng and agrculture, each havng been severely mpacted by the Upstream dverson.

b) The Upstream dam may not be consdered a reasonable exstng use because t was ncompatble wth Downstreams pre-exstng reasonable uses of rrgaton and fshng at the tme t became operatonal.

) Upstreams use of the flow of the Vancouver Rver n the nstant case s not benefcal or n keepng wth the goal of optmal utlzaton because t s, among other thngs, wasteful and therefore contrary to nternatonal law.

a) There s today an emergng customary rule of nternatonal law that nssts upon shared water resources beng put to ther most effcent, optmal use by co-basn and co-rparan states seekng to develop nterna-tonal watercourse resources on a mult-state bass.

b) Although benefcal and optmal use does not necessarly mean the most effcent use n the case of an underdeveloped country lackng n captal resources, nternatonal fnancng such as was avalable to Upstream must be taken nto account.

) At the very least, consstent wth the prncple of equtable and optmal use, and consstent wth customary norms, Upstream should have consulted wth Downstream about the uses to whch t ntended to put the dverted waters to mnmze possble adverse effects upon the pre-exstng uses of Downstream.

C . In any event, polluton whch deprves a co-basn/co-rparan state of ts equtable share of an nternatonal water-

Model Answer to Smulaton Exercse #


2way, as n the nstant case, s nconsstent wth the prncple of sic utere tuo et alienum no laedas (one must so use ones own property as not to do njury to anothers) whch s at the core of the customary nternatonal law doctrne of equtable water utlzaton by co-basn/co-rparan states such as Upstream and Downstream.

) The Tral Smelter Case evdencng the prncple of good neghbourlness reflects an emergng customary nternatonal law norm that specfcally prohbts transboundary polluton.

a) The Stockholm Declaraton of the U.N. Conference on the Human Envronment, among others, nssts that all states have a responsblty to ensure that actvtes carred on wthn ther own terrtores do not cause damage to the envronment of other states or of areas beyond ther own terrtory.

) The UN Conventon whch reflects customary nternatonal legal expectatons, requres that polluton caus-ng apprecable or substantal njury to a downstream rparan states rghts or posng a rsk to human health, as n the nstant case, be abated by the upstream rparan state.

a) Downstreams equtable utlzaton of the Vancouver Rver has been serously njured by the Upstream water projects, whch have substantally ncreased the salnty of the water and the pestcde levels n the water, because they wll no longer be able to use the polluted water for rrgaton or human consumpton. Upstream therefore has the duty to cease pollutng and to abate the exstng polluton.

3 .3 Tips for Coaching Negotiation Simulations

Key points of Coaching:. The smulaton experence should be a postve one.. People remember what they say and thnk for themselves better than what they are told.. There s a lmt to how much feedback, postve or negatve, a person can assmlate; people can remember only

two or three ponts.

Before the simulation:. Establsh rapport wth the group; make sure that you and they have all been ntroduced to one another.. Explan your role as a coach.

During the simulation:. Look for specfc behavours/concepts exhbted by the negotators. These may nclude:

A clear sense of the negotaton process and an ablty to move through the steps.

An ablty to de-escalate the conflct (lstenng sklls, refranng sklls, dealng wth feelngs, focussng on

nterests).

Strateges for promotng and makng a transton to nterest-based barganng.

Strateges for generatng optons.

Strateges for exertng nfluence or leverage.

Strateges for movng toward an agreement.

. Take notes that wll help you debref the smulaton. Some useful ways to take notes nclude:

Make two columns on your paper, n whch you lst strengths and problems observed durng the smula-

ton.

Wrte down some of the quotatons of the negotators, to use as specfc examples of thngs they dd well

or mght do dfferently.

Use some form of annotaton (+ or > n the margn, for example) to help you refer back to specfc ponts

n your notes.

. Interrupt the smulaton only f the negotators are really stuck or f the experence s no longer an opportunty for learnng. Tps for ths nterventon nclude:

Ask the group where they thnk they are and what deas they have for what would help.

Intervene and moderate a very bref dscusson of possble strateges that would help.



Gve one or more negotators tps on how to get the smulaton back on track.

Consder modellng an alternatve strategy f but do t brefly.

Get the partes back n ther roles and resume the smulaton.

After the simulation, debrief by facilitating a discussion.. Start by gvng the negotators an opportunty to talk about the experence and how t felt for them n ther nd-

vdual roles.. Accentuate the postve elements of the smulaton before examnng the weaker ponts.. Involve all the partcpants n the dscusson. Some useful questons nclude:

Ask what worked well for you?

Ask what dd the other negotators do that helped you relax, become more cooperatve or become wllng

to settle?

What was hard for you n your role as an advocate?

What could you or others have done dfferently?

. Identfy two or three key ponts (such as a sense of the process, strateges for de-escalatng the conflct, or nterest-based barganng) whch you thnk were relevant to the smulaton as played here. Look at your notes and try to determne what are the most mportant observatons to try to brng out n the debrefng sesson.

. Frame crtcsm n the form of suggestons of thngs the negotators may want to try at a future date rather than, What you should have done s . . . Be as specfc as possble n your postve and negatve feedback rather than make general comments whch may be dffcult for the partcpants to understand.

. The debrefng dscusson should focus on the process rather than the substance of the dspute.



Tree Exercise #24 .1 Neighbour 1 Only

THE TREE (ROLE PLAY SIMULATION EXERCISE #2)A large tree grows between two houses. Most of the year, the tree casts a shadow over one house n the mornng and the other house n the evenng. The tree s old and ts many branches have contnued to grow and spread. The tree s a home to many brds and nsects. They sng and whstle loudly n the mornng. Once each year the tree sheds ts leaves, exposng both houses to the cooler wnter sun.

The houses are dentcal and were made by the same bulder. The two famles that lve n the houses are good negh-bours. They moved nto the houses at the same tme years ago. They work for the same company and do the same job. Ther relatonshp has grown and become more respectful over the years. The chldren of the two famles played together on the tree when they were young, but the chldren have now moved away to ther own homes.

Recently a problem has developed. One of the famles has asked the other to help them chop down the tree. They say that the tree s blockng the mornng sun and that the roof of ther house needs repars from the fallng branches and rottng leaves. The other famly says that they want the tree to stay. They say that t s lke an old frend. It remnds them of ther chldren and gves them shade from the hot sun for half the day

NEIGHBOUR 1 For your information only!Your position:

Chop down the tree.

Your underlying interests:

The tree only provdes shade n the mornng. You would prefer t provded shade n the afternoon when the tem-

perature s the hghest. In the mornng you lke to sleep n late.

You are tred of havng to clean up the leaves every year. You are gettng older and t s very hard to clmb up on

your roof to remove branches. It s reducng the tme you have to relax and t s costng you money for house

repars.

You remember when the tree was much smaller. You enjoyed the colour t brought to your house and you would

st under t wth your famly to dscuss the days problems. You lked the tree when t was not so bg.

You need to fnd a soluton to ths tree. Your neghbours have been good frends and you hope that they are wllng

to meet your needs.

4 .2 Neighbour 2 Only

THE TREE (ROLE PLAY SIMULATION EXERCISE #2)A large tree grows between two houses. Most of the year, the tree casts a shadow over one house n the mornng and the other house n the evenng. The tree s old and ts many branches have contnued to grow and spread. The tree s a home to many brds and nsects. They sng and whstle loudly n the mornng. Once each year the tree sheds ts leaves, exposng both houses to the cooler wnter sun.

Tree Exercse #


The houses are dentcal and were made by the same bulder. The two famles that lve n the houses are good negh-bours. They moved nto the houses at the same tme years ago. They work for the same company and do the same job. Ther relatonshp has grown and become more respectful over the years. The chldren of the two famles played together on the tree when they were young, but the chldren have now moved away to ther own homes.

Recently a problem has developed. One of the famles has asked the other to help them chop down the tree. They say that the tree s blockng the mornng sun and that the roof of ther house needs repars from the fallng branches and rottng leaves. The other famly says that they want the tree to stay. They say that t s lke an old frend. It remnds them of ther chldren and gves them shade from the hot sun for half the day.

NEIGHBOUR 2 For your information only!Your position:

Leave the tree standng.

Your underlying interests:

The tree only shades your house n the afternoon. You would prefer t provded shade n the mornng. You would

lke to st outsde n the shade for your mornng tea.

Your son has offered to help out wth some of the yearly cleanup around your house. He wants to put the leaves

n hs garden and wll use the dead branches for frewood.

You have notced that the tree s not as healthy as t once was. It may be healther wth a thorough prunng.

You need to fnd a soluton to ths problem. You are concerned t wll damage your relatonshp wth your negh-

bours. They have been good frends and you hope that they are wllng to meet your needs.

Tree Exercse #


Positions vs Interests Exercise #3 The objectve of ths exercse s to determne the dfference between postons and nterests. Postons do not allow for many optons other than the one expressed. Ths makes negotaton dffcult as there s only one opton avalable. Inter-ests allow for a far greater range of optons to meet the nterests n order to form acceptable agreements.

For example, n statement #, ths dam wll be run to maxmse power producton, does not allow for any other pos-sblty but to operate the dam. In contrast, n statement # I want to secure my crop from drought, to have a stable ncome, expresses an nterest and ndeed answers the fundamental queston why t s mportant. The goal of securng crops may be accomplshed n many ways, from rrgaton to fertlser to crop rotaton etc. The dea that the fundamental nterest s to secure ncome allows for even more optons as t opens up the possblty of mcro-fnancng, cooperatve systems, new credt unons, agreements on crop prces and so on. All these can be part of an agreement n terms of meetng the nterests of the negotatng partes.

Logistics

Break the workshop nto groups of -0 people. Take the followng lst of Postons or Interests and ask the groups to go through and decde whch are postons and whch are nterests. They should have dscussons among themselves n attempts to arrve at unanmous decsons. Ths dscusson wll help people understand what consttutes a poston and an nterest.

The objectve s not to have the groups determne all the correct answers; t s stmulate dscusson and learnng.

When the groups return to the plenary, to save tme, have one person from each group represent the group.

Go n turn from one group to the next, havng each gve ts response to ONLY ONE answer.

.e. Group A gves an answer to #, Group B to #, Group C to # etc.

For each response ask f there s a dfferent answer from any group. Dscuss.

Answers:

#-P, #I, #P, #I, #I, #P, #- I, #8-P, #-I, #0P, #P, #I, #-P, #-I, #-I, #-P, #-I, #8-p, #-I, #0-P, #-P, #-P, #-P, #-I, #-I, #-I, #- I.

Postons vs Interests Exercse #


Positions or Interests?

. Ths dam wll be run to maxmse power producton.

. We are concerned that floodng s damagng property (costng money and lves).

. We need negotaton sessons to be tme lmted and scheduled well n advance due to other responsbltes.

. We want to be able to explore optons wthout mplyng any commtment or support.

. We are concerned that other countres wll want to try to control our domestc affars.

. There wll be no tourst boats allowed across the boarder.

. We are concerned that the floods wll not be suffcent to fertlse the felds and the water wll be too low to feed

the rrgaton system.

8. We are buldng the dam.

. I want to secure my crop from drought to have a stable ncome.

0. We need more fsh to be allowed to mgrate upstream.

. The defnton of trbutary cannot go beyond a frst order stream.

. We are concerned the dam wll affect the fsheres and the ecosystem.

. I fear that nformaton wll be based and negatvely affect potental to have nterests met.

. We want to develop a sustanable economy.

. We want to develop stable and cheap electrcty. Ths wll help us develop.

. I must have cm of water per day for my felds.

. We are worred that a fundamental proten source (fsh) may be lost or damaged.

8. The dam cannot be bult.

. We want to develop n a way that mantans the envronment.

0. Ths water should be used for rrgaton.

. I wll not partcpate n the negotatons anymore.

. I do not support dong ths research.

. I need to demonstrate progress to superors.

. We are concerned that commtments wll not be fulflled.

. They want to ncrease ncome.

. I feel ntmdated by other negotators.

. We need deas to be consdered even f they are not accepted.

Postons vs Interests Exercse #


Prisoners Dilemma Exercise #4Confidential Teaching lessons for the Prisoners Dilemma Simulation Exercise #4

The lesson learned for ths exercse s that the Prsoners Dlemma scenaro s a so-called socal trap exercse n whch long-term maxmzaton requres unenforceable mutual trust, and where sgnfcant short-term gans are possble by breakng that trust. Communcaton must be mplct and s therefore hghly ambguous and subject to msnterpretaton. Ths usually occurs when partcpants project negatve and adversaral ntentons that dont actually exst. The exercse hghlghts the frequency wth whch we make mprecse and nadequately supported assumptons. It rases the mpor-tance of makng and keepng assumptons explct and testng them perodcally. The dfference between reactng to the other sdes moves (or ones percepton of what those moves mean, or wll be), and actng purposefully to nfluence the other sde to (re)act constructvely, s easly llustrated by comparng the experences of dfferent teams. The monetary varaton tends to be dramatc between cooperatve and compettve games, and analyss usually suggests that to estab-lsh cooperaton, some team has to take a rsk. The danger of self-fulfllng assumptons s also llustrated. Partes can turn cautous compettors nto the cutthroat adversares they fear by proceedng wth preemptve ruthlessness.

Prsoners Dlemma Exercse #


Simulation Exercise #5:Vancouver River Part IICONFIDENTIAL INSTRUCTIONS AND TEACHING MATERIALS FOR NEGOTIATION SIMULATION EXERCISE #5

FOR DOWNSTREAM PLAYERS ONLY

Internal Negotiations

The last tme Downstream struck a deal wth Upstream, the Mnster of Foregn Affars for Downstream ended up los-ng hs post and Downstream members were left feelng cheated and angry. Ths tme around, some prelmnary cau-cusng among yourselves wll help to establsh what Downstreams prortes are and what youre hopng to get from Upstream. In order to negotate wth Upstream wth a unted front, you need to establsh your nternal prortes on the man ssues.

You wll have . hours to reach agreement on your negotaton strategy as a Downstream team. Ths s the nternal negotaton.

In ths nternal negotaton, you should:

Dscuss at least the followng key ssues: envronment, compensaton, employment and securty;

Develop an nternal agreement on what you want.

Address any other ssues that are brought forth by your team.

Prepare for the negotaton wth Upstream wth the goal of developng an effectve strategy for negotaton.

In the follow-up negotaton sesson wth Upstream you wll have . hours to reach agreement (or determne that none can be made) on the ssues of concern.

Ths wll be the external negotaton.

7 .1 Confidential Instructions for Stripes Foreign Minster for Downstream

You beleve you have been an effectve Foregn Mnster.

You are able to see the bg pcture for the long term health of Downstream, and know that establshng a good workng relatonshp wth Upstream s the best thng for Downstream to do. For you, the most mportant element s gettng a good package deal from Upstream. You realze that recevng compensaton from Upstream for alleged damages past, pres-ent and future may provde needed money to Downstream but may not create jobs nor ensure the health and safety of your ctzens. You are gong to do everythng possble to obtan a package deal as long as t s far and good for Downstream.

Your team ncludes Dots, a brght but dffcult member of your team as well as a lkely rval n the upcomng electons. You are pleased about ncludng the nternatonal law advsor because you trust the advsors judgment and you want a voce of reason when dealng wth Dots. You wll work wth Dots and the nternatonal law advsor to prepare for the negotatons wth Upstream. You are very open to ther deas, concerns, and nterests. However, snce you are Foregn Mnster, you are the one who must make fnal decsons. You support the dea of a neutral facltator. You are the lead negotator for your team.

Smulaton Exercse # Vancouver Rver Part II


Compensation

Your frst prorty s Compensaton. By makng ths a key component of your electon platform, you beleve that you can gan the support of many of those currently sympathetc to Dots. In your negotatons, try to get Upstreams guaranteed support of compensaton.

Havng ther support wll surely help guarantee that you wll acheve your nterest n obtanng compensaton. Of course, you know Upstream wll not agree to these demands unless they beleve that your threat of mltary acton s credble or you can convnce Upstream that they are serously volatng nternatonal law. In terms of how the compensaton s actu-ally pad, you are open to suggeston ncludng obtanng a share of the power currently beng generated by Upstream from the dam.

Environment

Your second prorty s envronment ncludng health and safety. You are worred about the health and safety ssues asso-cated wth what Upstream has done to the rver ncludng the nterference wth the rver fsh that has partcular cultural sgnfcance n Downstream. You have also heard stores from Downstream members about poppng noses comng from the dam, plus there was that ssue wth the odor several years ago. You want Upstream to be more responsve. That would mean Upstream would do more to ensure health and safety and at least attend regular meetngs (quarterly per-haps) wth Downstream so you can hear reports from Upstream staff and get follow-up reports on ssues of concern.

You can ask for anythng that wll ensure that Upstream takes ts envronmental responsbltes serously.

You are partcularly keen on the dea of restorng the rver fsh that appears to have been detrmentally mpacted by the actvtes n Upstream.

Employment

Your thrd prorty s employment for Downstream members. You want Upstream to help secure future employment for Downstream members. You would lke Upstream to eventually agree to a free trade zone and to a hrng commtment of % to 0% of all jobs assocated wth the dam and the green belts for Downstream members n both the short and long term. You are also open to other economc development deas that they may suggest.

Security

Your fourth prorty s securty. Ths ncludes food securty, energy securty and mltary securty. Even though your armed forces are much stronger than those of Upstream, the mltary route s not a route you would prefer to go.

Summary

Durng both your nternal and external negotatons you wll be meetng wth one or more other partes who may, or may not, have smlar ssues or nterests as yours.

During all of these negotiations you should:

. Present the ssues you want to address.

. Descrbe the nterests or needs you want to have met.

. Learn about the other partes nterests and ssues.

. Try to negotate and reconcle dfferences you may have wthn your own team.



To assist you in preparing you might fill out the chart below:

Your ssues/topcs for dscusson: Your nterests or needs: Your possble optons or solutons:

Ther ssues/topcs for dscusson: Ther nterest or needs: Ther possble optons or solutons:

7 .2 Confidential Instructions for Dots of Downstream

As you see t, Upstream owes Downstream. The bg deal they struck wth Downstream on another rver years ago was completely unfar, and Upstream knew t.

Your team ncludes Strpes, a capable but far too conclatory leader, and Dashes, a legal advsor. Whle you thnk Dashes advce wll be helpful, you suspect that Strpes and ths advsor wll form a unted front of reason aganst you. Thus, you plan to lsten to good advce from Dashes, but are also wllng to keep Dashes n place f needed. As you see t, f you can get a good deal for Downstream, you can take credt for t n the upcomng electons. If Strpes s too concla-tory on too many ssues, you can also use ths aganst Strpes n the electons. At worst, f Strpes s smply gvng n, or Upstream s unreasonable, you can make a vable threat. If the negotatons go poorly, you wll not hestate to organze Downstream members to stage protests callng for mltary acton and/or removal of the dam. Ths s not an dle threat. Nether Strpes nor Upstream are lkely to beneft from the meda storm that you could create f you need to. Of course, f you do walk out at any pont, you rsk lookng too radcal for many Downstream members, and thus rsk alenatng an mportant number of voters. Fndng the rght balance s what good poltcs s all about.

Security

You ntend to make securty for Downstream your number one prorty. By securty you mean energy securty and food securty as well as mltary securty. Ths s an mportant electon ssue. You are well connected wth Downstreams pow-erful mltary establshment.



Compensation

Your second prorty s to obtan compensaton from Upstream for past, present and future harm to Downstream. Although Strpes offcally represents Downstream on ths ssue, you know others n your country who also want Downstream to get as much as possble. In fact, some of your supporters would lke to see Upstream pay a lot smply because of the raw deal the Downstream receved twenty years ago. Ths s a symbolc ssue. However, you want to start wth a very hgh demand for two reasons: () you want to make Upstream well aware of the unfarness of past dealngs; () you can use your ntal poston, whatever the fnal outcome, n your bd for Strpes job.

Environment

Your thrd prorty s envronment ncludng health and safety. You want Upstream to act responsbly and not gnore the worres and concerns of Downstream members. You are tred of Upstreams ndfference to Downstream. Upstream must agree to develop an emergency evacuaton plan, establsh a -hour hotlne to call f anythng suspcous happens and hold monthly meetngs, at least for the frst year, wth Downstream so Downstream can hear reports from Upstream staff and get follow-up reports on ssues of concern. You are worred about beng unable to hunt, trap and fsh n the regon below the new dam. Youd lke to see Upstream antcpate problems, not react to them. They should set asde a specal fund to explore envronmental degradaton as a result of the development and nvolve local youth n envronmental mon-torng. Youd lke to see Upstream put asde about $00,000 for the frst year of envronmental studes. In addton to ths envronmental studes fund, you want to have a part n developng the montorng effort.

Employment

Your fourth prorty s employment for Downstream members. You are not partcularly nterested n havng Upstream help secure future employment for Downstream members. Nor are you partcularly nterested n the dea of a free trade zone between Upstream and Downstream. On the other hand, you do not want to be seen to be opposng anythng that mght help the lackluster Downstream economy so you are open to any deas that Upstream may suggest.

Summary

Durng both your nternal and external negotatons you wll be meetng wth one or more other partes who may, or may not, have smlar ssues or nterests as yours.Durng all of these negotatons you should:

. Present the ssues you want to address.. Descrbe the nterests or needs you want to have met.. Learn about the other partes nterests and ssues.. Try to negotate and reconcle dfferences you may have wthn your own team.






7 .3 Confidential Instructions for Dashes, International Legal Advisor to DownstreamYou are pleased by Strpes support of your nvolvement n the negotatons wth Upstream. Ths s a good sgn. Youve been workng hard over the past several years to buld your role as an advsor. Of course, your role n these negotatons s lmted as you are here manly to ensure that whatever happens makes legal sense.

In addton to ths role, you beleve that you may be able to help facltate the negotatons. Although Upstream has negotated many tmes before, they may not be senstve to the hardshps that Downstream contnuously faces. Smlarly, many Downstream ctzens ncorrectly thnk that Upstream s flush wth money. You want to take advantage of the fact that you are able to see both sdes of the pcture, and try to keep the talks progressng. Because of your senstvty to the Downstream groups, you understand that they may not wsh to dscuss every detal of ther negotatng strategy wth you. Be respectful of desres for prvate caucuses, but do your best to ensure that Downstream arent tryng to ambush Upstream wth any unreasonable demands at the same tme.

Compensation

Your top prorty s helpng Downstream to obtan far compensaton as a result of what may have been nequtable and unreasonable dstrbuton from past benefcal use of the Vancouver Rver. In the past, Downstream has tred to obtan extremely hgh assessments of ths past benefcal use. In the end, Downstream had to back down, but Downstream also ended up wastng tme and losng credblty.

Employment

The other area you may wsh to comment on s economc development. Although ostensbly only a legal advsor, you have been nvolved n helpng forge partnershps between upstream and downstream states throughout the world. One of the



best ways to do ths s to fnd mutual gans that would n ths case beneft both Upstream and Downstream. There are many ways Upstream could support Downstream at relatvely lttle to no cost to Upstream. For nstance, hrng Down-stream members as employees s at lttle cost, snce theyd be payng out the salares to workers anyway. Whle Upstream has typcally offered some % to 0% of the total jobs to Downstream members n the past, more recently, ths percentage has ncreased to as much as 0%. An example of a trade-off whch benefts both states s a professonal development program where specal sklls, n demand by a partcular ndustry, are taught to elgble Downstream job-seekers. Jont ventures, nvestment strategy workshops and nternshp and tranng programs could also be of great long term beneft to Downstream.

Summary

Durng both your nternal and external negotatons you wll be meetng wth one or more other partes who may, or may not, have smlar ssues or nterests as yours.

During all of these negotiations you should:








FOR UPSTREAM PLAYERS ONLYInternal NegotiationsBefore you meet wth the Downstream group, you need to determne among yourselves what your negotaton strategy wll be. Resolvng ths negotaton s worth a great deal to Upstream, partcularly n the face of mltary acton by Downstream. In order to negotate wth Downstream wth a unted front, as Upstream you need to establsh your nternal prortes on the man ssues.



You wll have . hours to reach agreement on your negotaton strategy as the Upstream team.Ths s the nternal negotaton. In ths nternal negotaton, you should:

Dscuss the key ssues.

Address any other ssues that are brought forth by your team.

Prepare for the meetng wth the Downstream, wth the goal of developng an effectve strategy for negotaton.

In the follow-up negotaton sesson wth the Downstream you wll have . hours to reach agree-ment (or determne that none can be made) on the ssues of concern. Ths wll be the external negotaton.

7 .4 Confidential Instructions for Red, Foreign Minister of UpstreamThs s only one of hundreds of negotatons youve partcpated n. You prde yourself on your ablty to be tough but far and always protect the nterests of your country. You wll work wth Whte and Blue to prepare for the negotatons wth Downstream. You are very open to your teams deas, concerns and nterests. However, snce you are Foregn Mnster you are the one who must make fnal decsons. You are the lead negotator for the team.

Ths s one of the frst tmes you have worked closely wth Whte. Youve heard Whte talk about forgng a new long-term relatonshp wth Downstream, but you dont beleve you need a new relatonshp to do thngs n Upstream the way you thnk they should be done.

Unbeknownst to Whte, you were very uncertan whether Whte was the rght person for the job durng hrng. After all, Whte seemed to be too progressve, too nnovatve and too much of a rsk-taker for the conservatve corporate culture of Upstream. But the Prme Mnster convnced you to take a rsk. Ths s your frst opportunty to see f Whte s sensble and protectve of Upstreams nterests.

Security

You are a former senor mltary commander. You were the frst woman n the hstory of your country to hold such a pos-ton. Your frst prorty s securty. You wsh to ensure Upstreams energy securty, food securty and mltary securty. You are anxous to avod a mltary confrontaton wth Downstream who you judge to have sgnfcantly more mltary hardware than Upstream. However, under no crcumstances wll you agree to the removal of the dam.

Compensation

Your second prorty s to deal wth the ssue of compensaton that you antcpate Downstream s gong to rase. You are fearful that the Downstream could seek payments for past, present and future alleged damages. You are worred that Downstream wll be greedy. You are partcularly dscomforted about the dea of payng for alleged past harms and the precedent you fear that mght set. If you are somehow forced nto payng compensaton, you want to obtan some assur-ances that Downstream wll agree to abde by a far assessment process.

You feel that you cannot agree to other concessons unless you have a reasonable and satsfactory dscusson about compensaton. You have left the fnancal detals of ths porton of the negotaton up to Whte. But you want hm to edu-cate you about what s far so you can be ready n the negotatons wth the Downstream. You cannot stand for an unfar precedent.



Health and Safety Concerns

You thrd prorty s to address health and safety concerns. You understand that Upstream has not been as effectve as t should have been. As far as you are concerned, the facts show that Upstreams safety record s superb. However, Upstreams record n communcatng ths record s qute poor. Thus, you are wllng to offer the Downstream what you would offer anyone else. You wll provde them the number of the closest regonal offce n the case of emergences, work wth local offcals to tran them n emergences and provde refrgerator magnets wth emergency numbers. You wll not stand, however, for any attacks on Upstreams safety record.

Employment

Your fourth prorty s employment for Downstream. In prelmnary talks, Whte has told you Upstream must wn Down-streams trust and strke a good deal by offerng other entcements, partcularly n regards to employment. Whte dd not go nto detal at that tme, but sad a proposal would be forthcomng. You assume Whte means jobs and job tranng, but you arent really sure. You also know that Blue wll be concerned about the percentage of Downstream members that Upstream must hre. Youll work wth Blue to develop a reasonable percentage.

Total Costs

From a purely monetary standpont, you are wllng to pay for other entcements to try to make Downstream happy (f Whte can make a convncng case) as long as the total bll does not exceed $00,000. Of course, the less money you spend, the better.

Summary











7 .5 Confidential Instructions for White, Deputy Minister for UpstreamThs negotaton s an exctng prospect for you. You know you can help Upstream to make sgnfcant mprovements n ts relatonshp wth Downstream. You know that Red, your boss, s pretty old fashoned when t comes to relatons. But you are confdent you can convnce hm and everyone assocated wth the project that workng cooperatvely wth Downstream s the most cost-effectve, responsble way to do busness. Ths s your opportunty to gan Reds trust and begn to steer Upstream n a new drecton.

Employment

Your frst prorty s to get Red to agree to support an economc development offce for Downstream as part of the overall deal. In addton to beng of help to the Downstream, ths offce would gve Upstream an opportunty to tran workers for specalzed or techncal jobs, dstrbute nformaton about job and tranng opportuntes and provde a venue for better communcaton between corporatons, government representatves and Downstream. You pcture t lke a techncal col-lege, offerng dfferent programs at dfferent tmes of the year and provdng scarce resources such as computers and nternet connectons for Downstream Members use. If t succeeds, t could be a model around the world.



You know you can get ths offce off the ground n the next few months, ncludng nformaton sessons for locals on the progress of the development. The cost n the frst year wll be $00,000, and an estmated $0,000 to $00,000 annually thereafter. The long-term payback to both Downstream and Upstream wll be many tmes that. Ths s a good nvestment for everyone. You also know that the Downstream wll want to have some percentage of short and long-term jobs be reserved for Downstream members. You thnk ths s mportant and as long as the workers are properly traned you thnk ths comes at relatvely low cost to the Upstream. On the long-term percentage, you want to keep the percentage as a goal rather than as a commtment (you are wllng to go as hgh as 0%, as a goal) and focus people on the long-term opportuntes of the economc development offce.

Health and Safety

Your second prorty s effectvely handlng health and safety concerns. You thnk the standard Upstream offerngs n ths regard are fne. Upstream provdes Downstream wth the number of the closest regonal offce n the case of emergences, works wth local enforcement offcals to tran them and gves them refrgerator magnets wth emergency numbers.

But gven Upstreams poor performance n the past, ths s not enough. You want to encourage Red, the Presdent, to be more progressve. Youd lke the Upstream to send a senor health and safety nspector to meet wth Downstream at least once a year. Ths costs next to nothng and bulds good relatons. You want Upstream to set up a -hour hotlne dedcated to safety concerns and worres expressed by Downstream members.

You expect that the cost of establshng, operatng and promotng such a hotlne n the frst year s probably n the neghborhood of $00,000.

As a fsher yourself you are very keen on the dea of restorng the rver fsh that appears to have been detrmentally mpacted by the actvtes n Upstream.

Compensation

Your thrd prorty s helpng set what compensaton wll be pad by Upstream to Downstream for alleged damages past, present and future. You are well aware that Red doesnt want to pay Downstream anythng partcularly for allegatons of past damages. However, you beleve that Strpes wants to work wth Upstream to develop an overall package of agree-ments. If you can brng some certanty and farness to the compensaton ssue, then you beleve you and Upstream wll have more room to move on other ssues, partcularly on your nnovatve projects. If you can help Red secure a far and reasonable rate, you thnk Red wll be able to be more flexble on other ssues.

Other

You magne that Downstream may ask for other specfc concessons. You are open to new and nnovatve deas. In gen-eral, for any new tems that are proposed, youll have to make sure they are cost-effectve and sensble n the eyes of Red. Youre pretty sure you can appease Reds budget sense and gve a good deal to Downstream, as long as everyone negotates n good fath.

Summary











7 .6 Confidential Instructions for Blue, International Law Advisor to Upstream As a close personal frend of the Upstream Foregn Mnster you feel responsble for seeng that she does nothng n these negotatons that mght jeopardze her career. In your experence, workng wth Downstream has become ncreasngly dffcult. Now, Downstream often comes to the table wth unreasonable demands. To make matters worse, lots of tmes these do not seem to be the same demands that Downstream ctzens appear to care about.

There are several thngs that are out of your control. Frst, because you are just a legal advsor, you dont spend Upstreams money for them. Its up to the Downstream and Upstream to fgure out how to deal wth poltcally volatle ssues lke compensaton. Second, as for Upstreams polcy on health and safety, thats ther busness too.

There are three thngs very dear to you.

Frst, under no crcumstances wll you countenance removal of the dam.

Second you want to try to avod a mltary confrontaton. However, you are much more of a hawk then Red or

Whte.

Thrd, you feel you need guarantees that n a worst case scenaro, whatever may get pad to Downstream by way

of compensaton s on a wthout prejudce bass and that Upstream acknowledges no fault.

Employment

Your frst prorty s to help negotate the employment ssue. An ssue that you know wll come up s jobs for Downstream members n the short and long term. Although ts not unusual to have commtments to hre % - 0% of local resdents for a project, youve heard rumors that the Downstream may ask for as much as 0%. That would be too bg a burden. It makes project management dffcult when you have all these new and often nexperenced workers on the job. Besdes, f Downstream ends up beng too radcal, youd have to worry about them sabotagng the dam ste.



Environmental Regulation

Your second prorty s dealng wth new nternatonal envronmental regulatons. Red and Whte have not been nvolved wth the complcated envronmental permttng for the new Upstream dam and green belt ntatves. Youve learned (panfully) that the World Bank has taken a new nterest n ensurng that new ntatves wth transboundary mpacts are developed sustanably. The new regulatons are more complex, requre more montorng and ecologcal surveys, and the reportng procedures appear to be very tme-consumng. Among other thngs, you need an addtonal envronmental specalst on ste to handle these ssues.

Summary


. Present the ssues you want to address.. Descrbe the nterests or needs you want to have met.. Learns about the other partes nterests and ssues.. Try to negotate and reconcle dfferences you may have wthn your own team.






7 .7 Preparation Sheets See Appendix TEACHING PACKAGE ONLY SIMULATION #5PREPARATION SHEET

. Identfy nterests.

. Estmate BATNAs as well as consder aspratons.

. Generate optons and packages.

. Consder objectve crtera for evaluatng optons.

. Clarfy your authorty and thers.

. Prepare for process as well as substance.

. Consder follow-through after negotatons.

8. Put t all together: develop a strategy.

PREPARATION SHEET - ACTIONS AND QUESTIONS

Identifying Interests

. What are your nterests?

. What are the other sdes nterests?

. Whch of your nterests are of most concern to you?

Assess BATNAs as well as Aspirations

. What are your best alternatves to a negotated agreement (BATNAs)?

. What are ther best alternatves to a negotated agreement (BATNAs)?

. What mght you do to mprove your BATNA? To weaken thers?

. What are your aspratons?

Generate Options and Packages of Options

. What nformaton, f any, s mssng that you need to make better decsons? Can you magne gatherng any of

that nformaton from the other sde(s)?

. What optons mght you consder to meet your nterests and thers?

. What reasoned arguments mght you use to support these optons?

. How mght you package these optons to meet your and ther nterests? Can you dentfy nterests and ssues that

you and they value dfferently?

Consider Objective Criteria for Evaluating Options

. What objectve crtera mght you use to evaluate the optons and packages you have created?

. Have you consdered what s far to you? What mght be far to them?

Clarify Your Authority and Theirs

. Does the other sde have the authorty to make agreements? If not, what are ther lmts?

. Do you have the authorty to make agreements? If not, what are your lmts?

. Are there any mssng stakeholders (nternally or externally) who mght later threaten

the agreement?

. Have you bult an nternal consensus as to your negotaton approach? Do you have those below you, wth you

and above you on-board?

Prepare for Process as Well as Substance

. Have you establshed a process for how you wll work together as a negotatng team?

. Have you developed suggestons for the process you and the other sde mght use to structure and smooth the



way for your negotatons?

. Gven what you know about the upcomng negotatons, do you thnk a neutral mght be helpful?

Consider Follow-Through After Negotiations

. Can you magne commtments and contngences that wll make the agreement more lkely to be followed?

. Are there ratfcaton procedures you or they must follow?

. Do you want a long term relatonshp wth them when you are done?

. Are there clear dspute resoluton procedures n place?

Putting it All Together: Develop a Strategy

. In what sequence do you thnk ssues ought to be dscussed? What tone do you ntend to take? How do you ntend

to approach frst offers. What do you ntend to reveal? What do you ntend to keep confdental? If negotatons

do break down, what s your ext strategy?

. Can you weave the elements of nterests, BATNAs, optons, packages and objectve crtera nto a coherent plan

of acton

Lessons Learned from Simulation Exercise # 5 (for discussion)The lessons learned from ths exercse nclude:

. In helpng to successfully resolve certan knds of conflcts, an nterest based negotaton approach has certan

advantages and dsadvantages over a str

Manual para maestros.

Documents

Transcript of Manual para maestros.