Negotiation and conflict resolution: the four step method.

Ikuru Hope

International School of Management

MBA, International Business,

509-NGCR - Negotiation & Conflict Resolution,

Professor Leslie Shaw

April 2012

Abstract

Conflict and negotiation is occurs daily, conflict is good and at the same time it’s bad, when

conflict is good it becomes beneficial to both parties and when bad, opportunities are missed out

on. This paper focuses understanding conflict and negotiation and a holistic view of the four step

method for negotiation.

Introduction:

Six hunters from six regions brought together and blind folded, asked to touch a fur and

say what animal it was, the first touched it and said it was the fur of a goat, the second said it was

a sheep, the third said it was a hyena and the fourth said it was a lion and they all had different

answers for it. The truth is that they were all right about their answers. They responded based on

their perception which was driven by their experience in hunting and probably based on the kind

animals obtainable in each region they came from. Then if one can get six different answers from

one question, this is conflict as everyone gives an answer based on their perception. Faure’s1book

describes how a belief system in Papau New Guinea called the cargo cult underwent a powerful

revival in their culture. According to this belief, all the wealth of the world promised to the

natives, that is the ‘cargo’ has been diverted on its way to them by the Whites before it could

reach its final destination. A number of rituals had to be accomplished according to specific to

enable the natives to get back what they were initially supposed to obtain, but this secret

information is carefully kept by the white people. Some Australian missionaries had

unsuccessfully tried to convince the believers that such an explanation had no solid ground.

Then, in order to eradicate as radically as possible this kind of magic beliefs, they have invited

1 Faure, G.O (1995) conflict formulation: going beyond culture bound views

one of the main apostles in the cult named Yali to pay a visit to what he thought of as the

paradise, the place where the Cargo was stored, the Australian city of Sydney. Thus, Yali spent

several weeks in the city, getting acquainted with the industrial, materialistic and rational

civilization.

However, the final result was opposite to what was expected. Yali, far from having his

system of beliefs collapsed while confronted with the objective truth, drew from the observation

he made during his stay, reasons to reinforce his initial beliefs. For instance the totems, animals

and plants that were so vigorously denounced as superstitions by the missionaries were seen by

him as carefully kept in homes in the form of bouquets on tables or other types of furniture.

Animals were accommodated in many houses, some of them being preciously kept in specially

designed places for such a purpose such as cages in zoos, so that they do not escape and deprive

the people from their beneficial influence. The nice words pronounced by the Whites had only

one goal, to hide the real importance of the totems and thus enabling them to keep all the cargo

for themselves.

Faure argued that “Such a case shows the difficulty of moving from one culture to

another that is from one system of beliefs with its hidden assumptions to another one. The

reframing is done here through the categories of the native and what may appear for some people

a little ridiculous or amusing is in fact, strictly what happens when one analyses events of a

society by means of using categories belonging to another society. To a certain extent, the way

western cultures scrutinize a number of social phenomena that takes place within other cultures

precisely refers to an approach similar to Yali’s”.

This case of shows how conflict starts from the innermost and then extends to the outermost by

influencing the perception of the Yali’s people, their perception has become a belief and the

quest to change that belief only made their apostle believe more.

Conflict starts internally by a perception, which is ones understanding based on an observation or

thought, then that person can spread that understanding and progressively it becomes a belief that

would be passed on from one generation to another.

Perception is the driving force behind every culture and belief system that further becomes a

norm and creates value for the society. A business dictionary defines perception as

2“The process by which people translate sensory impressions into a coherent and unified view of

the world around them. Though necessarily based on incomplete and unverified (or

unreliable) information, perception is equated with reality for most practical purposes and

guides human behavior in general”. With this definition, one can say that perception is often

equated with reality, which is true (like in the case of Yali) but to some other person (the

Australian missionary) the reality is different because his perception is different. What is

conflict? Why does it exist? Conflict is a disagreement through which the parties involved

perceive a threat to their needs, interests or concerns. As long as choices exist, then conflict must

play its role and resolving that conflict becomes a negotiation, which is the decision. An excerpt

from the bible shows a disagreement between two people that was resolved through mediation

(negotiation).

1st Kings, chapter 3:

16 Now two prostitutes came to the king and stood before him. 

17One of them said, “My lord, this woman and I live in the same house. I had a baby while she

was there with me. 

2 http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/perception.html retrieved 12-05-2012

18The third day after my child was born, this woman also had a baby. We were alone; there was

no one in the house but the two of us.

19“During the night this woman’s son died because she lay on him. 

20 So she got up in the middle of the night and took my son from my side while I your servant

was asleep. She put him by her breast and put her dead son by my breast. 

21The next morning, I got up to nurse my son—and he was dead! But when I looked at him

closely in the morning light, I saw that it wasn’t the son I had borne.”

22The other woman said, “No! The living one is my son; the dead one is yours.”

But the first one insisted, “No! The dead one is yours; the living one is mine.” And so they

argued before the king.

23The king said, “This one says, ‘My son is alive and your son is dead,’ while that one says,

‘No! Your son is dead and mine is alive.’”

24Then the king said, “Bring me a sword.” So they brought a sword for the king. 

25He then gave an order: “Cut the living child in two and give half to one and half to the other.”

26The woman whose son was alive was filled with compassion for her son and said to the king,

“Please, my lord, give her the living baby! Don’t kill him!” But the other said, “Neither I nor you

shall have him. Cut him in two!”

27Then the king gave his ruling: “Give the living baby to the first woman. Do not kill him; she is

his mother.” 3New International Version (1984)

Within oneself daily there’s always a disagreement found when choices exist, the point when we

disagree on what choice to make a mediation process begins to negotiate the choices by

weighing the benefits of the choices and finally we agree by choosing the choice with the highest

3 New International Version (1984)

benefit. Conflict is as old as mankind; it still continues and would continue till the end of time if

there’s any.

Conflict And Negotiation

Pruitt and Rubin (1986), defined conflict as “the perceived divergence of interest, or a

belief that the parties’ current aspirations cannot be achieved simultaneously4. When interest

differs by, conflict is bound to set in and the projected goal cannot be achieved by the either

party with interests. Conflict is the result of opposing interests involving scarce resources, goal

divergence and frustration. This frustration can change the course of Conflict into Rebellion, or

in its more extreme form, insurrection, is a dangerous endeavour, which people are going to

engage in only if the expected payoff is worth taking the risk5.

Gregg Walker, Professor of Speech Communication at Oregon State University developed a

table providing a sampling of various scholarly definitions of conflict from 1950’s.

Coser 1956  Social conflict is a struggle

between opponents over values

and claims to scarce status,

power and resources. 

struggle, opposition,

scarcity 

Schelling 1960  Conflicts that are strategic are

essentially bargaining situations

in which the ability of one

participant to gain his ends is

dependent on the choices or

strategy, bargaining,

dependence 

4 Pruitt, Dean G. and Jeffrey Z. Rubin (1986). Social conflict: escalation,

stalemate, and settlement. New York: Random House5 The Redistributive State and Conflicts in Africa by Jean-Paul Azam 2001

decisions that the other

participant will make.

Deutsch 1973  A conflict exists whenever

incompatible activities occur . . .

one party is interfering,

disrupting, obstructing, or in

some other way making another

party's actions less effective.

incompatibility,

interference effectiveness 

Wall 1985 Conflict is a process in which

two or more parties attempt to

frustrate the other's goal

attainment . . . the factors

underlying conflict are

threefold: interdependence,

differences in goals, and

differences in perceptions.

goals, interdependence,  

perceptions 

Pruitt and   

Rubin 1986 

Conflict means perceived

divergence of interest, or a

belief that the parties' current

aspirations cannot be achieved

simultaneously.

 interests, aspirations,

beliefs 

Conrad 1990 Conflicts are communicative

interactions among people who

communication,

interdependence   

are interdependent and who

perceive that their interests are

incompatible, inconsistent, or in

tension.

tension 

Tjosvold and   

van de Vliert   

1994

Conflict--incompatible

activities-- occurs within

cooperative as well as

competitive contexts . . . conflict

parties' can hold cooperative or

competitive goals.

 incompatibility,

cooperation   

 competition 

Folger,   

Poole, and   

Stutman 1997

Conflict is the interaction of

interdependent people who

perceive incompatible goals and

interference from each other in

achieving those goals.

 interaction,

interdependence   

 incompatibility 

Source: http://www.campus-adr.org/cmher/ReportResources/Definitions.html

He conforms that the definitions “indicate the inevitability of conflict in human affairs. They

reveal key features of conflict situations.  Many of the definitions, for example, stress that

conflicts involve interdependent parties who perceive some kind of incompatibility between

them”.

When we hear of conflict, we assume it’s violent. However, conflicts should not be perceived in

terms of violence (behavior) or hostility (attitudes), rather it should be perceived as

incompatibility or differences in issue position.

Burton (1990) argues that there are different kinds of disagreement. Management

problems are those in which people sharing interests and values seek to solve a problem jointly.

However, when people disagree about what decision should be made because of how they feel

that decision will satisfy their interests, they are in a dispute. The third, conflict, occurs when

people feel that the disagreement touches upon basic needs or fundamental values.

Howard (2003), posits that ‘the biggest misconception that people hold about conflict is

that it is intrinsically bad. But conflict in and of itself is an inevitable social and organizational

reality. Whether one subscribes to the Bible or to Freud, conflict is rooted in the human condition

and is not necessarily an indicator of dysfunction’6. He expanded further by giving reasons why

and how conflict becomes destructive. conflict becomes destructive when it; Leads to a win/lose

game where one side wins at the other's expense, Diverts energy from important activities or

issues, Destroys people's morale, Polarizes groups and reduces cooperation, Deepens differences,

Produces irresponsible/regrettable behavior (i.e., personal attacks) and Leads to stalemates rather

than decisions. He described an old advertisement featuring near-mythic body-builder Charles

Atlas; He built an impressive physique through a process called" dynamic tension," which puts

muscle against muscle. In the same way, the dynamic tension that results when executives go

head-to-head can be a source of great creativity, excitement, and even strength. This means that

as long as conflict abounds, there’s another side to it which can be harnessed and used for the

benefits of both parties. Negotiation comes into play at this point to harness the conflict and turn

it into strength for peaceful co-existence of the parties involved.

6 When Goliaths Clash: Managing Executive Conflict to Build a More Dynamic Organization Howard M Guttman 2003

Negotiation7 is a dialogue between two or more people or parties, intended to reach an

understanding, resolve point of difference, or gain advantage in outcome of dialogue, to produce

an agreement upon courses of action, to bargain for individual or collective advantage, to craft

outcomes to satisfy various interests of two people/parties involved in negotiation process.

Negotiation is a process where each party involved in negotiating tries to gain an advantage for

themselves by the end of the process. Kathleen and Christianne8 describe negotiation as the back

and forth communication process designed to anticipate, contain, and resolve disputes so that

parties with some shared and some opposing interests can reach mutually acceptable solutions.

For every problem there’s a solution. Thus, every conflict has a resolution and that process of

resolution is negotiation. However, as people’s perception differs, cultures differ, situation

differs and what is obtainable for person ‘A’ may be offensive to person ‘B’. The approach of

person ‘A’ to conflict (issue position) is different from person ‘B’ and this can affect a

negotiation process.

Understanding the Theory: Conflict Styles9

In the 1970s Kenneth Thomas and Ralph Kilmann identified five main styles of dealing with

conflict that vary in their degrees of cooperativeness and assertiveness. They argued that people

typically have a preferred conflict resolution style. However they also noted that different styles

were most useful in different situations. They developed the Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode

Instrument (TKI) which helps you to identify which style you tend towards when conflict arises.

Thomas and Kilmann's styles are:

7 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negotiation retrieved 14-05-20128 Conflict Negotiation Guidelines . Kathleen Novak, Christianne hall9 http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newLDR_81.htm retrieved 17-05-2012

Competitive: People who tend towards a competitive style take a firm stand, and know what they

want. They usually operate from a position of power, drawn from things like position, rank,

expertise, or persuasive ability. This style can be useful when there is an emergency and a

decision needs to be make fast; when the decision is unpopular; or when defending against

someone who is trying to exploit the situation selfishly. However it can leave people feeling

bruised, unsatisfied and resentful when used in less urgent situations.

Collaborative: People tending towards a collaborative style try to meet the needs of all people

involved. These people can be highly assertive but unlike the competitor, they cooperate

effectively and acknowledge that everyone is important. This style is useful when you need to

bring together a variety of viewpoints to get the best solution; when there have been previous

conflicts in the group; or when the situation is too important for a simple trade-off.

Compromising: People who prefer a compromising style try to find a solution that will at least

partially satisfy everyone. Everyone is expected to give up something, and the compromiser him

or herself also expects to relinquish something. Compromise is useful when the cost of conflict is

higher than the cost of losing ground, when equal strength opponents are at a standstill and when

there is a deadline looming.

Accommodating: This style indicates a willingness to meet the needs of others at the expense of

the person's own needs. The accommodator often knows when to give in to others, but can be

persuaded to surrender a position even when it is not warranted. This person is not assertive but

is highly cooperative. Accommodation is appropriate when the issues matter more to the other

party, when peace is more valuable than winning, or when you want to be in a position to collect

on this "favor" you gave. However people may not return favors, and overall this approach is

unlikely to give the best outcomes.

Avoiding: People tending towards this style seek to evade the conflict entirely. This style is

typified by delegating controversial decisions, accepting default decisions, and not wanting to

hurt anyone's feelings. It can be appropriate when victory is impossible, when the controversy is

trivial, or when someone else is in a better position to solve the problem. However in many

situations this is a weak and ineffective approach to take.

A proper understanding of this approach can set the negotiation process rolling in order to

achieve optimum benefits for the parties involved. However, the culture plays an intrinsic role in

negotiation. Do you know who you are dealing with, what does he believe in, where’s he or her

coming from and where is headed to, what aim does he want to achieve, what are the reasons?

When these questions are clearly satisfied, then you would have an idea on what is expected in a

negotiation process and what possible concessions can be given in order to seal or break the deal.

Having an eye gazed at the objective the negotiation tends to achieve is essential to kick off the

negotiation process.

The Negotiation Method

Using the four step method framework on negotiation, one is set to negotiate a deal.

The four step Method to negotiate

Prepare Argue Propose Bargain

Identify Signal Package Close

OBJECTIVES

What are our

ARGUING

Speak firmly and briefly

PROPOSING

Are we arguing or

BARGAINING

Decide what we want in

priorities?

Can we really attain

our objectives?

Can we determine

their objectives?

INFORMATION

What are the main

issues?

What is the balance

of power?

What are the

straight facts?

What assumptions

are we making?

CONCESSIONS

Value concessions

from low to high

What is their trading

value?

What concessions

do we want from

them?

VARIABLES

Exchange information

Listen

Question

Summarize

Challenge

Look for clues

Build on their ideas

Talk too much

Interrupt

Score points

Attack and Blame

Debate

Defend

Threaten

Talk floppy

SIGNALING

Are there signs of movement?

Have we signaled our readiness to

move?

Have the signals been received?

Are they using qualified statements?

Have we asked them to elaborate?

Have we responded positively?

proposing?

Are we linking or

separating issues?

How much negotiating

room do we have?

Are we firm on

generalities, flexible on

specifics?

Are we using strong or

weak language?

Are our conditions

specific?

Are our proposals

tentative?

Are our opening

concessions small?

Are our opening

conditions large?

PACKAGING

Have we identified their

and reviewed our

objectives

conditions

exchange for concessions.

Put these demands at the

start of our presentation.

Signal what’s possible if

they accept the conditions.

Present the proposal,

restate the conditions.

Keep all unsettled items

linked.

Never give something for

nothing.

Lead with conditions.

Keep everything linked.

CLOSING

When will we stop

conceding?

What kind of close is

appropriate?

summary

conditional

concession

Do we need to

adjourn before the

What are our vital

interests?

Are we aware of

their interests?

Are there bridging

factors?

What must we give

to reach agreement?

What is our fallback

position?

STRATEGY

What is our basic

strategy?

Is it simple?

Is it flexible?

TEAMWORK

Team Leader

Main Speaker

Support Speaker

Questioner

Summarizer

Observer

Listen more, talk less

Respond and reciprocate

Reward signals not intransigence

concessions

inhibitions

Is there enough

movement to table a

package?

Can we address our

package to their

interests?

Does our current position

give us room?

What conditions will we

put in the package?

What concessions will

we make in it?

What exactly do we want

in return?

Are we giving away too

much, too soon?

Have we considered all

possible variables?

Can we create a new

variable?

Who gets how much of

final offer?

Have they said yes

or no?

Are there any

outstanding items?

What has been

agreed?

Do we need to

write draft clauses?

Have we specified

points of

explanation

clarification

interpretation

If the agreement is

verbal, confirm it

in writing.

what and when?

Make concessions work

for objectives.

Value concessions in

other party’s terms.

Negotiation strategies include;No strategy, Rational, Ethical, Emotional, Insight, Disturb

homeostasis, Conceal objectives, High Pressure, Low pressure, Avoid concessions

Use his arguments

Are you sure ?

1.Use logic & reason to get him to accept your proposal.

2.Convince him of your integrity. Show he can trust you.

3.Appeal to the emotions is a powerful way to persuade !

4.Provide scattered information rather than systematic arguments. Allow him to see the

relationships himself.

5.Use statements to lead him to question the soundness of his present situation.

6.Use indirect & projective questions to orient him to identify his needs, then show you can meet

them.

7.Make clear & positive statements. Repeat them.

8.Use questions to lead him to a course of action so he feels he has made the decision to accept

your proposal.

9.Head off requests for concessions before they’re verbalized.

10.Acknowledge limitations, faults & problems before he does

This method helps us to question ourselves before we go into a negotiation process. Also, it

provides the parties involved with a clear objective of negotiation. However, the time frame of

the negotiation process can be agreed upon by the parties involved in the negotiation, but

negotiation is a back and forth communication which aims at achieving the objective of the

parties involved.

Negotiation Case

This case is typical of what vendors face in a competitive, hi-tech environment, and illustrates

the opportunity they have to reduce their price. Handled appropriately, a win-win outcome is not

difficult to achieve. From Dr Bob March's book "Chinese Negotiator"10.

Overview

HyperHawk, one of the world’s major providers of global supply management software

and services, helps companies reduce costs through efficient product and services sourcing. It

has handled more than $50 billion worth of products and services in the oil and gas, other natural

resources, retail, transport, finance, and industrial sectors for customers including General

Motors, Nestlé, Shell, Japan Energy, Mitsubishi, and Cadbury Schweppes.

Shanghai-based JJM, one of the biggest gaming and hospitality companies in Asia, is owned by

Chinese businessman Tan Wu Bo. We take up the story when JJM has been a HyperHawk client

10 http://www.negotiations.com/case/gaming-shanghai/ retrieved 18-05-2012

for six months, and the companies have signed an agreement to conduct two projects. The first,

completed in March 2005 and tremendously successful, saved JJM some $1 million, and the

second one is set to start. Impressed with the results, JJM wishes to explore the possibility of

other joint endeavors with HyperHawk.

To this end, a meeting is arranged between JJM’s Senior Vice-President of Finance Iris Ma and

HyperHawk’s Regional Managing Director Drake Dubois, and attended by JJM’s Vice-President

for Procurement Henry Chow and HyperHawk Sales Group Director Layton Pang.

Ma is keen to explore more projects with HyperHawk and has tasked Chow to follow up with

HyperHawk as soon as possible. The managing director of HyperHawk suggests that a session be

arranged with key stakeholders from both companies to discuss and assess possible opportunities

for other JJM projects.

The Scene

Ma and Chow agreed to the suggestion and asked that a proposal be submitted to JJM after the

opportunity assessment meeting that was attended by Chow, his assistant Mary Xie, who is also

the purchasing manager, and two members from HyperHawk. Both parties identified ten possible

projects.

Xie asked for a proposal to be submitted to JJM through her, and HyperHawk provided a

competitive price package that included services over a twelve-month period. As is to be

expected from a Chinese company like JJM, Xie asked for a reduction in the licensing fee,

additional program management days (at no extra cost), and an extension of the software term

from twelve months to twenty-four months.

In reply, HyperHawk put in writing its discussions to date with JJM:

1.JJM had agreed that HyperHawk could add value to the projects identified.

2.JJM would sign for a ten-project package to get a competitive price.

3.If HyperHawk could meet JJM’s demands, the latter would sign the contract by May-end

2005.

Xie agreed to point one above, but was noncommittal on points two and three. After much

discussion, HyperHawk agreed to lower its fee and provide JJM additional program management

days at no additional cost. However, HyperHawk said it could not agree to extend the twelve

month term for use of the software without charging extra.

Then, to complicate matters further, Xie suggested that JJM could not commit to an agreement

even if all the issues were resolved. The most recent negotiations were conducted quite hastily,

since HyperHawk knew that Xie was not the decision maker and approval had to come from her

top management. Many Chinese companies put in place a structure whereby the foreign

negotiator deals with multiple tiers of negotiators before working through the final deal with the

senior key decision maker.

This case study shows a deadlock in the negotiation. Probably in the first negotiation, the both

parties did not clarify their objectives and upon conclusion in the first negotiation, one party had

put in writing all agreements reached.

Using the four step method of negotiation:

A negotiation between two companies:

Company ‘A’ is a National oil corporation and a major oil and gas industry player in the

world. It has telecom asset worth millions of dollars in Nigeria. the assets include; fiber optic

cables (FOC), communication satellite, Transmission backbone capacity (FOC+STM-16 MUX)

(2.5Gb/s) 960 km of FOC on the company’s ‘A’ Right Of Way, VSAT Network, Network

Management System, 14 Telecoms Equipment Shelters for: Co-location of systems, Switching

System, Power systems: (Solar, Generator, Battery backup, PPMC Power source), Radio

Towers, Full compliments of Tools for FOC Maintenance, Mechanical workshop, Warehouses,

Office & Secured Space for erection of Telecoms systems and Training Centers. These assets

were installed to provide Telecoms services for the Oil and Gas industry, provide Unified

Communication Services for company and other oil and gas industry players, provide

Connectivity for Data, Video & Voice communications Contents to all customers (oil and gas

companies). However, company ‘A’ realizes that only 20 percent of their asset is utilized and

would like to outsource the assets to a telecom industry company.

Company ‘B’ is a leading telecom industry player, they provide and manage telecom

infrastructure for 10 major telecommunication companies. They’ve been in operation for over 20

years and counting.

Company ‘A’ approaches company ‘B’ with their problem of under utility of their assets and that

they would like outsource their assets giving the following condition;

The assets continue to service their business needs.

Generate revenue by providing services to the public.

Company ‘B’ seeing potential in this opportunity requested for a meeting. During the meeting,

company ‘B’ realizes that although the offer looked great, there are lots of expectations from

company ‘A’. Company B realizes that some of company ‘A’s assets would require a

turnaround maintenance to put it in use again since they were underutilized, and company ‘A’

requires all generated revenue when the assets are commercialized. However, company ‘B’

would be paid for managing the assets and generating revenues with whatever target given to

them by company ‘A’.

Company ‘B’s condition;

No targets for revenue generation

To company ‘B’, this seemed difficult but decides to negotiate with company ‘A’ on the terms.

However, company ‘B’ would like to manage the assets as for them it would of their interest to

be more profitable giving that the position and interest of both companies differs, negotiation can

help them both achieve their desired objective.

Before Negotiation Day 1: using the first of the four step method of preparation, both parties

prepare independently, identifying what objectives they tend to achieve, what information they

have concerning the other company, what concessions can be given, what are their variables,

what negotiation strategy are they using and set the negotiation team. The negotiation strategy of

a negotiating team depends solely on the team knowing who they are dealing with. It’s intrinsic

to know who and where you are about to negotiate with in order not to apply a wrong strategy in

which the resultant effect can lead to conflict or stale the negotiation process.

Preparing with this first step in the four step method, teams from both company ‘A’ and ‘B’ are

ready to begin their negotiation process. The negotiation teams on both company A and B carry

on a briefing before the meeting commences and after each negotiation carry on another

debriefing to review what they achieved at the end of each meeting. However, the first

negotiation meeting is more like an introductory meeting with the parties stating clearly what

their objectives are in respect to the negotiation.

Conclusion

Conflict arises in all spheres of life and negotiation is a fact that brings people together in

order to either resolve a conflict or create opportunities for the parties involved, either in

business or out of business. Having understood the different conflict style people tend fall into,

and the four step method for negotiating, this give one room to knowing the exact strategy to

apply during a negotiation process. In business, in order to ensure the success of the

organization’s business strategy there should be clear objective before negotiating the business.

Personal Action Plan

Current Skills Team work Packaging Collaboration Interpersonal

Skills To Work On Listening Questioning Bargaining

My Goals Improve listening

Empower team

Improve

questioning skills

Engage in more

bargaining

processes.

My Resources Time Analytical thinking

Action Plan Be more attentive in

a discussion process

without interfering.

Make it a habit – 3

weeks progressively

listening to people

without interfering.

Track my progress

daily by reviewing

daily events.

Empower with

skills and share

information.

Draw up an

analytical

questioning

approach.

Assumptions

Thesis + anti-thesis

= synthesis

Always question the

reasons behind

everything; whether

right or wrong.

Make it a habit- 21

days. This would be

applied in my daily

discussion.

Keep an open mind

in the process and

be objective and

logical.