Negotiation

Up to this point in the course we’ve been focusing on the ADIA concept in terms of setting ourselves up for success in various projects or in directing staffs toward a particular effort. Tonight we’ll take a look at negotiation techniques and tactics that can be used to make your strategy successful.  We’ll be practicing this with the Vieques exercise, with each of you taking on the roles assigned last week (please come ready to negotiate!)

Before we begin the exercises, there are a number of important points that should be reviewed in the articles for the module.  In “Negotiation and Reconciliation Principles,” Ducey describes a number of phases to successful negotiation.  These include Pre-negotiation (essentially preparation), a phase that can include deciding who should be involved in the negotiation, a consideration of others players (the “scorecard” approach), consideration of cultural impacts, understanding of interests and positions, and the concept of “ripeness”—the idea that there is a certain timefame in which the deal must be completed.  These factor are used to design the opening agreement or deal that can be initially presented.  The negotiation can then commence, with an initial opening argument or offer, the reaching of a mid-point agreement, mediation if required, and finally an end point.  The actual negotiation phase can be an art form—but often the success of the negotiation will be directed related to the amount of preparation the team makes before coming to the table.

In “The High Cost of Low Trust” Allred points out a number of common problems with misperception and mistrust.  The concept of “reciprocity” is important here; we tend to respond to actions of others with similar actions.  This can be very positive—or negative, leading to vicious cycles of increased misperception, bias, and negative results.  The key here is to recognize when the group is locked in these cycles…and act accordingly.

 

LD 11/12: Implementation

Today we continue our discussion of implementation with two famous case studies; the McMaster Case in Iraq (the results of which were ultimately responsible for the drafting of the Counterinsurgency Manuel, FM 3-24) and the NAS North Island case.  Prior to tackling these, as promised we’ll be taking about 30 minutes and going over the paper requirements and getting into some more details regarding the PACOM aor.

The “Domains of Implementation” article describes the potential “how” component of strategy implementation.  These are:

1)      Structural Reconfiguration (in practice often the one chosen, leading to the famous “reorg again” of Dilbert fame)—this can include redesign of an organization to a matrix form, network, downsizing, special purpose, the creation of a new entity or divesting of functions.

2)      Policy: Policy is a definite course or method of execution selected from various alternatives; in my experience, it is the primary function of mid to senior level staff officers. As the article notes, there are five questions that are useful in the development of policy and assessment of that policy: Why is the communicated plan being used (as related to vision, mission, objectives, goals); What strategies/objectives are especially important; What are the priorities for implementation (human capital, organizational structure, capabilities); What measurements or feedback indicate successful implementation (subjective/objective data, normed data, benchmarks); who is ultimately responsible for successful implementation (specific individuals, positions, teams/committees, units)

3)      Human Capital

4)      Technology

Consider these factors when we delve into the details of the case studies; how were they used effectively—or not?

LD9/10: Decision Making and Implementation

This week we’ll be wrapping up the decision making portion of ADIA and moving into the implementation phase.  Both sections tonight have excellent case studies to illustrate the processes and problems associated with these phases.

“The Case of the Warrior Diplomat” is based on a real world incident in the SOUTHCOM aor.  Even though it deals with a special forces team on a training mission, it’s particularly relevant today given the increased frequency with which staff officers work in the interagency.  A few things to consider when you read the case study:

Mission: the mission is outside the norm, involving a number of the non-military instruments of power. The team and the team leader must exercise diplomatic skills not only with their hosts, but also with the chain of command—which is not exactly aligned with the team’s goals.

Stakeholders: the U.S. team is quite diverse—and very typical for embassy country teams. What are the needs/desires/agendas for each of the stakeholders?

Environment: what is the general environment in the host nation, and the embassy? Are there conflicting goals/priorities between the two?

Culture: Note that you’ve been given an extra reading on the history of Paraguay; why is this important? Will it affect the decision making process of the team?

Finally, consider what kind of SWOT analysis should be done for this case; are there any immediate solutions to the team leader’s problem?

Module Ten introduces us to the Implementation phase of ADIA.  Implementation turns decisions into effective actions that can be communicated downward in the organization.  This requires some form of execution plan and alignment mechanisms.  In the reading pay particular attention to the ‘cascading’ concept; implementation doesn’t just effect one element of an organization, but can affect all levels in various degrees.   It should be noted that implementation is not without its challenges; as the article “the art of implementation” points out, there are plenty of points where implementation can fail (including strategic focus, prioritization, failure to develop, provide guidance to, or hold subordinates accountable) among others.  Implementation is everything; an organization that can’t implement will fail.  We’ll be examining these elements in the case study which looks at the implementation of German storm trooper tactics on the Western Front during World War One.

LD7/LD8: Decisions and the Decision Environment

Decision Making: Tonight we move into the “D” section of the ADIA process, examining means by which we make decisions. The decision making process assumes that you’ve done an assessment of prior to moving into this phase—but even then, it can be a complex process.

In 1920 Admiral Kalbfus taught that decision making has three parts: consideration of what course of action will accomplish the mission, whether there are resources to do so, and whether it is worth the cost.  Although an older viewpoint, this is a good base from which to examine decision making theory.  Today we recognize that there are a number of “decision traps” that must also be considered, including not having enough information, over confidence, framing the decision in the wrong context, relying on rules of thumb, “winging it” (aka “shooting from the hip,), not learning lessons, and not changing your plan as the situation changes, among others. Today’s environment is also challenging in the decision making environment as situations rapidly change, especially in the world of high tech communications ability.  Because of this, good decision makers identify alternatives that consider various degrees of risk and potential effectiveness.  You’ll find that this can be a complex process; moreover, decisions, once made, have a tendency to have a cascading effect often requiring an entirely new set of COAs. We’ll be examining Lee’s decision making prior to Pickett’s charge at Gettysburg as an example of the difficulties of this process.

Decision making is not done in a vacuum. Module 8 focuses on the decision environment  –the area where decisions are made (vice the process itself).  As decision makers we exist in a number of different environments both internal and external to our organization; how these affect the decision process can be largely a matter of where one is in the organization.  Regardless, however, it is crucial that environment be understood for its effect on the process itself.  Types of internal environment include the nature of work, primary culture of the organization, missions, functions, and organization.  External environments can include many of the issues we’re already discussed, including political influences, technological changes, challenges from other organizations/stakeholders, etc.  These elements can lead to inherent complexity and uncertainty in decision making.  To illustrate this, we’ll be examining the Challenger case study in detail, a classic case of a decision influenced by multiple environmental challenges.