Programme and Working Steps
Both courses (16th to 18th May and 21st to 23rd May) followed the same structure of working steps.
| |
 |  |
Day 1
Introduction
- Presentation of the participants including the specific areas where they need and apply negotiation skills in everyday professional life.
- "What is my personal negotiation style?" Establishment of an individual profile using a psychological questionnaire.
- Background and conceptual roots of the HARVARD methodology: Prisioners' Dilemma, strategic interdependence and win-win approaches. Examples of non-constructive approaches (win-loose).
| |
 |  |
Basics of the HARVARD methodology
- Avoiding position fights - instead think about how to make the "cake" bigger for all.
- Input: Analysis of interests and creation of a win-win situation
- Bi-lateral negotiation exercise
Introduction of a complex ABS simulation scenario
- Introduction of the basic scenario
- Formation of 4 stakeholder groups (the negotiation partners)
Negotiating in the ABS simulation scenario
- Analysis of interests and first meeting of the negotiation partners
- Feedback from the trainer
Day 2
Negotiating in the ABS simulation scenario (cont.)
- Input: Developing options and how to use them in negotiations
- Input: The functions and tools of the chairperson/moderator
- Second meeting of the negotiation partners
- Feedback from the trainer
- Informal negotiations between the stakeholder groups
- Input: Next-best Alternative (NBA) and "dirty tricks"
Visit to the African Wildlife Society
Late afternoon of the second day was used to expose the participants to experiences of the African Wildlife Society (AWF) (Link: www.awf.org ) with the establishment of Wildlife Management Areas in Tanzania. Establishing such areas involves negotiations with different stakeholders, such as local communities, hunters, lodge operators as well as local and provincial governement representatives.
| |
 |  |
An enjoyable dinner at the premisies of AWF in Arusha concluded the evening.
Download
|
499 kB |
Link
www.awf.org/content/heartland/detail/1282
Day 3
Negotiating in the ABS simulation scenario (cont.)
- Third meeting of the negotiation partners
- Feedback from the trainer and processing of results
Wrapping up and closing
- Assessment of the HARVARD methodology: Strengths, Weaknesses, Chances.
- How to "make your point" in negotiations: the 5-sentence technique. Individual exercises with the "hot chair".
- Evaluation of the course.
Evaluation
At the end of both courses, the participants were invited to state their degree of agreement according to certain statements about the course. The results of this quantitative evaluation are shown below:
Evaluation of Course 1
++ | + | +/- | - | |
I learned useful things for my work | 12 | 2 | ||
The learning methodology supported my learning process | 11 | 3 | ||
The group dynamic was good | 12 | 2 | ||
I feel encouraged to apply HARVARD in my everyday life | 12 | 2 | ||
I would recommend this course to colleagues | 13 | 1 |
Evaluation of Course 2
++ | + | +/- | - | |
I learned useful things for my work | 15 | |||
The learning methodology supported my learning process | 14 | 1 | ||
The group dynamic was good | 14 | 1 | ||
I feel encouraged to apply HARVARD in my everyday life | 13 | 2 | ||
I would recommend this course to colleagues | 15 |
Apart from this quite encouraging result many participants expressed their great interest in offering more of these courses especially for community-based groups. This included the need to train local trainers in this methodology and didactics. From the perspective of the trainer, most of the participants seem to have benefited considerably from the training. None of them knew before any methodology of how to negotiate, and the simple structure of the HARVARD approach will help them to remember at least some of the basic rules when they come into a situation where they will have handle a concrete negotiation situation.
Recommendations by the Trainer
- The scenario for the complex simulation game should be simplified, or at least made available in a more complex and a simpler version.
- The training of trainers (ToT) based in the region seems to be the necessary next step. There are two models of how to realize such a ToT:
- A group of 4-5 experienced trainers attends the course as "normal" participants and gets afterwards a 2 days-"upgrading course" about teaching methods, detailed didactic planning and more information about the HARVARD methodology.
- The second model seems to be more effective: After having participated in the training course, the future trainers have to conduct immediately their "own" training course, while the expatriate "master trainer" is coaching them and gives feedback. This approach creates a positive stress for the future trainers and allows the "master trainer" to assess the talents and capabilities of the new trainers through a life situation.
- The course design and the "mixture" of participants should be more differentiated. Especially, the participants from the communities stay shy and silent in the presence of experienced negotiators, academic teachers, "experts", etc. A special version of this course should be developed for this target group.
- The participants wanted to have at least half a day off to enjoy a little bit the place and the nearby city. Travelling to another country doesn't mean for them just to spend 3 days in a classroom and fly back again …
