Achieve win-win decisions in your projects

Project managers can use the natural decision-making process to disarm and deal with resistance and conflicting opinions in a constructive and proactive manner and establish a win-win perspective that promotes cohesion and ownership in the project

A survey among Danish project managers (Projektlederundersøgelsen 2014) showed that motivating project participants and ensuring coordination and support at all levels of the organization were the second and third biggest challenges for project managers. Project managers thus clearly benefit from focusing on followship and motivation as a lever for achieving better results in their projects.

Using the natural decision-making process, project managers and consultants can strengthen their roles by:

Inspiring trust and confidence
Ensuring that the project is based on a common foundation
Promoting ownership
Ensuring that hidden agendas are disclosed
Making problems more tangible
Minimising the risk of unexpected resistance later in the project.

This article offers a practical introduction to using the natural decision-making process, either as an open and direct process or as an inspiration for your own toolbox.

How to share an orange

Imagine two children fighting over an orange. The most immediate solution to this conflict would be to cut the orange into two halves. Is it a goodsolution, though – and if so, for whom?

Each child wants the orange. However, asking the children why they want the orange may produce a completely different result: One child needs the zest to bake a cake, and the other child wants to make orange juice. This information provides a new basis for a joint decision on how best to share the orange. Entering into a negotiation based on the children’s interests creates a real win-win situation in which both children are happy. Dividing the orange into two halves would have created a lose-lose situation and resulted in frustration, resistance, and demotivation in the children.

The relationship triangle is a practical tool to show stakeholders the importance of acting on the interest-based level. Project managers can use the relationship triangle as an analytical tool to understand the interrelationships between the project’s stakeholders. Statements such as “I have a right to,” “I demand” or “I make the decisions” indicate that a win-win outcome is not immediately possible. The project manager needs to inspire trust and confidence in the stakeholders to ensure that they act and negotiate on the interest-based level.

Relationsship triangle — The relationship triangle. In the interest-based paradigm (bottom), dialogue-based leadership creates winners as the parties' interests are considered in a common solution, increasing the value of the end product.

The natural decision-making process

The natural decision-making process is a method to help people make joint decisions for which they take responsibility and ownership. The method is also used in other contexts, e.g. for conflict resolution through mediation, which is gaining popularity in Denmark. The essence of the process is to shift the focus from a given demand to the needs and intentions underlying the demand. Uncovering a person’s underlying concerns, needs and interests – as in the story of the children and the orange – leads to completely different and better courses of action.

natural decisions making — The natural decision-making process. Go through the phases together, and look for win-win situations.

The method is readily accessible and can be used in many contexts, e.g. for decision meetings, workshops, clarification of needs, matching of expectations, disagreements, conflicts, etc. The project manager facilitates the process based on the specific situation.

How to use the tool

Use the story of the orange to introduce the natural decision-making process and the aim of achieving a win-win mindset. Illustrate the steps on a board, and agree on and indicate your current phase. It is crucial that the participants go through the phases together.

In Phase 1, each participant speaks freely. All participants share their views without being interrupted. More than one round of talks may be required – the important thing is to clear the air and “defuse” the situation. As a result, everyone feels heard and has the opportunity to say what is on their mind. When the project manager feels that the pressure has decreased, ask if anyone has anything to add. If this is not the case, proceed to Phase 2. Respect (and make sure that the other participants do as well) if anyone still has unvoiced concerns and needs to share them with the others.

In Phase 1, it is important to remember that people inherently want to go directly into solution mode (phase 3), but that it has the opposite effect if everyone has not had the opportunity to say what is on their mind and the underlying needs have not been fully uncovered. The facilitator therefore needs to be persistent and stay true to the process – otherwise, the process is derailed, and the foundation for a win-win decision is lost.

In Phase 2, the participants’ views are condensed into their underlying concerns, needs, and interests. In practice, the facilitator asks the participants to express these three elements in words. Some participants may only have input on one of the elements, and that is fine. All concerns, needs, and interests are noted on a board, and it is essential for the process that the participants appreciate each other’s views. The participants work towards a common point of interest by facilitating the recognition of conflicting interests through questions such as “John, can you understand that Karsten has these concerns?” and “Karsten, can you understand that John has these needs?”

In Phase 2, it often turns out that a group of decision-makers who appear to be in complete disagreement in Phase 1 have almost the same concerns, needs, and interests. In this case, the demands pale, and the way is paved for a common agreement via Phases 3, 4 and 5.

When everything has been noted on the board and mutually recognised, the facilitator is ready to move on to Phase 3.

In Phase 3, possible solutions are identified through brainstorming. A good opening question is: “Now that you see your own needs and those of the others on the board, what options do you see?” Facilitate the discussion, and note each option and solution on the board.

In Phase 3, be aware of unexpected conflicts and resistance. This is an indication that one or more participants still have unvoiced concerns. The only solution is to go back to Phase 1. You do not have to start from scratch, but when the concerns have been shared, ask the other participants if they have anything else to add. Revisit Phase 2 to establish whether any new underlying needs have emerged – and then return to Phase 3.

Everyone feels good, and the mood becomes distinctly enthusiastic and productive towards the end of Phase 3, which leads naturally on to Phase 4.

In Phase 4, the participants choose one or more solutions. This is relatively easy as the facilitator has just noted the options on the board.

In Phase 5, the group confirms its agreement on the decision made.

Tips and tricks

The method is well-documented and straightforward, but takes a little practice to master. Learning by doing – and sparring with others who understand the tool – is the only way. The following tips and tricks may be useful:

Obtain commitment to using the natural decision-making process before you start. Alternatively, you can use the method indirectly by being aware of and addressing the underlying concerns, needs and interests.
Be fully aware of the phase you are in as a facilitator and where each of the participants are, and do not be persuaded by good rhetoric and arguments.
To manage the phases and visualize the transitions between them, draw a “lane” on the board and use a magnet for each participant to show where they are (and pull back anyone getting ahead).
Be careful not to timebox the process – especially Phases 1-2 as these phases are critical to success.
Allocate plenty of time the first few times or if you know in advance that the project involves many different interests and needs pulling in opposite directions.
Be aware of your own role and of acting on the interest-based level of the relationship triangle by making room for each participant – regardless of your own position.

Results

Using the natural decision-making process, project managers can strengthen their role by:

Inspiring trust and confidence
Ensuring that the project is based on a common foundation
Promoting ownership
Ensuring that hidden agendas are disclosed
Making problems more tangible
Minimising the risk of unexpected resistance later in the project.

We hope that this article has encouraged you to use the natural decision-making process in your projects – either as an open and direct process or as an inspiration for your own toolbox.