dominated by the stronger preference. If it turns out to be for a particular 

 type of outcome, then the preference for an arbitrated solution will be 

 secondary. An organization exhibits behavior associated with two role types 

 simultaneously in each issue in which it is involved. The degree to which 

 each role type is exhibited may vary from issue to issue; however, one role 

 typically dominates. 



Advocates and guardians also tend to design their behavior to accomodate 

 the presence of an arbitrator or broker, and will attempt to push the decision 

 toward resolution in whichever arena they feel will support their values 

 (Olive 1981a, b, 1982). Different strategies are pursued by these organiza- 

 tional types, depending on the issue. Advocate organizations, for example, 

 often develop data gathering and analytical capacities, which are most 

 influential in the regulatory arena, and are often highly familiar with 

 procedures used by arbitrators to make decisions. Arbitrators tend to rely on 

 them for information and the opportunity to act. Guardians are more familiar 

 and comfortable with political strategies and often seek to use their 

 constituencies to show injury from an advocate's initiatives. 



LIAM allows the analyst to discern the dominant role type expected for 

 each organization, as well as its secondary role type, and the degree to which 

 organizations can be expected to exhibit both types of behavior. Each organi- 

 zation is evaluated in terms of all four role types; expected behavior is 

 calculated within each dimension; and the role type that appears to most 

 accurately describe an organization's behavior is the dominant role. Each 

 organization is located in a particular behaviorial space that is defined by 

 its location in both dimensions at once. 



Figure 5 illustrates the relative positions of two hypothetical organiza- 

 tions. The circular line within a quadrant represents the midpoint in that 

 quadrant. Organizations located within the circle, closer to the point of 

 origin, are moderate role players, whereas those outside it are more extreme. 

 The diagonal dotted lines divide each quadrant in half, so that an analyst can 

 determine the dominant role type for an organization. In this example, the 

 State legislature is located in the upper right-hand quadrant on the left-hand 

 side of the dotted line in that quadrant, closest to the broker continuum. 

 Its dominant role type is that of broker. Thus, this particular State legisla- 

 ture is predicted to strongly prefer the decision to be a brokered one, and 

 its behavior in this regard will be extreme. It will actively seek to pull 

 the issue into this arena. At the same time, though, it will tend to lean 

 toward the type of outcome usually promoted by guardians. If it has the 

 opportunity to broker the decision itself — as is probable — it is likely to be 

 highly receptive to information supporting guardian values. The FWS-ES is 

 located in the lower left-hand quadrant, beyond the circle; thus, its behavior 

 as an advocate will be extreme. It prefers an arbitrated solution, though not 

 to an extreme degree. 



Each of the 16 subquadrants (A - P) in Figure 6 has associated with it 

 different types and degrees of role playing. These 16 behavior patterns are 

 described in Appendix I. By examining the number, types, and relative 

 positions of all the players in a given conflict, an organization preparing 

 for involvement in an instream flow conflict can develop strategies that will 



38 



