Key questions for the organizations identified as preferring to operate 

 in the distributive arena include: Is there any one organization among them 

 with the legal authority or political clout to broker the decision itself? Do 

 the organizations that prefer a brokered process have ties with one another or 

 with the potential broker? Have they worked together frequently in the past-- 

 or formed coalitions among themselves to influence the outcome? This 

 information then must be compared to information regarding the regulatory 

 arena. How many organizations prefer to operate in the regulatory arena? Is 

 there one among them with the authority to arbitrate? Is litigation likely if 

 the decision is not arbitrated? Based on the answers to these and similar 

 questions, the analyst can develop strategies for participation in the 

 conf 1 ict. 



A second set of questions has to do with the organizational values 

 associated with the conflict. Each organization has a preference for a 

 particular type of outcome, no matter what its preferences for arena, and the 

 various organizations involved will pursue their preferred outcomes with 

 varying degrees of intensity. It is important, then, to determine not only 

 number of organizations preferring guardian-type outcomes over advocate ones, 

 but the intensity of these preferences as well. For example, is protection of 

 the particular resource involved a major mission of any of the organizations? 

 If so, how many? What is the likelihood of two or more of these organizations 

 forming a coalition on behalf of these resources? How actively will they 

 pursue change? What type of change? Conversely, how many organizations are 

 there that strongly desire to see this particular project or developmental 

 initiative undertaken? What stakes are involved for these organizations? 

 What types of information and tactics will the groups likely pursue, given the 

 nature of their commitment and interest in the outcome? Is compromise likely? 

 If so, by whom? What trade-offs might develop? Answering these questions 

 puts an analyst in a better position to determine the most effective strategies 

 to pursue on behalf of a particular set of values. If it appears, for example, 

 that intensely committed guardians outnumber the advocates, and that the 

 decision will likely be a brokered one, an advocate organization can choose 

 from among alternative strategies those that are most likely to advance its 

 own position and enhance its ability not only to communicate with the guardians 

 involved, but to influence the outcome so that its own objectives are at least 

 partially achieved. 



44 



