ask. the respondent to indicate the degree of authority (as an element of 

 power) an organization will bring into the conflict. Since the analyst has 

 already determined this, the answer will likely come readily to mind; if it 

 does not, the information is available for review using Looky. 



5.4 PHASE II: QUERY: ROLE ANALYSIS 



The second set of questions in Query permits the respondent to describe 

 the behavior patterns that are expected to emerge for each organization 

 involved. A series of behavioral statements is presented, and the respondent 

 is asked to identify the degree to which that statement applies to the organi- 

 zation. These statements were developed from the four role types typically 

 associated with organizations involved in resource issues (broker, arbitrator, 

 advocate, and guardian). Each question attempts to measure the degree to 

 which organizations are expected to exhibit each type of behavior. The answers 

 are coded on a scale from one to five. The most extreme response choice is 

 coded five, while the least extreme is coded one. No response choice was 

 coded zero, however, since it is reasonable to assume that, by virtue of 

 participating in the conflict, each organization will interact with the other 

 organizations involved, at least minimally. Thus, some type of behavior 

 pattern is expected for each. If no individual can be found having enough 

 experience with an organization to comfortably attempt analysis, individuals 

 outside the group conducting the analysis can be found to provide the necessary 

 information. 



Each of the four role types has several "behaviors" associated with it, 

 which together make up a distinct pattern. These expected behaviors were used 

 as the basis for developing the question set for each of these roles. The 

 role type "arbitrator" has been identified as having four behaviors: 

 (1) preference for objectivity in decisionmaking; (2) whether or not it will 

 preside over a formal decision process (as does a court); (3) the degree to 

 which it is expected to solicit information from all sides to a dispute; and 

 (4) whether or not it tends to have the authority to establish rules or promul- 

 gate regulations in conflicts of the type being analyzed, or to determine the 

 ultimate decision outcome. The broker has a different set of behaviors: 



(1) the degree to which it promotes a negotiated or consensual outcome; 



(2) whether or not it has physical or legal control of the resources involved; 



(3) the degree to which it prefers to consider or use economic, constituency, 

 or political information in resource decisionmaking; and (4) whether or not it 

 will attempt to see to it that all parties to a dispute are somewhat satisfied 

 with the outcome. All of these elements of behavior, it should be noted, are 

 related to preferences foi — and behavior associated with those preferences — one 

 decision arena or the other (regulatory/distributive). Thus, these behavioral 

 patterns stem from organizational preferences for procedure, rather than 

 specific outcome. 



The other two roles, advocate and guardian, relate to goal preferences. 

 An advocate organization prefers environmentally protective outcomes, and its 

 behavior reflects this preference. Thus, the questions in Query attempt to 

 measure the degree to which an advocate is expected to: (1) attempt to change 

 traditional patterns of resource use and management, which considers economic 



51 



