Laserfiche WebLink
other qualities of the water under discussion. He should be able to exploit <br />the requirements of competing uses for the water, such as dead storage or the <br />time, place, and consumptive nature of various uses. <br />In the back of his mind, the negotiator needs a list of items that are <br />expendable, throw-aways which he can use at crucial moments in a negotiation <br />to increase good will and to get concessions from the other side. The <br />negotiator who is factually prepared has every other party at a disadvantage. <br />It is often true that development agencies are interested in project <br />operation information, and commonly have these data available to them, while <br />environmental agencies are interested in biological criteria and standing <br />crop-type information. Both types of agencies tend to propose solutions which <br />meet their own criteria but do not address the values of the others. For <br />example, environmental agencies often do not consider the alternatives <br />realistically available to project operations but rely on "crusading" <br />techniques instead of thoughtful bargaining. This technique does not work <br />well with development agencies, which are accustomed to marketplace-type <br />bargaining. (Doerksen and Lamb 1979). The lesson is to study the stream from <br />your opponent's point of view. <br />A basic requirement for preparing to negotiate is to separate your <br />premises and data, and those of your opponent, into as many finely divided <br />units as possible. After they are separated, it is possible to make a <br />searching examination of their truth, importance, and relative weight. This <br />process lets you analyze the issues and positions and establish your <br />objectives and alternatives, before the negotiation, so that you are <br />comfortable with them. <br />4