P.J. Beers H.P.A. Boshuizen P.A. Kirschner Agreeing to Disagree: Perspective, Negotiation and Common Ground in Teams

Wicked problems; e.g. Marketing Macro- economics Organisation science Investment decision

Perspectives

From unshared to constructed knowledge Unshared knowledge Externalise d knowledge Common ground Shared knowledge Constructed knowledge Externalisation Internalisation Negotiation Integration

Negotiation Tool

Research questions Does the tool increase thinking about: –The status of a conversation topic –Other team members –Collaboration strategy What thoughts do participants report about negotiation processes? What thoughts do participants report about the tool?

Pilot study

Quantitative analysis Unshared knowledge External knowledge Common ground; Other team members; Strategic planning;

Qualitative analysis Misunderstandings Difference between understanding and agreement Construction of knowledge Difference in perspective Commitment to common ground Thoughts about the tool

Results quantitative analysis Mean ToolNo Tool Active knowledge External knowledge Common ground Other team members Strategy Number of stops

Results qualitative analysis Many misunderstandings Participants grasp difference understanding vs. opinion Participants learn together Participants recognise differences in perspective Commitment to grounding ranges from sheer manners to shared agreement –Commitment to grounding seems higher in groups with the tool

Results about the tool Record of common ground Structuring the discussion Using the board to ‘be useful’ Groups without the tool sometimes don’t care about the board

Conclusions Setting offers enough opportunity for the tool to work Participants are able to use the tool Participants may have been more motivated to grounding with the tool