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

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

3. Perspectives

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

5. Negotiation Tool

6. 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?

7. Pilot study

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

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

10. Results quantitative analysis Mean ToolNo Tool Active knowledge0.0310.033 External knowledge0.3370.359 Common ground0.0870.073 Other team members0.7100.774 Strategy0.2390.229 Number of stops17.3311.33

11. 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

12. 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

13. 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