Initial commit
This commit is contained in:
Zhongwei Li
398
skills/negotiation-alignment-governance/resources/template.md
Normal file
398
skills/negotiation-alignment-governance/resources/template.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,398 @@
|
||||
# Negotiation Alignment Governance Template
|
||||
|
||||
## Quick Start
|
||||
|
||||
**Purpose:** Create explicit stakeholder alignment through decision rights matrices (RACI/DACI/RAPID), working agreements, and conflict resolution protocols.
|
||||
|
||||
**When to use:** Decision authority is ambiguous, stakeholders have conflicting priorities, teams need coordination norms, or conflicts need structured resolution.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Part 1: Stakeholder Mapping
|
||||
|
||||
**Context:** [Brief description of situation requiring alignment]
|
||||
|
||||
**Key Stakeholders:**
|
||||
|
||||
| Stakeholder | Role/Team | Primary Interest | Current Concerns | Power/Influence |
|
||||
|-------------|-----------|------------------|------------------|-----------------|
|
||||
| [Name] | [Role] | [What they care about] | [Worries/blockers] | High/Medium/Low |
|
||||
| [Name] | [Role] | [What they care about] | [Worries/blockers] | High/Medium/Low |
|
||||
| [Name] | [Role] | [What they care about] | [Worries/blockers] | High/Medium/Low |
|
||||
|
||||
**Stakeholder Relationships:**
|
||||
- **Aligned:** [Who agrees on what]
|
||||
- **Tensions:** [Who conflicts on what]
|
||||
- **Dependencies:** [Who needs what from whom]
|
||||
|
||||
**Decision Points Needing Clarity:**
|
||||
1. [Decision 1]: Currently unclear who decides
|
||||
2. [Decision 2]: Multiple people believe they decide
|
||||
3. [Decision 3]: Decisions blocked due to ambiguity
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Part 2: Decision Rights Framework
|
||||
|
||||
### Option A: RACI Matrix
|
||||
|
||||
Use for: Process mapping, task allocation, operational clarity
|
||||
|
||||
| Decision/Activity | R (Responsible) | A (Accountable) | C (Consulted) | I (Informed) |
|
||||
|-------------------|-----------------|-----------------|---------------|--------------|
|
||||
| [Decision 1] | [Who does work] | **[ONE owner]** | [Who gives input] | [Who gets notified] |
|
||||
| [Decision 2] | [Who does work] | **[ONE owner]** | [Who gives input] | [Who gets notified] |
|
||||
| [Decision 3] | [Who does work] | **[ONE owner]** | [Who gives input] | [Who gets notified] |
|
||||
|
||||
**Key:**
|
||||
- **R (Responsible):** Does the work to complete the task
|
||||
- **A (Accountable):** Owns the outcome (exactly ONE person—neck on the line)
|
||||
- **C (Consulted):** Provides input BEFORE decision (two-way communication)
|
||||
- **I (Informed):** Notified AFTER decision (one-way communication)
|
||||
|
||||
### Option B: DACI Matrix
|
||||
|
||||
Use for: Strategic decisions, product choices, high-stakes calls
|
||||
|
||||
| Decision | D (Driver) | A (Approver) | C (Contributors) | I (Informed) |
|
||||
|----------|------------|--------------|------------------|--------------|
|
||||
| [Decision 1] | [Runs process] | **[ONE decider]** | [Must consult] | [Gets notified] |
|
||||
| [Decision 2] | [Runs process] | **[ONE decider]** | [Must consult] | [Gets notified] |
|
||||
| [Decision 3] | [Runs process] | **[ONE decider]** | [Must consult] | [Gets notified] |
|
||||
|
||||
**Key:**
|
||||
- **D (Driver):** Runs the decision process, gathers input, recommends
|
||||
- **A (Approver):** Makes final decision (exactly ONE—thumb up/down)
|
||||
- **C (Contributors):** Must be consulted for input (but Approver decides)
|
||||
- **I (Informed):** Notified of outcome
|
||||
|
||||
### Option C: RAPID Matrix
|
||||
|
||||
Use for: Complex strategic decisions with compliance, legal, or technical veto requirements
|
||||
|
||||
| Decision | R (Recommend) | A (Agree) | P (Perform) | I (Input) | D (Decide) |
|
||||
|----------|---------------|-----------|-------------|-----------|------------|
|
||||
| [Decision 1] | [Proposes] | [Must agree/veto] | [Executes] | [Advises] | **[ONE decider]** |
|
||||
| [Decision 2] | [Proposes] | [Must agree/veto] | [Executes] | [Advises] | **[ONE decider]** |
|
||||
|
||||
**Key:**
|
||||
- **R (Recommend):** Proposes the decision with analysis
|
||||
- **A (Agree):** Must agree (veto power for legal/compliance/technical)
|
||||
- **P (Perform):** Implements the decision
|
||||
- **I (Input):** Consulted for expertise
|
||||
- **D (Decide):** Final authority
|
||||
|
||||
### Option D: Advice Process
|
||||
|
||||
Use for: Empowered teams, flat organizations
|
||||
|
||||
Anyone can decide after seeking advice from affected parties and experts. Decision-maker accountable for outcome.
|
||||
|
||||
**Scope:** [Which decisions use advice process]
|
||||
**Guardrails:** [Minimum advisors, escalation criteria]
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Part 3: Working Agreements
|
||||
|
||||
### Communication Norms
|
||||
|
||||
**Sync (Meetings):** Use for brainstorming, negotiation. Agenda required 24h advance. Max [30/60 min]. Document decisions.
|
||||
|
||||
**Async (Docs/Slack):** Use for updates, approvals. Response times: Urgent (<2h), Normal (<24h), FYI (none).
|
||||
|
||||
**Documentation:** Decisions in [ADRs/log/wiki]. Meeting notes in [tool]. Source of truth: [location].
|
||||
|
||||
### Decision-Making Norms
|
||||
|
||||
**Decision Speed vs Quality:**
|
||||
- **Fast/Reversible decisions:** Use consent (no strong objections)
|
||||
- **Slow/Irreversible decisions:** Use explicit DACI with analysis
|
||||
|
||||
**Time-boxing:**
|
||||
- If no consensus after [N] discussions, escalate with:
|
||||
- Options analysis
|
||||
- Recommendation
|
||||
- Decision criteria
|
||||
|
||||
**Decision Documentation:**
|
||||
- Architecture decisions: ADRs (Architecture Decision Records)
|
||||
- Product decisions: Decision log with rationale
|
||||
- Process changes: Updated handbook/wiki
|
||||
|
||||
### Quality & Standards
|
||||
|
||||
**Definition of Done:**
|
||||
- [Criterion 1]: [Specific requirement]
|
||||
- [Criterion 2]: [Specific requirement]
|
||||
- [Criterion 3]: [Specific requirement]
|
||||
|
||||
**Quality Bar:**
|
||||
- Minimum: [Non-negotiable requirements]
|
||||
- Target: [Aspirational standards]
|
||||
- Trade-offs: [When quality can flex]
|
||||
|
||||
**Review Requirements:**
|
||||
- [Type of work]: Requires [N] approvals from [roles]
|
||||
- Approval SLA: [Timeframe]
|
||||
- Escalation: If not reviewed in [timeframe], [action]
|
||||
|
||||
### Escalation Paths
|
||||
|
||||
**When to Escalate:**
|
||||
- Decision blocked for > [N days]
|
||||
- Stakeholders fundamentally disagree after structured dialogue
|
||||
- Decision impacts outside agreed scope
|
||||
- Risk or compliance concern
|
||||
|
||||
**How to Escalate:**
|
||||
1. Document the issue and options considered
|
||||
2. Clarify the decision needed and by when
|
||||
3. Escalate to: [Manager / Committee / Executive]
|
||||
4. Include joint recommendation if possible
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Part 4: Conflict Resolution Protocols
|
||||
|
||||
### Level 1: Direct Dialogue (Default)
|
||||
|
||||
**When:** First response to disagreement
|
||||
|
||||
**Process:** 1:1 conversation. Assume good intent. Focus on interests (why) not positions (what). Use data/criteria. Seek understanding. Propose solutions addressing both interests.
|
||||
|
||||
**Outcome:** Agreement or escalate to Level 2
|
||||
|
||||
### Level 2: Facilitated Mediation
|
||||
|
||||
**When:** Direct dialogue fails after [N] attempts
|
||||
|
||||
**Process:** Neutral facilitator. Each party explains interests, concerns, constraints. Facilitator clarifies agreement/disagreement, objective criteria. Brainstorm options meeting both interests. Test solutions against criteria.
|
||||
|
||||
**Outcome:** Agreement, compromise, or escalate to Level 3
|
||||
|
||||
### Level 3: Escalation & Decision
|
||||
|
||||
**When:** Mediation doesn't resolve within [timeframe]
|
||||
|
||||
**Process:** Document for decider (context, options, positions, recommendations). Decider reviews, may request more info or facilitate final discussion, then decides. Disagree-and-commit: All parties commit once decided.
|
||||
|
||||
**Decider:** [Role / Name per decision type]
|
||||
|
||||
### Conflict Resolution Principles
|
||||
|
||||
**Separate People from Problem:**
|
||||
- Attack the problem, not the person
|
||||
- Use "I feel..." not "You always..."
|
||||
|
||||
**Focus on Interests, Not Positions:**
|
||||
- Position: "I want X"
|
||||
- Interest: "I need X because Y"
|
||||
|
||||
**Generate Options Before Deciding:**
|
||||
- Avoid false dichotomies
|
||||
- Brainstorm win-win solutions
|
||||
|
||||
**Use Objective Criteria:**
|
||||
- Data (metrics, user research, benchmarks)
|
||||
- Principles (company values, best practices)
|
||||
- External standards (industry norms, regulations)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Part 5: Negotiation Framework (For Trade-offs)
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Clarify Interests
|
||||
|
||||
**Party A:**
|
||||
- **Wants:** [Position]
|
||||
- **Because:** [Underlying interest/need]
|
||||
- **Success looks like:** [Outcome]
|
||||
- **Can't compromise on:** [Hard constraints]
|
||||
|
||||
**Party B:**
|
||||
- **Wants:** [Position]
|
||||
- **Because:** [Underlying interest/need]
|
||||
- **Success looks like:** [Outcome]
|
||||
- **Can't compromise on:** [Hard constraints]
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. Identify BATNA (Best Alternative To Negotiated Agreement)
|
||||
|
||||
**Party A's BATNA:** [What happens if no agreement]
|
||||
**Party B's BATNA:** [What happens if no agreement]
|
||||
|
||||
**Zone of Possible Agreement (ZOPA):** [Where both parties are better off than BATNA]
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Generate Options
|
||||
|
||||
**Option 1:** [Proposal]
|
||||
- Party A gets: [Benefits]
|
||||
- Party B gets: [Benefits]
|
||||
- Trade-offs: [Costs]
|
||||
|
||||
**Option 2:** [Proposal]
|
||||
- Party A gets: [Benefits]
|
||||
- Party B gets: [Benefits]
|
||||
- Trade-offs: [Costs]
|
||||
|
||||
**Option 3:** [Proposal]
|
||||
- Party A gets: [Benefits]
|
||||
- Party B gets: [Benefits]
|
||||
- Trade-offs: [Costs]
|
||||
|
||||
### 4. Evaluate Against Criteria
|
||||
|
||||
| Option | Criterion 1 | Criterion 2 | Criterion 3 | Total Score |
|
||||
|--------|-------------|-------------|-------------|-------------|
|
||||
| Option 1 | [Score] | [Score] | [Score] | [Sum] |
|
||||
| Option 2 | [Score] | [Score] | [Score] | [Sum] |
|
||||
| Option 3 | [Score] | [Score] | [Score] | [Sum] |
|
||||
|
||||
**Selected:** [Option X] because [rationale]
|
||||
|
||||
### 5. Agreement Terms
|
||||
|
||||
**What:** [Specific outcome agreed]
|
||||
**Who:** [Responsible parties]
|
||||
**When:** [Timeline]
|
||||
**How:** [Implementation]
|
||||
**Review:** [When to revisit]
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Part 6: Governance Maintenance
|
||||
|
||||
### Review Cadence
|
||||
|
||||
**Quarterly Governance Review:**
|
||||
- What's working well?
|
||||
- What's not working?
|
||||
- Emerging gaps or ambiguities?
|
||||
- Updated decision rights matrix
|
||||
- Revised working agreements
|
||||
|
||||
**Triggers for Ad-Hoc Review:**
|
||||
- Org structure change
|
||||
- New stakeholders or teams
|
||||
- Recurring conflicts in same area
|
||||
- Decision velocity declining
|
||||
|
||||
### Metrics to Track
|
||||
|
||||
**Decision Velocity:**
|
||||
- Time from decision needed to decision made
|
||||
- Number of decisions blocked > [N] days
|
||||
- Escalation frequency
|
||||
|
||||
**Conflict Resolution:**
|
||||
- Time to resolve conflicts
|
||||
- Escalation rate (Level 1 → 2 → 3)
|
||||
- Repeat conflicts in same area
|
||||
|
||||
**Agreement Adherence:**
|
||||
- Working agreement violations
|
||||
- Shadow governance incidents (decisions made outside framework)
|
||||
- Stakeholder satisfaction with process
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Output Format
|
||||
|
||||
Create `negotiation-alignment-governance.md`:
|
||||
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
# [Initiative/Team]: Negotiation Alignment Governance
|
||||
|
||||
**Date:** [YYYY-MM-DD]
|
||||
**Review Date:** [Quarterly]
|
||||
|
||||
## Stakeholder Map
|
||||
[Table of stakeholders, interests, concerns]
|
||||
|
||||
## Decision Rights Matrix
|
||||
[RACI / DACI / RAPID matrix for key decisions]
|
||||
|
||||
## Working Agreements
|
||||
|
||||
### Communication
|
||||
- Sync vs async guidelines
|
||||
- Response time expectations
|
||||
- Documentation requirements
|
||||
|
||||
### Decision-Making
|
||||
- Fast vs slow decision criteria
|
||||
- Time-boxing and escalation
|
||||
- Documentation standards
|
||||
|
||||
### Quality & Standards
|
||||
- Definition of done
|
||||
- Quality bar (minimum vs target)
|
||||
- Review requirements
|
||||
|
||||
### Escalation Paths
|
||||
- When to escalate
|
||||
- How to escalate
|
||||
- Who decides
|
||||
|
||||
## Conflict Resolution Protocols
|
||||
|
||||
### Level 1: Direct Dialogue
|
||||
[Process for peer-to-peer resolution]
|
||||
|
||||
### Level 2: Mediation
|
||||
[When and how to bring in facilitator]
|
||||
|
||||
### Level 3: Escalation
|
||||
[Final decision authority]
|
||||
|
||||
## Governance Maintenance
|
||||
- Review cadence: [Quarterly / Ad-hoc triggers]
|
||||
- Metrics: [Decision velocity, conflict resolution, adherence]
|
||||
|
||||
## Key Insights
|
||||
- [What alignment this creates]
|
||||
- [What conflicts this prevents]
|
||||
- [What enables faster decisions]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Quality Checklist
|
||||
|
||||
Before finalizing:
|
||||
- [ ] Decision rights: Exactly ONE Accountable/Approver per decision
|
||||
- [ ] All key stakeholders covered in framework
|
||||
- [ ] Working agreements are specific and observable (not vague)
|
||||
- [ ] Conflict resolution has clear escalation path
|
||||
- [ ] Agreements include review/update cadence
|
||||
- [ ] No shadow governance (framework covers real decisions)
|
||||
- [ ] Psychological safety (people can disagree without fear)
|
||||
- [ ] Stakeholders have consented to framework
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Tips
|
||||
|
||||
**For RACI/DACI:**
|
||||
- Start with most contentious decisions
|
||||
- One Accountable/Approver only (resist pressure for multiple)
|
||||
- Consulted ≠ consensus—input gathered, decider decides
|
||||
- Review quarterly—roles change, decisions evolve
|
||||
|
||||
**For Working Agreements:**
|
||||
- Make observable (not "communicate well" but "respond in 24h")
|
||||
- Include positive behaviors AND boundaries
|
||||
- Get explicit consent from all parties
|
||||
- Revisit when violated or ineffective
|
||||
|
||||
**For Conflict Resolution:**
|
||||
- Assume good intent (conflicts are structural, not personal)
|
||||
- Make escalation safe (not punishment, but decision support)
|
||||
- Document decisions to avoid re-litigating
|
||||
- Disagree-and-commit once decided
|
||||
|
||||
**For Facilitation:**
|
||||
- Stay neutral (don't take sides)
|
||||
- Make implicit tensions explicit
|
||||
- Use objective criteria when possible
|
||||
- Don't force consensus—escalate when stuck
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user