is a mediation technique in which one party assumes tohave less power that the other in order to settle down their problem.The difference between the parties or team members is seen as thefocal point where each other can get something of value or rather canlearn. The consequences of hostility are outlined and the teams aregiven an opportunity to predict what the other thinks about them(Dyer et-al., 2013). The agreement in most cases is written down asit will serve as the reference point and also such signing increasethe commitments to accept changes by the teams.

I would use negotiation to make the teams feel like there were nodisagreements that ever existed. I will insist on importance ofliving and working together as brothers and the benefits they can getfrom each other when they work under good terms (Dyer et-al., 2013).These benefits will come from their education backgrounds, culturaldiversities as well as religion and races. Listening to both parties’prediction of the other and what they want from each other will be myfocal point to lay down guidelines to be followed.

Even if the agreement will not be reached because groups are proneto resistance, I will make sure that they feel like the agreement hasbeen reached. I will put myself in each party’s shoes to make themfeel good. Each team’s achievements and drawbacks will be weighedequally and I will convince them that none is better than the other(Dyer et-al., 2013).

Not unless one party accepts change, no agreement can be reached. Iwill therefore use force to make one team lower itself depending onthe situation and weight of the conflict even though there will beprivate resistance. Here I will be forced to side with the team thatlooks more powerful and which feels more superior. The weak team willbe forced to accept defeat and that way the conflict will be solved(Dyer et-al., 2013).


Dyer, W. G., Jr., Dyer, J. H., &amp Dyer, W. G. (2013). Teambuilding: Proven strategies for improving team performance (5thed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass