Mind Mapping

Challenge: Describe your challenge, including all relevant information.

One of the challenges in Conflict Solution is work in the best way to have strong agreements but  the works take too much time to build de profiles and one mapping of relation. In that way in  most of the cases we cannot process all the information and we started the negotiations and, in  some moments:

➢ Difficult communication with the other team  ➢ Socialization and explore alternatives in base of limit investigation  ➢ Difficulties to work with another teams  ➢ Establish the real situation  ➢ Limits process of conflict management   ➢ Limits in tools of conflict management  ➢ Identify clearly all the actors of the problem

Selection: In your own words, briefly describe the tool you selected (e.g., what it is and why  you selected it for your challenge -- including any appropriate video lecture references).

Mind mapping is a design tool according of the context and situation that we need generating  insights from exploration activities and using those to create design criteria. I choose that tool  for three reasons. First, they can integrate in build criteria according of the steps of the conflict  search information, identify scenarios, analyses the human development, the actors to finally  use the appropriate strategy inside of the problem. Second it helps us to analyze the risks and  opportunities and le levels of influence in the negotiation. Third evaluated the options and limits  of offers that can we accept.

Application: Describe how you applied the tool you selected to your challenge (e.g., what you  did and how the tool was applied effectively or ineffectively).

When we discuss about the tool not all the people accepted, and the principle argument was  the resistance to change. For a month, the tool was ineffective in areas to analyses the risks,  offers and opportunities and some of the people consider go back for last practices. Later of that  moment we discuss for the results and fortunate we discovery the mistake and finally we  correctly apply the tool and our work. In my experience it is an excellent tool, but the key is  determined of all the process which parts a sensible to changes because our mistake was that.

Insight: Describe the insight you gained from applying the tool you selected to your challenge  (e.g., how an insight affected your thinking about the challenge and about design thinking  more broadly).

Applying the tool was an interest, the insight that we learned in the office was stablish new  requirements to escape of the comfortable are for example our brain need to push for explore  alternatives, in simple words be creative, dynamic and open mind for new tools in that way we  works with actives outside and it was helpful because our work increase. We have a lot of new  customers of course the work to changed the perspective for some people in the office and  additional mistakes gives the chance to explore details but in the end it works take time but  works a lot of.

Approach: Describe what you might do differently next time -- applying the same tool you  selected or a different one -- and the reason(s) why.

Honestly it is not to much that we need to consider, all the tools that we see in the course and  in the books can works correctly in a company If we adapt the process and which one is the best  option the key to know that it will works in our team was have a diagnostic an latter works in  the details to have a solid process according of the challenge that we have but in a personal  opinion people can push you to explore another tools to work our case was perfect and the  principal reason the time that we spend building the dynamic inside the office.

