| Landscape architects frequently deal with conflicting interest groups, all seeking an active voice in design decision-making. Projects may take years to complete as contending parties delay construction. This study examines a negotiating strategy to determine whether a more efficent process exists for resolving conflict in design projects.;A comparison of the case study with the major phases of the model reveal an incomplete match chiefly due to the mediator's lack of neutrality and the opposition's lack of unity and knowledge in negotiating conflict. The results of this study, however, still show that analytic principles in the Harvard model can apply to a variety of controversial cases handled by design firms.;A generic model for dispute resolution, developed at Harvard University, was applied to a typical design project, a proposed development for condominiums. Efforts by the developer to alter area zoning regulations created a strong protest from the surrounding neighborhood. |
