This physical table would provide an interactive surface, around which different stakeholders in a dispute could gather.
They each could individually play out scenarios based on various variables, and together as a group, they could see what (predicted) outcomes would result.
The stakeholders would see how their counterparts value different variables, and can have new means of finding compromises or new ideas for resolving a dispute.
The table would be able to play out scenarios to show future effects of a current decision the stakeholders could take.
It would be valuable in how it:
- focuses the competing stakeholders on a shared experience
- lets one stakeholder see the views & interests of others clearly, on a neutral surface
- lets them all play with what different choices will result in — giving them shared understandings
- builds a more collaborative workspace, makes a negotiating table less about arguments back & forth, more about solving a shared puzzle
This is echoed in Lauritsen’s recent article about Decision Spaces: http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/symposium/articles/Lauritsen-DecisionSpace.pdf