CONCLUSIONS

Why train conflict managers in international negotiation? Because training makes a dif­ference (Fisher 1997, 471-486). Some will use their new skills to be more effective in managing the crisis through negotiation processes.

What can be said about the present situation in the field of conflict resolution and negotiation training? First of all, the old observation that practitioners should help researchers to understand negotiation processes while researchers should feed trainers with new insights is still valid but also unrealistic. The three categories do not seriously overlap, though there are exceptions, like the German ambassador to Uganda who is a trainer of German diplomats at the same time (Muhlen 2005). A flow between the categories is still absent and this hampers effective training of ‘conflict resolvers’, though efforts have recently been made to integrate resource persons in training seminars in a novel way. The laboratory will then be constructed around the practitioners who will be tied to strict rules to make them as student-relevant as possible (Ibbotson Groth and Glevoll 2007). Furthermore, continental Europe is still lagging behind the USA and the UK in elevating the discipline of negotiation processes to an academic level.

How can trainers best train their trainees? Is there any advice on training modes and tools? Although training is becoming more and more ‘en vogue’ and trainers are increasingly seen as important contributors to the enhancement of conflict management and negotiation skills, really effective train- the-trainers’ facilities are relatively scarce. Trainees have more chances to experience laboratory situations, but ministries are still quite hesitant of prioritizing on training. To the contrary, companies are much more willing to invest in this development in human resources. Negotiation is still often seen as something one can learn by doing, notwithstanding the fact that mistakes can have devastating effects. Training tools are still relatively scarce in public-sector training that still has to borrow from the private sector. Academic publications providing tools are nearly non-existent. But progress is made and methods for evaluating exercises and simulations are being developed (Torney- Purta 1998, 77-97).

Where do we find the tools we need to train our trainees? Slowly but surely research findings can be used to upgrade training tools (Druckman and Robinson 1998, 7-38). This last chapter of the Sage Handbook on Conflict Resolution provides the reader with three types of exercises that can be used in training conflict managers through international negotiation processes. The given exercises are put in rank order from bilateral through minilateral to multilateral, according to growing complexity. These exercises and simulations, developed by the Clingendael Institute in The Hague, have been tested in over 80 countries around the world. It is up to the trainer or teacher to use them in the way he/she sees fit. It is up to her or him to use these games as a basis for other games or to create variants suitable for the context they are needed in. Prescriptions to trainers and teachers don't work, as they do not work for participants and trainees either. Experiencing the process and adapting to it is the key to effectiveness.