When I was younger, I was part of the youth wing of a political party. Back then, I didn’t really understand the complexity of negotiations or the hidden agendas that often influenced decisions. I just believed in working hard and making things happen for the party. One particular experience, however, changed my perspective on how things work behind the scenes, and it’s a lesson I wish I had learned sooner.
It was a big year for us. We had a major congress coming up, a crucial event not just for the youth wing, but for the entire party. The goal was to align the interests of the younger members with those of the adults in the party. A lot of preparation went into the event—many meetings, late-night discussions, and endless debates about the future of the party. But what seemed like a clear objective turned into a complicated mess.
There were hidden interests, whispers in the corridors, and subtle power struggles. We were supposed to bring fresh ideas and energy to the congress, but every decision seemed to be met with resistance. The youth wing had its vision, but as the meetings dragged on, it became clear that the adults in the party had other plans. Eventually, the congress failed to deliver the results we had hoped for, and the responsibility was handed back to the adults. In hindsight, that might have been their plan all along.
At the time, I didn’t realize what was happening. I was too focused on the work in front of me to see the larger dynamics at play. But as I look back on that experience now, I can see where things went wrong. We lacked a proper strategy. We weren’t prepared for the complexity of negotiation, especially in an environment where people had their own hidden agendas. If I had known then what I know now, we could have taken a different approach. Specifically, we should have followed a structured process like the CLEAR framework.
CLEAR stands for Communicate, Listen, Evaluate, Act, and Reflect, and it provides a roadmap for successful negotiation and collaboration.
We didn’t communicate as effectively as we could have. Instead of having clear, open discussions about what we wanted, we often got lost in debates and arguments. A clearer communication strategy would have helped avoid misunderstandings and made our intentions more obvious.
One of the biggest mistakes we made was not truly listening to each other. While we were eager to present our ideas, we weren’t as open to understanding the perspectives of the adults in the party. If we had actively listened, we might have picked up on their concerns and adjusted our approach accordingly.
As the meetings progressed, we failed to evaluate the changing situation. We kept pushing forward with our original plan, even though it became clear that things were shifting. A constant evaluation of the dynamics would have allowed us to adjust our strategy.
We didn’t act decisively enough. By the time we realized that the congress wasn’t going the way we wanted, it was too late to change course. We should have taken strategic actions earlier in the process to steer things in our favor.
After the congress, there wasn’t much reflection on what went wrong. If we had taken the time to reflect on our mistakes, we could have learned valuable lessons for the future. Reflecting on past experiences is key to improving future negotiations and decision-making processes.
Looking back, I wish we had followed the CLEAR framework. It would have helped us navigate the complex environment of political negotiations more effectively. It’s a lesson I’ve carried with me since then, and it’s one I try to apply in all areas of my life, whether in business, personal relationships, or any situation where collaboration and negotiation are required.
If you’re facing a difficult negotiation or trying to work through a complex problem with others, remember to keep things CLEAR. It might just make all the difference.