approach recognizes that there are many sources of social power. Therefore, negotiation is not a zero-sum game, where if someone wins, another person loses. Rather, the negotiation process is creative—discovering hidden interests of individual stakeholders while recognizing underlying common interests. Third, actors interact at different levels. A negotiation can take place between individuals, individuals and groups, or organizations. An understanding of stakeholder motivations, attitudes, and perceptions embedded in social norms and political economy is essential to the framework. When these stakeholder motivations lead to behaviors that undermine the public good, reformers within government, the private sector, and civil society must work together to champion change. These interventions succeed when those affected recognize that the benefits of change outweigh the costs of adopting new attitudes and behaviors. Stakeholders are analyzed at a lower, actor-centric level. Actors and their behaviors are analyzed in the context of a specific situation. Combining these two disciplines—strategic communication and negotiation—deepens the change agent’s understanding of the motivations of actors and/or stakeholders. It helps them to cocreate options that can lead to agreement. The inevitable conflict among stakeholders is considered normal, positive, and constructive. This contrasts with traditional approaches where conflict is considered to be negative. Thus, in workshops on the framework “Negotiating Strategic Change” negotiation techniques focus on practical steps to manage conflict. Conflict management and negotiation skills are critical to reform in developing countries. Here, there is room for practices and methodologies to evolve to develop the capacity of change agents from government, civil society, and the private sector to address conflict. Engaging multiple stakeholders with different perspectives on reform is an iterative process. It utilizes information gained to determine the next steps (see Figure). The process focuses on the stakeholder’s perspective rather than that of the reformer. First, define stakeholders and their positions on reform (whether they are for, against, or neutral). Then, probe for underlying reasons. Investigate the person’s interests, going beyond their stated position on reform. Analyze relevant political economy issues to determine whether the behavior of an individual or group is incentivized by the status quo. Assess the relative power of an individual or group to influence the reform process, whether positively or negatively. Observe, when feasible, or investigate using key informants, the social network of key influencers—who talks to whom and who can influence whom. Adaptive leadership capacity may surface and some influencers may be willing to take action to address a given problem and mobilize people to support change.