ARACRUZ Simulation

1) What did I learn from the Simulation?

For the most part, it was easy going into the simulation knowing what my group (FUNAI) wanted. I assumed that FUNAI, being interested in helping the natives (even though it was a government branch) would be aligned with FUNAI. I found this to be inaccurate. The indigenous people wanted MUCH MORE than what FUNAI would have been happy with. Every group was a little "selfish" in this sense. Although my classmates were generous, I feel like in the real-life situation, however respectful representatives could be, the main interest of the larger groups were slightly selfish. Each group would find reason within their requests, but in the end, everyone wanted something different--even groups that were seemingly on the same side! The most difficult group was probably that of the "Community"--they were the ones who probably had the best interests of all parties involved the best outlined, but nobody would cede to what they asked because we all had our minds made up (not the individuals, but the groups of the simulation).

2) What helped our group to be effective?

We listened to everybody, and made sure everybody spoke their piece. Everybody was respectful; nobody spoke out of turn, and we did really listen. I find that in situations that could prove confrontational or lead to conflict, staying calm and really listening--we were given two ears and one mouth and should therefore use them thus proportionately--helps a lot. Our communication was open; at the end of it all, we were aware of what each group wanted. According to our sheets, however, we could only give away so much. If the agreements were made between those of us involved (classmates, not "characters") then I believe an agreement (true agreement) could have been reached. Unfortunately, as it were, we were left with very little room to negotiate.

3) In what ways was your group ineffective?

We realized toward the end that everybody was bringing their own agenda to the table. The only way to really reach an agreement was to compromise. Unfortunately, what did compromising entail? Nobody would walk away with anything, really. The sad truth is that, in order to satisfy everyone equally--people would have to re-draw what their goals were. All the players in the simulation--but in their real-life situation with the real-life counterparts--would have to find a way to be happy with what they got, but also to be willing to give up some things they might have really wanted. Aracruz already felt they were doing a lot, giving a lot--but the groups interested in helping the indigenous (especially the indigenous groups) felt they could do more. In general, people representing BRAZIL and BRAZIL's interests found both sides to not be very giving (knowing their goals and that they are not willing to budge). This leads to an "agree to disagree" result, and nothing gets accomplished. 

Instead of "compromise" (which in itself sometimes has negative connotations), the parties involved should find a different way to settle things--give a little to get a little.