The exchange/negotiation section underscores that negotiation is a skill that can be acquired, and individuals with lower proficiency in this skill are likely to face a considerable disadvantage in any negotiation scenario. This holds true not only in integrative negotiations but also in advocacy efforts that rely on force-based strategies. Effective advocacy necessitates a comprehensive understanding of available options, the mechanics of various strategies, optimal approaches for different circumstances, required resources, and how to acquire and utilize them efficiently. This knowledge is typically gained through experience, and without it, parties navigating a challenging conflict for the first time are prone to a significant disadvantage.

In light of this, the Burgesses propose the establishment and utilization of a role termed an advocacy advisor. This individual would be well-versed in all forms of advocacy and conflict resolution, assisting disputants in formulating and executing a tailored strategy. While individuals in the United States may play roles resembling advocacy advisors—such as political strategists providing guidance on political means, lawyers offering advice on navigating the justice system, or community organizers aiding in raising awareness and fostering collaboration in advocacy efforts—few possess a broad understanding of various confrontation strategies that blend integrative, exchange, and threat power into an optimal “power strategy mix.”

Although one cannot currently seek out someone officially titled as an advocacy advisor, the suggestion is to identify individuals or groups with extensive knowledge and experience in diverse conflict resolution approaches. Engaging such individuals can significantly contribute to the conflict framing, scoping, and strategizing processes, enabling parties to devise and implement a strategy more likely to succeed compared to attempting to develop an approach without such assistance.