Imagine, one afternoon, by some magical coincidence you find yourself in a room where a number of ‘players’ are gathered around a world map, playing Risk. What’s unusual about this game is that the players are not ordinary people like me and you. They are in fact the heads of states of some of the most influential countries in the world and they have gathered together in the UN to ‘play it out’, over a Risk game.

Imagine the new president of USA, Barak Obama, is in charge of the US player while other corresponding heads of states are present as shown below.

Europe	USA	South America	Middle East	China	Japan	Africa

(Rules: using escalating cards and connected fortifications)

You are an excited observer and can’t wait to see what happens next and how it will all play out especially since a new person is now in charge of one of the most powerful continents.

Words can be quite powerful and have profound effect on the audience. The correct use of words can make your life a lot easier. Usually, it comes down to the tone of your argument and the incentives it provides.

To illustrate this point further, a series of scenarios are provided in this article. In each scenario a concept is stated in two different ways. One way is much more efficient than the other. The difference between the statements can show you the subtlety of choosing words and the consequences of using the wrong ones at the wrong time.

You made all the right moves in a Risk game. You set yourself next to the most ideal continents. You created conflicts between other players and watched them as they fought each other. You thought only in a few turns you will collect enough armies for your large continent that you will emerge as a new world power. Suddenly, out of no where, a new player started to invade one player after another and got more and more powerful every turn. He conquered one player a turn until your turn was up. He eliminated you and went on to win the game! Sound familiar? This is commonly known as ‘the chain effect’.

A series of elimination moves by a Risk player can lead him to victory much easier than collecting armies for continents or staying in isolation for a long period of time. You need to make sure that you are not caught up in this, while at the same time, know when to take advantage of it when the opportunity comes.

As you may know, learning by example is perhaps one of the best ways to learn new techniques. This walkthrough shows you ' the chain effect’. The Risk game presented here was played between 6 players starting from random locations.

The primary nature of any strategy, whether it is military campaign, business, marketing or games, is the relationship between ends, ways, and means. Here, ‘ends’ is the objective, such as global conquest, maximising market share, neutralising a crisis, etc; ‘ways’ is the form through which a strategy is pursued, such as a military campaign, diplomacy, or economic sanctions; and ‘means’ is the resources available such as armies, weapons, international influence and money. It is critical to make sure that the relationship between ends, ways and means is fully understood and thought out. It must be logical, practical, and clearly established from the outset. If this relationship is vague, the entire campaign is seriously flawed and you might be at risk.

Negotiation is one of the most important skills that one may need to use to resolve different types of conflicts. Negotiation is applicable to everyone as you should know the tricks of the trade if you want to succeed. The ability to negitiate effectivly in Risk game is also critical.

What I have found, as probably the most important element, is the concept of BATNA (Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement). Basically, you always need to have something, so that you can walk away from a deal. By having an alternative, you will feel stronger psychologically. People can see this confidence and will act accordingly in a negotiation. In contrast, if you think you don't have an alternative, you may portray yourself as a desperate negotiator which the other party may easily spot and exploit.

When you are involved in a competition such as a game, would you focus on tactics or strategy? Or would you focus on diplomacy instead? Or maybe a combination of them all. How would you improve your game while playing Risk? Which one do you think is more effective?

In my book, I emphasized greatly on the importance of diplomacy. In fact, it seems that a lot is driven by this concept. In this article, I provide an example in the space industry and show you how far diplomacy can take you.