Partisan analysis recognizes that competing interests and conflicts are natural and unavoidable in any significant government action. Any new project requires careful attention to the partisan or political nature of the process.

An inexact science. Partisan analysis use a number of different approaches and ways of thinking about interactions. Like many of the tools presented here, a partisan analysis is more a craft than an exact science. However, some basic questions can guide the analysis.

Way to determine wants and needs of participants. Partisan analysis includes finding out what participants want in general, or what they stand to gain or lose.

Method for understanding a wide range of issues. Partisan compromises often involve negotiation over a wide range of issues that may be unrelated to the immediate concern. In legislatures, this is referred to as logrolling. It is also important to understand both individual and organizational interests and desires. Those who speak for a group or organization do not necessarily share all the group's desires and objectives.

Framework for identifying key relationships. Projects typically involve parties with existing relationships and histories. It is important to know who are friends and enemies, where natural alliances and rivalries exist or may form, and what kinds of coalitions are possible or desirable. Consider where trust has developed or been betrayed and where old friendships or wounds will shape current perspectives and actions. These issues are often critical to forming the coalitions necessary to move forward.

An activity to find out who has power. A partisan analysis considers what power resources the parties bring to the table. These include: official status or authority; ability to punish or reward other participants; special expertise, status, skills, or reputation; and access to information. It's useful to know participants' preferences for different kinds of power and how they have acted in the past.

Way to analyze rules of the game. Effective strategies for managing projects depend on knowing what kinds of actions are acceptable and what tactics are the most successful in your organizational and political culture. These include preferred styles of negotiation or influencing others, limits or penalties for actions, and understanding the importance of signals and symbols of play.

Wild cards. Uncertainty plays a part in any environment. One major element of uncertainty is whether any outside actor or force will affect your plans. Partisan analysis often involves scanning the environment for possible external factors that may become involved. This scanning can also include analysis of the risks and probabilities of these kinds of events and the potential range of impacts.

Planning. Use partisan analysis to plan how to present your ideas (and your business case) to participants and outside audiences, and what to emphasize as your main selling points. You can also use it to decide the timing and format of presentations, what groups to make them to, and when.

Collaborating. This approach is an effective planning strategy for forming collaborations and work groups.

Strategizing. Use partisan analysis to develop a strategy for making potentially controversial decisions and for mobilizing support among participants and stakeholders.

Quality, amount of available information. The value of your partisan analysis depends in large part on the quality and amount of information available about the people and groups involved in your project. In most environments, people tend not to announce their true objectives and strategies. In fact, there can be substantial incentives to mask or deliberately misrepresent their true goals and interests. Judgments based on inferences about other people's goals and interests should be evaluated and tested against actions and other evidence.

Lack of definitive answers. Assessing the goals and interests of others involves a lot of uncertainty. There may be discord among groups about their goals and interests. It is often difficult to evaluate the accuracy and stability of statements and actions expressed by all groups involved in the project.

No history. Historical information may be an effective basis for judgment. However, iIn new initiatives, histories may be absent. Information about past actions and events may be unavailable, unreliable, inconsistent, or badly distorted by selective memory or interpretation.