Whereas previous chapters have focused on networks as conduits through which important resources and influences flow, this chapter provides a more in-depth account of the positional approach to networks. In doing so, we move away from conceptualizing social structures as more or less cohesive and integrated groups, cliques, communities, etc., toward a view of social structures as comprised of role structures. To use the baseball analogy, in moving toward a more positional view of networks, we shift from seeing teams as interacting individual players with relations with one another to seeing players as enacting the game through an interrelated set of positions on the field that come with role expectations. Thus, as depicted in our view of social structure in Figure 2.3, we begin to move upward and to the right – that is, toward higher levels of structure and greater levels of conceptual abstraction. Doing so requires a different set of methods, which we introduce in this chapter.

Chapter 8, The Individual Human Being as a Category – A Conclusion and an Outlook, returns to theory. To this end, the chapter weaves together the results of the case studies and the theoretical and methodological considerations. The chapter, serving as a conclusion to the book, simultaneously summarises the book, revisits the issue of interdisciplinarity, and presents its results. It also discusses the book’s contribution and value added. Most importantly, it demonstrates how the results of the empirical case studies are relevant for IR theory and what implications for IR theory, IL scholarship, and the study of global politics can be derived from these results. Finally, the chapter outlines future research based on the book’s results.

Chapter 2 – Humanisation in IR Theory and International Law – critically reviews the relevant IR and IL literature. The objective of this chapter is to identify gaps, strengths, and weaknesses of several approaches in both disciplines concerning the book’s objective, arguments, and research questions. In addition, it provides an answer to whether alternative approaches to the chosen framework provide a viable pathway to conceptualise the humanisation of global politics. Regarding alternatives approaches in IR, I discuss realist and liberal approaches, the literature on human rights and human security, and literature dealing with concepts such as self, identity, and agency. Regarding IL, I discuss, for similar reasons, the notion of mediation and how the individual human being, the international community, and the state relate to each other. And I offer a discussion of international law and the individual human being.

Chapter 5 – Heuristics and Positions: A Framework for Analysing Discourses of Humanisation – discusses what is necessary from a methodological perspective to analyse the appearance of the individual human being in global politics. To this end, the chapter develops an interpretative methodology and presents in more detail the abductive research logic and the method employed in the case studies. The book draws on positioning analysis and introduces it to thetoolbox of IR scholars. The chapter also outlines the research design and its operationalisation for the case studies. The analytical framework allows overcoming methodological individualism by studying the appearance of the individual human being in global politics instead of studying individual human beings. In doing so, the individual human being is made analytically accessible for scholars of global politics.

In Chapter 3 – The Social Construction of the Individual Human Being – A Conceptual and a Theoretical Framework – I develop and employ a conceptual and theoretical framework based on feminist and critical constructivist IR approaches and approaches from International Law. To this end, the chapter brings together building blocks drawn from these approaches: gender and body, norms and language, participants and positions, rights and duties, and human rights. The chapter demonstrates the advancement the framework makes possible. Furthermore, it provides evidence for the value each of the approaches and concepts adds to the frameworks and the analysis.

Most writers on negotiation (e.g. Cohen 2003; Fisher & Ertel 1995; Lax & Sebenius 2006; Thompson 2005) and most practitioners will acknowledge that good preparation leads to improved negotiation. However, there is little research specifically into how negotiators actually prepare. In one major commercial negotiation (the Tanker Refit case, examined more closely in Chapter 4), one of the parties invested a lot of time in collecting information to try to fully understand the situation they were negotiating about. In another major negotiation (the Telco JV case – see Chapter 12) the negotiators found themselves spending about two hours in preparation for each hour of meeting with the other party. On the other hand a team negotiating a major infrastructure contract spent very little preparation time together prior to their meeting with the potential customer (Lindholst 2015). What the negotiation literature does offer are preparation checklists that give some structure to a negotiator’s preparation (for examples, see Fisher & Ertel 1995; Fleming & Hawes 2017; Lewicki, Barry & Saunders 2015; Thompson 2005). These checklists vary in their advice, but they commonly include the need to set goals for the negotiation, as goals are believed to be an inherent aspect of planning (Futrell 2011; Wilson & Putnam 1990) and central to negotiation success.