The Conflict Indexes give an early warning about the issues that will become decisive for business, for government and for political parties.

The Conflict Indexes reinforce other research as they provide the early warning. For example, Radnor advised clients in February 2006 that the war in Iraq would be the major issue hurting Republican candidates in the 2006-08 elections. The reason: Iraq was becoming another Hurricane Katrina. The president had demonstrated his incompetence in dealing with Katrina. People were ready to doubt his judgment and leadership in Iraq.

The European Conflict Index has allowed Radnor to be surprisingly accurate in predicting changes of government in Europe. Radnor advised clients that France would elect Nicolas Sarkozy, that Sweden would turn out the Social Democrats, that Germany was likely to have a Grand Coalition - all months (and years) before the voters went to the polls. We advised clients that certain issues could lead to an earlier-than-expected election in Germany.

The American Conflict Index provided information about which candidates for U.S. president had the best chance to win the nominations, based on their record and positions on the key issues in those states that are most important to the nominating process. We were among the first to predict Hillary Clinton's troubles and to explain why she fell behind Barack Obama.

As the John McCain campaign ran out of money and collapsed in the Spring of 2007, we predicted that McCain would be back.

The theory behind both Indexes is that as the gap between the attitudes of the decision-makers in a country and the everyday people widens, the chances that the government will fail or change increases. For our purposes, decision-makers are defined as leaders in government and political affairs, the media, academia and business. The people are everyone else who can vote in the next election.

The first challenge is to understand which attitudes are important indicators of a gap and which are of lesser consequence. The second challenge is to analyze the significant gap-causing attitudes to determine whether and when they will lead to action that may produce change. Another challenge is to confirm our conclusions with additional research.

For information about applying the Conflict Indexes to your decision-making, please contact Ken Feltman here.

Conflict Indexes: Early Warnings
Radnor
Decision-making analysis for leaders.
Radnor Conflict Index

The best preparation usually prevails.

The Conflict Index predicts that Macron will win the French presidency by about 20 percentage points. The unknown factor is whether disenchanted voters will vote or stay home.
The Conflict Index predicted that the 2016 U.S. election would be a nail biter.

"The Clinton campaign is surprising weak in a few key states such as Ohio, Michigan and Pennsylvania. Clinton seems to be relying on organized labor to get her vote out - but many labor union members will not be voting for Clinton (if they vote at all). Clinton continues to hold a narrow lead in the projected popular vote - but that is narrowing. It is possible that Clinton could lose the Electoral College but win the popular vote. That would mean that Trump would become a president without a mandate."