THE ADVERSARIAL METHOD SETS UP DIFFERENT (ANTITHETICAL) AND CHALLENGING VIEWS (DEFINITIONS, POLICIES) OF A PROBLEM SITUATION SO THAT FACTORS, TAKEN FOR GRANTED BY ONE VIEW AS BASIC AND REASONABLE ASSUMPTION ARE CHALLENGED IN THE OTHER. THE INTENT IS TO ASSIST THE DECISIONMAKER IN UNDERSTANDING THE CRITICAL ROLE THAT THE POSTULATION OF DIFFERENT ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT THE PROBLEM PLAYS IN ITS BASIC DEFINITION AND ITS ULTIMATE DISPOSITION. THE INTENT IS TO ALLOW THE MANAGER TO CONVERT A PROBLEMATIC SITUATION INTO AN OPPORTUNITY. THREE BASIC STEPS CONSTITUTE THE METHOLOGY: (1) GROUP FORMATION, (2) ASSUMPTION SURFACING, AND (3) DIALECTICAL DEBATE BETWEEN GROUP POLICIES AND SYNTHESIS. THE FIRST STEP CONSISTS OF BRINGING TOGETHER AS MANY INDIVIDUALS AS POSSIBLE WHO HAVE A POTENTIAL BEARING ON THE DEFINITION OF THE PROPOSED SOLUTION AND HAVE DIFFERENT DEFINITIONS OF THE PROBLEM. THE ASSUMPTION SURFACING (OR SPECIFICATION PROCESS) IS A SET OF TECHNIQUES FOR HELPING DECISIONMAKERS UNCOVER AND ANALYZE THE CRITICAL KEY ASSUMPTIONS UPON WHICH THEIR POLICIES REST. THE PURPOSE OF THE DIALECTICAL DEBATE IS TO SHOW BOTH PARTIES THAT THERE ARE DIFFERENT WAYS OF VIEWING THE SITUATION AND THAT WHAT EACH TAKES AS A SET OF NATURAL ASSUMPTION, THE OTHER TAKES AS A SET OFF UNWARRANTED ASSUMPTIONS. THE MOST DIFFICULT PART OF THE METHODOLOGY IS THAT OF ACHIEVING COMPROMISE BETWEEN ASSUMPTIONS AND COMING UP WITH A NEW, SYNTHETIC SET OF ASSUMPTIONS THAT BRIDGE THE OLD POLICIES AND GO BEYOND THEM. AN ASSUMPTION-NEGOTIATION PROCEDURE MUST BE WORKED OUT FOR ACHIEVED SYNTHESIS. NOTES AND A LIST OF REFERENCES ARE PROVIDED. (MJW)