1. Did the Head of School, faculty budget committee, and board of trustees agree on appropriate decision criteria and negotiating process before debating the merits of specific projects? Why or why not?
2. Would agreeing to decision criteria and negotiating processes before discussing the merits of specific projects have been helpful to coming to an "acceptable" agreement? Why or why not?
3. What is negotiable in this role play? Was the domain (i.e., what is negotiable) of the negotiation expanded during negotiations (i.e., were more items added to the bargaining mix)? Did or would such an expansion have helped come to an "acceptable" agreement?
4. What sources of power does each group have (i.e., Head of School, faculty budget committee, and board of trustees) (see pps. 180-193 Lewicki et al.)?
5. Which group, if any, has the greatest amount of power and what impact, if any, did that have on the outcome?
6. What techniques, if any, were used by any of the groups to establish a more integrative (win-win) solution? Was an integrative solution achieved? Why or why not? Was an integrative solution preferable? Why or why not?