1. In Part A of the case, is Peter Smith micromanaging Keith Schmidt or simply fulfilling his responsibilities? Justify your answer with evidence.
2. In Part A of the case, what type of conflict are Peter Smith and Keith Schmidt experiencing?
3. In situations like Part A of the case, what can an organization do structurally to reduce conflict resulting from role ambiguity?
4. Who is at fault in the conflict between Peter Smith and Keith Schmidt? What specific behaviors could each of them have done to reduce the conflict? Cite two behaviors each of them could have engaged in to reduce the conflict.
5. In Part B of the case, should Fischer involve the board in further discussions leading to a decision about whether or not to file a lawsuit? Alternatively, should she formulate a recommendation on her own for the board's next meeting?
6. In Part B of the case, do you think the museum should sue the Smiths? Why or why not?