Metrics of Learning. The Kirkpatrick evaluation methodology describes four levels of evaluation for training programs: Level 1 Reaction, Level 2 Learning, Level 3 Behavior, and Level 4 Results.9 In the leadership laboratory, participants worked together for 10 months and had three face-to-face workshops complemented by a series of webinars and individual coaching. Changes in knowledge and attitudes were tracked, as well as changes in negotiation behavior. The second laboratory demonstrated collaborative action through group exercises and individual self-assessment tools. Following this, there was a marked increase in collaborative approaches deployed during the third laboratory and a decrease in the competitive behavior evident in the second laboratory. One key metric of learning was the participants’ recognition of the sources of social power within the group. The third leadership laboratory provided insight into the similarities and variations in perceptions within and between negotiation groups. The mean scores of the four negotiation groups showed similar perceptions of social power among the groups. When ranking the seven power sources from the most used to the least, the ability to identify and use critical information was the dominant source of power, followed by legitimate, referent, and charismatic power. Among the four negotiation groups, there was little use of threat or buyout, as coercion and reward power were least dominant. This demonstrated a marked reduction in the use of competitive strategies since the second leadership laboratory held 5 months earlier. Further, it signaled a change in practice among the participants. During the second leadership laboratory, an exercise to test the level of cooperative or competitive behavior showed participants were highly competitive. This was evident from the results of a structured, forced choice, dyadic bargaining exercise where numerical outcomes measured the tendency to compete or collaborate. During the third leadership laboratory, participants focused more on inquiry and dialogue to gain a deeper appreciation of the other person’s perspective and identify areas for potential collaboration. The manner in which individual personalities played the seven roles in each negotiation group varied (videos of each of the negotiations provide this information). However, while the role-players’ personalities and skills varied in each of the four negotiation groups, there was remarkable similarity in the dominant roles played by the Director of Public Works and the Mayor, the first and second most powerful roles, respectively, among the four groups. The remainder of the roles were assigned a power ranking as follows: third truck owner, fourth the director of Women Advancing Through Education and Research, fifth city engineer, sixth city treasurer, and seventh Director of Community Action. Perhaps the greatest insight into social power comes from each role-player being able to assess their own power role in relation to the other six roleplayers according to how they perceived the social power exhibited by each. Of the 26 role-players for which we have the data, 18 (69%) perceived their own power to be greater than it was perceived by the group as a whole. Only six (23%) perceived their power to be less than perceived by others. There were two role-players whose self-assessment matched the other negotiators’ perception of their roles. Generally, among the four negotiating groups, those who had an inflated perception of their power relative to the group’s perception did so by a margin 33% greater than those who had a lesser view of their power. There were two main conclusions from the negotiation experience and role-plays that were pivotal to the experience during the third laboratory. The final evaluation described how skills were progressively strengthened through the various phases of work by participants. The learning activities stimulated a heightened awareness and curiosity regarding the skill-building necessary to increase their proficiency as leaders negotiating strategic change. For many, the role-play and negotiation experience were a high point of the third laboratory.