[From Stefan Balke (04.02.01)]
In the original rubber band task it is easy to see that the idea of just
pulling harder leads to broken rubber bands in a few minutes or seconds.
That´s the reason why people who don`t want to break the rubber bands
stop pulling stronger and stronger and start talking with the other person
about the problem of breaking the rubber bands.
In everyday conflict situations it is mostly not so easy to see that the
object of desire will be serioulsly damaged and/or it is not so easy to see
which party is responsible for this unintended side-effect. So I think about
a rubber band task that comes closer to the everyday situation. What do you
think about a game like this (the numbers are arbitrary):
1.) Every person has to pay 5$. This are 10$ together.
2.) The person who is able to win at least 3 of 5 rounds gets this 10$.
3.) To become the winner of a single game it is necessary to pull the knot
over the target dot x1 or x2.
p1 ----------------------------O---------------------------------- p2
4.) If the own rubber band breaks or if the knot is over the other persons
dot the round is lost. If the knot is of the own target dot, the game is
5.) After each round it is possible to make a compromise in the sense to
stop the game and take back the 5$. To make a compromise it is necessary
that _both_ persons agree. It is also possible to make an agreement like: we
stop now and I get 7$, the rest is for you.
5.) There are 10 rubber bands. The rubber bands are of the same size, but of
different age. The older ones are less stabel. The distribution of the bands
is random. It is impossible to see the age of the rubber bands. 2 of 10
rubber bands are old ones.
6.) The target dots x1 and/or x2 move itself.