This paper contains a partial report on an empirical study to assess the utility of Gross' theory of role conflict resolution in predicting role choice by administrators who become involved in formal collective negotiations for the first time. Some relationships between role choice and selected situational variables are also examined. The study findings conclude that (1) the Gross theory provides a useful framework for examining internal and external environmental factors, (2) the administrator role in negotiations will increasingly identify with board expectations as older and more experienced incumbents retire or seek other responsibilities, and (3) role ambivalence characterizes study subjects. In essence, role performance is consistent with an emerging "managerial" concept of school administration, but role preference is identified with the more traditionally oriented "instructional leader" image of the administrator. (Figure 1 on page 18 may reproduce poorly because of marginal legibility.) (Author/JF)