Sample Press Release Mouse Negotiation 11-12

SAMPLE PRESS RELEASE

EUROMOUSE COMPANY AND THE FRENCH GOVERNMENT RESPOND TO THE COMMUNITY MAYORS

Two representatives of the EuroMouse Company and 2 of the Government met today with community members to discuss the needs of the current residents of Bailly, Coupvray, Magny, Chessy with respects to the ongoing construction of a new attraction park in the region of Marne-La-Vallée.

Mary, representative and general counsel of the EuroMouse Company, called the meeting “constructive” and praise the mayors for their articulate and well-prepared participation. “the mayors had some considerable concerns, and the EuroMouse Company is committed to doing whatever we reasonably can to respond to those concerns and to help us work together with these mayors to maintain and improve the EuroMouse project.

EuroMouse company is strongly committed to safety in all its projects and is happy to respond to several of the suggestions of the mayors of the 4 communities in that regard. We will be working with the mayors to increasing the development of their community without affecting the life of their residents while the construction continues. For example, additional consultant from Mouse to deal with administrative problem is one specific request that we will be acting on immediately.

EuroMouse and the mayors also worked out a system of regular consultation to insure that the communities had adequate input and information about the project as it progresses.

Mouse Negotiation - 11/12/17

Mouse Négociation

A few months ago, Mouse, the world largest entertainment conglomerate and the French government signed a Master Agreement to create the EuroMouse development in Marne La Vallée. The agreement was controversial and had a very bad impact on the communities surrounding by the project. In this negotiation, the four mayors of Chessy, Bailly, Coupvray and Magny were discussing with 2 representatives of the government and 2 representatives of the company Mouse to find an agreement on the damage they are suffering from the construction. During this negotiation, I was the mayor of Bailly and my main concerns were find a solution for the administrative nightmare created by the construction, the bad impact on the life conditions of my residents and reach an amount for a financial compensation in the form of annual payment. In alliance with the 3 other mayors we also had concerns about the overwhelming volume of permit requests, the need of a community planner to deal effectively with the enormous changes resulting from the EuroMouse project. Before the negotiation, with the 3 other mayors we agree on the amount on the annual payment we want: 3 million.

I was really disappointed of this negotiation because we spend too much time on small issues, we had too much difficulties to make the negotiation go further because none of us was able to take initiatives and my partners were not synchronized. There was a lack of preparation and organization. My counter partners were not that implicated and concentrated during the debate and it was very difficult to find an agreement. To rectify that, we took various breaks to recalculate our positions and what we really want from the government and the company. Sometimes, the other mayors didn’t let me speak and we talk all together at the same time. I was feeling a little bit bad at the end of the negotiation because we had to redefine objectives which were very clear at the beginning and we always had to redirect the debate on the main issues. For me, the main point was the financial compensation and we spent too much time on less interesting point like the values of Mouse. To improve our negotiation, I thought that a speaker for all the group who manage the discussion was necessary. I try to lead the discussion but it was quite hard to be listened. Personally, I saw this debate as a messy negotiation without very constructive arguments and no real plan to follow.

However, at the end we managed to find an agreement in the framework of a win-win negotiation.

These were the various issues we agreed on:

• Agree to hire a community planer employed by the government and extra administrative assistants for each community.
• Help of a French consultant from EuroMouse to manage the construction of the project
• The government will build stronger roads
• Make a press release with good publicity for the project with a financial compensation
• Annual payment during the construction of $2 million and after a 2% annual payment
• The mayors will stop the blocs of the farmers of their communities to let the construction continue.

Reading: Mental errors: How to recognize and avoid them

Mental errors: How to recognize and avoid them

This chapter presents the various mental errors committed by the parties during the negotiation. According to the article, 5 kinds of mental errors can be bringing forward:

The first one is the escalation. This kind of error occur when calm businessman entered in a difficult and competitive negotiation, it is also called “over commitment”. For the authors, there is 3 possible reasons explaining why wise businesspeople make this error:

-       Because negotiator never want to lose a deal especially when it is highly visible; therefore, they are ready to make very unreasonable measures.

-       Within the framework of auctions and bidding contest where people are pit against each other, which encourage irrational behaviour.

-       When businesspeople use the other people’s money to win beyond the point of rationality.

To correct the situation, it is necessary to control the alternatives of the deal before the negotiation keeping in mind that money spend in overpriced deal can be invested in other compromises. Negotiators must be very objective and observational where they are fixing the walk-away price and defined clear breakpoint to stop the negotiation when they have reached the walk-away price. However external factor can affect this price, so negotiators need to be open to recalculate it.

The second one is partisan perceptions defined as a psychological phenomenon that causes people to have different views of the world according to their point of view. To avoid partisan perceptions, negotiator should know how to stand outside a situation by recognizing it, putting themselves in the other side’s position, asking the opinions of their colleagues, posing the problem as it appear to themselves or using a hypothetical situation. They also can reverse the role with the other party.

The third one is irrational expectations. In this scenario, the expectations of one side cannot be meet which remove any zone of possible agreement (ZOPA). To overcome this problem both side may have an educating dialogue where people are listening to the expectations of each, and the negotiator should give more information to increase the reservation price of the opposite party.

The fourth mental error is overconfidence. When businesspeople overestimate their strengths and underestimate those of our rivals they can lose a deal. It can also be related to another mental error called “groupthink”. This error appears when businesspeople are part of a cohesive group thinking around a norm. People are driven by social psychological pressures and reject any opposite views. For the authors groupthink are characterized by an illusion of invulnerability and certitude, people accept only certificated data and alternatives are not taken into account. Any form of external opinion or view is directly denied.

Finally, the last mental error is unchecked emotions. Bad things appear when the businesspeople lose the control of their emotions and that the negotiation start to be running by anger. In that situation, people stop thinking in logical or rational way. The only goal of the deal become damaging the other side, affecting negatively its own interests at the same time. Big injuries occur when negotiator get their feelings out of control. To resolve this situation, a period of reflexion is necessary and an objective moderator can be called to moderate the communication.