Introduction to Negotiation Strategy
At Oak Spring University, we provide corporate level professional Negotiation Strategy and other business case study solution. DISNEYLAND RESORT PARIS: MICKEY GOES TO EUROPE case study is a Harvard Business School (HBR) case study written by Martha Maznevski, Karsten Jonsen. The DISNEYLAND RESORT PARIS: MICKEY GOES TO EUROPE (referred as “Disneyland Resort” from here on) case study provides evaluation & decision scenario in field of Leadership & Managing People. It also touches upon business topics such as - negotiation strategy, negotiation framework, Globalization, Organizational culture.
Negotiation strategy solution for case study DISNEYLAND RESORT PARIS: MICKEY GOES TO EUROPE ” provides a comprehensive framework to analyse all issues at hand and reach a unambiguous negotiated agreement. At Oak Spring University, we provide comprehensive negotiation strategies that have proven their worth both in the academic sphere and corporate world.
What’s my BATNA (Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement) – my walkaway option if the deal fails?
What are my most important interests, in ranked order?
What is the other side’s BATNA, and what are his interests?
The case tracks the story of Disneyland Resort Paris from its opening in 1992 until the end of 2006, illustrating how the resort's managers learned from their initial errors how to take a strong cultural product (the Disney experience) and implement it effectively in a multicultural environment. However, by the end of 2006 the park was still not profitable and the managers were hoping for 2007, the Park's 25th anniversary season, being a turnaround year. The case presents the dilemma of global integration vs local adaptation in a multicultural and culturally-sensitive environment.It draws upon unique insights from some of historic key players as well as the current ones and sets up situations that can be interpreted from different roles in an organization (marketing, operations, senior management, etc.) and some of the issues they faced being the first multi-cultural Disney theme park in the world. Disneyland Resort Paris opened its gates in April 1992 amidst enormous controversy as a bastion of American cultural imperialism in Europe. By 2006 it was the most visited tourist site in Europe with over 12 million annual visitors. In spite of a difficult tourist industry in the early 2000s, Disneyland Resort Paris's attendance remained stable: 60% of its visitors were repeat visitors, and guest satisfaction was extremely high. The operation had created 43,000 jobs, invested more than a??5 billion and contributed to the development of a new region. As the leaders developed their execution plans, they wondered what principles should guide them and how to interpret Disney in multicultural Europe. Guests from different parts of Europe wanted different things from a vacation: how could they keep the classic Disney magic yet successfully appeal to European consumers? After 15 years of switching between French and American leadership, the answers were still not obvious. The leaders agreed that the 2007 celebrations of its 15th anniversary should set the scene for Disney's recognition as a well established experience in the heart of Europe, and a long-term financial success. But what would it look like and what path would take them there? Learning objectives: The case was written to support two teaching objectives; the class can focus on one or both depending on time and instructor objectives. It raises issues that can be dealt with through perspectives of organizational behaviour, general management and marketing. 1. Identifying the complex role of national or ethnic cultures in multinational firms. Disneyland Resorts were "selling" one culture (idealistic American culture) to guests from many cultures, and only started to become successful when they could articulate cultural issues well. 2. Working with the global standardization vs local adaptation tension. Disneyland Resorts could be neither completely standardized nor adapted. Finding an "intermediate" solution is not obvious but is key to managing the Resort for high performance.
By interests, we do not mean the preconceived demands or positions that you or the other party may have, but rather the underlying needs, aims, fears, and concerns that shape what you want. Negotiation is more than getting what you want. It is not winning at all cost. Number of times Win-Win is better option that outright winning or getting what you want.
Options are the solutions you generate that could meet your and your counterpart’s interests . Often people come to negotiations with very fixed ideas and things they want to achieve. This strategy leaves unexplored options which might be even better than the one that one party wanted to achieve. So always try to provide as many options as possible during the negotiation process. The best outcome should be out of many options rather than few options.
When soft bargainers meet hard bargainers there is always the danger of soft bargainers ceding more than what is necessary. To avoid this scenario you should always focus on legitimate standards or expectations. Standards are often external and objective measures to assess the fairness such as rules and regulations, financial values & resources , market prices etc. If the negotiated agreement is going beyond the industry norms or established standards of fairness then it is prudent to get out of the negotiation.
Every negotiators going into the negotiations should always work out the “what if” scenario. The negotiating parties in the “DISNEYLAND RESORT PARIS: MICKEY GOES TO EUROPE” has three to four plausible scenarios. The negotiating protagonist needs to have clear idea of – what will happen if the negotiations fail. To put it in the negotiating literature – BATNA - Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement. If the negotiated agreement is not better than BATNA then there is no point in accepting the negotiated solution.
One of the biggest problems in implementing the negotiated agreements in corporate world is – the ambiguity in the negotiated agreement. Sometimes the negotiated agreements are not realistic or various parties interpret the outcomes based on their understanding of the situation. It is critical to do negotiations as water tight as possible so that there is less scope for ambiguity.
Many negotiators make the mistake of focusing only on the substance of the negotiation (interests, options, standards, and so on). How you communicate about that substance, however, can make all the difference. The language you use and the way that you build understanding, jointly solve problems, and together determine the process of the negotiation with your counterpart make your negotiation more efficient, yield clear agreements that each party understands, and help you build better relationships.
Another critical factor in the success of your negotiation is how you manage your relationship with your counterpart. According to “Martha Maznevski, Karsten Jonsen”, the protagonist may want to establish a new connection or repair a damaged one; in any case, you want to build a strong working relationship built on mutual respect, well-established trust, and a side-by-side problem- solving approach.
According to
Harvard Business Review
, there are three types of negotiators – Hard Bargainers, Soft Bargainers, and Principled Bargainers.
Hard Bargainers – These people see negotiations as an activity that they need to win. They are less focused less on the real objectives of the negotiations but more on winning. In the “DISNEYLAND RESORT PARIS: MICKEY GOES TO EUROPE ”, do you think a hard bargaining strategy will deliver desired results? Hard bargainers are easy to negotiate with as they often have a very
predictable strategy
Soft Bargainers – These people are focused on relationship rather than hard outcomes of the negotiations. It doesn’t mean they are pushovers. These negotiators often scribe to long term relationship rather than immediate bargain.
Principled Bargainers – As explained in the seven elemental tools of negotiations above, these negotiators are more concern about the standards and norms of fairness. They often have inclusive approach to negotiations and like to work on numerous solutions that can improve the BATNA of both parties.
Open lines of communication between parties in the case study “DISNEYLAND RESORT PARIS: MICKEY GOES TO EUROPE” can make for an effective negotiation strategy and will make it easier to negotiate with this party the next time as well.
Martha Maznevski, Karsten Jonsen (2018), "DISNEYLAND RESORT PARIS: MICKEY GOES TO EUROPE Harvard Business Review Case Study. Published by HBR Publications.
Feel free to connect with us if you need business research.
You can download Excel Template of Case Study Solution & Analysis of DISNEYLAND RESORT PARIS: MICKEY GOES TO EUROPE
Services , Retail (Catalog & Mail Order)
Financial , Misc. Financial Services
Energy , Oil Well Services & Equipment
Energy , Oil Well Services & Equipment
Technology , Electronic Instr. & Controls
Capital Goods , Construction Services
Services , Business Services
Financial , Misc. Financial Services
Healthcare , Biotechnology & Drugs
