1

THE EIS SIMULATION

TEAM 3 :

CHEAKA SawdatouCORONAS Aurélia DAIF LoubnaBOUZIANE AmineDUCOURANT Christophe

JOSE PIETRI

2

Plan StrategyTacticsTeam dynamicsLeadership-FollowershipDecision makingInformationValuesResultsWhat worked well for usWhat didn’t work so wellEvolution RoleConclusions

3

Strategy

Collecting information

Interest

Evaluation and adaptation

Decision making

We didn’t choose our strategy immediately. First, we took the ownership of the game in order to better understand the rules

4

TacticsOur first decisions were not efficient enough

We started by informing people and collecting information

It was important for us to define the kind of relationship between employees, and to define the role of Ann Finkelbaum

Our strategy was good until an unexpected event happened (“loose Scotti”). Then we decided to focus on the top managers by organizing meetings, collecting their viewpoint.

5

Team dynamics(1) Workgroup : each decision was approved by the group after discussion.

Sometimes we decided to take some risks to improve the evolution of the project

6

Team dynamics(2) During the game we faced 2 unexpected events.

The first unexpected event happened because the managers weren’t involved. In order to get back managers attention, we decided to organize a meeting with the management staff (SCOTTI).

The second unexpected event was that Ann Finkelbaum joined the team with a new solution, which was acclaimed by the hole group.

7

Leadership-FollowershipNo leader has distinguished himself

There is a mutual relationship established between each member of the team which is really beneficial in the effectiveness of the group.

8

Decision making As every member of the team is adding his opinion, the decision making was more efficient.

After discussion between ourselves, we have done the analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of each decision.

During the game we realized the importance of the time. This is why we were even more vigilant in making our decision towards the end of the game.

9

Information Most of information concern employees and members of CEO

These information are important for the development of the strategy

For example, information concerning Ann, allowed us to avoid the lobbying.

10

Values

SuccessTo listen

To adapt

To follow Leadership

Unique vision

Objectives

11

Results

9 adopters with Ann Finkelbaum

12

What worked well for usThe first step was to contact all concerned

members via e- mails and to set up some face to face meetings. The objective was to clarify the new process of the EIS project.

We chose to go step by step and not to cut corners. Considering Anne’s strong personality we noticed that Lobbying would not be relevant for us because it would create real conflicts.

13

What didn't work so wellThe beginning of our mission was quite difficult because

we didn’t see any positive reaction from people.

Some actions taken were not efficient concerning managers who usually didn’t have time.

We focused a lot on a person who was very interested, and by neglecting the others, they were less interested.

Using pilot tests at the beginning was unsuccessful because we were always on the stage : “awareness”.

14

The evolution

15

Time keeper : CORONAS Aurélia Our decisions were more relevant over the time

Strategic : BOUZIANE Amine Study and qualify all the possibilities and actions

to be takenBrave actions : DAIF Loubna

Take some risky an brave actions to progressDecision maker: DUCOURANT Christophe

In case of conflict, he was the Judge Analyst /profiler : CHEAKA Sawdatou

Analyze the impact of each action on specific people

Role

16

ConclusionNo matter the number of decisions, the most

important was to take good decisions at the right time

Progress step by step

Choose the right action at the right time (same action has not the same impact in two different moments during the process).