The Alcatel- Lucent Merger; What went wrong? 1. The conditions and negotiation factors that pushed forth the 2006 merger that were not present in the 2001 merger were in 2001 Lucent’s executives wanted the deal as a “merger of equals” rather than a takeover by Alcatel. However in 2006 Tchuruk agreed to pay 10.6 billion euro for Lucent to create the world’s largest telecommunications equipment maker. Tchuruk said the combined company would realize 1.4 billion euro in cost savings over the following 3 years, but they had to cut 9,000 jobs. 2. According to the company's website (http://www2.alcatel-lucent.com/news-center/) it appears that the combined merger is doing very well. Recently on September 13, 2012, Alcatel-Lucent was ranked Technology Super sector leader by Dow Jones with a score of 87/100. This is the second year in a row that the company is recognized in the Dow Jones Sustainability Index (DJSI). The Super sector Leader report highlighted: "growing environmental challenges and resource constraints, Alcatel-Lucent has continuously developed and implemented globally recognized innovations in eco-sustainable communication technologies.”. 3. I believe the merger is "a giant transatlantic experiment in multicultural diversity" because you have to vastly different cultures, Franco-American merging into one combined companies. Although the companies combined experience some cultural clashes but at the end were able to come together and become a successful company. After evaluating the comment that he merger is a “giant transatlantic experiment in multicultural diversity”, the evidence that the company would run into cross-cultural problems since the merger took place in 2006 was definitely there. One of the first clues was the disaster that was the failed merger of 2001. It was obvious that there were communication and cultural differences, such as CEO Patricia Russo not speaking French. There was also the factor of Alcatel operating primarily in France and Lucent was primarily in the United States. 4. It is hard to determine how much of the decline to attribute to leadership problems, as opposed to industry factors. The industry was suffering as it was, or as soon as the merger was made, but I feel like the company could have done much better if there were better leadership. 5. In 2001 when the original negotiations took place both companies were already in disagreements about how the company should be operated. Both American and France have different business models. How the combined companies should be operated should have been negotiated earlier on which was the main issue why the two companies could not agree on a merger in 2001. Times changed later in 2006 along with the different economic factors and troubled economy played some role in the push for the merge however negotiations on how the companies combined should be operated should have been agreed upon before the merger to avoid the problems the companies faced with after the merge.