This can clearly be understood from the figure provided below (Botticell, Pucevich, Scriptunas, & Thurston, 1999).
In the case of McDonalds, the company could have clearly reduced the performance expectation gap by avoiding the case and could have worked a way out with Morris and Steel by negotiating for an out of court settlement. This would have saved the company a whole lot of time and would have also ensured that the company and the stakeholders are not affected by the trial (Hartman & DesJardins, 2007). The trial for the company has been one of the longest and most expensive trials and this could have been easily avoided if the company used good negotiation techniques. Also, if McDonalds had implemented a stronger argument at the start of the case rather than allowing a slack in the performance, then the company would have been able to save up on time and also would have saved a lot of costs as well.
The public issues life cycle consists of four main steps, a) changing stakeholder expectations, b) political action, c) formal government action, and d) legal implementation (Botticell, Pucevich, Scriptunas, & Thurston, 1999). With the start of the public issues life cycle the company was faced with a concern that was building regarding the healthiness of the food that the company served. The leaflets acted as the drivers of the issues and this brought out the problems into public. Also, the website that Steel and Morris had developed as a protest against the company also added to the driver and led the company to be faced with higher levels of problems with the stakeholders.
As an executive of McDonalds, I would personally recruit and develop a team which would consist of people with excellent negotiation skills. Also, an attempt will be made to include people with a strong financial expertise and a law expertise. The staff of this team, irrespective of their expertise, should