Previous chapters have demonstrated how negotiations in the EU lend firm support to the theory of formal leadership. In the EU, the member states have delegated extensive powers of agenda management, brokerage, and representation to the Presidency in response to identifiable collective-action problems. Drawing upon these powers and the Presidency's informational and procedural advantages, EU governments have used the office as a platform for political influence, thus raising the efficiency of negotiations and shaping the distribution of gains from negotiated agreements. Yet what does the EU case actually say about the power of the chair in multilateral negotiations? The EU is sometimes described as sui generis – one of a kind – because of attributes that cannot be assumed in all multilateral negotiations, such as the low number of actors, the high level of homogeneity, and the high degree of institutionalized cooperation. To what extent can the conclusions from this particular negotiation context be generalized to multilateral bargaining at large? Is the phenomenon of a negotiation chair that wields power and influences outcomes isolated to the EU or is it a general feature in multilateral bargaining and international cooperation? This chapter addresses these questions by placing the European experience in a comparative perspective. I consider evidence from multilateral negotiations in the areas of security, trade, and environment, drawing mainly on existing secondary accounts.