Balancing Integration with Business-as-Usual
- This topic has 10 replies, 11 voices, and was last updated 3 months, 4 weeks ago by
.
-
Posts
-
As integration leaders, we often face the challenge of executing a merger while keeping day-to-day operations running smoothly. The tension between integration activities and business-as-usual (B-a-U) can lead to confusion, disengagement, and missed opportunities if not managed proactively.
Have you experienced a merger where business-as-usual was disrupted or neglected? What worked (or didn’t) in keeping teams aligned and customers engaged?
Looking forward to your insights.
As leaders we need to be example setting to our staff. We show our team that we need to stretch ourselves by taking on extra work. The integration work is the more interesting work than the Business-as-usual. So in order to engage your team, you should try to delegate some of the business-as-usual work to them and make this a stretch assignment for them. This stretch assignment can give them recognition and/or a bonus and as such engage them rather than disengage.
The business-as-usual can also change as a result of the integration work done, so the importance of b-a-u can not be underestimated.In my current company after lots of struggle from teams trying to joggle both BAU and Integrations they decided to balance workloads on experienced SMEs that are needed for Integrations, and give priorities to them, so when there is Integration work this will be priority over BAU activities, also when possible, they are hiring people specifically to manage integrations activities. This is seeing as a positive move so far within the groups.
Bringing in new ideas while keeping everyday work running smoothly needs a careful plan. By clearly sharing information, using resources wisely, and handling changes well, companies can add new things without hurting the quality or regular flow of their main work.
Dedicated responsibles or teams can be an option, once DDs or Integration efforts start to impact quality of BAU. For short period of times, this might not be needed, but for sustained periods and larger deals, I would recommend to dedicate staff instead of overloading expert staff with existing significant BAU workloads.
A lot of valuable mentions already available in the posts above.
I would synthesize as such, to make sure the integration work and BaU run in parallel:1. Ensure revenue-generated activities are not disrupted by the integration, by running through the Order to Cash processes, and Procure to Pay processes/journey.
2. Ensure there is a leader running the integration work
3. As already mentioned above, have ambitious and capable team members take on some integration tasks, in addition to BaU to accelerate the integration and increase their skills and capabilities.To contribute to the excellent discussion so far, I have observed the following approach to balance business operations with project delivery:
1. If the organisation is large enough with ongoing project work, establish dedicated project teams to mobilise across functions, responsible for delivering enterprise projects, including integration. These teams should contain a multi-disciplinary group of “para troopers” who can be deployed as needed. This maintains in-house capabilities and avoids the increased costs associated with hiring external consultants to boost capacity.
2. For subject matter experts who handle both regular business tasks and project work, set KPIS / performance targets linked to their remuneration (bonuses). This alignment will help manage their focus and time effectively.I am currently part of the integration project team leading a detailed programme to migrate our employees to the acquirer’s financial, project management, and CRM systems. This transition involves multiple teams working closely together to ensure a smooth experience for staff. One of our greatest challenges has been maintaining business-as-usual while replacing the core systems that people rely on to deliver client work.
Compounding this complexity is our rapid growth, which has increased pressure on the integration team to secure employee engagement. To address these demands, we have adopted an agile approach—running extra learning and information sessions, establishing an internal buddy network for peer support, bringing subject matter experts onsite, staging integration tasks strategically and accelerating key activities ahead of cutover. We’ve also engaged senior principals to lead by example and developed supporting materials to guide staff through the change.
Despite these efforts, there will inevitably be impacts on BAU. However, this reality hasn’t been fully acknowledged within the business, and the Steering Committee remains somewhat optimistic about the extent of disruption. Client deadlines still need to be met throughout the transition, making it a delicate balancing act between transformation and continuity.
Every situation is unique, but sharing these experiences may help others anticipate similar challenges in their own integrations.I am currently part of the integration project team leading a finance operation:
From my experience, once the announcement is placed the high level should build a IMO team including all the departments, make daily Schedules meeting, involves multiple teams working closely together to ensure a smooth experience for staff parallel with BAU.This is an extremely interesting equation. On the BaU side is the careful handling of an acquisitions very value the acquiring company is looking to capture without destroying its comparative strengths. And when the best people start leaving the acquired company then the project has failed.
On the other hand there is a new owner with plans and synergies and possibly some cultural shifts. The no-information connotation that comes with BaU can make employees even more anxious than honest truths.
It therefore comes down to planning integration thoroughly ahead of closing and doing an immediate communication plan. Transparency about the positive reasons a company was acquired, the less good, the plans for the latter and also the invariable opportunities for teams within a larger and hypothetically stronger post acquisition organization.
Personally what I have seen work best is a humble you-are-better-than-us for certain functions, certain non negotiables for integration like ERPs and accounting standards, but then a selling attitude from the acquirer for synergies rather then forcing them on the target.
To sum up, move quickly and transparently on integration with the business as usual state as a not too far away target.In my experience the biggest issue is that teams are expected to run BAU at full speed while also doing integration work on top, and nobody wants to admit the real capacity limit. What helped us was being very clear on priorities each week and agreeing what will not be done. Trying to keep everything running “as normal” usually causes more problems than the integration itself. When leaders are honest early, teams stay much more engaged and customers barely feel the impact.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.