[Alexandra Tóth]

If you could change one thing about the involvement of HR/People function in the M&A, what would it be?
I go with the time when we are involved, as it supposed to be much earlier than the DD phase. What are your thoughts?

[Sílvia Duarte]

Timing.

HR is often brought in at Due Diligence, when the deal is already priced and decisions are mostly made. That’s too late. People risks should shape the deal, not just the integration. M&A is a people decision long before it’s a financial one.

[dawrelo]

good

[Hassaan Khan]

I completely agree, the biggest change I would make is bringing HR/People into the deal much earlier than the formal due diligence phase. By the time DD starts, many critical people decisions (leadership structure, retention risks, cultural fit, and change impact) are already constrained by deal assumptions. Earlier HR involvement would allow buyers to properly assess talent dependencies, integration complexity, and cultural risks upfront, and to reflect these in valuation, synergy plans, and the integration strategy. In my experience, people-related issues rarely “show up” as red flags in financial DD, but they often become the main drivers of post-close underperformance.

[Fahmid Ibne Siraz Taseen]

Completely agree — the real issue isn’t just that HR comes in late, it’s that by the time they arrive the deal is already locked in. The price is set, the synergies are baked into the model, and the integration story is written. At that point HR isn’t shaping the outcome, they’re being asked to execute around decisions that have already been made.

People risks also don’t behave like financial or legal risks. They don’t sit neatly in a data room, but they’re often the things that erode value after close — leadership dynamics, culture, and whether the few individuals the business really depends on are actually going to stay.

What needs to change is the mandate, not just the timing. HR should be involved pre-LOI with a real voice in the go/no-go discussion, and early people insights should feed directly into valuation and the deal thesis. If your revenue case depends on retaining key people who haven’t even been identified or spoken to yet, that isn’t a forecast — it’s optimism.

At its core, M&A is a people decision that we describe in financial terms. The earlier that’s reflected in how deals are assessed, the more realistic the value case becomes.

[Sujit Prasad]

It would be to involve HR much earlier in the deal process. In many cases, HR is brought in mainly during the integration stage, but by that time many key decisions have already been made. I believe HR should be actively involved during due diligence and deal evaluation, especially to assess cultural compatibility, leadership capabilities, talent retention risks and organizational structure. These people related factors can significantly influence whether the merger will succeed or face integration challenges. From my perspective, earlier HR involvement would help organizations identify potential risks sooner and design better integration plans that support both business goals and employee engagement.

[Author]

Posts