[Kendra Kelly]

While I agree that all mergers will have different aspects to consider, I think an organization can greatly benefit from a tested and repeatable merger and integration approach. So much work goes into identification of the scope of the merger, what needs to be integrated at each stage gate, how to integrate culture etc. and having a repeatable playbook, even if required to stray from it in unique situations can definitely help speed up the process rather than approaching each merger or acquisition as a one-off transaction. This approach also helps to lower the risk.

[Olena]

I believe a standardized framework with flexibility for customization works best. Having a consistent M&A process provides structure, governance, and ensures important steps are not overlooked. However, every acquisition has different strategic objectives, risks, cultures, and integration needs. In my experience, trying to apply exactly the same process to every deal can create unnecessary complexity. The framework should remain consistent, while the level of effort and integration approach should be adapted to the specific transaction.

[Amine Imghi]

I believe the best approach is to standardize the core M&A process while adapting its application to each transaction. Common governance, decision gates, Due Diligence requirements, integration templates and reporting methods provide discipline and prevent important activities from being missed.

However, the depth, pace and priorities should reflect the deal rationale, size, risk, industry and desired level of integration. For example, a full absorption requires a different approach from an acquisition where the target remains largely independent. The process should therefore provide a consistent framework without becoming a rigid checklist.

[Author]

Posts