[Lindsey Edson]

I keep seeing different schools of thought on sequencing.

Some teams push to standardize systems first to create a “single source of truth.” Others focus on harmonizing processes before touching systems. And in a few cases, the emphasis is actually on aligning leadership and decision rights first, then letting everything else follow.

In post-merger integration, governance and decision rights are always established early (formally or informally), and that then shapes whether teams prioritize systems or process standardization first. Curious how others approach sequencing from there?

[Milton Reyes]

Hi Lindsay, I’m definitely a bit biased toward the culture side of things! In my experience, when you have “true alignment and strong trust among leaders”, decisions around systems and processes become so much easier to execute.

I’ve witnessed leaders come together around a table with zero hidden agendas or power plays, focusing purely on what is best for the organization. When leaders build that kind of consensus and champion it together, it maximizes synergies across the board. I’m not saying to standardize cultures. From my perspective, the hard work is on the culture and mindset alignment.

[Miguel Coelho]

Hi Lindsey,

My view is that:

– Processes are enabled by systems – however, you can shape the process even considering different systems. Ex: align reporting cycles, Month End Closing activities ect
– Systems may be divided by complexity, and definetly some system changes are long lead time items, consider for example and ERP change. While others may to simpler to migrate to the chosen one, for example, to the chosen M365 environment
– On decision rights: there are some thing that are actually critical for change of control. For example, align the DoA matrix

Given this, there is a flux of change and timings within these pillars. However, by and large, my experience is that you standardise critical processes first and decision rights (critical for change of control), while IT stack normally includes long lead time items

[Milou van der Hoek]

Great answers. In the integrations I have witnessed there was always a heavy overlap between all three, and they happened along side each other.

[Priyanka Chauhan]

I agree with you Milton — culture and mindset alignment are critical. Even if we start by standardizing processes, the execution will only work if leaders trust each other and are aligned on the bigger organizational goal. Without that alignment, decisions around systems, roles, and processes can become territorial. So practically, I see culture as the foundation, while processes and systems become easier to standardize once leaders are genuinely working as one team.

[Shelly Barnes]

Hi Lindey, Here is my view:

People are the foundation because culture, trust, and alignment determine whether any integration effort sticks. Without shared language, clear decision rights, and leadership alignment, even well‑designed processes and systems fail. Early work with people isn’t about standardization; it’s about building trust and stabilizing expectations so teams can absorb the changes ahead.

Processes are usually the first area where meaningful standardization is both possible and necessary. They shape how work flows and how decisions get made. Aligning processes early prevents duplicate work, conflicting approvals, and operational bottlenecks. It also gives teams the clarity they need before larger system changes begin.

Systems come next but only where value/synergies or risk demands it. Some systems must be addressed immediately because they enable integration itself, like email, collaboration tools, identity management, or communication infrastructure. Others, such as ERP or operational platforms, should follow only after leadership alignment and process clarity. When system decisions are rushed or made without cultural alignment, they often lead to rework, wasted investment, and unnecessary disruption.

So the practical sequence is simple: build trust with people, align processes, and standardize systems where the deal’s value and risk profile require it. Integration moves faster when culture is acknowledged early, processes create structure, and systems are sequenced based on impact rather than convenience.

[Author]

Posts