Who should own a post-merger integration capability?
- This topic has 7 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 11 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Who should own a post-merger integration capability? Should it belong in the Strategy & Corporate Development function, as an execution arm to realize the strategy? A strategic initiatives group that executes on enterprise initiatives? Or somewhere else?
In my opinion each divisional leader should own post merger integration capability. Strategy and overall plan are developed and drive by corporate leader. It is up to each group/team to execute post merger.
There should be a dedicated owner that is responsible for handling integration as a program. They should work with each area (HR, sales, finance, etc) to ensure appropriate results and progress. The accountability ultimately for the success of realizing the synergies/value should be at the Board level!
The ownership of a post-merger integration (PMI) capability can vary, but there are a few common options:
Strategy & Corporate Development: This function can own PMI as an execution arm to realize the strategic objectives of the merger.
Strategic Initiatives Group: A dedicated group responsible for executing enterprise-wide initiatives, including PMI, can work closely with the Strategy & Corporate Development team.
Integration Office/PMO: Establishing a dedicated office or PMO can oversee all integration activities, coordinate teams, and ensure alignment with the overall strategy.
Business Unit/Functional Ownership: PMI capability may reside within the impacted business units or functional areas, ensuring direct involvement and accountability.
Hey Mike,
I would agree with Christos that the best approach is a proper PMI team along with a PMO in your organization.
We have integrated 5 companies somewhat successfully without the PMI or PMO, but having the structure in place would have yielded many benefits and saved us millions in expense.
Our approach was to have a 2 person team ( due diligence expert & integration expert ) work together and coordinate divisional leaders within the parent org and the acquired orgs. Best practices were applied with regard to documentation, templates, and a playbook.
It is possible without a formal PMI and PMO, but it is much more painful, slower, and more costly in the long run.
Very interesting thoughts in this thread. Interested to hear thoughts from others on what sorts of tools and templates have proved successful in managing this integration activity?
I agree with Chris, although it is possible without a formal PMI team, there is definitely a need for a more focused approach to integrating the organisations. We have used a Transformation office to manage all the Post-merger integrations and to ensure that this is successful there a specialised M&A senior members within this team. It is also oimportant that ownership of trhe integraqtion activities are agreed at an Executive level and that the head of your PMI team is part of that Executive structure.
In my experience, depends on where the real strategy influence sits in the organization. Have seen best efforts by a standing PMO/PMI team but unless they are fully empowered by the “kings” of the business, will be difficult to have long-term success. Certainly a dedicated unit is required, but more importantly is the placement and true ownership / accountability of the business unit/functional unit that will have responsibility to ensure effective design and execution. I am referring to the “Leadership Circle” that was briefly discussed in section 7. More important than this lesson may have stated to give this group near-directly ownership of certain elements. Otherwise, always too easy to blame strategy or IMO for issues and failures.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
