.png){kind=small}
Mergers and acquisitions (M&A) are designed to create value—through cost savings, operational efficiencies, and new growth opportunities. Yet, many of these benefits fail to materialize due to misalignment in systems, processes, and infrastructure. Without a structured approach to operational execution, companies face inefficiencies, miscommunication, and workflow disruptions that can erode the very synergies the deal was meant to achieve.
Integrating two businesses is not just about merging assets and teams—it’s about creating a seamless operational backbone that supports the new entity’s long-term success. Whether it’s IT systems, supply chains, customer service processes, or financial workflows, companies must align how work gets done to avoid unnecessary friction, delays, and revenue loss.
The Challenge of Operational Alignment in M&A
Every organization operates with its own set of standardized processes, proprietary systems, and infrastructure that dictate how work flows from one function to another. When two companies merge, they often bring:
Different enterprise technology platforms – ERP systems, CRM software, accounting tools, HR platforms, and other IT systems that may not be compatible.
Conflicting workflows and approval structures – Variances in reporting hierarchies, procurement systems, and compliance protocols that slow down execution.
Redundant or overlapping functions – Two organizations may have duplicate roles, contracts, or service providers, creating inefficiencies if not addressed.
A failure to standardize these elements can create frustration among employees, inefficiencies in execution, and potential compliance risks if key processes are not properly maintained.
Common Pitfalls in Operational Execution
Many companies focus heavily on financial and strategic integration while underestimating the complexity of standardizing operational functions. This leads to avoidable disruptions, including:
1. Misalignment in Technology Systems
Merging companies often run different software platforms for finance, HR, procurement, and customer service.
IT teams may face unexpected data migration challenges, security risks, or compatibility issues.
Example: In the Hewlett-Packard and Compaq merger, IT system mismatches resulted in supply chain disruptions that cost the company millions in lost revenue.
2. Inconsistent Business Processes Across Functions
One company may rely on centralized decision-making, while another has a decentralized operational model.
Standardized workflows may vary significantly by department or region, leading to confusion and bottlenecks.
Lack of clarity on new processes can cause delays in approvals, reporting errors, and compliance risks.
3. Failure to Prioritize Infrastructure Consolidation
Redundant vendor contracts, office spaces, or supply chain partners increase operational costs if not streamlined.
Overlapping logistics and distribution networks can create inefficiencies that slow down customer fulfillment.
Companies often postpone rationalizing assets and infrastructure, leading to longer-term inefficiencies.
A Smarter Approach to Operational Integration
Instead of treating operational execution as a secondary concern, companies should approach it with the same level of rigor and strategic planning as financial and cultural integration.
Validate Operational Risks Before Implementation
To prevent unexpected disruptions, companies should conduct an operational audit before integration begins, assessing:
Technology compatibility – Which IT systems need to be merged, replaced, or integrated?
Process redundancy – Where do workflows overlap, and which version should be standardized?
Supply chain stability – Will vendor agreements, logistics, or procurement contracts be affected by integration?
Identifying these challenges before closing the deal allows organizations to anticipate risks rather than reacting to them.
Balance Standardization with Flexibility
Merging companies often default to a rigid, one-size-fits-all approach to standardization, which can create resistance or inefficiencies. A better approach involves:
Testing and iterating process changes in phases before rolling them out company-wide.
Identifying core processes that must be unified versus allowing flexibility where it improves execution.
Recognizing when legacy systems should be maintained if they provide a competitive advantage rather than forcing consolidation.
Use Bias Dynamics to Guide Decision-Making
Operational teams across both companies will have different comfort levels with change. Understanding and leveraging these biases can reduce friction and improve execution:
Early adopters with an innovation bias will be more willing to embrace new tools and processes—engage them first to build momentum.
Employees with a tradition bias will resist process changes unless they are clearly justified—bringing them into early discussions increases their buy-in.
Action-biased employees will want to move fast—giving them clear milestones prevents rushed decisions that create future inefficiencies.
Evidence-biased employees will need proof before changing systems—providing data on performance improvements ensures they feel confident in the transition.
When operational execution is aligned with the natural tendencies of the workforce, companies experience less resistance, fewer disruptions, and smoother adoption of new systems.
Test, Measure, and Refine Instead of Forcing Change All at Once
Rather than implementing sweeping changes overnight, companies should:
Pilot new operational models in select business units before a full rollout.
Track key performance indicators (KPIs) to measure the impact of process changes.
Gather continuous feedback to refine workflows, rather than assuming one approach will work across the entire organization.
Beyond Systems & Processes: Other Key Considerations for Operational Execution
While technology and workflow integration are critical, M&A operational execution also requires attention to:
Customer Experience Alignment – If companies have different service models, how will customers be affected by the transition?
Regulatory Compliance & Risk Management – Merging organizations in different regions or industries must align compliance requirements to avoid legal issues.
Employee Training & Support – Employees need guidance on how to operate within new systems and workflows to maintain productivity.
The Path to Seamless Operational Execution
M&A success depends on how well organizations integrate their day-to-day operations—not just on closing the deal. Companies that invest in a structured approach to operational execution will see:
Fewer workflow disruptions by aligning business processes early.
Smoother technology transitions by proactively addressing IT and system compatibility.
More efficient infrastructure consolidation by prioritizing asset and supply chain integration.
A standardized but flexible approach to operational execution ensures that companies don’t just merge on paper—but function effectively as a unified organization.