1. Top 10 Integration
Mistakes and How to
Avoid Them
Copyright © 2013, Whitaker & Company, Inc.

2. Introduction
Integrations are disruptive. Period.
Expect your integration to disrupt operations and hamper business continuity.
Do not underestimate the preparation and work required to manage a
successful integration-they can be ugly, time consuming, and contentious.
Prepare for the worst, and expect the best as they say.
The following paper outlines 10 fairly typical mistakes and provides some
advice on how to avoid them.

3. # 1: Lack of Pre-Planning
Lack of adequate pre-planning is one of the leading causes of poorly executed
integrations. When integrations fall short of their objectives, 70% of the shortfall is
linked to inadequate integration planning & execution
Symptoms and Signs Potential Outcomes
 No formal integration oversight authority or  Integration gets off to a slow start and never
responsibility established recovers
 Limited or no risk assessment activities  Failure to deliver on synergy targets
completed
 Employee morale and retention issues
 Incomplete due-diligence documentation
 Customer defections
 No confirmed closing date
 Major disruption to business continuity
 Confusion and anxiety among employees
Steps to Address
 Establish Integration Management Office (IMO) at least 30 days prior to deal close
 Draft integration strategy to help prioritize workstreams
 Complete operational and cultural risk assessments
 Secure access to due-diligence documents
 Draft integration charter and confirm governance (IMO should report into C-suite executive)
 Confirm talent assessment process (if required) and get documents completed by Day 0

4. # 2: No Formal Integration Strategy
Integration managers must ensure alignment between a company’s operating
strategy and the integration strategy to make sure your team is “integrating with
the end in mind”
Symptoms and Signs Potential Outcomes
 NewCo operating model still in flux or  Integration efforts may be incongruent with
undefined operating strategy
 Organizational structure still TBD  Limited to no ability for functional leads to
prioritize integration workstreams
 Integration objectives undefined or
nonexistent  Integration will take longer than expected, and
may even require a “do over”
 No executive support for integration
resources  Inability to deliver on synergy targets
Steps to Address
 Complete integration strategy strawman to help solidify direction and secure buy-in from
executives
 Complete integration risk assessments to inform strategy
 Develop integration workstream prioritization framework
 Establish Integration Management office (IMO)
 If needed, help clarify business objectives to inform integration strategy

5. # 3: Failure to Prioritize Workstreams
Without workstream prioritization, every functional integration plan and workstream
will be considered as important as the next, and it will be difficult to focus on high
priority workstreams that can deliver the most business value
Symptoms and Signs Potential Outcomes
 Integration work feels overwhelming to most  “Low value” workstreams dominate activity
functional leads
 Integration milestones slip
 Functional leads continually requesting more
info on integration strategy and objectives  Synergy realization negatively impacted
 Senior management anxious regarding  Functional leads get frustrated and deprioritize
integration progress integration work
 Too many “low value” workstreams  Senior management becomes frustrated with
integration progress
Steps to Address
 Ensure integration strategy, objectives and timetables have been communicated
 Create integration workstream prioritization framework to assist functional leads
 Where applicable, assign specific synergy or business benefit values to high priority workstreams
 Make sure IMO office reporting output for senior mgmt focuses on high priority workstreams
 When necessary, deprioritize medium/low priority workstreams if functional leads are having
difficulty managing their workload
 Have IMO office personnel assist with functional workstreams

6. # 4: Senior Leadership Void
Integration Management Office and leaders need to report into a C-level executive
to ensure consistent focus and accountability. Also, IMO offices frequently need an
expedient escalation and issue resolution method to manage conflicts
Symptoms and Signs Potential Outcomes
 Integration managers or IMO office reporting  Integration work is deprioritized among
into a single function like HR or Finance functional leads
 Confusion at senior executive level as to who  Negative impact on communication planning
“owns” the integration work as no central office can be used as a pivot
point for integration updates
 No sense of urgency among integration leads
 Failure to achieve synergy targets within the
 Fluid post close organizational structure may specified timeframe
mean senior executives are still “TBD”
 Lack of “quick wins” and success stories
Steps to Address
 Accelerate post close organizational planning to solidify leadership structure
 Establish charter and governance from C-level office during pre-planning
 Establish IMO as transparent extension of designated C-level executive’s office
 Create issue escalation and decision making framework for senior executive team to ensure high
priority issues get “moved up the chain” quickly

7. # 5: Poor Communication Planning
Frequent communication to all stakeholder audiences is one of the hallmarks of a
sound integration plan. Poor communication planning can negatively impact
morale and even slow your integration down as people clamor for information
Symptoms and Signs Potential Outcomes
 Executive communication reactive vs.  Employee morale negatively impacted as they
proactive are “kept in the dark”
 Lack of established communication vehicles  Customers confused as to next steps become
for acquiring organization prime targets of competitors
 Limited risk assessment prework to  Employee defections (good people leave
determine high priority communication needs when they feel they are not valued)
 Information sharing to date on as “as needed  Integration energy spent on reactive issues
basis” and putting out fires
Steps to Address
 Solidify key messages for each key stakeholder audience in advance of Day 0
 Create communication plan matrix for Day 0 thru 90 days
 Establish communication channels and vehicles (if needed-create new ones to support the
integration)
 Draft communications for senior executives to speed execution
 Create simple but effective “rolling FAQ log” that can be updated weekly and shared with affected
employees

8. # 6: Poor Synergy Program Management
Synergies are typically one of the most important reasons why companies
undertake mergers and acquisitions in the first place, but companies fail to achieve
projected synergies over 50% of the time!
Symptoms and Signs Potential Outcomes
 Synergy estimates are inflated, overly  Deal fails to deliver on targeted value
optimistic, and/or lack costs to achieve
budgets  Cost overruns due to poor estimates for CTA
(costs to achieve)
 Timeframe to achieve is unrealistic
 Delayed integration timeframe
 No formal executive or functional ownership
of synergy targets  Synergy targets get dispersed among
functions and become impossible to properly
 No connection between synergy targets and monitor and track
integration workstreams
Steps to Address
 “Stress test” synergy targets during due-diligence to confirm projections and rework if necessary
 Confirm cost to achieve (CTA) budgets
 Confirm which synergy targets are the responsibility of the Integration Management Office
 Confirm frequency and source of synergy reporting updates and coordinate delivery with IMO
 Make sure synergy workstreams are clearly accounted for in functional workstreams
 Ensure synergy related workstreams are always marked high priority

9. # 7: Inadequate Resourcing
Integrations require dedicated time and resources, and poorly resourced
integrations and take longer, cost more, delay synergy realization and can burn
good people out
Symptoms and Signs Potential Outcomes
 No formal scope or governance to guide  Delayed integration timeframe
resource planning and set expectations
 “Revolving door” for functional integration
 Integration work treated as “second priority”, leads
and everyone’s “day job” overwhelms
integration work  Burnout and resentment of integration work
 No air cover from senior executives to  Failure to achieve synergy targets
support the need for dedicated resources  Failure to establish reliable resourcing
 Good people avoiding integration work requirements baseline for next integration
Steps to Address
 Create integration charter with formalized functional resource expectations and timing
 Create job description summaries for functional leads
 Scope and prioritize integration workstreams so functional leaders have a solid understanding of
the level of effort and time required to complete integration work
 Secure external resources to offload special projects and other integration work
 Document time and resource expenditures to establish baseline and set expectations for next
integration effort

10. #8: Lack of “End State” Transition
Every integration needs to have an end. Planning for your end state is just as
important as planning the integration itself
Symptoms and Signs Potential Outcomes
 Functional “end state” is undefined, confusing  Delayed integration timeframe
and functional leads are frustrated
 Integration work becomes functional work and
 No formal end date where bulk of integration vice versa…meaning integration workstreams
activity should be concluding get deprioritized
 Integration work and regular work is  Open ended integration workstreams become
intermingled-making “end state” an huge headaches for functional leads
impossible thing to define in the first place
Steps to Address
 Develop formal end state transition process with anticipated timing and clarified roles and
responsibilities
 Document deadlines and deliverables associated with the remaining open items
 Make sure open integration workstreams are documented and handed off to functional leads via a
formalized transition
 Provide a full understanding of what has to be done, by when, and by whom. Make sure people
have an understanding of the negative implications should the project get delayed

11. #9: Poor Organizational Planning
Organizational design is a critical part of any “Newco” merger scenario, and poorly
planned and executed transitions can have adverse affects on the new entity
Symptoms and Signs Potential Outcomes
 Competing business models and priorities  “A” Players depart as they become frustrated
linger well after merger closes with dysfunction and lack of communication
 Too many executives and key leaders unsure  Temporary business strategies and practices
of eventual role and responsibilities become “hard coated” due to delays in
solidifying new org design and leadership
 Poor communication to rank and file
regarding Newco organizational design and  Employees become demotivated and morale
leadership structure suffers due to fear of the unknown
Steps to Address
 Clarify Newco business strategy and operating principles as soon as possible
 Accelerate organizational design and the “naming” of key executives-making it a high priority
workstream
 Make leaders aware of risks and side affects of delays-keep them informed and updated as to the
consequences of delayed decision making
 Make decisions on workforce reductions early and expedite the position elimination process so
affected employees can quickly return to focusing on their work, or transitioning out of the
company

12. #10: No Formal Measurements
Collecting feedback from all stakeholder groups to continually optimize your
integration process is critical for making integration a core competency in any
organization
Symptoms and Signs Potential Outcomes
 Information on previous integrations is  Integration competency becomes “static”,
confusing, hard to locate, and/or non-existent never improving and most often getting worse
 “Feedback” is all via rumor mill and informal  Employees feel they have no voice in helping
communication channels improve execution and become passive
 No established process to address and  Acquiring company gets reputation as being
correct poor practices insensitive and irresponsive to employee
concerns
Steps to Address
 At day 100, initiate a formal process to collect feedback from Integration Manager participants and
acquired company employees
 Do a employee survey developed and administered through HR and implemented after any
downsizing or RIFs (reductions in force)
 Be sure to include a sample from: Senior management, Integration office (IMO) team members,
Employees (from both companies), Consultants involved in project (if applicable)
 Make sure the Integration Manager facilitates a “Lessons Learned” meeting with Integration
Manager participants and functional leads to create an after action review document

13. Whitaker & Company Overview
Whitaker & Company is an Atlanta-based consulting firm
specializing in post merger & acquisition integration.
Since 2005, Whitaker and & Company has been involved in
merger integration engagements totaling over more than $25
billion for both domestic and international companies. We help
companies realize the full value of their mergers and
acquisitions via a full array of solutions and services
Whitaker & Company President Scott C. Whitaker is an
accomplished executive with expertise in corporate strategy
and operations with Fortune 500 companies, and is the author
of Mergers & Acquisitions Integration Handbook: Helping
Companies Realize The Full Value of Acquisitions, a
comprehensive resource to help companies create a scalable
post merger or acquisition integration process that accelerates
operating and business benefit goal realization.
For more information contact info@whitakercompany.com

14. Thank You!
For more information contact:
Info@whitakercompany.com