|
The odds are stacked against you -- most mergers or
acquisitions fail to deliver and do not meet expectations. So you
might ask why so many companies want to make acquisitions. Phillip
Coggan recently quoted "Chief Executives seem no more able
to resist their urge to merge, than dogs can resist chasing rabbits".
Irwin Stelzer is quoted "when it comes to mergers, hope triumphs
over experience".
In this brief article I write about my involvement
in the merger of two companies and highlight some of the key issues
which faced the management team, with particular focus on the marketing
organisation. The real challenge was to capitalise on the strengths
of the two companies to give the new entity an advantage to create
'The Power of 2'.
The opportunity and challenge to create the 'Power of 2' happens
when two different organisations are brought together by merger
or acquisition to create one new single entity. The challenge is
to manage two organisations with different cultures, different strategies,
different products, different information systems, different policies
and procedures, different buildings, different people and management
teams and make them, as one, a more powerful and superior performing
entity than the previous two organisations. This entails a massive
change management programme to improve customer satisfaction, retain
customers, motivate and energise staff, reduce costs, improve performance
and at the same time achieve the business objectives and satisfy
the shareholders.
What was my merger experience?
I was the Marketing Director, part of the management team responsible
for the marketing function when Sperry and Burroughs in the U.K.
joined together in 1986.
John Perry, who was appointed Managing Director and Chairman of
Unisys Ltd led this programme after the merger of Sperry and Burroughs
and said "This process is going to be like rewiring the
house with the electricity turned on". In other words
the bringing together of two organisations has to take place while
keeping customers happy, achieving revenue and profit targets and
looking after your people. The merger in the UK was a great success,
with orders, revenue and profitability growing by 20% plus in the
following two years. However the merger was not successful in all
countries. In my opinion, our success was due to the strength of
leadership, quality of the management team, detailed planning, speed
of implementation and ruthless execution of the plan.
John Perry held his first meeting with the Directors from both
Sperry and Burroughs to start the process. He introduced the meeting
by stating, "We had two choices for completing the merger.
We could take 12 months to complete and consider everything to try
and prevent mistakes being made or we could take three months and
make mistakes." The latter option was selected because
we anticipated mistakes anyway and the longer the process took,
the more uncertainty and lack of direction we would face. Some other
countries took over twelve months to implement the merger and as
a result, did not achieve the same success as the U.K.
So what happened?
John Perry set out his stall in relation to the vision, direction
and what the merger meant, both for customers and employees and
he presented this at many company meetings throughout the country.
The two management teams of the previous companies were present
at the first meeting so we had two finance directors, two marketing
directors etc at all the initial meetings. John informed the directors
that he would appoint his new management structure at an agreed
date in the future once the blueprint for the merger was agreed
and ready for implementation. John was the ex Managing Director
of Burroughs so it was clear that the ex Managing Director of Sperry
would not get the top job but would be offered another job in the
new organisation. An outline plan and programme with milestones
was put forward and the directors were appointed to working groups
to report back with agreed programmes and plans for implementation.
This process meant that the directors of the two companies were
able to have input without knowing how or if they would be involved
in the new organisation. Although this process created competitiveness,
tension, and anxiety with certain individuals, overall it worked
well as there was a vast pool of knowledge and ability which ensured
a balanced input on the issues facing staff and customers. The directors
and senior managers worked exceptionally long hours - at least 12
hours daily, plus weekend working. This lasted for three months
and did put a strain on us, but it was a very rewarding process
to be part of the team giving birth to the new organisation.
The most difficult part of the process was to manage
the redundancy programme of nearly 1000 people and to then get the
people from different working cultures to work together in a constructive
way. A key part of the process was ensuring the selection process
was transparent so everyone understood we were building a new people
structure which was based on meritocracy and their ability to do
the job. People management was essential to the success of the merger.
This was a long-term, ongoing process as many of the staff couldn't
help but relate situations back to 'how it used to be' in their
previous organisations. We tried to build the new organisation by
taking the best from the two previous organisations, which meant
the directors had to have an open mind for introducing new working
methods. The other difficulty was to ensure that customers were
given a high priority and to convince them that their investment
in the products, services and technology would be secure in the
future. While all this was going on, the competition was spending
their time trying to unsettle our customer base.
There are many books that concentrate on mergers and
acquisitions (see end of article) so it is not my intention in this
short article to cover all the issues. However, in one of the books,
'Capitalise on Merger Chaos', the author suggests that 80% of mergers
fail because of culture clashes, mismanagement and the chaos that
follows a merger.
|