Twenty years ago, 70% of mergers failed – big names like AOL and Time Warner, Daimler and Chrysler, are now infamous. Today? That number has flipped, with nearly 70% of deals succeeding. So, what’s changed? And more importantly, how do you avoid the same pitfalls?
We have seen firsthand how deals that looked perfect on paper fell apart in the real world. Years ago, we worked on an acquisition where the numbers seemed rock-solid: synergies promised major cost savings, and the market was excited. But no one asked if the two company cultures could mesh. Within months, the friction became unbearable – key talent left, and integration hit wall after wall. We thought we could fix it, but in the end, the deal didn’t deliver. That’s a lesson you don’t forget.
M&A today is less about just cutting costs or acquiring a competitor. Smart acquirers are more thoughtful about what they buy – and why. Companies like Carlisle, for instance, now reject “fixer-upper” deals. Their CEO, @Chris Koch, explained how they’ve shifted to acquiring businesses with organic growth potential – ones that don’t need major overhauls to thrive. By focusing on companies that are already growing, Carlisle avoids the costly pitfalls of trying to force a turnaround.
What can we learn from them?
- Hard synergies are non-negotiable. Whether it’s savings from raw materials or factory consolidations, you dig into these during due diligence to ensure there’s real, tangible value – not just promises.
- Every acquisition needs a robust integration plan. You always make sure to map out a playbook with clear dates, milestones, and measurable goals.
- Time is money, and quick results matter to investors.
- The human element is just as crucial. It’s not about whether leaders can keep running their current business – it’s about whether they can integrate into the broader organization and drive even more value.
- Then there’s the industry factor. Deals closer to a company’s core business tend to succeed.
So, if your company is considering its next acquisition, your focus should be on understanding the bigger picture, rather than just on spreadseets.