Mr Bert says of the 300 merger deals in the last five-seven years, the firms success track record has been around 90 per cent. These were the deals where we had significant involvement, says he. Recently, three out of ten deals that we have got involved with are re-mergers.
For the consultancy business, Mr Bert says the firm has identified four core areasfinancial industries, telecom, consumer products and retail, and energy (including process industry and utilities)for driving its business in India.
Sharing AT Kearneys findings on M&As, Mr Bert reveals a chilling fact: only three out of 10 mergers are successful. Excerpts from a conversation on issues pertaining to merger and merger-reintegration with Mr Bert that took place on the sidelines of the India Economic Summit 2002 in New Delhi.
How successful are mergers and acquisitions in India
The data in India is consistent with what we find globally, which is only three out of 10 mergers being successful. Most M&As fail. Weve studied over 1,000 M&As in the last decade and analysed those deals.
One way of measuring success is shareholder value creation. But weve a more stringent measurecreating shareholder value above the industry average. The second matrix is combined profitabilityas per our study, 29 per cent of the companies have combined profitability, that is one penny more than the two companies on the stand alone basis.
What factors lead to merger failures: clash of cultures, big egos, incompatible IT systems or different management approaches
The single reason cited for failure in the chain is: Mastering the integration process. Our study has covered nine reasons: insufficient communication, unclear synergy expectations, compromise in new organisation structure, missing master plan, missing momentum, lack of top management commitment, unclear strategic concept, missing pace of project, and IT issues being addressed too late.
Compromises in organisation structure is extensive. You cant have two CEOs, two CFOs, two VPs of operations. Too often, companies dont take tough decisions in the hope that the cream will rise to the top. It really becomes dysfunctional. Nobody knows whos in charge. The deal rests on an overall integration plan or master plan.
Under-communication is the No 1 reason for failure. Almost all questions coming from employees was about me, me and me: what happens to my health-care benefits, my incentives, my compensation, my redundancy or relocation. They are not focussed on integration at hand, which is a monumental task. Companies need to formulate (step-by-step) a communication plan to lessen their anxiety level and make them focused on integration.
What time-frame should be given to merger-saving companies
One of the key best practices is to create a sense of urgency. Our research shows that the targeted synergies not achieved in 18 to 24 months, typically will never be achieved. Its common sense: beyond two years the competitive landscape changes, internal priorities change. To measure success, a period of three months prior to the deal to two years after the deal should be given to companies to achieve the targeted synergy.