Co-evolutionary integration: a complexity perspective on mergers & acquisitions

Despite an apparently thorough ‘due diligence’ process, many mergers and acquisitions (M&A) still fail to meet pre-merger objectives. One of the main contributing factors is insufficient emphasis on post-merger relationships, and the development of an emergent culture to support the new organisational form. Two examples of M&A will be used to illustrate a successful and a dysfunctional application of post-merger integration, seen from a complexity theory perspective. An ideal post-merger integration, according to complexity, would resemble the creation of a child. It has some characteristics inherited from both parents but it has its own unique personality and identity. Yet in most cases the more dominant partner tries to impose its own culture, ways of working and procedures. It expects the dependent partner to adapt to these conditions, instead of facilitating reciprocal learning and coevolution between the partners. The paper will explore the differences in attitude of the two companies and identify some of the key contributing factors to successful co-evolutionary integration from a complexity theory perspective. It will do so by outlining the relevant characteristics to M&A, of organisations as complex evolving systems. It will finally propose that coevolutionary integration may be facilitated by using the logic of complexity and the co-creation of an enabling infrastructure.

[1]  E. Mitleton-Kelly The information systems professional as a hermit , 2004 .

[2]  Hema A. Krishnan,et al.  The influence of mergers on firms' product‐mix strategies , 2004 .

[3]  Eve Mitleton-Kelly,et al.  Treasury Operations In A Multi-National Oil Company: Dialogue On The Methodology Of Using Natural Experiments In Complex Evolving Systems , 2004 .

[4]  Eve Mitleton-Kelly An Integrated Methodology to Facilitate the Emergence of New Ways of Organising-Proceedings of the 3 , 2004 .

[5]  Robert D. Galliers,et al.  Organisational Complexity: Organizing Through the Generation and Sharing of Knowledge , 2004 .

[6]  Brian H. Kleiner,et al.  The effective management of mergers , 2003 .

[7]  A. Rodríguez‐Pose,et al.  Rising Metropoli: The Geography of Mergers and Acquisitions in Germany , 2003 .

[8]  N. Levy EU Merger Control: From Birth to Adolescence , 2003, World Competition.

[9]  S. H. Appelbaum,et al.  A cross method analysis of the impact of culture and communications upon a health care merger: Prescriptions for human resources management , 2003 .

[10]  The Process and Impact of Trust Mergers in the National Health Service: A Financial Perspective , 2003 .

[11]  Christiane Demers,et al.  Merger and acquisition announcements as corporate wedding narratives , 2003 .

[12]  Till Vestring,et al.  Merger integration: why the soft issues matter mos , 2003 .

[13]  Eve Mitleton-Kelly Complexity research - approaches and methods: the LSE Complexity Group integrated methodology , 2003 .

[14]  V. Garrow,et al.  Reaping the Benefits of Mergers and Acquisitions , 2002 .

[15]  J. Child,et al.  International mergers and acquisitions in the UK 1985-94: a comparison of national HRM practices , 2002 .

[16]  E. Mitleton-Kelly Ten Principles of Complexity & Enabling Infrastructures , 2002 .

[17]  K. Bijlsma-Frankema On managing cultural integration and cultural change processes in mergers and acquisitions , 2001 .

[18]  Michael X Cohen,et al.  Harnessing Complexity: Organizational Implications of a Scientific Frontier , 2000 .

[19]  P. D. Hall,et al.  The Management Factor in Acquisition Performance , 1987 .

[20]  A. Sorge Culture and Organisation , 1981 .