To begin with, let’s face it, within the strategy development realm we climb onto shoulders of thought leaders such as Drucker, Peters, Porter and Collins. Even world’s top business schools and leading consultancies apply frameworks which were incubated with the pioneering work of such innovators. Bad strategy, misaligned M&A, and poorly executed post merger integrations fertilize the organization turnaround industry’s bumper crop. This phenomenon is grounded inside the ironic reality that it is the turnaround professional that frequently mops in the work from the failed strategist, often delving into the bailout of derailed M&A. As corporate performance experts, we’ve got found that the whole process of developing strategy must account for critical resource constraints-capital, talent and time; as well, implementing strategy will need to take into consideration execution leadership, communication skills and slippage. Being excellent either in is rare; being excellent in both is seldom, at any time, attained. So, when it comes to a turnaround expert’s look at proper M&A strategy and execution.

Within our opinion, the essence of corporate strategy, involving both organic and acquisition-related activities, is the search for profitable growth and sustained competitive advantage. Strategic initiatives require a deep understanding of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats, as well as the balance of power inside the company’s ecosystem. The business must segregate attributes which are either ripe for value creation or prone to value destruction including distinctive core competencies, privileged assets, and special relationships, as well as areas susceptible to discontinuity. In those attributes rest potential growth pockets through “monetization” of traditional tangible assets, customer relationships, strategic real estate property, networks and knowledge.

The business’s potential essentially pivots for capabilities and opportunities which can be leveraged. But regaining competitive advantage by acquisitive repositioning is often a path potentially packed with mines and pitfalls. And, although acquiring an underperforming business with hidden assets as well as forms of strategic real estate can certainly transition a business into to untapped markets and new profitability, it’s always best to avoid buying a problem. All things considered, an undesirable company is simply a bad business. To commence a prosperous strategic process, a firm must set direction by crafting its vision and mission. When the corporate identity and congruent goals are established the path might be paved the next:

First, articulate growth aspirations and see the basis of competition
Second, assess the lifetime stage and core competencies from the company (or the subsidiary/division in the matter of conglomerates)
Third, structure an organic and natural assessment procedure that evaluates markets, products, channels, services, talent and financial wherewithal
Fourth, prioritize growth opportunities which range from organic to M&A to joint ventures/partnerships-the classic “make vs. buy” matrices
Fifth, decide where you should invest where to divest
Sixth, develop an M&A program with objectives, frequency, size and timing of deals
Finally, have a seasoned and proven team ready to integrate and realize the worth.

Regarding its M&A program, a company must first observe that most inorganic initiatives tend not to yield desired shareholders returns. Considering this harsh reality, it can be paramount to approach the method having a spirit of rigor.

For additional information about M&A go to our new web page.