Excerpt from Article:
Too many staffing decisions during M&A integrations are designed to achieve balance rather than the best. Good management gets sacrificed on the altar of compromise.
This is the “one for me, one for you” fallacy. You get a VP of Marketing, we get a VP of Sales. You get to keep the fabrication plant in New York, we get to keep our regional headquarters in Texas. None of these negotiated “tradeoffs” make sense on their own merits, but somehow they come to be seen as reasonable when taken together.
This is lousy leadership. Bad management. It takes “fairness” down to too local a level. Looked at in the broader scheme of things, how fair is it to stockholders? To customers? Even to the rest of the employees? Don’t all those people deserve the best the combined company has to offer? What if this were two professional football teams being merged—would you go for fair representation from each team in your starting lineup, or would you field your very best talent?
Now is the time to go for organizational upgrades. Choose the best, regardless of which company provides it. Don’t shoot for a 50-50 deal. Go for 70-30, or 10-90—whatever makes you stronger, faster, more competitive. Whether you’re talking managers, facilities, product lines, sales teams, R & D projects, even brand names, be willing to be “unfair.” Favor the best, instead of playing the game of politically correct tradeoffs.