‘losers’ in the race for line business jobs – they would not have the credibility
to get the job done. So probably the best staffing approach is to appoint ‘up-
and-coming’ managers, leaving the daily business under the original leadership
until the new organization can be put in place.
Transition teams are most effective when members come from both the
acquired and acquiring companies and by facilitating personnel exchange,
members of one transition team can help to develop a better understanding of
each other’s capabilities. People who are suited for a transition team usually
have a mix of functional and interpersonal competencies (including cross-
cultural skills), backed up by strong analytical skills. Having an ability to accept
responsibility without full authority and being effective in mobilizing
resources across organizational boundaries are two competencies that are espe-
cially important, and consequently such roles are good development opportu-
nities for those with high potential.
The effective transition team serves as a role model for how the new
organization should act. It disseminates the shared vision and makes sure that
practices are appropriately aligned with the vision. However, too many task
forces and teams slow things down, creating coordination problems, conflict,
and confusion. The integration projects should focus on those with high
potential savings at low risk, leaving those with greater risk or lower benefits
until later. In the process of transition, prioritization is critical.
Moving with speed
Evans et al. (2002) observe that most companies with experience in acquisi-
tions recommend moving fast. Creeping changes, uncertainty, and anxiety
that last for months are debilitating and immediately start to drain value from
an acquisition (Ashkenas et al., 1998). While this may seem counterintuitive to
some, ‘a problem jeopardizing the success of many acquisitions has been a ten-
dency to restructure slowly, motivated by the best of intentions. While time
and resources are being spent on giving people time to adjust and not upset-
ting the old culture, competitors come along and take away the business’
(Evans et al., 2002, p. 278).
The desire to move fast may come from the firm that has been bought up.
A survey of European acquisitions of US high-technology firms in the Silicon
Valley reported that speed in integration was one of the key drivers of success-
ful post-merger integration – but also one of the most problematic (Inkpen
et al., 2000). The understanding of what is ‘quick’ or ‘fast’ among most of the
European acquirers (usually large, established companies with entrenched rou-
tines and procedures) was very different from the norms of the Valley. This cre-
ated confusion, frustration, and ultimately the loss of market opportunities.
Research also shows differences in the speed of the integration process
according to the national origins of the acquiring firm. Japanese and Northern
European acquirers tend to move cautiously, conscious of the potential cultural
conflicts (Child et al., 2001). This works well if the approach is one of preservation,
106 International Human Resource Management