10 Common Reasons Why Mergers and Acquisitions Fail
Kison Patel
CEO at M&A Science and DealRoom | Revolutionizing Corporate M&A with Innovative Education & Technology Solutions
This is our Linkedin Newsletter series where we share the latest science-based trends, strategies, and techniques from the world's top M&A professionals. Subscribe for exclusive interviews and crowd-sourced solutions to improve your M&A practice.
“Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way.”
Anna Karenina, Leo Tolstoy
Just as Leo Tolstoy’s famous opening line from Anna Karenina, successful mergers and acquisitions are alike, while those that fail are all unsuccessful in their own way. Even the most seasoned in-house acquisition teams experience occasional M&A failure, it comes with the territory.
Exactly how many deals can be deemed a failure is a moving target, but a recent article by the Harvard Business Review put the figure at somewhere between 70% and 90%. Even if you halve those figures, the odds of success are not hugely favorable for most M&A participants.
We at DealRoom help dozens of companies organizing their M&A process and below, we outline 10 of the most common and up-to-date reasons why this is so.
10 Reasons Why Mergers and Acquisitions Fail
1. Overpaying
This is probably the most common reason of transaction failure. Most attractive target companies operate under the assumption that "everything is for sale at the right price".
This effectively translates to "the business is always for sale when a buyer is willing to overpay".
In publicly listed companies, this usually means a premium over the share price and there’s little reason to doubt it’s any different in small, privately-held companies.
Buyers to set a limit before negotiations start and stick to it to minimize the chances of overpaying.
2. Overestimating synergies
Overestimating synergies goes hand-in-hand with overpaying in a transaction.
Overestimating the synergies inherent in a transaction is often the first step that leads to overpaying.
While the idea that costs will largely stay the same as two companies combine is alluring, it’s also far more difficult to achieve in practice than most managers are willing to admit. And revenue synergies are no less complicated to achieve.
For this reason, M&A practitioners would be well advised to look at potential transaction synergies through a highly conservative lens.
3. Insufficient due diligence
The importance of due diligence can never be emphasized enough, partly because so many firms are evidently keen to get it over with as soon as possible.
One of the major problems that arises during the diligence process is that the acquirer is depending on the target company to provide information that isn’t always complimentary to their management. This creates obvious agency problems.
By extension, the more uncomplimentary the information, the more the target company's team is likely to withhold it and/or explain it away.
In extreme cases, this can lead to transaction failure in the long-run.
4. Misunderstanding the target company
Even due diligence doesn’t guarantee a complete understanding of the target company.
Diligence provides the best opportunity to do so, but there are plenty of cases where even a lengthy period of due diligence doesn’t reveal what makes a company tick.
The example of British grocery retailer Morrissons acquiring rival company Safeway in 2003 is testament to this.
What looked like a great deal on paper for Morrissons, expanding their footprint all over the UK, turned into a nightmare, essentially because the two firms served completely different types of customers.
5. Lack of a strategic plan
A good "why" is an essential component of all successful transactions. That is, without a good motive for a transaction, it’s doomed to failure from the outset.
Academic literature on M&A is replete with studies of managers engaging in "empire building" through M&A, and research into how is a common trend in M&A.
A good rule of thumb here is that the if a transaction's motive can't be easily explained, the more likely it is to be a failure.
Recommended by LinkedIn
"Market share" is a good motive; "become a visionary in the industry" is not.
6. Lack of cultural fit
Perhaps an "inability to acknowledge cultural differences" might be a better title.
Why?
Because cultural difference in itself isn’t a problem, rather, it’s the inability (or unwillingness) to acknowledge them and bridge the gap.
Any two companies engaging in a transaction should use a change manager to oversee the process.
Categorizing culture differences in mergers and acquisitions as merely a "soft area" of the transaction has led to billions of dollars being destroyed over the years.
7. Overextending resources
Bolt on mergers and acquisitions, target companies which are small in size relative to the acquiring company, are usually considered to be the best type of transactions.
One of the main reasonings behind this is that bolt on deals don’t require as many resources to be acquired or to be integrated.
On the other side of the equation, are transactions that require significant resources on the part of the acquiring firm. Loading up on debt to acquire creates pressure from day one to cut costs, which is never a good start for a deal, and often the beginning of the end.
8. Wrong time in industry cycle
For the myriad of reasons cited for the failure of the notorious AOL/Time Warner deal, one is seldom given; the year 2000 was not a good time for media firms to merge.
The media industry was about to undergo the biggest shake-up in its history, from which it is only now beginning to show signs of recovery.
The inability to see long-term shifts is a human trait (we overestimate change in the short-term and underestimate it in the long-term) and one that impacts many M&A managers, ultimately leading to the downfall of transactions.
9. External factors
External factors (sometimes called "exogenous factors" or just "risks"), refers to everything that’s out of a manager’s control. 2020 provides us with a readily available example.
Suppose the managers of two hotel chains are considering a merger. The deal makes sense on almost every level; financial, cultural and strategic.
There is no overlap in geography, meaning regional hotel chains are joining to create a national chain.
On paper, the deal is perfect. As soon as the deal closes, a pandemic sweeps the world, tourism stops and money dries up.
The deal has been a failure because of external factors that few could have foreseen.
10. Lack of management involvement
The most obvious reason for failure is left till last. Management involvement is something of a catch-all answer and often incorporates many of the other reasons on this list.
No stage of the M&A process will manage itself, be that the search for a suitable target to the integration of two businesses into the newly formed entity.
When managers deem other tasks in their company to be more important than the successful implementation of M&A, they shouldn’t be surprised when the deal is eventually deemed a failure.
Read also:
Conclusion
The number of transactions that fail every year, even among experienced practitioners, is a testament to the difficulty of getting everything absolutely right in M&A.
A list like the one we have just outlined serves as a warning to managers that things can go wrong, even after they have seemingly taken all the right precautionary steps.
Our previous article on due diligence is an excellent place for any manager looking to maximize their chances of a successful transaction and avoiding these pitfalls.