Teams often treat TSA budgets as 'free money' for integration, leading to casual extension requests. To drive urgency, integration leads must show how TSA costs directly impact a functional team's P&L. This shifts perception from a central budget item to a direct departmental expense, accelerating the exit process.
Related Insights
Don't just hand an integration plan to functional leaders post-close. Involve them early in the process as co-architects. Their input is crucial for validating financial models and strategic assumptions, ensuring realistic expectations and fostering ownership of the deal's success.
When lobbying for a new tool like telemetry, don't just ask for the tool. Frame its absence as a direct blocker to your core responsibilities. By stating, "I can't make decisions without this data," you tie the budget request to clear business outcomes and personal accountability.
To truly disconnect, empower your team with financial autonomy for problem-solving. Define a clear budget (e.g., '$400 per problem') within which they can act without your approval. This forces resourcefulness and prevents you from becoming a micromanagerial bottleneck.
Proving value for internal tools is challenging when direct revenue is absent. Treat inter-departmental budget allocation as a form of "payment" and a signal of buy-in. Alternatively, measure success through concrete efficiency gains, such as reducing a three-day financial reconciliation process to three hours.
To avoid a broken handoff, embed key business and integration experts into the core deal team from the start. These members view diligence through an integration lens, validating synergy assumptions and timelines in real-time. This prevents post-signing surprises and ensures the deal model is operationally achievable, creating a seamless transition from deal-making to execution.
Viewing TSAs as simple contracts encourages extensions and complacency. Framing them as projects with defined start dates, end dates, and scopes creates the necessary urgency for the acquiring company to build internal capabilities and exit the agreement on time, preventing costly integration debt.
To combat decision paralysis during integration, implement a regimented playbook with RASI charts (Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, Informed). Critically, decisions are time-bound with clear milestones. If a decision isn't made within the specified timeframe, it is automatically escalated, forcing resolution and maintaining momentum.
In the final deal approval meeting, require every functional lead (HR, finance, sales, etc.) to present their findings and cast an explicit go/no-go vote. This forces accountability and surfaces last-minute objections, preventing passive dissent where a stakeholder might later claim they were unheard, thus undermining integration.
To capture an executive's attention, connect operational-level problems to their strategic business impact. A slow development cycle isn't just a process issue; explain how it directly causes delayed time-to-market, higher costs, and lost market share to competitors, which are the metrics an economic buyer truly cares about.
Getting approval for an operations hire is difficult because they aren't directly tied to new revenue. Instead of a vague promise of "efficiency," build a business case by quantifying the cost of a broken process—like a high lead disqualification rate—and show how the hire will unlock that hidden pipeline.
