To maintain objectivity in acquisitions, Bending Spoons separates assumption-setting from model output. The team rigorously debates and locks in all inputs without seeing the projected P&L or IRR. This prevents the common bias of tweaking assumptions to justify a desired outcome. The final model output is then treated as unchangeable.

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.

Before hunting for acquisitions, the internal business owner (deal sponsor) must write a thesis answering "what problem are we solving?" This prevents reactive M&A driven by inbound opportunities and ensures strategic alignment from the start, separating the "why" from the "who."

At IVP, even when a partner is passionate about a deal, the firm encourages them to 'sleep on it' after a debate. This deliberate pause allows the partner to process the team's feedback without pressure, often leading to a more rational assessment of their own conviction and preventing investments driven by emotion rather than collective wisdom.

To avoid confirmation bias and make disciplined capital allocation decisions, investors should treat every follow-on opportunity in a portfolio company as if it were a brand-new deal. This involves a full 're-underwriting' process, assessing the current state and future potential without prejudice from past involvement.

Cisco establishes "value drivers"—quantifiable or time-bound success metrics based on the deal thesis—very early on. The diligence process is then used to rigorously test whether the target can achieve these specific metrics, ensuring a clear, data-driven path to value creation post-close.

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.

Many M&A teams focus solely on closing the deal, a critical execution task. The best acquirers succeed by designing a parallel process where integration planning and value creation strategies are developed simultaneously with due diligence, ensuring post-close success.

To avoid emotional spending that kills runway, analyze every major decision through three financial scenarios. A 'bear' case (e.g., revenue drops 10%), 'base' case (plan holds), and 'bull' case (revenue grows 10%). This sobering framework forces you to quantify risk and compare alternatives objectively before committing capital.

AI models tend to be overly optimistic. To get a balanced market analysis, explicitly instruct AI research tools like Perplexity to act as a "devil's advocate." This helps uncover risks, challenge assumptions, and makes it easier for product managers to say "no" to weak ideas quickly.

Three dangerous mindsets, or "coats of conviction," derail M&A deals. They are: reactive positioning (chasing auctions), integration negligence (delaying planning), and the model mirage (trusting an untested financial model). A disciplined, proactive process is the antidote to these common pitfalls.