Similar to technical debt, integration debt refers to harmonization items that can't be completed in the initial 90-day window. An "integration debt tracker" formally documents these tasks, assigns ownership, and ensures they aren't forgotten after the main integration project is considered complete.

Related Insights

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.

Don't surprise an acquired company with an integration plan on day one. Snowflake turns diligence into a collaborative process post-term sheet. They work with the target's leadership to jointly build the integration thesis, define milestones, and agree on charters, ensuring buy-in and alignment before the deal is even signed.

The biggest risk after closing a deal is losing momentum. To ensure success, Snowflake assigns a 'Directly Responsible Individual' (DRI) for integration. This person leads reviews at 30, 60, 90, and 180 days post-close to hold everyone accountable to the integration plan and original thesis.

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.

Framing M&A like a marriage, rather than a transaction, fosters a long-term perspective. Sourcing is dating to find value alignment, the Letter of Intent is the engagement, and post-close integration is the marriage itself—the phase where the real, hard work of building a successful union begins.

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.

A separate Integration Management Office (IMO) creates a risky handoff. A better model for agile teams is for the Corp Dev professional who sourced and led the deal to pivot and own the integration plan post-close. This ensures the original deal thesis is carried through execution without loss of context.

In M&A integration, ambiguity is the enemy. Brad Jacobs' "throat to choke" principle ensures extreme accountability by assigning every single task, no matter how small, to one specific individual with a firm deadline. This prevents tasks from falling through the cracks and clarifies ownership across thousands of line items.

A detailed, rigid integration plan is fragile. A better approach is to create an "integration thesis" that sets clear "goalposts" and timelines for making key decisions. This allows for flexibility and data-informed choices (e.g., using A/B tests post-close) rather than locking into pre-deal assumptions.

Use an "Integration Debt Tracker" to Manage Long-Tail M&A Tasks | RiffOn