So in today's episode, Robert and Toby continue their conversation around value creation in M&A, but this time taking a more philosophical approach to the factors that impact the desire to go after value that is beyond what Rob defines as the 'bleeding obvious'
By 'bleeding obvious' Rob is alluding to the usual synergies, cost reductions, and efficiencies that result from typical M&A deals, and whilst achieving these can be stressful on the organization, the pathway is based on proven methodologies that are well trodden.
But then there is the innovative value that can be derived from M&A and in many cases that area has a lesser pursuit. Why is that?
Robert and Toby ponder whether it's because the organization is exhausted after dealing with the post-deal shenanigans or whether CEO's are risk averse and don't want to push value creation too strongly at the risk of their performance bonuses etc.
But maybe it's determined by the 'style' of CEO at the helm. Some are clearly focused on delivering consistent performance, whilst others are more 'entrepreneurial' and willing to take greater risks.
And maybe it's just that two teams are needed. The initial team that goes about achieving the bleeding obvious, with a second team swinging in slightly behind team 1 to pick up on the more creative/innovative themes and drive that additional 'buried treasure' that Toby often refers to?
The answer will always depend on many factors, and in fact could be a combination of all three scenarios that the dynamic duo talks about, but the fact remains that many deals stop at completion of the integration phase, and a lot of additional value creation remains buried.
What do you think? Have you got examples where that elusive innovation value has been uncovered? Do you want to come on a future podcast episode and talk about it? Let us know - you know how to find us.
So in today's episode, Robert and Toby continue their conversation around value creation in M&A, but this time taking a more philosophical approach to the factors that impact the desire to go after value that is beyond what Rob defines as the 'bleeding obvious'
By 'bleeding obvious' Rob is alluding to the usual synergies, cost reductions, and efficiencies that result from typical M&A deals, and whilst achieving these can be stressful on the organization, the pathway is based on proven methodologies that are well trodden.
But then there is the innovative value that can be derived from M&A and in many cases that area has a lesser pursuit. Why is that?
Robert and Toby ponder whether it's because the organization is exhausted after dealing with the post-deal shenanigans or whether CEO's are risk averse and don't want to push value creation too strongly at the risk of their performance bonuses etc.
But maybe it's determined by the 'style' of CEO at the helm. Some are clearly focused on delivering consistent performance, whilst others are more 'entrepreneurial' and willing to take greater risks.
And maybe it's just that two teams are needed. The initial team that goes about achieving the bleeding obvious, with a second team swinging in slightly behind team 1 to pick up on the more creative/innovative themes and drive that additional 'buried treasure' that Toby often refers to?
The answer will always depend on many factors, and in fact could be a combination of all three scenarios that the dynamic duo talks about, but the fact remains that many deals stop at completion of the integration phase, and a lot of additional value creation remains buried.
What do you think? Have you got examples where that elusive innovation value has been uncovered? Do you want to come on a future podcast episode and talk about it? Let us know - you know how to find us.