by Steve Adubato, PhD

A law firm in California recently expanded by adding a smaller law firm to their operation. On paper, the merger looked great because the smaller firm had an area of expertise that increased their overall portfolio and created new opportunities and markets.

The only problem was that when it came to communicating and managing the merger, key leaders fell short. More specifically, they just assumed everything would work out without realizing they needed to be more proactive in dealing directly with potential problems and issues instead of waiting for them to fester and get out of control. Consider the following.

When the acquiring law firm communicates that their standard operating procedure regarding a particular way of doing business needs to be complied with “because that is the way we do things around here,” it sends a powerful message. That’s not a good enough answer when you are bringing in new people who you want to be part of the team but who have a very different organizational culture and way of doing business.

When you communicate in such an autocratic fashion, it sends the message “we don’t really care what you think or how you did things before and we don’t what impact this has on your existing clients and customers. Just do what you are told and keep your mouth shut.” That is not a great way to successfully create an organizational marriage.

Further, many organizations that acquire or merge with others don’t have an effective feedback mechanism for concerns and issues to be put on the table. When this happens, those coming into a new organization often feel isolated, which will cause them to complain to each other and ultimately become less productive. This in turn adversely affects employee morale and effectiveness.

Consider the issue of space and office design and what it communicates. The original law firm occupied the first two floors of their office building and all the people from the new firm were placed on the third floor. Think about that. All the people from the original firm are still together as if they are one team. But the newly acquired folks have been segregated and separated. What does this communicate when people go to work, but don’t ever see or interact with other professionals in a different part of the building? Aren’t they all supposed to be part of the same work family?

In this same California law firm, with people separated by floors, you would hear many managers referring to each other as the “Smith people” or the “Jones people.” When you separate people by where they work or where they came from, and rarely put them together to work on jobs, you create two different organizations working under the same roof. That is not a merger. That’s like a husband and wife who are separated or divorced but still living in the same house because they can’t afford to sell it.

Finally, when organizations merge, much is expected, particularly of the new people who come in. There are tremendous demands on their time and they are asked to work long hours, sometimes over the weekend. Consider having a social event in which the spouses of the newly merged employees come together with those from the original firm. Why? Because it communicates clearly that the organization respects and appreciates the personal and family lives of every employee.

Simply put, mergers don’t happen by magic. They succeed only with honest, open and consistent communication among all parties involved.