Synergy Obsession vs. Orchestration Reality: Why M&A Automation Engines Often Fail

Synergy estimates find favor with boards because they present financial benefits such as “£2 million in IT cost savings.” The numbers disappear when integration projects encounter complexity and change resistance because there is no realistic orchestration roadmap.

The Disconnect

• Wishful Integration: Overestimating API availability and underestimating legacy approvals.

• Workflow Bloat: Over‑engineered automation pipelines that nobody adopts.

• Change Management Vacuum: The absence of training and ownership and governance leads to scripts being abandoned by users.

Lessons in Synergy Overreach

Research conducted on LinkedIn shows that 70–90% of M&A deals fail to meet synergy expectations because integration expenses including IT alignment and employee training and regulatory fees were omitted from the original model.

A Pragmatic Orchestration Roadmap

1. Phase 1 - Lightweight Orchestration Layer e.g. n8n: The implementation of a streamlined automation engine should begin with 2–3 minimum‑viable processes (e.g., incident remediation, user provisioning).

2. Phase 2 - requires proof of ROI through weeks of savings before expanding to more workflows.

3. Phase 3 -Governance & Adoption: Version control together with stakeholder champions and training should be implemented to prevent orphaned automations from occurring.

Let’s discuss your situation if you pursue synergies yet experience obstacles in orchestration implementation. A 90‑Day Impact CTO engagement creates a minimalistic automation system which starts delivering actual cost savings and user adoption during the first thirty days. Visit www.theimpactcto.com to learn more.