I sat in a room of Canada's top dealmakers at TechExit.io in Vancouver recently.
Bankers. PE. Corp dev. Lawyers. Founders. Investors.
Smart people. Real capital at stake.
Everyone talked about valuation. Multiples. Earn-outs. LOIs. Optionality. Dry powder. Tax efficiency.
Here's what I didn't hear: integration failure rates.
M&A conversations obsess over valuation mechanics. But value erosion happens in integration.
The 24/24 problem
They talked about starting 18–24 months early.
Most CEOs bring in M&A lawyers 24 months before a sale. They bring in a People/HR integration lead 24 days after close.
And then they're surprised when:
- Key leaders leave
- Incentives distort behaviour during earn-outs
- Culture fractures
- Systems don't talk to each other
- Governance slows or paralyzes decisions
- Execution stalls
The humans who built the company feel the shock first
If you're selling, your team absorbs uncertainty, role ambiguity, incentive changes, and leadership turnover.
If you're buying, your existing team absorbs integration fatigue, political friction, and cultural collision.
Harmonization isn't integration
An LOI can outline purchase price and structure.
It does not design the business that has to operate the day after close. The post-close operating model. Decision rights. Incentive alignment. Leadership standards. Integration accountability.
By the time most companies call someone like me, the deal is signed and the integration risk is live.
If you're planning an exit
If you're planning an exit in the next 12–24 months — buy-side or sell-side — and no one is accountable for looking at people, org design and execution risk before the LOI is locked…
That's a gap.
Live deal? Or one coming? Let's talk before the LOI gets locked.