Post on 14-Jan-2015
description
Best Practices for Knowledge Transfer in Merger & Acquisition Integrations: A Phenomenological Study
Dr. Thomas BlumerApril 15, 2014
2
Quick Introduction
Dr. Thomas Blumer (tfb@qad.com)Director of Knowledge Management at QADSpecialty: KM, Systems Integrations, M&A, KPIsDBA in Business AdministrationMBA in Technology ManagementBS in Business Administration (Finance)
Agenda
• Research Study Background• Data Analysis• Conclusions• Implications for Companies• Implications for Leaders• Recommendations
3
4
Research Study Background
The Four Dimensions
KnowledgeTransfer
M&AIntegrations
Phenomenology
U. S. EnterpriseSoftwareIndustry
5
6
Problem Statement
• Approximately 50% of M&A destroyed value for shareholders of the acquiring company(a)
• Knowledge has become one of the main assets for the enterprise software industry (b)
• Less than 24% of companies achieved access to talent or know-how through M&A (c)
• Little research exists on how M&A process influences knowledge transfer, which is crucial for acquiring, understanding, and incorporating newly purchased knowledge (d)
7
Purpose Statement
The purpose of this qualitative phenomenological study was to identify and explore best practices for knowledge transfer in mergers and acquisitions integrations in the U. S. enterprise software industry.
8
Research Question
How do people successfully transfer knowledge during a merger or acquisition integration?
9
Limitations
10
• Self-collected data- Bias towards managers and executives
• Research- Phenomenology is subjective (a)
- Postpositive when dealing with human behavior (b)
Postpositive means that the researcher cannot be positive about the results of their studies when focusing on human behavior or actions. Studies are often a reduction of the reality and leave out certain important variables for different reasons—variables that may be important to understand the system (Phillips & Burbules, 2000; Watzlawick, Beavin-Bavelas, & Jackson, 1967).
Delimitations
• Focus on enterprise software industry• Focus on United States• Focus on people with M&A and knowledge
transfer experience• Focus on the M&A integration process
11
12
Data Analysis
Sample Demographics (n=22)
13
30-39 years
40-49 years
50-59 years
60 years and over
Age
Male
Female
Gender
ManagerExecutive
Employee
Position
No move
Branch or subsidiary (acquirer)
Headquarters (acquirer)
Left company
New Work Location
Caucasian
Hispanic
Mix Asian
Race
Sample Population Criteria
• Enterprise software industry- IT- Support- Services- (Sales)
• M&A experience• Knowledge transfer experience• Sequential sampling (a)
(Maximum variation until saturation)
14aGhauri & Gronhaug (2005)
Findings OverviewCategory Theme Sources Percenta References Percentb
M&A 1. M&A Integrations 22 100% 407 21%
Knowledge Management 2. Communication 22 100% 442 23%
3. Knowledge Transfer 21 95% 180 9%
4. Lost Knowledge 21 95% 95 5%
5. Information Ambiguity 18 82% 60 3%
Organizational 6. Management 22 100% 227 12%
7. Organizational Culture 22 100% 189 10%
8. Information Systems 21 95% 164 8%
Personal 9. Trust 20 91% 97 5%
10. Feelings 19 86% 97 5%
Total 22 100% 1958 100%
15Note. aRepresents the number of participants compared to the whole sample (n=22); bRepresents the number of references compared to all the references within this category (n=1958).
10 Core Themes by Importance
16
2. C
omm
unicat
ion
1. M
&A Inte
grat
ions
6. M
anag
emen
t
7. O
rgan
izatio
nal C
ultu
re
3. K
nowle
dge
Tran
sfer
8. In
form
atio
n Sy
stem
s
9. T
rust
Lev
el
10. F
eelin
gs
4. Los
t Kno
wledg
e
5. In
form
atio
n Am
bigu
ity0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
21%
40%
30%
10%
M&A Knowledge Transfer Organizational Personal
Core Themes Word Similarity
17
18
10 Conclusions
Define and communicate M&A goals StatementExecutives had to explain the strategic M&A goals to integration managers, line managers, employees, and IT.ExampleOne of the dilemmas as stated by Participant 5 was that executives did not want to share goals clearly and honestly up front because of the fear that valuable employees who were needed for integration work might leave the company too early unless they were given a strategic function. However, manager should communicate the goals clearly to secure the strategic resources.What’s newExecutives should ensure strategic success by communicating M&A goals clearly and openly with the risk of creating tactical integration issues for non-critical business units rather than doing the opposite. 19
Deliver consistent messages
StatementIt was important to synchronize internal and external communication.ExampleParticipant 5 mentioned, "And they [communication from management] have stayed very consistent. And they are not saying something to the press and then something else to us." What’s newHolistic view on communication including reputation.
20
Select the appropriate transfer channel for the knowledgeStatementThere are different kinds of knowledge, and each requires a different transfer approach (e.g., IT knowledge, business knowledge, and M&A knowledge).ExampleParticipant 4 stated, “In a merger situation, the solutions for, making knowledge management a smooth affair is actually outside knowledge management, on the strategic level.“What’s newCross-divisional solutions: • Business process ensures knowledge transfer.• Knowledge management ensures that the right knowledge
is preserved during integrations.
21
Avoid knowledge transfer traps
StatementThe knowledge transfer trap is a situation in which the knowledge or the data was transferred, but it was useless.Example• Participant 1 mentioned that the data from their knowledge
base was transferred into the new system; however, neither customers nor support engineers could find the content anymore because the search engine was overwhelmed.
• Participant 18 stated that the complexity of the acquired product required employees with a PhD to work in customer support, although the patents were successfully transferred.
What’s new The possibility of successful transfer without value.
22
Manage perception differences between companiesStatementEveryone interpreted the situation through his or her frame of reference, which caused information ambiguities.Example• Different information depended on who you talk to. Different
people in different positions have different viewpoints (Participant 14).
• This difference was often big between the acquirer and the acquired company. The issue is that effective knowledge transfer requires understanding (Participant 6).
What’s newThe true meaning of the M&A impact cannot be fully understood by studying M&A or by managing an integration, but by going through an adapt-and-go integration as an acquiree.
23
Back up knowledge transfer with decisionsStatementManagement decisions had a direct impact on the M&A integration and on knowledge management. It all boiled down to having access to resources, getting budget allocations, and gaining sponsorship for the KT initiatives.Example• Participant 15 elaborated on how senior management allocated time for the
knowledge management initiative and stressed the importance that the commitment has to go beyond lip service.
• C-level support was important to ensure knowledge-sharing goals were set from the top all the way down to kick-start a knowledge-sharing culture (Participant 4).
What’s new Literature has paid little attention to knowledge transfer during M&A (Zollo & Meier, 2008), and the same is true for the influence of management (Sitkin & Pablo, 2004). This research provided some practical examples.
24
Focus on behavior, not culture
StatementIn addition to the mental changes in the behavior, this study found instances where systematic processes were introduced to enforce the new way. Participant 2 summed it up like this: “And guess what? The systems don’t allow you to do it the old way.”ExampleThe program was called KM stars and rewarded people for knowledge-sharing activities. By creating this program and financially rewarding people for sharing, this initiative sent the message to employees that senior management found knowledge sharing important (Participant 10).What’s new The research provided practical examples on how to overcome knowledge transfer challenges in M&A integrations.
25
Foster interactive systems
StatementTechnology, like public instant messaging, enabled knowledge transfer before IT people started integrating systems.ExampleThere are many interactive systems available and Participant 6 mentioned, "Fundamentally no one of them is critical. But the collection of them together." Participant 22 mentioned that communities of practice enabled new members to participate quickly in role-specific discussions company-wide and to be recognized as experts within weeks What’s newLiterature did not focus on the additional challenges for communities of practice during M&A integrations, such as budget allocations for migrating systems or onboarding of new employees.
26
Improve the organizational socialization processStatementThis study revealed the importance of organizational socialization; the integration teams should first focus on managers and then employees to create a trusting culture, which companies need for knowledge transfer.Example• Participant 6 stated, "You’ve got to be re-recruited.... And if you don’t feel
as if you’ve been brought in and that you’re an important part of the team, you’re going to drift away."
• Participant 13 stated that employees chose the companies they worked for before a merger; however, in a merger, many employees move into the new company simply to have a job—it is not a cognizant decision to join a particular company.
What’s newOrganizational socialization goes beyond learning the new tools: it includes learning how to navigate in the new organization efficiently and effectively.
27
Remove negative emotions and political barriersStatementManagers made a difference in integrations, shaped organizational cultures, selected information systems, built trust, and influenced with their actions the feelings of the employees.ExampleParticipants 10 and 22 mentioned that communities of practice highlighted professionalism and removed the politics, which helped to overcome barriers to knowledge sharing. This was particularly true if sharing was incentivized, linked to a promotion path (Participant 10), or embedded in standard operating procedures or computer systems (Participant 4).What’s newThe difference to the existing literature is that this research provided practical best practices on how to overcome these kinds of challenges.
28
Conclusions
• Define and communicate M&A goals• Deliver consistent messages• Select the appropriate transfer channel for the
knowledge• Avoid knowledge transfer traps• Manage perception differences between companies
• Back up knowledge transfer with decisions• Focus on behavior, not culture• Foster interactive systems• Improve the organizational socialization process• Remove negative emotions and political barriers
29
30
4 Implications for Companies
Ensure sustainable profits
StatementThe following implications for companies all support ensuring sustainable profits.Mastering the integration process does not guarantee financial successExample• Participant 11 mentioned that 6 years after the acquisition, 50%
of the workforce was reduced.• Participant 18 mentioned that the financial outcomes of M&A
deals were kept secret because the financial goals were seldom reached.
What’s newKnowledge transfer is required to set realistic M&A goals and to ensure ongoing profit. Sustainable profits require a sales force that knows how to sell the acquired product and an R&D organization that can leverage the acquired intellectual property to build the next generation of the product. 31
Set the right M&A goals
Statement The M&A deal price often determines the financial M&A goals, which are often unrealistic.Example• Participant 18 recommended engaging in OEM deals first to get
a good understanding of the potential of the company. • Participant 18 elaborated on the connection between M&A deal
price and M&A goals. If the M&A goals are too low, shareholders may not approve a deal; if the goals are high to meet the deal price, they become unrealistic.
• Participant 13 mentioned that the integration teams should have actively communicated which of the initial M&A goals they could accomplish and which goals would change.
What’s newEnhanced understanding of (a) the conflict between the M&A deal price and the M&A goals and (b) the communication challenge of the true M&A goals. 32
Establish accountability
Statement Ongoing reorganizations and management changes make M&A accountability difficult. This is particularly challenging as the success of a M&A deal is not visible for many months or even years.Example“After two or three years after you see results, very few people will be in that room comparing the results and understanding what did work and didn’t work” (Participant 18)
What’s newThe study illustrated how M&A goals are set and why accountability and transparency are difficult.
33
Maintain a strong sales force
Statement A strong sales force ensures reaching the M&A goals; however, transferring sales competencies is difficult. The sales force is often not interested in learning new products or does not have the capacity.Example• Participant 5 mentioned that the existing sales force seldom
wanted to take on new products and that special incentives had to be set.
• Participant 18 agreed and stated that after years of losing market share the company realized the importance of keeping the acquired sales teams together (separate) and focusing on their core products.
What’s newThe research questioned the advantage of a combined sales force because of the increased complexity and the missing passion. If merging sales forces is required, timing, training, and compensation are crucial.
34
Implications for Companies
• Ensure sustainable profits• Set the right M&A goals• Establish accountability• Maintain a strong sales force
35
36
3 Implications for Leaders
Leadership matters
Statement Knowledge transfer is driven by leaders through their understanding, actions, and decisions.Example• Engaged leaders aligned and motivated their teams and
removed roadblocks to speed up the integration process (Participants 4, 6, 18, 19).
• Disengaged, self-serving leaders jeopardized integrations, delayed the integrations, and created additional stress (Participant 17).
What’s newLeaders have to be aware of their feelings and the feelings of employees during M&A integration. After leading several acquisitions, Participant 16 realized what it meant to be acquired once his company got acquired.
37
M&A integrations can be improved
Statement Integrations can be improved by following the best practices for knowledge transfer; for example the ones discussed in this research. ExampleThe research identified lost opportunities, particularly around key knowledge holders. For example, the sales force is not just important for maintaining the prognosticated revenue; the knowledge from the sales force is difficult to transfer and existing sales people are often reluctant to take on new responsibilities (Participant 5, 18, and 20).What’s newThe research showed the complexity of M&A integration, the political struggles, and the challenge of determine the right integration points for the different departments. Each integration is different; however, clear communication—particularly around the true M&A goals and applying the discussed knowledge transfer best practices—is universal. 38
Communication and decisions are importantStatement Communication built the foundation for knowledge transfer by informing employees, building trust, and engaging employees. Decisions need to reflect what was communicated because contradictory, direction-changing, or secret decisions jeopardized trust.Example• Changing the integration approach midstream from a symbiotic
approach, where people are excited to work on a new solution, to an adaption approach, is detrimental (Participants 6 and 19).
• Participant 2 elaborated on his frustration regarding a foregone conclusion for the new development platform.
What’s newThe conducted interviews provided extensive insight into the communication process, the communication systems, the communication methods, and the different sources of information. In addition, knowledge transfer relies on the manager selecting the right integration approach, the right integration teams, the right tools, and the right process adjustments.
39
Implications for Leaders
• Leadership matters• M&A integrations can be improved• Communication and decisions are
important
40
41
6 Recommendations
Over-communicate
Statement During an M&A integration, managers have to use every communication channel to reach their employees and to inform and engage them.Example• "I mean the key to M&A is communication." Leaders do not just have to
communicate—they have to over-communicate (Participant 19).• Participant 6 confirmed that only 10% of the communication gets through
to people and that communication depends on a good understanding by the parties involved.
What’s newThe research highlighted that several participants were not clear about the true M&A intentions. The combination of open communication, frequency of communication, understanding of the parties, and selection of the right communication channels will improve the situation.
42
Identify and secure knowledge
Statement Participants 4 and 18 stressed the importance of identifying the strategic knowledge holders. Example• When managers had to reduce their teams during M&A
integration, managers often selected the tactical specialists to keep operations running, and the strategic people were dismissed (Participant 4).
• Participants 17 and 18 mentioned how certain products could not be supported without one or two key specialists.
What’s newThe research highlighted the challenges for managers between ensuring continuity of the current operation and ensuring future growth. As a result, a company needs to secure knowledge from a strategic point to ensure the next generation of the software can be developed.
43
Instill job security
Statement During M&A integrations, managers and integration teams have to instill job security for the resources the company needs.Example• As a manager, it is important to ensure job security for the important
knowledge assets. Retention plans, compensation, and career opportunities have to be aligned with the message of who is important to the company (Participants 1, 3, 5, 6, 12, 14, 17, and 18).
• In addition to retention bonuses, three participants (Participants 12, 14, and 18) recommended keeping successful teams together.
What’s newTransparency, good communication, and applying the right HR tools such as retention bonuses have to be aligned. Employees have to be aware of the true M&A goals to ensure themselves of their importance.
44
Carefully select integration team membersStatement Integration team members should be subject matter experts, have worked in M&A integrations, and preferably know both companies. Example• Appointing the right experts to the integration teams is not easy
for political reasons; the managers are often neither integrations experts nor subject matter experts (Participants 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, and 20).
• In addition, four participants recommended employing third-party M&A experts, at least as mediators (Participants 4, 13, 15, and 20).
What’s newThe study revealed the political challenges of finding subject matter experts. For example, certain managers participated in high-level discussions for self-serving purposes and excluded themselves from lower level process work, while the integration teams had to go through several iterations of potential subject matters until the true ones were discovered.
45
Adjust systems and processes
Statement The true value of knowledge comes from sharing the knowledge across the company by adjusting the systems and processes to support the transfer.Example• Participant 4 mentioned that knowledge transfer should be embedded in
processes and systems to ensure that changes are sustainable. • Sustainability was an important aspect for M&A integration and was highlighted
by 13 participants (Participants 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 20).• Participant 10 proposed that knowledge-sharing activities should be tracked,
communicated, celebrated, and a prerequisite to promotion. What’s newKnowledge transfer requires adjusting existing business processes, which often requires adjusting computer systems to enforce the change.
46
Influence the KT culture
Statement Managers can and should actively influence the organizational culture and kick-start a knowledge transferring culture after an M&A integration. Example• Participant 4 suggested kick starting the knowledge-sharing culture,
setting clear knowledge transfer goals for the leadership team, and creating mixed teams for enhanced knowledge transfer.
• Managers should balance their teams with employees from the acquired and the acquiring companies (Participants 4, 12, and 13). Not only does such a decision create trust, it also helps propagate knowledge. Separate teams had minimal interactions with each other and knowledge was hardly exchanged (Participant 11).
• It is important to differentiate which teams to migrate quickly to improve knowledge transfer and which teams to keep separated to ensure an uninterrupted revenue stream (Participants 18 and 20).
What’s newThe interconnectedness of soft components, processes, and systems during M&A integrations.
47
Recommendations
• Over-communicate• Identify and secure knowledge• Instill job security• Carefully select integration team
members• Adjust systems and processes• Influence the KT culture
48
Researcher’s Reflections
• Bias- Selection of participants- Preference for pragmatic approaches
• Surprises- Every participant could contribute something
new- Dissonance between self-view of acquirer and
view from acquired company- Underestimation of the importance of the sales
force
49
Theory meets Practices – NVivo 9
50
ThemeSources References
Sub-Theme
Section
Sub-Section
Source
Reference
Annotation
Meaning Units
Essence
Theme
Further Research
• Continue qualitative exploration in different setting- Different companies- Different industries- Different countries
• Test findings with quantitative approach and build grounded theory
• Processes- Establishing effective integration teams- Building a new organizational culture
• People- Organizational socialization process of existing employees- Sustainability of career opportunities
• Tools- Influence of extract, transform, load (ETL) tools & web
cameras 51
References
• Adolph, G., Pettit, J., & Sisk, M. (2009). Merge ahead: mastering the five enduring trends of artful M&A. McGraw-Hill.
• Aronson, E. (2007). The social animal (10 ed.). New York, NY: Worth Publishers.
• Badrtalei, J. & Bates, D. L. (2007, June). Effect of organizational cultures on mergers and acquisitions: The case of Daimler Chrysler. International Journal of Management, 24(2), 303-317.
• Beard, M., Boyd, L., & Fix Conti, S. (2007). M&A integration: CEO's field guide to the art & process of effective merger integration. Kearney, NE: Professional Growth Press.
• Brahma, S. S. & Srivastava, K. B. L. (2007, December). Communication, executive retention, and employee stress as predictors of acquisition performance: An empirical evidence. ICFAI Journal of Mergers & Acquisitions, 4(4), 7-26.
• Bruner, J. E. & Bruner, A. W. (2004). Applied mergers and acquisitions. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
• Buono, A. F. & Bowditch, J. L. (2003). The human side of mergers and acquisitions: Managing collisions between people, cultures, and organizations. Washington, DC: Beard Books. 53
References
Cartwright, S. & Schoenberg, R. (2006, March). Thirty years of mergers and acquisitions research: Recent advances and future opportunities. British Journal of Management, 17 , S1-S5. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8551.2006.00475.x
Chreim, S. (2007). Social and temporal influences on interpretations of organizational identity and acquisition integration: A narrative study. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 43(4), 449-480. doi:10.1177/0021886307307345
Cools, K., Gell, J., Kengelback, J., & Roos, A. (2007, July). The brave new world of M&A. Retrieved from http://www.bcg.com/publications/files/Brave_New_World_MA_Aug_2007.pdf
Covey, S. R. (2004). The 7 habits of highly effective people. New York, NY: Free Press.
Dixon, N. M. (2000). Common knowledge: How companies thrive by sharing what they know. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Firstbrook, C. (2007). Transnational mergers and acquisitions: How to beat the odds of disaster. The Journal of Business Strategy, 28(1), 53-56. doi:10.1108/02756660710723215
Foos, F., Schum, G., & Rothenberg, S. (2006). Tacit knowledge transfer and the knowledge disconnect. Journal of Knowledge Management, 10(1), 6-18. doi:10.1108/13673270610650067
54
References
Galpin, T. J. & Herndon, M. (2007). The complete guide to mergers & acquisitions: Process tolls to support M&A integrations at every level. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Ghauri, P. & Gronhaug, K. (2005). Research methods in business studies (3rd ed.). Harlow, England: Pearson Education.
Girdauskiené, L. & Savaneviciené, A. (2007, October). Influence of knowledge culture on effective knowledge transfer. Engineering Economics, 54(4), 36-43.
Gopinath, C. (2003). When acquisitions go awry: Pitfalls in executing corporate strategy. Journal of Business Strategy, 24(5), 22-26. doi:10.1108/02756660310504933
Holl, P. & Pickering, J. F. (1991). Takeovers and other influences on economic performance: A plant level analysis. Applied Economics, 23(11), 1779-1788. doi:10.1080/00036849100000073
Inkpen, A. C. (2008, March). Managing knowledge transfer in international alliances. Thunderbird International Business Review, 50(2), 77-90. doi:10.1002/tie.20180
Junni, P. (2007, October). Knowledge transfer in mergers and acquisitions: The roles of fear of exploitation and contamination. Retrieved from http://sandiego.strategicmanagement.net/handouts/0dfad03b407ab17112a42084ce525c97SMS%202-page%20handout%20-%20Junni.pdf
55
References
Lajoux, A. R. (2006). The art of M&A integration: A guide to merging resources, processes, and responsibilities (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw Hill.
Langdridge, D. (2007). Phenomenological psychology: Theory, research and method. Harlow, England: Pearson Education.
Mathew, V. & Kavitha, M. (2008, July). The critical knowledge transfer in an organization: Approaches. ICFAI Journal of Knowledge Management, 6(4), 25-39.
McCaskey, M. B. (1982). The executive challenge: Managing change and ambiguity. Marshfield, MA: Pitman.
Moeller, S. & Brady, C. (2007). Intelligent M&A: Navigating the mergers and acquisitions minefield. West Sussex, England: John Wiley.
Moitra, D. & Kumar, K. (2007, July). Managed socialization: How smart companies leverage global knowledge. Knowledge & Process Management, 14(3), 148-157. doi:10.1002/kpm.278
Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Parkes, A., Hasegawa, M., & Manjunatha, R. (4-8-2010). Merger and acquisition data validation. 12/247290. Ref Type: Patent 56
References
Pritchett, P., Robinson, D., & Clarkson, R. (1997). After the merger: The authoritative guide for integration success (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Riege, A. (2007). Actions to overcome knowledge transfer barriers in MNCs. Journal of Knowledge Management, 11(1), 48-67. doi:10.1108/13673270710728231
Schleimer, S. & Riege, A. (2009). Knowledge transfer between globally dispersed units at BMW. Journal of Knowledge Management, 13(1), 27-41. doi:10.1108/13673270910931143
Schmidt, J. A. (2002). Making mergers work - The strategic importance of people. Alexandria, VA: Towers Perrin.
Sherman, A. J. & Hart, M. A. (2006). Mergers & Acquisitions from A to Z (2nd ed.). New York, NY: AMACOM.
Sitkin, S. B. & Pablo, A. L. (2004). Leadership and the M&A process. In A. L. Pablo & M. Javidan (Eds.), Mergers and acquisitions: Creating integrative knowledge ( Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Smith, J. A., Flowers, P., & Larkin, M. (2009). Interpretative phenomenological analysis: Theory, method and research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Stahl, G. K. & Mendenhall, M. E. (2005). Mergers and acquisitions: Managing culture and human resources. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. 57
References
Stahl, G. K., Mendenhall, M. E., & Weber, Y. (2005). Research on sociocultural integration in mergers and acquisitions: Points of agreement, paradoxes, and avenues for future research. In G. K. Stahl & M. E. Mendenhall (Eds.), Mergers and acquisitions: Managing culture and human resources (pp. 401-411). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Szulanski, G. (1996, Winter). Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17(Winter Special Issue), 27-43.
Taylor, W. (1991, March). The logic of global business: An interview with ABB's Percy Barnevik. Harvard Business Review, 69(2), 90-105. doi:Interview
Vlaar, P. W. L., Van den Bosch, F. A. J., & Volberda, H. W. (2006). Coping with problems of understanding in interorganizational relationships: Using formalization as a means to make sense. Organization Studies, 27(11), 1617-1638. doi:10.1177/0170840606068338
Wenger, E., White, N., & Smith, J. D. (2009). Digital habitats: Stewarding technology for communities. Portland, OR: CPsquare.
Windsor, D. (2003). Change management competencies for creating collaborative organizations. In M. Beyerlein (Ed.), Advances in interdisciplinary studies of work teams (pp. 31-65). Oxford, England: Emerald.
Youngjin, Y., Lyytinen, K., & Heo, D. (2007, October). Closing the gap: Towards a process model of post-merger knowledge sharing. Information Systems Journal, 17(4), 321-347.
Zollo, M. & Meier, D. (2008, August). What is M&A performance? Academy of Management Perspectives, 22(3), 55-77.
58
59
Backup Materials &Printer Friendly Graphics
The Four Dimensions
KnowledgeTransfer
M&AIntegrations
Phenomenology
U. S. EnterpriseSoftwareIndustry
60
Findings (Saturation Graphic)
61
Parti
cipa
nt 1
Parti
cipa
nt 2
Parti
cipa
nt 3
Parti
cipa
nt 4
Parti
cipa
nt 5
Parti
cipa
nt 6
Parti
cipa
nt 7
Parti
cipa
nt 8
Parti
cipa
nt 9
Parti
cipa
nt 1
0
Parti
cipa
nt 1
1
Parti
cipa
nt 1
2
Parti
cipa
nt 1
3
Parti
cipa
nt 1
4
Parti
cipa
nt 1
5
Parti
cipa
nt 1
6
Parti
cipa
nt 1
7
Parti
cipa
nt 1
8
Parti
cipa
nt 1
9
Parti
cipa
nt 2
0
Parti
cipa
nt 2
1
Parti
cipa
nt 2
20%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
18%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
% N
ew
meanin
g u
nit
s
% C
um
ula
tive n
ew
meanin
g u
nit
s
Findings (Saturation Graphic)
62
Parti
cipa
nt 1
Parti
cipa
nt 2
Parti
cipa
nt 3
Parti
cipa
nt 4
Parti
cipa
nt 5
Parti
cipa
nt 6
Parti
cipa
nt 7
Parti
cipa
nt 8
Parti
cipa
nt 9
Parti
cipa
nt 1
0
Parti
cipa
nt 1
1
Parti
cipa
nt 1
2
Parti
cipa
nt 1
3
Parti
cipa
nt 1
4
Parti
cipa
nt 1
5
Parti
cipa
nt 1
6
Parti
cipa
nt 1
7
Parti
cipa
nt 1
8
Parti
cipa
nt 1
9
Parti
cipa
nt 2
0
Parti
cipa
nt 2
1
Parti
cipa
nt 2
20%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
18%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
% N
ew
meanin
g u
nit
s
% C
um
ula
tive n
ew
meanin
g u
nit
s
QuantitativeResearch
Design
MixedResearch
Design
ExperimentalResearch
CorrelationalResearch
SurveyResearch
TriangulationMixed Method
Explanatory Mixed Method
Exploratory Mixed Method
Qualitative Research
Design
NarrativeResearch
GroundedTheory
Ethnography
Case Study
Phenomenology
Methodology and Design
DescriptivePhenomenology
Interpretative Phenomenology
Interpretative Phenomenological
Analysis (IPA)
Hermeneutic Phenomenology
Critical Narrative Analysis
TemplateAnalysis
63
Findings OverviewCategory Theme Sources Percenta References Percentb
M&A 1. M&A Integrations 22 100% 407 21%
Knowledge Management 2. Communication 22 100% 442 23%
3. Knowledge Transfer 21 95% 180 9%
4. Lost Knowledge 21 95% 95 5%
5. Information Ambiguity 18 82% 60 3%
Organizational 6. Management 22 100% 227 12%
7. Organizational Culture 22 100% 189 10%
8. Information Systems 21 95% 164 8%
Personal 9. Trust 20 91% 97 5%
10. Feelings 19 86% 97 5%
Total 22 100% 1958 100%
64Note. aRepresents the number of participants compared to the whole sample (n=22); bRepresents the number of references compared to all the references within this category (n=1958).
10 Core Themes by Importance
65
2. C
omm
unicat
ion
1. M
&A Inte
grat
ions
6. M
anag
emen
t
7. O
rgan
izatio
nal C
ultu
re
3. K
nowle
dge
Tran
sfer
8. In
form
atio
n Sy
stem
s
9. T
rust
Lev
el
10. F
eelin
gs
4. Los
t Kno
wledg
e
5. In
form
atio
n Am
bigu
ity0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
21%
40%
30%
10%
M&A Knowledge Transfer Organizational Personal
66
Tacitness
Specificity
Complexity
Experience
Partner Protectiveness
Cultural Distance
OrganizationalDistance
Ambiguity
IT
LearningStrategy
TrustCulture
Flexible Structure
Knowledge Transfer
0.342*
-0.045
0.168*
-0.2
83*
0.02
30.
176*
0.27
4*
-0.357*0.744*
0.688*
0.660*
0.62
3*
*p < 0.01
Simonin (1999)
Rhodes et al. (2008)
67
Methodology
Research Interconnectedness
68
Chapter 1
Purpose Research Question
Chapter 2Literature
Review
Chapter 3Research Approach
Chapter 422 Interviews10 Themes
1958 References
Conclusions
Implications for Companies
Implications for Leaders
Recommendations
Data Analysis Process
• 10-step method combines- Moustakas (1994) based on his modified
• Stevick-Colaizzi-Keen methoda
• van Kaam methodb
- Langdridge (2007) method- Smith, Flowers, and Larkin (2009) method
69aStevick (1971), Colaizzi (1973), and Keen (1975); bvan Kaam (1959, 1966)
10-Step Approach
1. Conduct researcher self-description of the phenomenon (Moustakas, 1994).
2. Identify suppressed or omitted data points (Langdridge, 2007; Smith et al., 2009).
3. Create meaning units (Moustakas, 1994).4. Eliminate repetitive, overlapping
meaning units (Moustakas, 1994).5. Cluster meaning units into themes
(Moustakas, 1994).
70
10-Step Approach
6. Repeat steps 1-5 for all participants.7. Fine-tune and reorganize overarching
meaning units and themes (Langdridge, 2007; Moustakas, 1994).
8. Add verbatim text examples (Moustakas, 1994).
9. Compose the essence of the experience (Moustakas, 1994).
10.Reflect on the process (Moustakas, 1994).
71