A Fortune 100 company planned to merge 2 business units with vastly differently corporate cultures and possibly mandates. The reason for the merger was as result of changing and converging market technologies, demographics changes driving the want/need for different technology.

It was decided that it was necessary to combine 2 testing laboratories. The basis of their decision was the competitive ‘knowledge’ synergy as result of the future of convergence, the combining of assets to reduce operating and infrastructure costs. The goal was to cut the amount of equipment and space needed in half.

Conflict:

The cultures clashed. The former entity, Technology Service Area #1, had a long history and tradition of doing things a certain way. The competition in that domain moved more slowly and methodically. Many of their systems and methodologies were predicated on tradition serving an infrastructure that was older. The average length of person in their job was 22 years. Their customer base was firmly established. The latter, newer entity, Technology Service Area #2, had little history. Their systems were new and methodologies were being created in near ‘real-time’. The employees were younger, very ambitious, and anxious to please. Their culture included as much innovation and speed as possible without arduous and seemingly unnecessary process. People in their jobs averaged 5 years. Their market environment was extremely competitive and technology is changing quickly.

Resolution:

The physical move, required by the Technology Service Area #1,, was extremely painful and disruptive for them. “We feel like we’re being assimilated”. They saw the latter entity as a group of cowboys in the wild west who would do anything to compete and win. The former entity felt that important values, those values which made them successful, were being disregarded.

As result, there was an increasing lack of cooperation and coordination due to a lack of trust and respect. Processes, which otherwise might have worked though not ideal, were rendered useless. They were unwilling to share equipment or synergize processes. The staff was demoralized and disintegrated. The initial time estimated to move the lab was 6 months, and it had extended to 11 months with no end in sight.

The Vice President was at the end of his rope in terms of possibilities and attempts at constructive dialogue and change. Internal meetings were simply ‘stonewalled’ with members sitting arms folded, not willing to talk about the situation or solutions any longer. The decision to abort the initial integration plan was close to the only option he could see due to a profound lack of cooperation. Through a referral, Lidia Young was called in to assess, create a plan and execute it towards improving productivity of the teams and integration if possible.

Lidia conducted an assessment through discovery and excavation through interviews, regarding the concerns and problems. She explored and identified belief systems of key individuals, the group, and focused on personal goals as well as the various groups’ aspirations. What did they aspire to do? What do they want to be known for? After the initial assessment, through a series of carefully facilitated meetings, both teams realized they wanted many of the same things and that their current stance was preventing their personal success as well as the success of their projects.

After the meetings with Lidia, the groups were able to synergize and get the appropriate processes into place. Both groups were able to then identify equipment sharing possibilities, leverage each other’s knowledge, and co-locate.

Conclusion:

Within 2 months of Lidia’s involvement, the groups were successfully integrated, willing and wanting to work together and leverage each other’s knowledge, eliminated of one of the labs, consolidated office and infrastructure space, resulting in millions of dollars in savings and competitive knowledge benefits to the organization.