CASE STUDY 1

Framing and Structuring Change in a High-Stakes Acquisition

A global FMCG organisation acquiring a founder-led premium brand faced significant integration risks before execution even began. By framing and structuring change upfront—clarifying governance, decision rights, and people priorities—the organisation achieved Day-1 readiness, preserved critical talent, and maintained business continuity while enabling growth during integration.

Service category: Framing and Structuring Change

Transformation scenario: Pre- and post-acquisition integration

Sector: FMCG / Consumer Goods

Geography: Europe (anonymised)

Context Integrating a global FMCG group and a founder-led premium brand

Acquirer: A global FMCG organisation (>10,000 employees globally), operating across multiple regions and brands.

Acquired entity: A mid-sized premium brand organisation (~500 employees), with highly centralised decision-making, strong founder influence, and deep emotional attachment to the brand and leadership.

Strategic intent: Accelerate growth and international expansion while preserving brand equity, talent, and organisational stability.

Business challenge Integration risk before execution

Despite strong strategic alignment, leadership faced critical integration risks before formal execution began:

Lack of clarity on how integration decisions would be made.
Risk of culture clash between a global matrix organisation and a founder-led local company.
High dependency on a small number of critical commercial and R&D roles.
Pressure to move fast, with limited tolerance for employee disruption.
Risk of paralysis in the first 100 days due to unclear governance and decision rights.
The executive team needed a way to translate strategy into executable change without destabilising the business.

Role Framing and structuring change for acquisition integration

Leading the design of a pre- and post-close Integration Execution Framework (IEF) that translated strategy into executable governance, people priorities, and timelines. The approach focused on how change would be led, decided, and absorbed, not merely on what activities should happen.

Approach: designing an Integration Execution Framework (IEF)

01: Leadership and organisational diagnostic

Structured interviews with global and local executives, HR, and functional leaders.
Identification of integration non-negotiables vs. locally protected elements (culture, brand practices, autonomy).

02: Integration principles definition

Stability before optimisation.
Protection of critical roles and informal leaders.
Progressive alignment rather than immediate standardisation.

03: Integration Execution Framework (IEF)

Clear governance model.
Decision-rights matrix.
90 / 180 / 360-day roadmap focused on clarity and sequencing.

04: People and organisation structuring

Identification of critical talent and retention priorities.
Interim organisation design to avoid leadership vacuums post-close.
Early role clarity for key leaders to reduce uncertainty.

05: Leadership and manager communication framework

Sequenced leadership messages.
Manager toolkits to ensure consistent messaging across the organisation.

06: Executive dashboard and governance cadence

Weekly executive dashboard tracking:

Decision bottlenecks.
Talent risk signals.
Organisation stability indicators.

Results and business impact Stable integration, retained talent, sustained performance

Day-1 readiness with a clear operating rhythm and aligned leadership.
Significant reduction in decision latency, enabling execution without escalating tensions.
High retention of critical talent during the first 12 months post-acquisition.
Business continuity preserved, allowing growth while integration progressed in controlled waves rather than disruptive shocks.

Within the first 6–12 months:

Stable leadership governance accepted by both global and local teams.
Minimal voluntary attrition in key populations.
Ability to launch synergy initiatives without triggering resistance.
Sustained commercial and operational performance during integration.

Why does this matter for organisations in France?

This case demonstrates how framing and structuring change upfront:

Prevents integration failures before they happen.
Protects people, performance, and credibility.
Enables faster execution because the rules of change are clear.

This approach helps organisations to:

Structure integration decisions in a way that supports constructive social dialogue and predictable consultation processes.
Navigate legal and regulatory constraints without slowing down execution or creating uncertainty.
Manage founder-to-corporate transitions by protecting identity, informal leadership, and critical talent while introducing scalable governance.
Execute M&A integrations under regulatory and reputational pressure without destabilising operations or eroding credibility.

As a result, organisations can move faster because the rules of change are clear—protecting people, performance, and leadership legitimacy throughout the integration.

Not sure where to start your change initiative?

Start with framing and structuring change

Begin with a change assessment to uncover risks, readiness, and opportunities for impact.