SHIFT Case Study

POST-MERGER INTEGRATION OF TWO COMPETING SERVICE FIRMS

An anonymised account of combining two former competitors into one operating model while protecting client relationships through the transition.

Stravision SHIFT DivisionAnonymised engagementPost-merger integration
90Days to Unified Ops
6Integration Workstreams
4Delivery Phases
Client Context

Two ways of working, one operating model

Both firms had established processes, systems and client relationships, and each believed its own approach was the better one to keep.

The parties and their clients are confidential, so this account describes the integration approach rather than the transaction or any commercial term.

Confidentiality note: This case study is intentionally anonymised. It does not identify the client, sector, jurisdiction or any authority involved, and it does not quote or represent any authority.
The Challenge

Combine operations without losing clients

Integration risk is mostly people and communication.

01 / Decisions
Choose one way
Decide process by process which approach continues, and record why.
02 / Clients
Protect the relationships
Assign ownership and communicate changes before clients notice them elsewhere.
03 / People
Clarify roles fast
Remove ambiguity about reporting lines and responsibilities early.
Engagement Model

Six workstreams in the integration

A framework view of the engagement, not the client's file.

01 / Design
Target operating model
Define the combined structure, roles and decision rights.
02 / Process
Process selection
Choose which processes continue, which merge and which retire.
03 / Systems
Platform consolidation
Plan the move to shared systems and data without service interruption.
04 / Clients
Relationship continuity
Map accounts, assign owners and sequence client communication.
05 / People
Roles and change
Confirm structure, address overlap and support the transition.
06 / Tracking
Benefit tracking
Track what integration was meant to deliver against what it does deliver.
Delivery Sequence

How the integration was sequenced

01
Design
Agree the target operating model and decision rights.
02
Decide
Select the processes and systems that continue.
03
Transition
Move clients, people and platforms on a planned sequence.
04
Embed
Track benefits and close the remaining overlaps.
What Made It Work

What protected the client base

Named account owners
Every client had one accountable contact from day one of the transition.
Sequenced communication
Clients heard about changes from the firm, in order, rather than by accident.
Decisions recorded
Process choices were documented, so debates were settled once rather than repeatedly.
Reported Outcome

Unified ops in 90 days, 0 client churn

90
Reported days to unified operations, with no client churn This reflects the result already published in Stravision's case-study listing. No additional financial, operational or authority-specific outcome is claimed on this page.
Outcome
Unified in 90 days
Reported as recorded in the firm's own case-study summary, with client and counterparty details withheld.
Scope
Advisory and coordination
Authority determinations, legal interpretations, regulated filings and statutory audit remained outside the engagement.
Verification
Pending internal signoff
The reported figure should be confirmed by Stravision's authorised factual owner before promotional use.
Important information This anonymised case study is provided for general informational purposes only. It does not constitute legal, regulatory, tax, audit, accounting or other professional advice, it does not quote or represent any authority, and it should not be read as a guarantee that comparable work will produce the same result. Outcomes depend on the facts, scope, client implementation, third party decisions and other circumstances. Obtain advice from appropriately qualified professionals and confirm current requirements before acting.
FAQ

Two established ways of working, overlapping roles, and clients who notice uncertainty before management addresses it.

Early. Prolonged ambiguity about roles and reporting lines is what drives attrition of both staff and clients.

No. Each process should be chosen deliberately, with the reason recorded, so the decision is not revisited endlessly.

With named ownership and planned communication, so the change is explained rather than discovered.

SHIFT can support operating model design, process selection, system consolidation planning, client continuity mapping and benefit tracking within an agreed advisory scope.

No. Deal terms, valuation and legal structuring remain with the client's corporate finance and legal advisers.

It normally begins with a short scoping conversation to confirm the facts available, the evidence that already exists, the decisions required and which elements need an appropriately qualified specialist before any work is agreed.

No. It is the reported outcome for this anonymised case. Results depend on the facts, scope, implementation and decisions taken by third parties.

Authority determinations, legal interpretations, regulated reporting, statutory audit and other reserved work remain with the relevant authority or an appropriately qualified provider.