MEASURING POST-MERGER SUCCESS:

INTEGRATION PROCESSES AND HUMAN FACTORS

Simon Harrison1 and Peter Farrell2
1
ROK, Westhoughton, Bolton, BL5 3NW UK
2
School of the Built Environment and Engineering, The University of Bolton, Bolton, BL3 5AB, UK

Mergers and acquisitions (M&As) are arguably the most popular and influential form
of business investment. So much so, that in the last 10 years the level of M&A
activity in the UK construction industry has increased significantly as companies seek
to gain competitive advantage. Whilst the majority of additional M&A activity has
been undertaken with emphasis on growth, the reality is that only approximately 37%
of M&As achieve the level of success forecast at initial outset. It is well understood
that few, if any, corporate resource decisions can change the value of companies as
quickly or dramatically as major M&As, however often too much emphasis is placed
on the pre acquisition stage - due diligence. Companies often fail to realise the
importance of the post merger stage, integration, which can be detrimental to deals.
While stakeholders involved in M&As will focus on effectiveness, efficiency, growth
potential and increased profitability, recent research shows that companies are now
concentrating more on the less documented, human factors which can affect M&A
performance and the success of M&A transactions. Based on a literature review
across various disciplines, both nationally and internationally, the ongoing doctorate
study focuses on the human factors and processes which affect post-acquisition
integration and success of M&As. Whilst the future research direction is still under
development, the objective is to develop a framework, which will enable the
measurement/benchmarking of human integration performance in future M&A.

Keywords: acquisitions, human factor, integration, mergers, success.

INTRODUCTION
This paper has been developed from earlier research (Harrison and Farrell, 2006),
which focused on an M&A case study involving a national contractor and a small
building contractor. The research highlighted the importance of; pre and post-
acquisition knowledge, communication, and employee feelings, but more importantly
how human factors can influence the overall success of acquisitions. It provided
recommendations for further research, which focused on the human factors and the
need to benchmark success in future M&As. These recommendations have been used
in the development of a PhD Study. The context of this study is to use a literature
review in order to examine the M&A processes and human factors which influence
success. The paper will conclude with an aim and objective that will be taken forward
into the main data collection and analytical stages of the research.
THE PROBLEM
M&As have attracted a great deal of attention from the financial press and other media
sources (Carrillo, 2001), which is predominantly due to the level of activity over the
1
[email protected]

Harrison, S and Farrell P (2008) Measuring post-merger success: integration processes and human
factors. In: Dainty, A (Ed) Procs 24th Annual ARCOM Conference, 1-3 September 2008, Cardiff, UK,
Association of Researchers in Construction Management, 3-12.
Harrison and Farrell

last twenty to thirty years. Between 1978 and 1998 the value of domestic activity in
the UK increased almost twenty fold from £1.14 billion in 1978 to £22.1 billion in
1998. Even though activity levels were dampened somewhat by the gloom of
economic recession in the early 1990s there was a resurgence of confidence in 1995,
which has sustained high levels of investment up until the present time (Cartwright
and Cooper, 2002).
Gardner (2004) agrees that the late 1990s saw an unprecedented number of mega-
mergers around the globe, followed by a long lull in takeover activity, and there is
evidence that a new wave is expected in the industry over the next 5 years. Carleton
and Lineberry (2004) states that after a relatively short hiatus following the infamous
events of September 11, 2001, and their impact on the World economy, the pace of
M&As around the globe is again on the rise. According to government statistics, the
major increase in M&A activity should continue (Digeorgio, 2002). Delaney and Wall
(2001) agree that overall merger activity has increased dramatically over the past
decade.
Every boom has a bust (Bruner, 2005), and the promise does not always match the
reality. The opportunity to merge or acquire is often presented to shareholders as a
strategy for wealth creation, but it is estimated that more than half of all M&As prove
financially unsuccessful (Cartwright and Cooper, 1992). Statistics taken from IBM
(2000), show that only 37% of acquisition’s are considered to be ‘very successful’, in
the eyes of the companies undergoing the process; this suggests that reality often falls
short of the ideal. Bruner (2004) says that some writers portray M&As as the kind of
losing proposition that compulsive gamblers face in Las Vegas; “you can’t win; you
can’t break even; and you can’t get out of the game”. Beyond all the statistics and
optimistic press announcements, real organisations are being disrupted, real
executives are being displaced, and real shareholders are being disappointed – not for
lack of effort, but largely for lack of effective planning and integration (Galpin and
Herndon, 2000).
Pikula (1999) agrees that, M&As frequently fail, in part because managers neglect
human resource issues, which are rarely considered until serious problems arise.
Cartwright & Cooper (2002: 3) state that; “even though much has been written about
the economic, financial and strategic aspects of M&As, it is only relatively recently
that research attention has turned to the role and contribution of the human factors”.
Human factors are about the impact that M&As have on people in the workplace; the
psychological difficulties that people experience, the culture clashes that can emerge
in organisations during the post-merger integration period, and the ways in which
these problems can manifest themselves, such as communication breakdowns, lower
commitment, power struggles, drops in productivity, office politics and loss of key
members (Buono and Bowditch, 2003).
M&A Integration is not just a few random activities that can be handled after the
event, but a series of well-orchestrated activities that begin long before and continue
long after acquisition (Schweiger, 2002). Post-acquisition integration is where
expectations are fulfilled or broken and where employee knowledge increases
dramatically. Burner (2004) suggests that M&A transaction terms set the stage for this
crucial phase of the deal. Failing to recognise integration issues at the bargaining table
or in the analytic phase of the work can create enormous problems later on. More
importantly, knowing what to do after the definitive agreement is signed is vital to the
success of the deal. Grundy (2003) agrees that this is the most important period as the

4
 Measuring post-merger success

acquirer has the opportunity to learn from the M&A. It is also considered to be the all
important determinant of the success of the acquisition (Sudarsanam, 1995).
The relatively poor performance of M&As has provoked a steady stream of research
over the past two decades. This concentrated initially on pre-acquisition issues, but
has slowly moved onto post-acquisition issues. More and more studies have revealed
the importance of post-acquisition and effective integration, and the need to gain co-
operation and commitment from employee’s (Devine, 2003). Evidence based on a
wide range of performance indicators presents a rather gloomy picture in suggesting
that, at best, no more than 50% of M&As achieve the level of success initially
anticipated (Cartwright and Cooper, 2002:3). Carleton and Lineberry (2004) agree that
the odds of achieving organisational success after M&As are not good, but if M&As
are so prone to failure, then why do management teams still carry on making deals,
and why do business people still use the same old yardsticks (processes) to measure
their transactions as earlier M&A waves (Devine, 2003).
It is relatively clear that despite recent research and current developments, M&A
success in construction remains difficult to define and achieve. As Gaughan
(2005:124) states; “in light of the lack of a common benchmark factor, we need to
expand our research to include a benchmark”. This would enable industry to measure
performance over a defined study period, against defined success criteria.
Benchmarking is a continuous activity, not a one off project which has an ultimate
goal of achieving world class status (Holloway et al., 2007). Willis and Rankin (2007)
agree that benchmarking has been used as a mechanism for the assessment and the
improvement of performance of the construction industry.
The remaining part of this paper will examine the processes that influence human
factors; planning, integration, change management, culture, and communication. It
will also examine the human factors which influence success; employee uncertainty,
employee feelings, the merger syndrome and stress.
M&A PROCESSES THAT INFLUENCE HUMAN FACTORS
Planning/Strategic Considerations
Anderson (1999) suggests that in the strategic planning phase, personnel should assess
the corporate cultures of the two organisations to identify areas of divergence which
could hinder the integration process. Communication methods, compensation policies,
skills set, and company goals need to be assessed. Before reaching the deals,
companies should agree on what elements of their respective cultures should be
retained and how they will rectify significant differences. Pikula (1999) agrees that
there is a need to be proactive rather than reactive. When the negotiations for M&As
have been completed, strategies should be developed which will ensure that the
human aspects will not be hindered, but will facilitate in the successful combination of
the two organisations. Bruner (2004:123) also agrees that strategy influences the
outcome of M&A integration, but suggests that other factors such as; deal design,
negotiation, and process management are also vital to M&A success. While research
undertaken by KMPG (1999) suggests that companies which gave a priority to the
selection of management teams, cultural assessment and communication plans were,
on average, more likely to produce a successful outcome.

5
Harrison and Farrell

Integration/Cultural Integration
Rankine (1998) suggests that one of the critical success factors for adding value
through acquisitions is to act quickly to integrate the new business, therefore
preparation is essential. Any preparation must be conducted at a stage when there is
very little time available and should involve the development of a detailed integration
plan. Eccles (1996) agrees, but suggests that preparation is not the main factor in
integration success. In order to combat fear, any newly acquired business should make
the mode of running their acquisition immediately, clearly and decisively obvious.
Cartwright and Cooper (2002: 79) suggests that; “the problem of integrating two,
often previously rival, workforces and their cultures and getting them to co-operate
and work together cannot be underestimated. There is always an inherent danger that
the acquiring company will destroy the very attributes that caused it to want to buy the
company in the first place”. Whilst it may sound relatively straight forward, as
Schweiger (2002) suggests; integrating M&As is a complex process that requires
knowledge, insights, and energy of many people. A crucial part of successful
integration is whether firms can socialise employees effectively into the newly
emerged entity so that they learn accepted ways of behaving in that organisation
(Aguilera et al., 2006).
Research has also recommended that a harmonious integration of the beliefs and
values of a merging firm and the ability to integrate organisational cultures is more
important to success than the financial or strategic factors (Majidid, 2007). DiGeorgio
(2002b:263) suggests that; “The bottom line on culture fit is very important – a lot of
thought needs to go into it”. Cartwright and Cooper (2002) agree that differences in all
cultural dimensions are important and can be potential barriers to integration. While
Habeck et al (2000) suggests that cultural integration is critical to the success of any
M&A, if it can be managed as a defined process. Overcoming cultural differences is
by far the most troublesome aspect of making M&As work. People from different
cultures are suddenly thrust together and expected to address complex issues of
strategy and working practices, which Piklua (1999) believes can lead to competition
between employee groups and hostile ‘they-we’ attitudes.
Anderson (1999) says that employees typically emphasise or exaggerate the
differences between organisational cultures. Distorted perceptions and hostile feelings
toward employees from the other organisation may become common, and failures are
typically attributed to the other company. Cultures collide; employees find that
behaviour once sanctioned is no longer rewarded, maybe not even approved of, and
perhaps may be even punished - employees can become confused, then frustrated
(Pritchett, 1997), which often results in a post merger conflict or culture clash
(Anderson, 1999).
Change Management
It is well known that M&As will create an expectancy of change (Cartwright and
Cooper, 2001). Change is omnipresent. Societies change, technologies change,
markets change, competition changes. If others change and you do not, your relative
position alters. So you change, or worse, are changed (Heller, 2006). Burke and
Cooper (2000) suggested that; if organisations did not change they would stagnate and
decline. Rankine (1998) agrees that however impressive the potential benefits of
M&A, they will always require change, and this makes the human factor critical.

6
 Measuring post-merger success

Changing the way in which organisations conduct their business, managerial style,
systems, procedures and the symbols of there identity, means changing people and
their organisational culture. IBM (2000) suggests that; “most M&As need a high
degree of integration because they drive considerable human and organisational
change. They also state that the kind of change in M&As is often the biggest that
individuals, and the organisations they work for, will have experienced. Gaplin and
Herndon (2000) agree that a merger creates immense change management issues, but
suggest that actions aimed at specific integration processes should help to minimise
the risks and stack the odds in favour of making the deal work.
Devine (2003) states that; the reality of many M&As is that they are often extremely
difficult and stressful events for many people. Merger studies reveal that employees
need emotional support and practical skills in managing change in order to survive the
upheaval. While Pritchett (1997) agrees, he also suggests that people may also often
resist change and dislike the sort of uncertainty that arises from M&As, especially if
they think it is being badly handled. However Hardy (1999) says that; resistance to
change is based on fear, and that people should expect change after M&As and should
be ready for its implementation, which will ultimately reduce levels of uncertainty.
Rankine (1998) disagrees; he believes that failures in change management issues are
related to the speed of change and failure to act swiftly, results in confusion all round.
Communication Issues
The importance of communication can not be over-emphasised, not least during
M&As (Phoenix, Obsidian Contract, 2006). Fisher (2004) said that one of the key
lessons learned from M&As is transition and establishing clear communication lines
upward, and positive control downward, immediately. Guirdham (1999) agrees that
managers of all types, business executives, members of the professions and people at
work generally need to be able to communicate with each other successfully in
M&As.
Yazdifar et al., (2006) agrees that organisations undoubtedly realise the importance of
good communications for successful implementation of the entire M&A process, but
they often find it hard to make this communication both constant and lucid. Berk’s
(1996) views differ. He believes that communicating the facts in an M&A to all the
affected parties is a process that can be reduced to its components and managed
effectively. It is important, however, to allow enough time to do the job right.
Communication helps employees because it informs them of the changes in their
environment (Moran and Parnassian, 2005). Mook (2000) suggests that
communication is essential to close the gap between top management and employees.
While Wall (2005) suggests that communicating the right message to employees is
important. What may be obvious in the boardroom may simply not be getting to
employees. Risberg (2003) believes that in order to improve employees knowledge;
communicate, communicate, and then communicate some more, keeping the
communication process going and making it reach broadly and deeply throughout the
organisation is imperative to the success of M&A deals. Mumm and Beuerlein (2004)
agree that maintaining continuous communication is important, but ensuring this
between people is imperative.

7
Harrison and Farrell

HUMAN FACTORS THAT INFLUENCE SUCCESS

Employee Uncertainty
There is a great deal of uncertainty that builds up as the merger situation unfolds. The
future is vague. When employees ask for specific answers they may get a fuzzy
response from higher management (Pritchett, 2006). Davy et al (1988) suggest that;
“the only thing certain about M&A is that nothing is certain”. Often people feel the
truth is a moving target. Decisions are made, announced, and then promptly changed.
Some have a personality that enables them to endure this kind of work climate fairly
well. Others find it extremely upsetting and because the future is so ambiguous,
people get uneasy (Pritchett, 2006).
Schweiger (2002) agrees that M&As create high levels of uncertainty and suggests
that there is a need to realise that this will result in many changes for many people.
The bottom line is that people must be prepared for, or comfortable with change. Part
of becoming comfortable is to view change as an opportunity rather than a threat.
However as highlighted by Swee (2001), overemphasis on integration and change
management can lead to unsatisfied employees and a lack of common identity, which
is likely to diminish the level of operational synergies achieved.
Uncertainty will have an adverse impact not only on organisational performance, but
also on the longer term physical, psychological and mental health of employees
(Cartwright and Cooper, 2001). As Moran and Panasian (2005:6) suggest some;
“employees often cope with the uncertainty surrounding a merger by reducing levels
of commitment and instead use energy either to cope with anxiety and confusion or try
to find new employment opportunities”. These consequences are particularly critical
given that negative effects of mergers do not seem to go away with time, but get more
serious as time passes.
Management/Leadership Issues
Management of virtually any business will find there is no shortage of problems to
contend with at the M&A stage (Pritchett, 1997). Garrow (2006) suggests that
leadership or management represents the ‘other party’ to the psychological contract
and can contribute significantly to the success or failure of a new deal. It has to be
demonstrated, and it has to be shared. Decisions are not made in a vacuum, nor do
they just happen (Habeck et al., 2000). Gaplin and Herndon (2000) agree that
leadership is important in providing clear direction for the move into an uncertain
future of a new business. In summary, managers in the acquiring firms can take a
variety of managerial actions to help ensure effective integration of acquired
employee’s into the newly merged firm. A crucial task for upper management and
leaders is to sell the idea of effective integration, policies, values, and systems to
employees (Aguilera et al., 2006).
However as highlighted by Pritchett (1997); in some instances the acquirer ignores
many of the management and human resource problems of mergers because nobody in
the top management circle has a real good idea how troublesome issues should be
addressed. Sometimes top management knows M&As is not proceeding well in
certain respects but chooses to turn its back on the problems. Anderson (1999) agrees,
but suggests that managers should in most cases be familiar with and prepared to deal
with the ‘Merger Syndrome’, in which employees initially react to the merger.
It is quite clear that leadership is a most urgent priority. The faster a merged company
can establish a management plan – by working out compromises, minimising or

8
 Measuring post-merger success

preventing deflections, and making the most of available talent and knowledge – the
faster it can take advantage of growth opportunities (Habeck et al., 2000), and
enhance cultural compatibility between different groups of people (Moran and
Panasian, 2005).
The Merger Syndrome/Employee’s Feelings/Employee Stress
Pritchett (2006) suggests that; in a merger situation there are usually some major
changes people have to deal with. Employee’s very often feel a strong sense of loss.
The camaraderie within a close-knit work group may be sacrificed because
departments are merged. Some people lose authority, and a lot of people may lose a
significant degree of job satisfaction. Some people in the company will have to
struggle with strong feelings such as fear, worry, sorrow, anger, and regret. In some
employees it will be very obvious. In others you may have to look more closely to see
the subtle signs of what is going on at an emotional level.
Employee reactions normally follow a general pattern (Anderson, 1999), but research
suggests that; “in the world of M&A few matches are made in heaven" (Mook, 2000).
It is therefore important that managers recognise people react differently to the same
situation. Someone’s opportunity is someone else’s threat (Schweiger, 2002). Pritchett
(1997:43) agrees that; “employees commonly get blindsided, emotionally jolted, by
the news that their corporate family is being reshaped and given a new authority
structure”.
It is well documented that M&As are particularly stressful forms of organisational
change, because they are associated with loss and lack of control and result in change,
uncertainty and increased workload for employees (Cartwright and Cooper, 2002).
Pikula (1999:1) agrees that; “even the best-orchestrated mergers can be threatening,
unsettling, and stressful for some employees”. They usually result in uncertainty,
insecurity, and fears concerning job loss, job changes, job transfers, compensation
changes, power, status and prestige changes.
Cartwright and Cooper (2002) state that; even in successful mergers, the stressful
nature of the experience has been shown to produce a negative residual effect on the
psychological health of employees. While Rankine (1998) states that; any acquirers
who take human resource management seriously tend to incorporate human resource
planning within their overall business planning process and therefore should be well
equipped for the merger syndrome.
FINDINGS
This study highlighted two separate areas which affect the level of success achieved in
M&As. The first type were M&A processes and included; growth, lack of planning,
strategic, integration, cultural issues, change management and communication. The
second type were specifically related to employees / people and included: uncertainty,
feelings, the merger syndrome, and stress. The author discovered that there are several
M&A processes which affect the human factors or people involved and that in time
these problems will undoubtedly affect the level of success achieved in an M&A
transaction.
CONCLUSIONS
The underlying concept in this piece of research was to highlight the human factors
and M&A processes which can affect the level of success achieved in M&As by
construction companies. As Rankine (1998) states; when acquisitions are being

9
Harrison and Farrell

planned and negotiated, human resource issues tend to take second place to
commercial and financial considerations and the human factor is often neglected,
which in turn leads to poor integration performance and reduced levels of success.
Whilst the human factors are a well recognised and well researched part of the M&A
process; employee’s problems are responsible for one-third to one-half of all merger
failures (Habeck et al., 2000).
De Valance (2006) suggested that major developments in M&A will eventually
impact upon construction economics; therefore the success of acquisitions depends on
how well the organisations are integrated, but more importantly on how processes can
affect the human perspective. Many of the case studies and literature illustrate that
M&As are disruptive events in the lives of the employees involved, and that they lead
to increased stress and uncertainty. The only thing that is not clear is how much affect
each of these psychological events and behavioural reactions have impacted upon
performance.
Due to the increasing levels of M&A activity and the conclusions from this study, it is
clear to see that there is need to improve the current and future levels of success
achieved in M&A activity in the construction industry. Although the majority of
recent research provides an overview of the processes and human factors which can
affect success, it does not provide a way to measure them against success.
FUTURE RESEARCH
The conclusions of this study will be used in the development of the study, which will
focus around the following aim and objective: The aim of the study is to investigate
M&A success levels within the UK construction industry. The objectives are still
under development, but will include; identifying which/if integration processes and
human factors affect the level of success achieved in M&As and the development a
framework which will enable the measurement / benchmarking of human integration
performance in future M&A activity.
REFERENCES
Anderson, J, K (1999). People Management: The crucial aspect of mergers and acquisition.
Kingston: Queens Press.
Aguilera, R V and Denker, J C and Yalabik, Z Y (2006). Institutions & Organisational
Socialisation. Integrating Employees in Cross-Border Mergers & Acquisitions,
Emerging Research Frontiers in International Business Studies, Volume 2.
Bruner, R.F (2004). Applied Mergers & Acquisitions, University Edition. New Jersey: Wiley
Finance.
Bruner, R.F (2005). Deals from Hell. M&A Lessons That Rise Above the Ashes. New Jersey:
John Wiley & Sons.
Buono, A.F and Bowditch, J.L (2003). The Human Side of Mergers and Acquisitions,
Managing Collisions Between People, Cultures and Organizations. Washington DC:
BeardBooks.
Burke, R.J and Cooper, C.L (2000) The Organization in Crisis. Downsizing, Restructuring
and Privatization. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Limited.
Cartwright, S and Cooper, G.L (2001). Managing Mergers, Acquisitions and Strategic
Alliances. Intergrating People and Cultures.The Human Factor. Oxford: Butterworth
Heinemann.

10
 Measuring post-merger success

Cartwright, S and Cooper, G.L (2002) HR Know-How In Mergers and Acquisitions.

Reprinted. Trowbridge: Cromwell Press.
Carleton, R.J and Lineberry, C.S (2004). Achieving Post-Merger Success, A Stakeholders
Guide to Cultural Due Dilligence, Assessment, and Integration. San Francisco:
Pfeiffer, John Wiley & Sons.
Delaney, F.T and Wamuziri, S.C (2001) Mergers and acquisitions in the construction industry.
In: Akintoye, A (Ed.), 17th Annual ARCOM Conference, 5-7 September 2001,
University of Salford. Association of Researchers in Construction Management, Vol
1, 629-37.
DiGeorgio, R, M (2002b). Making Mergers and Acquisitions Work, What We Know and
Don’t Know: Part 2. Journal of Change Management.l3 (3), 259-274.
Eccles, T. (1996). Succeeding With Change, Implementing Action-driven Strategies. London:
McGraw-Hill Publishing Company.
Fisher, J.T. (2004). M&A integration at Delta Connection Inc, The importance of employee
and company culture in a corporate transaction. Risk Finance 5(4) 14-18. Online
Available: http://infotrac.galegroup.com/itw/infomark/327/664/
88197042w7/purl=rc1_EBA_ [Accessed on 11th September 2006].
Gaplin, T.J and Herndon, M (2000). The Complete Guide to Mergers and Acquisitions,.
Process Tools to Support M &A Integration at Every Level. San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass.
Garrow, V (2007). Managing the Psychological Side of the Contract through a Merger
London: Rofferty Park.
Grundy, T. (2003). Smart Things to Know About Mergers & Acquisitions. Oxford: Capstone
Books.
Guirdham, M (1999). Communicating Across Cultures. London: Macmillan Press Limited.
Habeck, M.M and Kroger, F and Tram, M.R (2000). After The Merger. Seven Rules For
Successful Post-Merger Integration. London: Pearson Education Limited.
Hardy, G (1996). Successfully Managing Change in a Week. London: Hodder & Stoughton
Educational.
Harrison, S and Farrell, P (2007) Communication Flow in Mergers and Acquisitions. The
Third Scottish Conference for Postgraduate Researchers of the Built and Natural
Environment, Probe 2007, 20th-22nd November 2007, Glasgow Caledonian
University. Postgraduate Researchers of the Built and Natural Environment. 191-202.
Heller, R (2006). Growth in business, Bigger is Better but on the Right Kind of Growth. Paper,
Online Available: http://thinkingmanagers.com/management/business-growth.php
[Accessed on 18th September 2006].
IBM Global Services and Confederation of British Industry (2000). Managing Mergers &
Acquisitions. London: Caspian Publishing Limited.
KMPG (1999). Unlocking Shareholder Value, The key to Success, Mergers and Acquisitions,
A global Report. London. KMPG Report: November 1999.
Maurizio, Z (1999). M&A: the challenge of learning to integrate. Financial Times, Dec 6th:pp
06. Online
Available:http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=46873427&sid=9&fmt=3&clientld=4
8146&rqt=309&vname =pqd [Accessed on 18th September 2006].

11
Harrison and Farrell

Mickleson, R. and Worley, C (2003). Acquiring a family firm, a case study. Family Business
Review. San Francisco. 16(4), 251-269. Online Available:
http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=542541771
&Sid=9&fmt=4&clientld=48146&rqt=309&vname=pqd [Accessed on 18th
September 2006.
Mook, B (2000). The effects of mergers on people. Denver business journal, Dec 8th 2000.
Moran, P and Panasian, C (2005). The Human Side of Mergers & Acquisitions, A Look at the
Evidence. Unpublished PhD Thesis, Universidad de Talca, Chile.
Mumm, J and Beuerlien, D (2004). The people side of M&A. Giants Oak Book, Dec, 8, 12. pp
26. Online Available:
http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=830697421&sid=5&fmt=3&clientld=48146&rq
t= 309&vname=pqd [Accessed on 18th September 2006].
Phoenix Obsidian Contract (2006). Mergers and Acquisitions. Online Available:
http://www.serach.lycos.co.uk/searchfame.html?url=http%3A [Accessed 24th Sept
2006].
Pikula, D, A (1999). Mergers & Acquisitions: Organisational Culture & HR Issues. Kingston
Queens Press.
Pritchett, P (2006). The Employee Guide to Mergers and Acquisitions. UK Edition: Pritchett.
Pritchett, P (1997). After the Merger. The Authoritative Guide for Integration Success.
Revised Edition: McGraw-Hill.
Risberg, A (2003). The merger and acquisition process. Journal of International Business.
Online Available: http://www.jibs.net [Accessed on 11th September 2006].
Schweigner, D.M (2002). M&A Intergration, A framework for Executives and Managers.
London: McGraw-Hill.
Sudarsanam, P.S (1995). The Essence of Mergers and Acquisitions. London: Prentice-Hall
International.
Swee, C,G (2001). Management strategies for successful post-acquisition integration. The
Academy of Management Executive. Feb, 15, 1: pp 152-153.
Wall, S, J (2005). Looking beyond the obvious in merger integration. Mergers and
Acquisitions Journal Philadelphia, 40(3). :pp 41-47. Online Available:
http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=809415901
&Sid=5&fmt=3&clientld=48146&rqt=309&vname=pqd [Accessed on 18th
September 2006].
Willis, C.J and Rankin, J.H (2007) Improving the performance of the construction industry
through the use of benchmarking and industry maturity modelling. 3rd Scottish
Conference for the postgraduate researchers of the built and natural environment.
PROBE 07, 20th-22nd November 2007, Glasgow Caledonian University, 493-504.

12