Due diligence for assets that are changing underneath the deal
Why commercial, operational and technology diligence must increasingly test future scenarios rather than validate historical performance.
Read articleRelated macro
M&A strategy
Shape M&A strategy from portfolio rationale and target priorities through diligence, value creation and integration.
Discover the macroEditorial overview
Articles
M&A strategy when the obvious targets are gone
How companies can build a stronger acquisition radar by connecting portfolio logic, target intelligence and strategic fit before competition intensifies.
Read articleFocus
Strategic diligence asks whether the transaction still makes sense under scrutiny
It tests fit, competitive logic, alternatives, downside and whether ownership advances the buyer's broader strategic position.
Commercial diligence tests whether demand and competitive assumptions can withstand scrutiny
It examines market growth, customer behavior, pricing, competition and revenue quality behind the investment case.
Strategic challenges
Which assumptions could cause the deal thesis to fail?
The challenge is identifying where downside comes from before valuation, momentum and confirmation bias narrow the decision.
What must integrate first for the deal thesis to remain credible?
The challenge is sequencing change around value drivers and critical dependencies instead of trying to combine everything at once.
POV
Keeping an asset is an active capital-allocation decision
If leadership would not buy the business today, it should have a very clear reason for continuing to own it.
A good target can still be the wrong acquisition for an unprepared buyer
Deal quality depends partly on the acquirer's ability to absorb complexity, not simply on the attractiveness of the asset.
Strategic impact
Portfolio-led M&A makes acquisition priorities more selective and coherent
Clear strategic gaps and timing criteria help leadership pursue transactions that reinforce portfolio direction rather than distract from it.
Failure analysis makes critical deal assumptions easier to challenge
Testing downside pathways helps leadership identify where the transaction is most exposed to execution, market or integration risk.
What we observe
Buyers often assess the target more rigorously than their own ability to integrate it
A strong asset can still destroy value when leadership capacity, systems or organizational bandwidth are insufficient.
Target assessments often extrapolate recent growth without testing its underlying cause
Strong historical results can conceal customer concentration, weak differentiation or favorable conditions that may not persist.