Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
Exploring the experience of acquired employees within an organization following acquisition
(USC Thesis Other)
Exploring the experience of acquired employees within an organization following acquisition
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
Exploring the Experience of Acquired Employees Within an Organization Following
Acquisition
by
Skylar Morris
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
A dissertation submitted to the faculty
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education
December 2021
© Copyright by Skylar Morris 2021
All Rights Reserved
The Committee for Skylar Morris certifies the approval of this Dissertation
Alexandra Wilcox
Adrian Donato
Jennifer Phillips, Committee Chair
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2021
iv
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to explore the experience of acquired employees within an
organization following an acquisition to understand influences that impact employee
engagement. The study achieved its purpose by interviewing acquired employees and analyzing
documents and artifacts. The Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis framework was used to
determine the gap between current and desired performance levels among employees post-
acquisition. The data analysis process helped to highlight assets of the organization including the
operations playbook as a key source of procedural knowledge; the mission, vision and values as
a source of value for acquired employees; on-site participation of members of the acquiring
organization; and a culture of acceptance towards the contributions of acquired employees.
Alternatively, gaps within the organization were found during the data analysis process,
including a lack of use of industry best practices in merging cultures to promote engagement
during integration, a failure to highlight model examples of engaged acquired employees from
previous integrations, and a lack of vision of the future state resulting in acquired employees not
truly understanding their responsibility in the acquiring organization. Four recommendations
were developed to address the gaps discovered. These recommendations include the use of the
competing values framework during the pre-combination phase, utilizing facility visits and the
“lend-a-hand” program to ensure that acquired employees have a vision of the future state,
creating an onboarding packet with job aids for acquired employees, and highlighting model
examples of engaged acquired employees during the acquisition process.
v
Dedication
To my roommate, friend, caretaker of our beloved Golden Retriever, and wife, I could not have
done this without all your love and support. Thank you for putting up with all the late nights I
spent studying, the meals you cooked to keep me focused, and for always pushing me to keep
going when I thought I’d had enough.
To my parents who taught me to work tirelessly towards my goals and to be kind to everyone I
meet along the way. Thank you for all the sacrifices you made so that I could be where I am
today. I hope that one day I can be as great of a parent as you both were to me.
To my beloved Golden Retriever, Dodger, even though you can’t read this you are truly the
goodest boy I could ever ask for. Thank you for all the nights you kept me company while I was
studying and for all the smiles you brought to my face when I needed it most.
vi
Acknowledgements
First and foremost, I would like to thank Dr. Jennifer Phillips for the countless hours of
reviews, counseling, encouragement, and guidance. You made this journey possible, and you
always knew how and when to push me in the ways that I needed it most. To my committee
members Dr. Alexandra Wilcox and Dr. Adrian Donato, thank you so much for all your input
and helping me to make the best dissertation product possible. Finally, I want to thank Dr. Cerry
Klein for pushing me outside of my comfort zone early in my academic career and inspiring a
lifetime of learning.
vii
Table of Contents
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... iv
Dedication ....................................................................................................................................... v
Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................ vi
List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. x
List of Figures ................................................................................................................................ xi
Chapter One: Introduction .............................................................................................................. 1
Background of the Problem ................................................................................................ 2
Importance of Addressing the Problem .............................................................................. 4
Organizational Context and Mission .................................................................................. 6
Organizational Goal ............................................................................................................ 7
Description of Stakeholder Groups ..................................................................................... 8
Stakeholder Group for the Study ........................................................................................ 9
Stakeholder Performance Goal ........................................................................................... 9
Purpose of the Study and Questions ................................................................................. 11
Overview of the Conceptual and Methodological Framework ......................................... 11
Definitions......................................................................................................................... 12
Organization of the Project ............................................................................................... 13
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature ........................................................................................ 14
The Acquisition Process ................................................................................................... 14
Mergers and Acquisitions Within Healthcare ................................................................... 15
Human Related Issues in Mergers and Acquisitions ........................................................ 18
Engagement in Relation to Productivity and Retention .................................................... 22
Impact of Mergers and Acquisitions on Engagement, Productivity and Retention .......... 26
Promising Practices for Employee Engagement in Mergers and Acquisitions ................ 30
viii
Clark and Estes (2008) Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences’
Framework ........................................................................................................................ 33
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences ............................... 34
Conceptual Framework ..................................................................................................... 50
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 53
Chapter Three: Methodology ........................................................................................................ 55
Study Questions ................................................................................................................ 55
Overview of Methodology ................................................................................................ 55
Data Collection, Instrumentation and Analysis Plan ........................................................ 57
Ethics and Role of Researcher .......................................................................................... 64
Chapter Four: Findings ................................................................................................................. 67
Participating Stakeholders ................................................................................................ 67
Document and Artifact Analysis ....................................................................................... 69
What Is Koufax Supply Management Group (KSMG) Acquired Employees'
Perception of Their Engagement During the Acquisition Process? .................................. 71
What Are the Knowledge and Motivational Influences Affecting Engagement
Among Acquired Employees of Koufax Supply Management Group (KSMG)? ............ 75
What Is the Relationship Between the Organizational Culture of Koufax Supply
Management Group (KSMG) and Acquired Employees’ Engagement? .......................... 92
Summary ......................................................................................................................... 103
Chapter Five: Recommendations and Discussion....................................................................... 106
Discussion of Findings .................................................................................................... 106
Recommendations for Practice ....................................................................................... 112
Limitations and Delimitations ......................................................................................... 124
Recommendations for Future Research .......................................................................... 126
Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 128
References ................................................................................................................................... 131
ix
Appendix A: In-Depth Review of Acquisition Process .............................................................. 147
Pre-Combination Phase ................................................................................................... 147
Combination Phase ......................................................................................................... 148
Post-Combination Phase ................................................................................................. 149
Appendix B: Utrecht Work Engagement Scale .......................................................................... 151
Appendix C: Qualitative Interview Protocol .............................................................................. 153
Appendix D: Document Analysis Protocol................................................................................. 158
Appendix E: Critical Values Framework .................................................................................... 159
Appendix F: Information Sheet for Exempt Research ................................................................ 160
x
List of Tables
Table 1: Organizational Mission, Organizational Goal and Stakeholder
Group’s Performance Goal
10
Table 2: Promising Practices in Employee Engagement in Mergers and
Acquisitions
32
Table 3: Knowledge Influences 40
Table 4: Motivation Influences 44
Table 5: Organizational Influences 50
Table 6: Data Sources 56
Table 7: Interview Participants 69
Table 8: Artifacts Collected and Analyzed 70
Table 9: Summary of Knowledge Influences and Findings 77
Table 10: Summary of Motivation Influences and Findings 86
Table 11: Summary of Organizational Influences and Findings 94
Table 12: Summary of Influences and Findings 105
Table 13: Recommendation Implementation Timeline 122
Table 14: Recommendation Conceptual Framework Crosswalk 123
Table B1: Utrecht Work Engagement Scale 151
Table C1: Interview Questions 154
xi
List of Figures
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework for Exploring Knowledge, Motivation, and
Organization Influences on Acquired Employee Engagement
52
Figure E1: Critical Values Framework 159
1
Chapter One: Introduction
Mergers and acquisitions are complex events subject to a wide range of difficulties. One
prominent cause of failure is due to human related issues that cause significant problems in the
merger and acquisition process. Human related issues consist of the manner in which associates
“deal with and react to the deal” (Mirc, 2013, p. 2), including psychological sociological
perspectives. The human related issue that is most commonly cited as the root cause of failure is
the “culture clash,” or failure to achieve cultural integration, between the combining
organizations (Marks & Mirvis, 2010).
These human related issues lead to the breakdown of an estimated one-third to one-half
of all unsuccessful acquisitions (Degbey et al., 2020). Throughout the merger or acquisition
process, employees of the organizations are faced with increased stress due to a lack of cultural
integration that results in tremendous impact on productivity, engagement, and retention (Galpin
et al., 2013; Gelfand et al., 2018; Marks & Mirvis, 2010). These factors ultimately contribute to
the high failure rate of mergers and acquisitions (Vedd & Liu, 2017). Described by Catteeuw et
al. (2007) as “the degree to which employees are satisfied with their jobs, feel valued and
experience collaboration and trust” (p. 152), engagement of employees is critical during
turbulent times as “engaged employees will stay with the company longer, and continually find
smarter, more effective ways to add value to the organization” (Catteeuw, 2007, p. 152). This
study explores the experience of acquired employees within an organization following an
acquisition to understand influences that impact employee engagement. The results of this study
are expected to inform actions that can be taken to improve productivity and retention of
acquired employees during future merger and acquisition processes.
2
Merger and acquisition success requires avoiding the potential pitfalls of the human
related issues and meeting a specified return on investment as defined during the due diligence or
exploration phase (Deutsch & West, 2010). Though the number of mergers and acquisitions of
organizations has increased by over 1,900% over the past 35 years (M&A Statistics, 2020), the
acquisition success rate has remained at an estimated 25% (Marks & Mirvis, 2001). When
acquiring organizations do not meet the specified levels of return expected with the transaction,
failure occurs, which results in diminished returns for companies and their investors (Welch &
Welch, 2009).
Background of the Problem
Throughout the past 35 years research on cultural integration in mergers and acquisitions
has grown in prevalence as an increasing number of authors have contributed to the topic
(Cartwright & Cooper, 1993; Galpin & Whittington, 2010; Marks & Mirvis, 2010; Teerkingas &
Thanos, 2018). This increase in research likely corresponds to the increase in global volume and
value of mergers and acquisitions as volume has increased from 2,676 mergers and acquisitions
with a value of $347 billion in 1985 to 49,481 mergers and acquisitions with a value of $3.7
trillion in 2019 (Institute of Mergers, Acquisitions and Alliances, 2020). Though much of the
literature has focused on the hard aspects of mergers and acquisitions including financial
aspects, operations analysis, and sales strategies, many authors have begun to explore the soft
aspects of mergers and acquisitions (Cartwright & Cooper, 1995; Galosy, 1990; Mirc, 2013).
Soft aspects, as Nicola Mirc (2013) explains, are “the way people inside the merging
organizations deal with and react to the deal” (p. 2). Soft aspects include people related issues
such as retention, engagement, productivity, and cultural integration, which have a tremendous
impact on event outcomes (Vedd & Liu, 2017).
3
As researchers continue to investigate the low success of mergers and acquisitions, which
is estimated at 25% (Marks & Mirvis, 2001), the focus on soft aspects provides an interesting
area of opportunity particularly in the study of cultural integration. In the research on cultural
integration, there has been some discrepancy on the impact of differences in culture. Some
researchers have found that differences in culture improve outcomes due to the growth in
perspective for the combined organization (Datta & Puia, 1995). However, the majority of
authors have found that differences in culture negatively affect acquisition success due to the
challenges associated with balancing the variation between the organizations (Stahl & Voigt,
2008, Teerkingas & Very, 2006).
Building on the perspective of cultural integration, the topic of engagement has been
studied through a variety of different lenses and contexts, however this study uses the work of
Schaufeli and Bakker (2004) and the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES) to define the
concept of engagement. Schaufeli and Bakker (2004) proposed that engagement can be defined
as the opposite of burnout, and that three factors including vigor, dedication, and absorption can
be used to measure engagement. Specifically, Schaufeli and Bakker (2004) defined engagement
as follows:
A positive, fulfilling, work-related state of mind that is characterized by vigor,
dedication, and absorption. Rather than a momentary and specific state,
engagement refers to a more persistent and pervasive affective-cognitive state that
is not focused on any particular object, event, individual, or behavior. (p. 5)
The UWES scale targets these three factors with a variety of questions in an effective survey that
has been tested for accuracy by numerous studies (Mendes & Stander, 2011, Schaufeli &
Bakker, 2004).
4
In addition to engagement, researchers have focused their efforts on the relationship
between mergers and acquisitions and the impact on engagement, productivity, and retention
(Amiot et al., 2012; Cartwright & Cooper, 1990; Dirva & Radulescu, 2018; Galosy, 1990;
Galpin & Whittington, 2010; Georgiades & Georgiades, 2014; Sincovics et al., 2011). The
completed studies highlight the differences in working practices and environments that come
with integrating unique cultures that impact productivity in the combined organization
(Cartwright & Cooper, 1994; Georgiades & Georgiades, 2014). Additionally, the literature
discusses the impact on engagement as two different cultures merge resulting in a loss of identity
for acquired employees as elements of the culture begin to transform (Bouchikhi & Kimberly,
2012; Degbey et al., 2020). Finally, retention is a focus of many authors who cite a lack of
engagement for associates in the combined organization due to changing cultural settings and
models that eventually results in a search for new employment opportunities (Appelbaum et al.,
2017; Degbey et al., 2020; Kummer, 2008). Together, these findings help to explain the
experiences of acquired employees within an organization following an acquisition within the
context of engagement. Through the completion of qualitative interviews and document analysis,
this study intends to add to the existing research by informing actions that can be taken to
improve engagement of acquired employees during future merger and acquisition processes.
Importance of Addressing the Problem
The problem of acquired employee engagement following an acquisition is important to
solve for a variety of reasons. Specifically, if the organization does not effectively manage
acquired employee engagement appropriately, there is a potential impact on both the members of
the combining organizations and the shareholders or owners of the acquiring organization. When
considering the impact on the members of the combining organizations, Cartwright and Cooper
5
determined in their mixed methods study of two combining financial services organizations that
the acquisition process produces a particularly stressful life environment (1993). This described
stressful life environment occurs due to a loss of identity, reduced job security, transformation of
work responsibilities and was measured in the study using “48 short items arranged on six
subscales” (Cartwright & Cooper, 1993, p. 6) to describe mental health. Though Amiot et al.
(2012) concluded in their longitudinal study of health care organizations that the stress is greater
for the acquired organization, they did also confirm a meaningful impact for employees of the
acquiring organization. In addition to the stressful environment, Julia Galosy (1990) noted the
sense of loss endured by the acquired organization and combined feelings of mourning that
impacts the behavior of employees and potentially the success of engagement during the
acquisition. Finally, as studied by Bouchikhi and Kimberly (2012) members of the acquired
organization often struggle to find a sense of identity with the new organization which has
further impact on engagement of the individuals involved in the acquisition.
Though the effects of under-engagement on the members of the combining organization
make the problem important to solve, it is also critical to analyze the impact on shareholders or
owners of the acquiring organization. As discussed in the introduction, lack of success in the
human related issues of acquisitions causes a breakdown of an estimated one-third to one-half of
all unsuccessful acquisitions (Degbey et al., 2020), which can cause considerable strain on the
finances and strategy of the organizations. This level of failure and impact on the combined
organization, then results in decreased return on investment for all key shareholders or ownership
(Welch & Welch, 2009), which can in turn have an effect on society as a whole (Zhu et al.,
2016). The impact of under-engagement on behalf of the members of the combining
6
organizations as well as the shareholders and key stakeholders of the organizations described
above illustrates the importance of addressing the problem of practice.
Organizational Context and Mission
Kershaw Health (KH, a pseudonym), and their supply chain and operations subsidiary
Koufax Supply Management Group (KSMG, a pseudonym), own and operate over 100 acute
care hospitals, and a total of over 290 senior living facilities, ambulatory care centers, and
medical offices throughout the United States. The mission of KH and KSMG is to improve
health outcomes for all individuals, with a focus on the impoverished, in the communities where
the organization provides health care. KH was started in the early 1900’s when two hospitals
began to work together to provide better quality of care for members of the community by
sharing knowledge and resources; it has since grown to further the mission of the original two
hospitals by expanding care throughout the United States.
As a nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization, the focus of KH is to better the health of the
overall community, as well as return all profits in the form of charity care for the impoverished
as clarified in the mission statement. Overseeing the entire KH organization (roughly 105,000
employees), the KH Leadership Team (KHLT) consists of the Chief Executive Officer, Chief
Operating Officer, Chief Financial Officer, and Chief Medical Officer who direct the overall
strategy and determine areas of growth and review potential acquisition targets. Within the
structure of KH, the KSMG Leadership Team (KSMGLT) manages the supply chain and
operations subsidiary (consisting of nearly 700 employees) and includes the Chief Executive
Officer, Chief Operating Officer, Chief Financial Officer, and Head of Business Development.
Under the leadership of the Head of Business Development, the Deployment Team leads the
7
supply chain and operations integration of acquisitions and serves as a primary driver of cultural
integration as they are the first associates on site at any acquired health system.
Currently, KH and KSMG measure engagement and a variety of other factors of all
employees through the completion of annual surveys in the enterprise resource planning system
used by the organization. These surveys are communicated as a priority by the KH and KSMG
Leadership Teams, and completion rate by subsidiary to ensure meaningful data is gathered.
Unfortunately, the survey data is not made available to employees, and I was unable to use the
information to better understand the engagement level of acquired employees during the
acquisition process for the purpose of this study.
To better understand engagement of acquired employees in the future, I will use the
Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004). This scale concentrates on three
factors determined to measure engagement: vigor, dedication, and absorption (Schaufeli &
Bakker, 2004). Using the three specific factors of vigor, dedication, and absorption provides a
method with tested accuracy to determine organizational improvement. The knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influence tables in Chapter 2 include a crosswalk to each of these
factors.
Organizational Goal
KSMG’s goal is that by December 2023, KSMG will implement solutions that increase
engagements for associates of acquired organizations by 10% as compared to the current state.
This goal was established by the KSMGLT in response to the concerns of the KHLT with the
integration of new acquisitions into the organization. As the organization continues to grow and
acquire health systems, the KHLT wanted to ensure that the culture of KSMG was properly
8
integrated into the acquired organization. As directed by the KHLT, the KSMGLT has
implemented the organizational goal in order to accomplish this objective.
The success of the organizational goal will be measured by post acquisition surveys and
reflective meetings that occur following the completion of the acquisition process, which will
occur through December of 2023. If KSMG and the Deployment Team are unsuccessful in
accomplishing the organizational goal, there is concern from the KHLT that the organization will
not be effective in integrating future acquisitions, limiting the growth of KH and inhibiting the
ability to accomplish the mission of the organization.
Description of Stakeholder Groups
The stakeholder groups that benefit from the accomplishment of the organization’s goal
are: acquired employees of KH, Deployment Team associates, KHLT, KSMGLT, and KH
associates who interact with the acquired employees. Acquired employees of KH are associates
of organizations that have been acquired by KH and now report up through KSMG, which is the
supply chain and operations subsidiary of KH. These employees serve in a variety of roles within
KSMG, and their cultural integration is important to the success of the organization as a whole.
The next stakeholder group, the Deployment Team, serves as a primary driver of cultural
integration as these individuals are the first associates on site at any acquired health system. Due
to their early arrival at an acquired health system, they have a tremendous impact on the
perceptions of employees in the new organization and are key to establishing relationships
between members of the combined organization. KHLT provides direction for the organization
including making decisions on which health systems to acquire and how to implement business
strategies. These individuals are critical to the success of the business and have delegated the
organizational goal as part of the plan to increase the success of future acquisitions of KH.
9
Similar to the KHLT, the KSMGLT leads the supply chain and operations subsidiary,
focusing on delivering results based on the strategy of the larger organization. In alignment with
the organizational goal directed by the KHLT, the KSMGLT is responsible for achieving the
results and guiding the members of the Deployment Team towards successfully implementing
the recommendations of the research study. Finally, KH associates who interact with the
acquired associates include the nurses, doctors, hospital administrators, and others who depend
on the services of the acquired employees to accomplish their own responsibilities. These
individuals are seen as the customers of KSMG and are thus an important beneficiary of
improvements made toward the organizational goal.
Stakeholder Group for the Study
Though each of the stakeholders described above play an important role in achieving the
organizational goal, acquired employees were selected as the key stakeholders for the research
study as their actions and behavior determine the success or failure of that goal. Specifically,
within the broad group of acquired employees, the local leaders of the supply chain and
operations functions work closest with the Deployment Team that onboards the acquired
organization; they would likely be most receptive to solutions focused on improving cultural
integration. Due to the unique perspective of the local supply chain and operations leaders from
acquired organizations, it is important to evaluate the knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences with regard to engagement, which is why acquired employees were selected as the
stakeholder of focus.
Stakeholder Performance Goal
To support KH in reaching the organizational goal a stakeholder performance goal was
developed. Specifically, the stakeholder performance goal is defined as 25% of acquired
10
employees in KSMG are more engaged in their work than prior to the acquisition by December
of 2023. Though the stakeholder goal is distinct from the organizational goal, it serves as an
important measure of success towards reaching the organizational goal; without improving
engagement among the acquired employees, the organizational goal is at a high risk of failure.
The increase of 25% was determined based on similar KH employee goals, as well as my
experiences within the organization. The stakeholder performance goal is presented within the
context of the organizational mission and organizational goal in Table 1.
Table 1
Organizational Mission, Organizational Goal and Stakeholder Group’s Performance Goal
Organizational mission
The mission of Kershaw Health (KH) and the Koufax Supply Management Group (KSMG) is
to improve health outcomes for all individuals, with a focus on the impoverished, in the
communities where the organization provides health care.
Organizational performance goal
By December 2023, Koufax Supply Management Group (KSMG) will implement solutions
that increase engagement for associates of acquired organizations by 10% as compared to
the current state.
Acquired employee goal
By December 2023, 25% of acquired employees in Koufax Supply Management Group
(KSMG) are more engaged in their work than prior to the acquisition.
11
Purpose of the Study and Questions
This study explores the experience of acquired employees within an organization
following an acquisition to understand influences that impact employee engagement. The results
of this study are expected to inform actions that can be taken to improve productivity and
retention of acquired employees during future merger and acquisition processes. Though a
complete performance evaluation would focus on all stakeholders, the stakeholder to be focused
on in this analysis is employees of KSMG acquired by KH (acquired employees). The analysis
will focus on acquired employees' knowledge, motivation and organizational influences related
to their ability to manage the emotionally difficult period of being employed by an acquired
organization and remaining engaged throughout the acquisition process.
The following questions guide this study:
1. What is Koufax Supply Management Group (KSMG) acquired employees' perception of
their engagement during the acquisition process?
2. What are the knowledge and motivational influences affecting engagement among
acquired employees of Koufax Supply Management Group (KSMG)?
3. What is the relationship between the organizational culture of Koufax Supply
Management Group (KSMG) and acquired employees’ engagement?
Overview of the Conceptual and Methodological Framework
To analyze the problem of conflicting cultures among merging organizations and the
subsequent negative impact on productivity and retention of associates, the Clark and Estes
(2008) gap analysis was used as the conceptual framework. The Clark and Estes framework
focuses on identifying gaps in performance that impact the success of the organization due to
knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences. Through an accurate assessment of the
12
gap between the current status and the accomplishment of the organizational goal, Clark and
Estes propose that distinct issues may be resolved with properly developed recommendations.
To complement the conceptual framework, the methodological framework of the study
will be completed utilizing a qualitative methodology. As described by Merriam and Tisdell,
qualitative inquiry attempts to describe and understand “how people construct their worlds, and
what meaning they attribute to their experiences” (2016, p. 6). This study explores the
experience of acquired employees within an organization following an acquisition to understand
influences that impact employee engagement. Based on this purpose of the study, a qualitative
study is most appropriate for the research process.
Definitions
• Acquisition is the process of one organization purchasing another organization to form a
single larger organization which will work together towards a common goal (Aristos et
al., 2018; Galpin & Herndon, 2014; Marks & Mirvis, 2010).
• Culture is “The accumulated shared learning of [a] group as it solves its problems of
external adaptation and internal integration; which has worked well enough to be
considered valid and, therefore, to be taught to new members as the correct way to
perceive, think, feel, and behave in relation to those problems” (Schein, 2017).
• Engagement is “a positive, fulfilling, work-related state of mind that is characterized by
vigor, dedication, and absorption. Rather than a momentary and specific state,
engagement refers to a more persistent and pervasive affective-cognitive state that is not
focused on any particular object, event, individual, or behavior. (Schaufeli & Bakker,
2004, p. 5).
13
• Productivity is the ability of an individual to complete assigned tasks, projects, or
activities, in an appropriate manner and time frame to support the accomplishment of a
larger purpose (Chesley, 2019; Dirva & Radulescu, 2018; Hanaysha, 2016; Markos &
Sridevi, 2010).
• Retention is continued employment of associates within an organization. The act of
remaining employed at a company and choosing not to leave the firm for any reason over
a given period of time (Degbey et al., 2014; Galpin et al., 2013; Kummer, 2008).
Organization of the Project
This research study is divided into five chapters. The first chapter introduced the problem
of practice and the importance of determining a solution, defined research questions, discussed
the framework for the project, provided definitions for key terms, and described the
characteristics of the organization being studied including the mission, goals and stakeholders.
Chapter 2 contains a literature review that focuses on the acquired employees knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influences that will be examined in the study. Chapter 3 focuses
on the methodology utilized in the research study including participant selection, processes and
procedures for collecting the data, and steps in analyzing the results. Next, Chapter 4 assesses the
collected data, the findings which are generated, as well as implications of the research study.
Finally, Chapter 5 reviews the recommendations for the organization and stakeholder group
including an implementation and evaluation plan and provides guidance for future research on
the topic.
14
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
Chapter 2 completes a review of the literature on cultural integration throughout the
mergers and acquisitions process, focusing on the impact on engagement, productivity and
retention. In the first section, the literature on the acquisition process is reviewed, followed by a
discussion of mergers and acquisitions within healthcare. Next, human related issues, including
cultural clash between organizations is analyzed, including research on the psychological and
sociological perspectives. Then the literature review examines the relationship of engagement to
productivity and retention. The fifth section highlights the impact of engagement, productivity
and retention as distinct phenomena on mergers and acquisitions. The last section elaborates on
the Clark and Estes gap analysis (2008) to examine the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences on acquired employees. Chapter 2 is then concluded with a review of
the conceptual framework for this study.
The Acquisition Process
In the mergers and acquisitions process, progress is typically measured in three distinct
phases: the pre-combination phase, the combination phase, and the post-combination phase
(Denison & Ko, 2016; Galpin & Herndon, 2014; Lakshman, 2011; Marks & Mirvis, 2011a;
Marks & Mirvis, 2011b). To illustrate the immense amount of change that takes place during the
phases, Marks and Mirvis (2011a) use the three-stage change model of Kurt Lewin (1947) to
explain the unfreezing, changing, and refreezing that occurs. Throughout these three phases
acquired employees transition from employees of the acquired organization to employees of the
combined organization and experience an oftentimes difficult set of events and emotions (Amiot
et al., 2012; Georgiades & Georgiades, 2014; Marks et al., 2017).
15
During the pre-combination or due diligence phase an intense focus is placed on
researching potential acquisition targets and determining how the associates of the different
organizations will mesh with each other in the future state (Denison & Ko, 2016). Next, in the
combination or integration phase the transformation process occurs as the organizations merge
from separate entities to a single firm (Arce & Araujo, 2017). This integration period includes
the implementation of major organizational changes that can have a tremendous impact on
acquired associates causing stress, insecurity and anxiety (Kaetzler et al., 2019; Marks & Mirvis,
2010; Sincovices et al., 2011). Finally, in the post-combination phase the combined organization
continues to drive toward the desired end state and attempts to build relationships and trust with
acquired employees to reach success (Lakshman, 2011). Appendix A provides an in-depth
discussion of the acquisition process that includes further detail regarding each of the three
phases.
Mergers and Acquisitions Within Healthcare
In nearly every industry, mergers and acquisitions have been leveraged as a method of
accomplishing organizational goals and achieving business strategy through reducing costs,
improving revenues, making operational improvements and accumulating scale (Arce & Araujo,
2017; Chesley, 2020; Deloitte 2020). The healthcare industry is no exception to this rule as
healthcare related mergers and acquisitions account for 5.5% of all activity since 1985 (IMAA,
2020). Though mergers and acquisitions within the healthcare industry have occurred for quite
some time, the recent passing of the affordable care act (ACA) has increased volume
significantly over the past several years (Chesley, 2020; Ovseiko, et al., 2015). This increase in
mergers and acquisitions impacts acquired employees as the shift in volume results in more
16
acquired employees that are affected by the integration process (Marks & Mirvis, 2010;
Cunningham et al., 2015; Ovseiko, 2015).
Similarities to Other Industries
acquisitions in healthcare face many of the same challenges that impact the success of
mergers and acquisitions in other industries. Specifically, in healthcare there is a great focus on
the due diligence process and ensuring that the merger or acquisition would support the overall
goals of the combined organization (Brown et al., 2012; Ovseiko, 2015; Stempniak, 2014).
Additionally, literature on mergers and acquisitions in healthcare specifically name exemplary
leadership and communication as important factors in success, which is analogous to other
industries (Chesley; 2019; Marks & Mirvis, 2010; Thier et al., 2014). Along with the importance
of leadership and communication, there is tremendous focus in the literature on the stress and
loss of identity of employees of the acquired organizations and the egos of the acquiring
organization, which can impact the acquisition process (Amiot et al., 2012; Appelbaum et al.,
2017). Finally, the healthcare industry is also susceptible to merger and acquisition failures as
seen in other industries (Chesley, 2020; Kastor, 2010a, 2010b) These failures come in the form
of company separation or a decrease in combined organizational value causing acquired
employees to again be put in challenging situations (Chesley, 2019; Kastor, 2010a, 2010b; Marks
& Mirvis, 2010).
Differences in Healthcare Mergers and Acquisitions From Other Industries
Though mergers and acquisitions within healthcare share a great deal of similarities with
other industries, there are many unique aspects to the acquisition process that play a significant
role in the success or failure of the event. Starting with the pre-combination phase, healthcare
organizations place a great deal of emphasis on the patient survey results as well as billing and
17
payment processes to determine the value of the potential acquisition (Brown et al., 2012). These
specific elements of a healthcare system are important because patient surveys provide insight
into the customer experience, and the billing and payment processes allow for insight into
potential synergies and current revenue streams (Brown et al., 2012).
Healthcare organizations oftentimes have drastically different missions, visions, and
values which can make it difficult to find a compatible organization to merge with or acquire
(Brown et al., 2012). In the healthcare industry, organizations often maintain a strong identity
with their purpose whether as an academic hospital or religious affiliated system creating an
additional barrier to successful cultural integration (Ovseiko, 2015). This added difficulty can
sometimes cause organizations to complete additional due diligence such as the use of the
competing values framework to ensure that the combined organization has the opportunity to
succeed (Chesley, 2019, 2020).
Another necessity in healthcare mergers and acquisitions is to ensure that physician
leaders are included in the acquisition discussions and that most are in support of the merger or
acquisition (Kastor, 2010a, 2010b). Unlike most mergers and acquisitions in other industries,
physician leaders comprise a large group outside of the executive board that have a significant
influence on the support or opposition of other employees throughout the organization (Brown et
al., 2012). If physician leaders support the merger or acquisition, the acquisition team should
then place a priority on aligning physician culture as an initial step to gain momentum towards
aligning the rest of the organization (Stempniak, 2014).
Finally, healthcare mergers and acquisitions provide an opportunity to gain synergy
through combining clinical departments (AHA, 2019). In the healthcare industry, hospital
systems often have strengths and weaknesses in their clinical offerings which can limit the ability
18
to provide comprehensive service to the patient population (Kastor, 2010a, 2010b). Hospital
systems can address these deficiencies and fill a void in service through the completion of a
merger or acquisition of a competing hospital system and greatly improve the overall capabilities
of the organization (Stempniak, 2014). Through these differences in healthcare mergers and
acquisitions, acquired employees are subjected to a variety of experiences based on the mission,
vision, and values, physician involvement, and clinical offerings of the acquiring organization
(Chesley, 2019; Stempniak, 2014).
Human Related Issues in Mergers and Acquisitions
Throughout the literature, one of the most common themes associated with mergers and
acquisitions is the impact that human related issues have on the integration process and the
success or failure of the event (Cartwright & Cooper, 1994; Harding & Rouse, 2007; Shook &
Roth, 2010). In the merger and acquisition literature, aspects are typically divided into hard
aspects including financials, operations and sales and soft aspects or human related issues
(Cartwright & Cooper, 1995). The consensus of the literature notes that while the hard aspects
are traditionally what attracts potential acquirers, the soft aspects are often what prevents
acquisitions from succeeding (Galosy 1990; Mirc 2013; Shook & Roth, 2010). In the readings,
several topics emerged during the review process that focused on the human related issues.
These topics are: loss of identity amongst acquired employees, the existence and impact of
conqueror syndrome by the acquiring organization, the emotions invoked as a result of being
required to perform at a high level in a new environment and the tremendous difficulty of
integrating culturally different organizations.
19
Difficulty of Integrating Culturally Different Organizations
The process of integrating culturally different organizations brings about additional
human related concerns. For example, during the integration process, working practices and
environments are merged between organizations which can increase stress and make acquired
associates uncomfortable (Cartwright & Cooper, 1994). Additionally, according to the literature,
during the integration process acquired employees are faced with increased pressure to succeed
to prove that they can contribute in a setting with unfamiliar policies, practices, and procedures
(Marks et al., 2017; Rubin et al., 2013). This increased pressure to succeed in a different culture
presents a unique challenge for acquired associates and is both physically and emotionally
taxing.
Like the challenges in changing work environments, the career paths and opportunities
change during the acquisition which can cause confusion during the integration process for
acquired employees (Cartwright & Cooper, 1990; Georgiades & Georgiades, 2014). Next, when
the cultural integration process occurs, incompatibility between the organizations can decrease
enthusiasm for the acquired employees diminishing the potential for event success (Cartwright &
Cooper, 1990). This lack of enthusiasm can then result in diminished engagement with the new
organization which causes associates to look for new employment opportunities (Appelbaum et
al., 2017; Degbey et al., 2020; Kummer, 2008). Finally, poor structure and processes of cultural
integration by the acquiring organization oftentimes leads to a lack of shared identity and
positive attitudes for the combined organization including the acquired employees (Bouchikhi &
Kimberly, 2011; Stahl & Voigt, 2008).
20
Emotions Invoked as a Result of Being Acquired
Following the announcement of the acquisition within the organizations and to the
general public, employees of the acquired organization often experience a range of emotions
(Cartwright & Cooper, 1993; Degbey, 2020; Sinkovics et al., 2011). Initially, acquired
employees often experience a sense of anger or embarrassment that their company was
purchased that can lead to a desire to search for new employment opportunities to remove
themselves from the situation (Dirva & Radulescu, 2018; Sinkovics et al., 2011). Additionally,
Degbey et al. (2020) noted in their study on employee retention in mergers and acquisitions that
acquired employees can experience a loss of psychological ownership or attachment when the
acquisition is announced.
This loss of psychological ownership can then reduce the sense of responsibility that
acquired employees have for the combined organization to succeed (Degbey et al. 2020;
Sinkovics et al., 2011). Next, as the integration process begins, the literature discusses the
increased obligations that acquired employees often endure that can lead to feelings of being
overwhelmed and emotionally exhausted during the event (Galosy, 1990; Sinkovics et al, 2011).
Though the literature describes a wide range of emotions for acquired employees, the overall
consensus in the reading is the increased stress level and insecurities of acquired associates are
experienced as a result of the merger or acquisition (Cartwright & Cooper, 1993; Kaetzler et al.,
2019; Marks & Mirvis, 2011a).
Loss of Identity Amongst Acquired Employees
During the integration process the social identity of the acquired employees plays an
integral role in the success or failure of the merger or acquisition and should be managed
appropriately (Amiot, et al., 2012; Bouchiki & Kimberly, 2011; Bouchiki & Kimberly, 2012). As
21
defined by Amiot et al. (2012) in their study on social identity change during a merger, “social
identity represents the part of the self-concept that derives from memberships of social groups”
(p. 444). Though the literature acknowledges that culture and social identity are similar in that
culture “refers to values and beliefs while identity refers to the self-concept,” they are certainly
not the same as every value and belief of self-concept (Bouchikhi & Kimberly, 2011, p. 6).
Due to the nature of social identity described above, numerous sources in the literature
describe the impact of acquired employees losing their identity due to the loss of attachment to
their careers, colleagues, and routine during the integration process (Cartwright & Cooper, 1993;
Georgiades & Georgiades, 2014; Sarala, 2009). Though all employees are subject to losing some
of their social identity during the integration process, a study conducted by Amiot et al. (2012)
determined that members of the organization with higher status were less worried about threats
to their identity. Additionally, the Amiot et al. (2012) study noted that perceived similarities
between the combining organizations increased the identity with the new organization, while
perceived differences decreased identity with the new organization. This focus on identity with
the new combined organization leads to the conclusion of the importance of reaching a shared
identity for all employees during the integration process (Dirva & Radulescu, 2018, Stahl &
Voigt, 2008). Specifically, during the merger or acquisition, organizational leadership should
focus on building the new desired identity for all employees in order to increase the chance of
success for the event (Mirc, 2013). Finally, this new shared identity among all employees should
eliminate any feelings of an in-group versus out-group bias to reduce the opportunity for long-
term harm on acquired employees (Goette et al., 2012; Lee et al., 2015).
22
Existence and Impact of Conqueror Syndrome
Another human related issue described in the literature is the presence of conqueror
syndrome in members of the acquiring organization. As described by Bouchikhi and Kimberly
(2012) in their article “Making Mergers Work” conqueror syndrome occurs when members of
the acquiring organization portray an attitude of superiority over members of the acquired
organization during the integration process. When this attitude of superiority is perpetuated by
members of the acquiring organization, the effects on members of the acquired organization can
be considerable (Georgiades & Georgiades, 2014; Kummer, 2008; Sinkovics et al., 2011).
Specifically, this attitude can impact the quality of the relationships between members of the
combining organizations and can place additional stress on members of the acquired organization
with no benefit to the success of the acquisition (Kummer, 2008; Welch, 2009).
Instead of maintaining an attitude of superiority, the goal of associates of the acquiring
organization should be to support associates of the acquired organization including helping to
limit stress and negative emotions (Galpin & Whittington, 2010; Kotter, 2012; Marks & Mirvis,
2011a; Thach & Nyman, 2001). Based on the review of the literature, this support starts with the
leadership team of the combined organization acting as role models and setting an example for
all employees (Arce & Araujo, 2017; Mirc, 2013; Stafford & Miles, 2013). This point is
furthered by Sadri and Lees (2001) when they stated that management should begin by
“modeling the behavior that they wish to encourage” (p. 858) and then emphasize the behavior
by taking specific actions to increase acquisition success.
Engagement in Relation to Productivity and Retention
Over the past 25 years organizations of all types have placed a priority on researching the
relationship between employee engagement on productivity and retention in the workplace
23
(Corporate Leadership Council, 2004; Harter et al., 2016). This research focused on engagement
has helped numerous organizations make important changes in the workplace to help utilize
engagement as a mechanism to increase productivity and retention. One aspect of the research on
engagement has been to properly define engagement within the context of the workplace. This
study uses the work of Schaufeli and Bakker (2004) and the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale
focused on vigor, dedication and absorption to define and measure engagement during the
acquisition process. As part of the effort to increase engagement in the workplace, organizations
have also been able to succeed in bettering the associate experience and improving business
results for the organization (Bersin et al., 2016; Petro, 2013). In the review of the literature
associated with engagement in relation to productivity and retention, studies were divided into
three sections: first focusing on factors related to engagement, then concentrating on engagement
in relation to productivity, and finally reviewing engagement in relation to retention.
Factors Related to Engagement
In the review of the literature, many researchers focused on behaviors and actions related
to engagement. As part of their study on engagement and burnout Schaufeli et al. (2002)
developed the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004) based on the theory
that engagement is the opposite of burnout. The UWES scale focused on asking questions about
three factors determined to measure engagement including vigor, dedication and absorption
(Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004). Since the development of the UWES scale, numerous studies on
engagement have utilized the questions due to the tested accuracy of the three-factor model
(Mendes & Stander, 2011, Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004).
In addition to the UWES scale, the review of the literature provided insight into elements
of engagement including the consensus found by Kular et al. (2008) that attachment to the
24
organization is a factor of engagement and the elements of focus and commitment cited by
Pandita & Ray (2018). Similarly, in a study on the impact of employee engagement, Petro (2013)
developed a framework of 11 factors of engagement that stem from four conditions in the
workplace and lead to nine organizational outcomes. When analyzed as a whole, the factors of
engagement cited in the literature can be summarized in the definition of engagement described
by Baldoni (2013) as a state where “People want to come to work, understand their jobs, and
know how their work contributes to the success of the organization” (p. 1). Understanding these
factors of engagement for acquired employees is important for establishing an environment
where the new associates can contribute to the success of the combined organization (Marks &
Mirvis, 2011b; Rubin et al., 2013).
Engagement in Relation to Productivity
Evaluating engagement in relation to productivity first requires an understanding of the
importance and definition of productivity in the context of the workplace. In their study on
improving productivity through engagement, Hanaysha (2016) stated that “employee
productivity is a key determinant of organizational profitability and success” (2016, p. 63) and
that in general, “employee productivity is an assessment of the efficiency of a worker or group of
workers” (p. 62). In the Hanaysha study of 242 employees at a public university, concluded that
each of the three factors of the UWES scale (vigor, dedication and absorption) have a positive
effect on productivity, and that overall work engagement has a positive effect on employee
productivity. Based on these results Hanaysha (2016) demonstrated that employee engagement
leads to productivity and “higher productivity tends to increase the competitive advantage
through reduction in costs and improvement in quality of output” (p. 63).
25
Along with the Hanaysha (2016) study, Gallup and the Corporate Leadership Council
have conducted the most thorough investigations on engagement making specific notes about the
connection to productivity. Specifically, the Corporate Leadership Council (2004) studied over
50,000 employees in 30 countries over 14 industries and determined that increasing engagement
leads to increased effort and productivity. Similarly, Gallup (Harter et al., 2016) found in their
meta-analysis on 1.8 million employees in over 82,000 business units a strong correlation
between engagement and productivity even after correcting for variation among organizations.
Another aspect of the research notes that increased engagement also increases the productivity of
other employees (Baldoni, 2013), and that employee engagement is “interwoven significantly
with important business outcomes” (Markos & Sridevi, 2010, p. 92). Finally, Catteeuw et al.
(2007) discussed the importance of leveraging engagement to drive performance during turbulent
times such as a merger or acquisition, and Brown et al. (2016) noted that poor engagement of
acquired employees leads to a lack of commitment, leading to low performance and innovation
and can impact the success of the merger or acquisition.
Engagement in Relation to Retention
Similar to the importance of leveraging engagement to increase productivity, the
literature discusses the positive influence that engagement can have on retention. As discussed
by Mendes and Stander (2011) employees often initially develop an “intention to leave” (p. 3)
that then manifests itself into the actual act of the employee leaving the organization. This
intention to depart is addressed by Brown et al. (2016) who noted that it is important to use
engagement as a tool for the organization to become irresistible to ensure that talented acquired
employees are retained. Though strong organizations never want to lose employees
unnecessarily, the literature also highlights that using engagement to increase retention can have
26
a tremendous impact on reducing costs (Baldoni, 2013; Mendes & Stander, 2011). Specifically,
Gilsdorf et al. (2017) stated that employee turnover can cost an organization up to twice the
annual salary of the departed associate as a result of decreased quality and customer service,
disruption, and time spent to replace the associate.
In the 2016 Gallup study on engagement, a strong correlation was found between
engagement and retention similar to that of productivity (Harter et al., 2016). Additionally, in the
research completed by the Corporate Leadership Council, it was concluded that a 10% increase
in individual employee engagement equated to a nine percent decrease in the probability that the
associate would leave the organization in the next 12 months (Corporate Leadership Council,
2004). Finally, Pandita & Ray (2018) concluded that although employees of different ages need
different stimuli to prevent departure, increasing engagement improves several of these elements
including being challenged and satisfied at work. Overall, it is important for the acquiring
organization to engage acquired employees to ensure that they are retained and contribute to the
success of the combined organization (Galpin et al., 2013).
Impact of Mergers and Acquisitions on Engagement, Productivity and Retention
Within the research on mergers and acquisitions, a great deal of focus is placed on the
impact that the integration process has on engagement, productivity and retention of acquired
associates. As noted throughout the literature, the relationship between human related issues and
the merger or acquisition is an important indicator of potential success or failure, and
engagement, productivity and retention are certainly no exception (Georgiades & Georgiades,
2014; Kaetzler et al., 2019; Marks & Mirvis, 2011a). Investigating the interaction between
mergers and acquisitions on engagement, productivity and retention of acquired associates
requires a review of past research, findings, key concepts, opportunity for mitigating negative
27
effects and other elements of the literature. Based on the research, the material has been divided
into three sections focused on each unique relationship and the discussion in the literature.
Impact of Mergers and Acquisitions on Engagement
Throughout the literature on mergers and acquisitions one recurring theme is the
acknowledgement that an acquisition event plays a momentous role within an organization and
can be a powerful life event for employees (Cartwright & Cooper, 1990; Georgiades &
Georgiades, 2014; Marks & Mirvis, 2011a). Due to the significance of the event, a merger or
acquisition can play a major role in the engagement of associates during the transition. In the
research on the impact of mergers and acquisitions on engagement, Georgiades and Georgiades
found that the fears and stress prior to the event had a bigger impact on engagement than during
the change itself (2014). As part of a quantitative study on identity threat and engagement, Amiot
et al. (2012) discovered that acquired employees were overall more worried about the transition
process than members of the acquiring organization with regard to identity with the new
organization and stress levels.
Other elements highlighted in the literature include the loss of psychological ownership
of the acquired organization by the acquired employees resulting in a decreased sense of
investment towards the combined organization (Degbey et al., 2020). Furthermore, cultural
incompatibility during the integration process can often cause a decrease in enthusiasm when
acquired employees join the new organization (Cartwright & Cooper, 1990). Also, a lack of
alignment between culture and strategy in the new organization oftentimes leads to the
frustration of acquired employees, and an overall decrease in engagement (Kaetzler et al., 2019;
Rubin et al., 2019). One final theme of the literature noted that poor structure and processes of
cultural integration by the acquiring organization can lead to a lack of shared identity and
28
positive attitudes for the combined organization (Bouchikhi & Kimberly, 2011; Stahl & Voigt,
2008). This impact of mergers and acquisitions on engagement of acquired employees can affect
the success of the integration process and should be a primary focus of the leadership team
(Amiot et al., 2012; Marks & Mirvis, 2011a).
Impact of Mergers and Acquisitions on Productivity
Though many mergers and acquisitions are completed based on the premise that
synergies will increase the value of the combined organization, productivity often decreases for
acquired employees during the acquisition reducing the realized synergies below the expected
value (Georgiades & Georgiades, 2014; Marks & Mirvis, 2010; Perry & Herd, 2004). In their
meta-analysis on cultural differences, Stahl and Voigt (2008) found that increased cultural
differences between organizations are associated with decreased synergy realization due to
resistance to change and a lack of resource sharing impacting productivity of acquired
employees. Another empirical study completed by Sinkovics et al. (2011) focused on the
emotions of associates in mergers and acquisitions and discovered that oftentimes acquired
employees had difficulty adapting to the new company and being productive and even noted
attempts to sabotage the acquisition using theft and absenteeism.
The literature also posited that the added stress that the integration process adds to the
lives of the acquired employees reduces the capacity for individuals to focus on work related
tasks (Cartwright & Cooper, 1993; Kaetzler et al., 2019). In addition to the added stress,
alterations in working practices and environments impacts the productivity of acquired
employees (Cartwright & Cooper, 1994). Next, acquired employees put a great amount of energy
into simply surviving the merger process rather than focusing on work efforts decreasing the
impact in the combined organization (Galosy, 1990). Finally, acquired employees are faced with
29
increased pressure to succeed in the integration process, which often results in a reduction of
productivity due to unfamiliar policies, practices, and procedures, as well as working with new
associates (Marks et al., 2017; Rubin et al., 2013).
Impact of Mergers and Acquisitions on Retention
Another area of concern is the retention of key acquired employees during the integration
process (Galpin et al., 2013; Marks & Mirvis, 2011a; Nahass & Suidan, 2017). Retaining the key
acquired employees is difficult largely for two reasons: first, if staff reductions are necessary,
some key acquired employees may not be identified and let go from the organization, and second
key acquired employees may be concerned about opportunities in the combined organization and
decide to leave (Cosack et al., 2010; Galpin & Herndon, 2014; Lee & Park, 2013). In their
survey of over 150 senior leaders focused on acquisition results, Nahass and Suidan (2017)
determined that less than half of respondents believed that they had achieved significant success
in retaining key acquired employees. In a qualitative study, Georgiades and Georgiades (2014)
found that many acquired employees left the organization due to a fear of career derailment, a
decreased sense of security, and loss of relationships with organizational leaders.
Other areas of research on the impact of mergers and acquisitions on retention highlight
the sense of possession of the acquiring firm, which sometimes results in the use of insulting
behavior towards acquired employees leading to a decrease in retention (Degbey et al., 2020;
Amiot et al., 2012). Similarly, in acquisitions, the career path and opportunities of acquired
employees are severely impacted due to the integration process which leaves acquired employees
with fewer reasons to join the combined organization (Cartwright & Cooper, 1990; Georgiades
& Georgiades, 2014). Finally, acquired employees often experience a sense of anger or
embarrassment that their company was acquired which results in a will to leave the new
30
organization for a fresh start (Dirva & Radulescu, 2018; Sinkovics et al., 2011). Overall, the
literature highlighted that if key acquired employees are not retained, the combined organization
will face additional challenges in realizing the goals of the merger or acquisition (Bergh, 2001;
Kummer, 2008; Marks & Mirvis, 2010).
Promising Practices for Employee Engagement in Mergers and Acquisitions
The below practices will be integrated into this evaluation using the Clark and Estes
(2008) gap analysis framework to examine how to support the organization in reaching the
stakeholder goal of 25% of acquired employees in KSMG being more engaged in their work than
prior to the acquisition by December of 2023. The literature highlights both specific examples of
activities and more general strategies that are promising practices for employee engagement in
mergers and acquisitions. First, specific practices during the due diligence phase include the use
of the competing values framework (CVF) as an analytical tool to determine compatibility
between prospective acquisition targets (Chesley, 2019, 2020; Ovseiko, 2015). Next, following
the announcement of the acquisition, Kummer (2008) advocates for a structured talent
assessment process in each level of an organization's hierarchy by mapping social networks,
using surveys, and plotting associates on a two-dimensional grid to specify priority.
With an understanding of the talent in the acquired organization, Lee and Park (2013)
noted the importance of working with high priority retention targets to create customized
retention packages that best suit each individual. As the acquiring organization completes the
integration process several researchers discuss the completion of debriefs or a thorough review
process along the way to improve communication and collaboration prior to and during the event
(Barkema & Schijven, 2008; Galpin & Herndon, 2014; Mielly et al., 2017; Welch, 2009). One
final specific exercise discussed in the literature consists of a role-reversal process where
31
members from both the acquiring and acquired organizations switch roles to complete a
simulated merger process requiring both sides to gain a different perspective (Marks & Mirvis,
2010).
In addition to the specific activities discussed above, several general strategies were
discussed throughout the literature. The most common practice cited in the literature was for
employees of the acquiring organization to avoid the conqueror syndrome, an attitude of
superiority, and instead help to limit stress and negative emotions among employees (Bouchikhi
& Kimberly, 2012; Galpin & Whittington, 2010; Kotter, 2012; Marks & Mirvis, 2011a; Thach &
Nyman, 2001). This practice extends to general strategies of having the leadership team act as
role models and set the example for the new organization (Arce & Araujo, 2017; Mirc, 2013;
Sadri & Lees, 2001; Stafford & Miles, 2013). Additionally, the literature specifically discussed
the importance of providing a defined career path with opportunities for acquired employees to
maintain engagement (Cartwright & Cooper, 1990; Georgiades & Georgiades, 2014) and
teaching acquired employees the processes and procedures of the new organization to ensure
they remain engaged throughout the process (Georgiades & Georgiades, 2014; Vestring, King, &
Rouse, 2003; Sinkovics et al., 2011; Weber & Tarba, 2012). Finally, the research discussed the
critical aspect of maintaining alignment between culture and strategy as a best practice for
improving engagement throughout the integration process (Kaetzler et al., 2019; Rubin et al.,
2019). Table 2 outlines a consolidated representation of promising practices that were explored
in this study based upon the review of literature.
32
Table 2
Promising Practices in Employee Engagement in Mergers and Acquisitions
Promising practice Literature
Use of the competing values framework
(CVF) in the due diligence process
Chesley (2019, 2020) and Ovseiko (2015)
Structured talent assessment process of
acquired employees
Kummer, 2008
Customized retention packages Lee and Park (2013)
Debrief or review process Barkema and Schijven (2008); Galpin and
Herndon (2014); Mielly et al. (2017);
Welch (2009)
Role reversal simulation Marks and Mirvis (2010)
Limit stress and negative emotions of
acquired employees
Galpin and Whittington (2010); Kotter
(2012); Marks and Mirvis (2011a); Thach
and Nyman (2001)
Avoid the conqueror syndrome (attitude of
superiority by the acquiring firm)
Bouchikhi and Kimberly (2012)
Leadership of the acquiring firm acting as a
role model for all employees
Arce and Araujo (2017); Mirc (2013); Sadri
and Lees (2001); Stafford and Miles
(2013)
Defining career paths and opportunities for
acquired employees
Cartwright and Cooper (1990); Georgiades
and Georgiades (2014)
Teaching acquired employees processes and
procedures
Georgiades and Georgiades (2014);
Vestring, King, and Rouse (2003);
Sinkovics et al. (2011); Weber and Tarba
(2012)
Maintain alignment between culture and
strategy
Kaetzler et al. (2019); Rubin et al. (2019)
33
Clark and Estes (2008) Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences’ Framework
The conceptual framework of the research study utilized a modified approach to the
Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis model. The gap analysis model as proposed provides a
methodology to determine the gap between the current performance level and the desired
performance level for an organization using analytical and systems thinking. In the five-step
process used in the model, the first step requires identification of critical business and individual
goals, the second step defines the gap in performance toward the goals, next an analysis is
completed to better understand causes of the performance gap, the fourth step selects and
implements knowledge, motivation, and organizational solutions, and finally the results are
evaluated to determine next steps.
During the problem-solving process one common misstep is a lack of true understanding
of the situation. This lack of understanding complicates the problem of research leaving the
individual or organization confused or worse: providing an incorrect solution. Using the gap
analysis framework (Clark & Estes, 2008) and completing each step in the process helps to
reduce the possibility of errors through gaining a complete understanding of the organizational
goal and investigating influences on the current position. Finally, to ensure that the problem is
solved, and the goal is reached, the outcome is reviewed for any potential opportunities for
improvement.
In the gap analysis framework (Clark & Estes, 2008) three aspects are used to investigate
the problem of practice including: knowledge influences, motivational influences, and
organizational influences. Knowledge influences focus on how performance goals will be
achieved (Clark & Estes, 2008), and this research study evaluates how acquired associates can
gain the knowledge necessary to be successful. Motivational influences occur as individuals
34
choose to aspire towards a goal, persist through difficulties towards a distinct goal, and expend
mental effort to advance towards the goal (Clark & Estes, 2008) and in the research study will
look at acquired associate’s motivations to succeed in the new organization. Finally,
organizational influences consist of the processes, procedures, supplies and resources (Clark &
Estes, 2008) and will be considered in the research study with regard to how the acquiring
organization uses these elements to encourage acquired employee success.
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences
Using the gap analysis model, this study focuses on understanding the influences that
inhibit reaching the performance goals of KH and KSMG. Specifically, the stakeholder goal of
the study is to explore the experience of acquired employees within an organization following an
acquisition to understand influences that impact employee engagement. After grasping the
stakeholder goal and competency for investigation, knowledge, motivation and organizational
influences that impact the success of acquired associates were developed based on the literature
and experience. In the next section, these influences will be introduced.
Knowledge Influences
In an effort to further explore the problem of practice, knowledge influences applicable to
the research study were investigated to better understand the perspective of acquired associates.
As described by Clark and Estes (2008) several different tools including information, job aids,
training and education can be used to influence the knowledge of organization members. These
tools help associates to learn how to complete the goals set for them by the organization, as well
as to provide a continuous learning environment for future challenges. Along with the knowledge
tools mentioned by Clark and Estes, Krathwohl (2002) discussed the four types of knowledge
and six categories in their two-dimensional revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy. Specifically,
35
Krathwohl lists factual knowledge, conceptual knowledge, procedural knowledge and
metacognitive knowledge as the four categories of knowledge which describe elements
influencing knowledge. These categories serve as the foundation for the investigation into the
problem of practice and will assist in analyzing knowledge influences in the next four sections.
See Table 3 for more information
Understanding the Principles, Structures, and Philosophies of the Acquiring Organization
As a result of the acquisition process, acquired employees are integrated into an
organization with which they are likely unfamiliar (Georgiades & Georgiades, 2014; Marks &
Mirvis, 2011a). Their unfamiliarity can extend to the principles, structures and philosophies of
the acquiring organization all of which are an integral part of the business (Vestring, King, &
Rouse, 2003; Weber & Tarba, 2012). This knowledge of principles, structures and philosophies
is conceptual as it refers to the connections between the different aspects of the organization
within the bigger system (Krathwohl, 2002). To ensure that acquired employees feel like they are
a part of the new organization, it is important that the new associates learn the principles,
structures and philosophies. This knowledge helps acquired employees to build an identity with
the new organization and helps to orient their efforts as associates (Bouchikhi & Kimberly 2011;
Bouchikhi & Kimberly, 2012; Degbey et al., 2020). Finally, the impact of this knowledge assists
in integrating the acquired employees and completing a successful acquisition (Dirva &
Radulescu, 2018; Georgiades & Georgiades, 2014).
The literature reviewed regarding the employee knowledge of organization principles,
structures and philosophies involved several applicable research studies. A study on the
importance of organizational philosophy on business development recognized that organizational
philosophy is a vehicle for action in business competition and illustrated the importance of
36
associate alignment (Laguado et al., 2018). Furthermore, the literature notes that knowledge of
the organizational structure is critical to assigning and dividing the tasks of the employees and
that a clear structure from the employee perspective encourages productivity (Ajagbe et al.,
2016; Stahl & Voigt, 2008). Above all, the literature acknowledges that alignment between
employees and the goals of the organization, including principles, philosophies, and structure, is
important to success (Clark & Estes, 2008; Galpin & Herndon, 2014; Kaetzler et al., 2019;
Markos & Sridevi, 2010; Schein, 2017).
Capacity to Access Resources Available to Support Success in the Acquiring Organization
Another key stakeholder influence is the capacity of acquired employees to access
resources provided by the acquiring organization to support the success of acquired associates.
Since acquired associates are unfamiliar with the new organization, they likely do not have the
procedural type of knowledge for how to access and leverage potentially helpful resources that
are available including sources of information, data, materials and other support services
(Georgiades & Georgiades, 2014; Krathwohl, 2002; Sinkovics et al., 2011). Acquired associates
who do not learn these procedures early in the integration process are certainly at a disadvantage
compared to their peers and can struggle to complete tasks and meet goals efficiently (Degbey et
al., 2020; Salanova, et al., 2005). On top of the impact that this influence can have at the
individual level, when large groups of acquired associates do not know how to access available
resources, the success of the integration process and the combined organization could be put at
risk (Dirva & Radulescu, 2018; Kaetzler et al., 2019; Xenikou & Simosi, 2006).
As part of their study on employee knowledge of organizational resources, Salanova et al.
(2005) concluded that access to resources including training, autonomy and technology mediated
engagement and performance of employees. Other elements of the literature complemented the
37
Salanova and Agut study noting that employee knowledge of available resources, ability to
access those resources, and encouraging associate use of those resources was critical to reinforce
productivity (Hanayasha, 2016; Marks & Mirvis, 2011a; Oehler, 2019). Similarly, the research
highlighted the impact of the employee knowledge of resources on improving performance and
efficiency, particularly when applied to critical areas such as change efforts (Clark & Estes,
2008; Schweizer & Patzelt, 2012; Simoneaux & Stroud, 2014; Xenikou & Simosi, 2006).
Conclusively, the literature recognizes the synergy that occurs when employees understand the
available resources of the new organization throughout the integration process and are able to use
these support services in pursuit of the desired end state (Bouchikhi & Kimberly, 2012; Galpin &
Whittington, 2010; Perry & Herd, 2004).
Knowledge of How to Execute Processes and Procedures of the Acquiring Organization
Acquired associates are typically welcomed into an organization that they are unfamiliar
with, which can cause stress and anxiety for the new members of the firm (Georgiades &
Georgiades, 2014; Stahl & Voigt, 2008). In the new organization, the processes and procedures
used are procedural types of knowledge describing the know-how and methods of accomplishing
tasks which are likely foreign to the acquired employees (Creasy et al., 2009; Krahwohl, 2002;
Lakshman, 2011; Weber & Tarba, 2012). To ensure that the integration process is successful, it
is important that acquired associates are able to implement the processes and procedures of the
new organization to participate in the integration activities including supply chain, finance,
human resources, and technology activities (Appelbaum et al., 2017; Marks & Mirvis, 2011a).
Following the completion of the integration process this knowledge continues to provide value in
the combined organization as it allows acquired associates the opportunity for success in the
steady state (Marks & Mirvis, 2010; Lakshman, 2011).
38
Throughout the review of the literature researchers highlighted the importance of
understanding the processes and procedures of an organization. Specifically, researchers
determined that using a process-oriented business approach improves an organization’s ability to
meet its financial and market orientated objectives and that employees’ ability to define these
processes is an important piece of the improvement (Pradabwong et al., 2017). In addition to
defined business processes, the literature determined that education and training play an
important role of learning processes and procedures (Clark and Estes, 2008; Creasy et al., 2009;
Trkman, 2010). Also, the literature posited that the ability of employees to contribute to key
processes and procedures of the organization is important to employee engagement and the
success of the firm (Petro, 2013).
Creating a Plan to Succeed in the Acquiring Organization Based on Ability
One final knowledge influence is the importance of acquired employee reflection on their
strengths and weaknesses to create a plan to succeed in the combined organization. This
reflection on strengths and weaknesses is considered metacognitive knowledge as it requires the
acquired associate to improve their awareness of their own knowledge (Krathwohl, 2002). When
acquired employees join the new organization, the integration process will likely change the
career path and opportunities previously pursued (Cartwright & Cooper, 1990; Georgiades &
Georgiades, 2014). As these career paths and opportunities change, acquired employees should
reflect on their abilities to determine how they will be able to utilize their skills to succeed in the
integration process and in the combined organization (Marks et al., 2017).
In the literature review, several studies discussed the importance of employee knowledge
of ability and the value of creating a plan to succeed. Strengthsquest (2020), created by Donald
Clifton, is a personal development framework that focuses on analyzing individuals’ strengths
39
and weaknesses. Specifically, Clifton and Harter (2003) theorized that by targeting usage and
improvement of strengths individuals can make greater improvement and achieve more
compared to a comprehensive performance improvement plan. Furthermore, Giddings (2020)
determined that employee engagement improved through the use of reflection on positive job-
related events illustrating the potential benefits to acquired employees. As a whole, the literature
emphasizes the importance of acquired employees assessing how they will succeed in the new
organization with a focus on understanding their duties and creating a plan to perform and
remain engaged throughout the acquisition (Catteeuw et al., 2007; Marks et al., 2017; Sinkovics
et al., 2011).
40
Table 3
Knowledge Influences
Assumed knowledge
influence
Knowledge type Engagement crosswalk
Acquired employees need
knowledge of the business
practices of the acquiring
organization.
Conceptual Vigor
Absorption
Acquired employees need to
know how to access the
resources available to
support their engagement
in the new organization.
Procedural Vigor
Absorption
Acquired employees need to
know how to execute the
processes and procedures
utilized by the acquiring
organization that
contribute to their
engagement.
Procedural Vigor
Dedication
Acquired employees need to
reflect on their strengths
and weaknesses in
relation to organizational
expectations of the new
organization.
Metacognitive Absorption
Dedication
Note. The engagement crosswalk was developed based on the engagement factors needed by the
acquired employee to accomplish the assumed knowledge influence. Vigor, dedication, and
absorption are used as part of the crosswalk based on the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale
(Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004). The Utrecht Work Engagement Scale focuses on asking questions
about three factors determined to measure engagement including vigor, dedication and
absorption (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004). Adapted from “Utrecht Work Engagement Scale:
41
Preliminary manual,” by W.B. Schaufeli and A.B. Bakker, 2004, Utrecht University. Copyright
2003 by Schaufeli & Bakker. See Appendix B for more information.
Motivational Influences
Along with analyzing acquired employee knowledge and skill influences as related to the
stakeholder goal, it is critical to comprehend the motivation influences in the same context.
According to Clark and Estes (2008) attainment of organizational goals is subject to the three
motivational indexes where employees choose to aspire towards a goal, persist through
difficulties towards a distinct goal, and expend mental effort to advance towards the goal. To best
understand acquired employees’ motivation toward the stakeholder goal, a literature review of
applicable sources was completed. For the purpose of this study and examining the stakeholder
goal, the next sections evaluate three motivation influences focused on self-efficacy, value and
interest. See Table 4 for more information.
Confidence of Acquired Employees in Their Ability to Remain Engaged
When acquired associates join the new organization during the integration process, it is
critical that they have self-efficacy in their ability to remain engaged as employees in the new
organization so that they remain engaged in the event. Described by Zimmerman et al. (2017, p.
313) self-efficacy “refers to personal judgments of one's capabilities to organize and execute
courses of action to attain designated goals.” In the acquisition, acquired employees face a great
deal of stress and oftentimes spend a great deal of energy just trying to survive the acquisition
process (Cartwright & Cooper, 1994; Galosy, 1990). These difficulties combined with increased
pressure to succeed and contribute to the integration process in an unfamiliar environment stack
42
the odds against acquired employees (Galpin & Herndon, 2014; Galpin & Whitington, 2010;
Marks et al., 2017; Rubin et al., 2013).
To overcome these difficulties, a self-efficacious mindset must prevail and encourage the
individuals to believe that they control outcomes and can create positive situations and avoid
negative circumstances (Bandura, 2000). In a study of middle managers in an Italian service
organization, Borgogni et al. (2011) found that self-efficacy was directly and indirectly linked to
collective efficacy along with job satisfaction and organizational commitment illustrating the
impact that self-efficacy can have on a group. The Borgogni et al. study helps to connect to other
areas of the literature that describe the importance of acquired employee confidence in individual
skills and as a group on the success of the integration process and as employees in the new
organization (Galpin & Whittington, 2010; Georgiades & Georgiades, 2014; Marks & Mirvis,
2010; Stempniak, 2014).
Acquired Employees Value Participating in the New Organization
As acquired associates join the new organization, it is imperative that they value
participating and performing in the acquisition so that they are engaged in their actions. In their
text “Achievement Values” Wigfield et al. (2017) discussed the research on value in motivation
and surmised that when individuals value an achievement, they self-regulate their efforts and
focus their desire on reaching a specific result. Alternatively, if individuals do not value an
achievement, they likely reduce their effort and allocate their physical and mental resources to
other goals (Pintrich, 2003; Wigfield et al., 2017). Building on the discussion of value, the
literature acknowledges that value is only part of what drives motivation and that expectancy is
also critical (Ambrose et al., 2010; Wigfield et al., 2017). Specifically, the values along with
costs that may impact value and the expected success or failure of the task are a part of the
43
expectancy value theorem which is believed to be an integral part of human motivation
(Ambrose et al., 2010; Wigfield et al., 2017).
Further investigation of the literature acknowledged the importance of using value to
motivate acquired associates in the integration process. Several studies acknowledged the role
that psychological ownership plays in acquisitions and Degbey et al. (2020) concluded that
psychological ownership of the combined organization is positively related to employee
commitment involvement in mergers and acquisitions. Similarly, other studies theorized that
acquired associates share an identity with their previous organization and the acquiring
organization should consider this self-concept including values and beliefs to ensure associates
see value in the new organization (Bouchikhi & Kimberly, 2011; Bouchikhi & Kimberly, 2012;
Lee et al., 2015). In conclusion, the literature recognizes that acquired associates should have
enthusiasm to join the new organization and see value in successfully completing the integration
process and performing in the future state (Amiot et al., 2012; Cartwright & Cooper, 1990;
Marks & Mirvis, 2011a).
Acquired Employees Should Be Interested in Engaging in the New Organization
A final motivation influence involves the importance of acquired associates maintaining
an interest in engaging in the new organization throughout the integration process. As discussed
in the literature, individuals are more likely to be engaged in an activity and motivated to achieve
success if they are interested in the material (Ambrose et al., 2010). These personal interests are
often unique to each individual, however, the relationship between the person and a specific
object of interest can help to focus efforts more clearly based on the situation (Harackiewicz &
Knogler, 2017; Pintrich, 2003). Though acquired associates may not have genuine interest in the
acquisition activities when compared to a personal hobby, one method of generating interest is to
44
demonstrate the importance of the activities. Specifically, Harackiewicz and Knogler (2017)
noted that creating utility value can establish interest in a given activity if value is seen beyond
the current circumstances and associates understand the benefits to occur in other elements of
life.
Within the literature on mergers and acquisitions, researchers discussed the importance of
acquiring organizations clearly defining career paths and opportunities so acquired employees
maintain an interest in engaging with the new organization (Cartwright & Cooper, 1990;
Georgiades & Georgiades, 2014). Along with defining career opportunities, the research suggests
that the acquiring organization should make an effort to personalize incentives and rewards for
acquired associates based on what is specific to the individual to generate interest (Lee & Park,
2013). In conclusion, the literature mentions that acquired associates should avoid negative
emotions as a result of the acquisition of their former company and embrace the new
organization as a new interest (Dirva & Radulescu, 2018; Georgiades & Georgiades, 2014;
Sinkovics et al., 2011).
Table 4
Motivation Influences
Motivation influence Motivation construct
Acquired employees need to be confident
they can remain engaged in the combined
organization.
Self-efficacy
Acquired employees need to value
participating as an associate in the new
organization.
Value
Acquired employees need to be interested in
engaging as an associate in the new
organization.
Interest
45
Organizational Influences
As the third and final influence associated with the stakeholder goal, organizational
influences include processes and procedures of the organization as well as supplies and resources
(Clark & Estes, 2008). These stated elements have a critical influence on how the stakeholder
group is able to perform in their role and determine whether or not they will be able to
accomplish the goals of the organization and are thus an important part of the research study. As
defined by Gallimore and Goldenberg (2001), organizational influences are typically divided into
cultural models and settings. Cultural models are “shared mental schema or normative
understanding of how the world works or ought to work” (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001, p. 47)
and cultural settings which are events or “those occasions where people come together to carry
out joint activity that accomplishes something they value” (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001, p.
48). In the next four sections the literature on organizational influences including cultural models
and cultural settings that are applicable to the stakeholder goal are presented. See Table 5 for
more information.
Culture of Acceptance and Embrace Towards the Contributions of Acquired Employees
During the integration process it is important that acquired employees are welcomed into
an organization that accepts and embraces the contributions of new associates. Though this may
seem obvious, it is well documented in the literature that employees in the acquiring organization
often feel a sense of possession over not only the acquired organization but acquired associates
as well (Amiot et al., 2012; Degbey et al., 2020). These feelings of possession often include a
sense of superiority on the part of the employees of the acquiring firm resulting in an
unwelcoming nature towards acquired employees (Marks & Mirvis 2011a; Stahl & Voigt, 2008).
Unfortunately, the effects of these attitudes often result in an us vs them competition resulting in
decreased engagement on acquisition tasks due to time and energy spent on quarreling with
46
associates that are now on the same team (Amiot et al., 2012; Lee et al., 2015; Marks & Mirvis,
2010; Sarala, 2009).
In a review of associated literature numerous studies confirmed that a welcoming culture
is important to new employees. Cesario and Chambel (2019) found in a study of business
associates that three components of the welcoming process including the corporate welcome,
management welcome and coworker welcome had a significant impact on work engagement and
commitment. Similarly, Vital and Alves (2010) studied health care workers and determined that
in a sample of 114 professionals that the manner in which associates were welcomed into the
workplace influenced their motivation. Overall, the literature concluded that welcoming and
embracing new associates into the organization helps to increase organizational productivity and
utilizing the contribution of acquired associates is important to a successful acquisition
(Appelbaum et al., 2017; Galpin & Herndon, 2014; Kaetzler et al., 2019; Marks & Mirvis 2010;
Oehler, 2019).
Acquiring Organization Should Use Best Practices in Merging Cultures
The next organizational influence involves the acquiring company using industry best
practices when merging cultures to limit the negative impacts of integration on acquired
employee engagement. In the literature review process, several studies focused on the benefits of
using industry best practices for change management and in particular culture integration. The
competing values framework (CVF) was referenced as an analytical tool utilized to determine
cultural differences in the existing and desired end state for organizations which was found to
assist with the due diligence process (Chesley, 2019, 2020; Ovseiko, 2015). The importance of
the due diligence process was another common theme in the literature as many researchers
recognized the importance of completing the appropriate cultural analysis prior to the
47
acquisition. Specifically, Degbey et al. (2020) noted that while a great deal of acquisitions focus
on finance and strategy, people issues cause an estimate one-third to one-half of all failures.
According to the literature, these failures are often due to a lack of focus on cultural
compatibility and an absence of cultural integration best practices (Denison & Ko, 2016; Harding
& Rouse, 2007; Marks & Mirvis, 2010; Stempniak, 2014).
Following the due diligence process other best practices were noted in the literature
including using metrics to drive cultural integration success. Though some might argue that soft
aspects such as culture cannot be quantified, researchers noted that desired behaviors can and
should be tracked in order to reach a defined cultural end state (Engert et al., 2019; Miller &
Fernandes, 2009; Mirc, 2013). Moreover, specific exercises were discussed as best practices for
merging cultures such as a role reversal between the acquiring and acquired organizations
discussed by Marks and Mirvis (2010) and intentional cultural discussions focused on
perceptions and viewpoints of each organization on the other organization as well as themselves
(Galosy, 1990; Weber & Tarba, 2012). A final best practice discussed is the use of an after action
review process to improve cultural integration success (Barkema & Schijven, 2008; Galpin &
Herndon, 2014; Mielly et al., 2017; Welch, 2009). The evidence highlights that when properly
implemented, after action reviews provide employees with a valuable communication and
collaboration tool which assists with increasing knowledge of a prior event and enhancing the
impact of future efforts across a multitude of organizations (Allen et al. 2018). Furthermore, in a
study of 174 business students Eddy et al. (2013) determined that teams that participated in a
guided debrief process significantly outperformed those which did not participate in an debrief
process.
48
The literature review process yielded many cultural integration practices that have been
effective for different organizations. Some of the practices discovered are not applicable to the
research study as the acquired employees are not exposed to the techniques and would not be
able to provide insight into the presence of particular practices among leadership. For the
purpose of this study the following practices will be examined to determine if they are present
within the organization: intentional cultural conversations between organization members, role
reversal or perspective altering activities, and introspection or after action review events.
Acquiring Organization Should Highlight Examples of Successful Acquired Employees
When acquired employees join the new organization, they are often facing a great deal of
stress in their new environment and likely questioning their ability to succeed in an unfamiliar
situation (Cartwright & Cooper, 1993; Georgiades & Georgiades, 2014). For this reason, it is
important that the new organization provides a model of success for acquired employees to
remain engaged in the integration process. One method of providing this model of success is by
highlighting examples of career opportunities and other acquired employees who have succeeded
within the organization (Cartwright & Cooper, 1990; Georgiades & Georgiades, 2014; Marks et
al., 2017; Oehler, 2019). These examples of success and opportunity increase engagement with
the new organization and ultimately play an important part in the success of the acquisition
(Appelbaum et al., 2017; Bouchikhi & Kimberly, 2011; Degbey et al., 2020).
The literature review process yielded many other examples of the importance of
observing like individuals succeed. Specifically, Zambrana et al. (2015) determined that mentors
for underrepresented minorities who have faced the struggle of succeeding at predominantly
white institutions as an underrepresented minority themselves can improve retention and success
of mentees. Furthermore, Bayerle and Scanlon (2017) found that middle school girls who had a
49
female mentor studying engineering had increased levels of both interest and confidence in their
ability to succeed as engineers in a recent research study. Finally, the literature highlights the
importance of acquired employees gaining a sense of familiarity with the new organization and
the role that mentors and examples of similar background has on that process (Appelbaum et al.,
2017; Marks & Mirvis, 2010; Petro, 2013).
Transition Plans and Responsibilities Clearly Articulated by the Acquiring Organization
Perhaps the most common organization influence referenced in the literature, the
importance of clear communication of transition plans and responsibilities is important to the
engagement of acquired employees. This organizational influence includes details around the
transition plan and responsibilities such as staff reductions, human resource policies, work
environment transitions, scope of work changes, and future state job responsibilities (Marks &
Mirvis, 2010; Mirc, 2013; Sadri & Lees, 2001; Stafford & Miles, 2013). These details are
important to communicate appropriately to acquired employees, as they have a tremendous
impact on their daily life as an employee (Galosy, 1990; Georgiades & Georgiades, 2014). If the
acquiring organization does not articulate this information satisfactorily to the acquired
employees, fear and anxiety along with distrust and suspicion can impact productivity,
commitment and even employee health (Dirva & Radulescu, 2018; Sinkovics et al., 2011).
50
Table 5
Organizational Influences
Organizational influences Organizational influence category
The acquiring organization needs a
culture of acceptance towards the
contributions of acquired
employees.
Cultural Model Influence 1
The acquiring organization needs to
utilize industry best practices in
merging cultures to promote
engagement during acquisition.
Cultural Setting Influence 1
The acquiring organization needs to
highlight model examples of
engaged acquired employees from
previous acquisitions.
Cultural Setting Influence 2
The acquiring organization needs to
clearly articulate the
accompanying responsibilities of
acquired employees under the
transition plan throughout the
acquisition process.
Cultural Setting Influence 3
Conceptual Framework
The conceptual framework of the research study provides a tool to express the main ideas
of the study through a visual illustration and statement (Maxwell, 2013). This visual illustration
allows me to best explain the connections and relationship between key concepts and outlines the
lens with which they view the problem of practice (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016; Rocco &
Plakhotnik, 2009). Due to the role that the conceptual framework serves, it has a great deal of
influence over the study as it plays a foundational role and helps me to mentally visualize their
work (Rocco & Plakhotnik, 2009). Though the previous elements of the literature have provided
51
background information as well as described the effects that play a role on the problem of
practice, the conceptual framework emphasizes the interrelatedness of the influences on the
stakeholders. Following the presentation of the visual in Figure 1, the conceptual framework is
described in detail.
Figure 1
Conceptual Framework for Exploring Knowledge, Motivation, and Organization Influences on Acquired Employee Engagement
52
53
As can be seen in Figure 1, the visual depicts the conceptual framework described in
Chapters 1 and 2 focusing on the knowledge, motivation and organizational influences. The
outside boundary of the figure clarifies the scope of the research study which includes the
cultural context of the integration process. This outer boundary is composed of two elongated
half circles coming together at the center of the visual. The adjoined half circles are designated
as the acquired organization and acquiring organization, and these two figures meeting in the
middle illustrate the development of one combined organization. Within each half circle there are
three boxes representing engagement, productivity, and retention for both the acquiring
organization and the acquired organization. The boxes on the acquiring organization side of the
diagram are labeled as influences as the acquiring organization influences the acquired
organization based on the integration process.
On the other side of the diagram from the acquired organization perspective, the boxes
are labeled as outcomes as the influence of the acquiring organization determines outcomes of
the acquired organization. Within each of these three boxes in both half circles, there are three
interconnected circles representing the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences that
impact the engagement, productivity, and retention influences and outcomes. Connecting each of
the three boxes on separate sides of the diagram are three purple arrows which serve to illustrate
the relationship between engagement, productivity, and retention. Lastly, sets of arrows connect
each of the three corresponding boxes between the half circles depicting the impact of the
influences in the acquiring organization on the acquired organization.
Summary
This study explores the experience of acquired employees within an organization
following an acquisition to understand influences that impact employee engagement. The results
54
of this study are expected to inform actions that can be taken to improve productivity and
retention of acquired employees during future merger and acquisition processes. To provide
context to the purpose of the study, Chapter 2 presented literature on the integration process,
mergers and acquisitions in healthcare, human related issues in mergers and acquisitions, the
relationship between engagement, productivity, and retention, and the impact of mergers and
acquisitions on engagement, productivity, and retention. Additionally, Chapter 2 provided insight
into the gap analysis viewpoint of the research study examining the relationship between
acquired employee engagement and knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences.
Though the literature reviewed included different facets of the influences, no specific utilization
of the gap analysis framework on acquired employee engagement in the healthcare industry or to
the organization researched in the study. To address this aspect of the research, Chapter 3 will
include the methodology utilized focusing on how the gap analysis framework was used on the
stakeholder goal and include a discussion of data collection practices, ethics considerations and
limitations.
55
Chapter Three: Methodology
This study explored the experience of acquired employees within an organization
following an acquisition to understand influences that impact employee engagement. The results
of this study are expected to inform actions that can be taken to improve productivity and
retention of acquired employees during future merger and acquisition processes. The study
achieved its purpose by exploring the KMO influences affecting acquired employees within
Koufax Supply Management Group, a subsidiary of Kershaw Health. The focus of this chapter
includes the design of the research study, methods of data collection, and analysis plan for the
data.
Study Questions
The following questions guide this study:
1. What is Koufax Supply Management Group (KSMG) acquired employees' perception of
their engagement during the acquisition process?
2. What are the knowledge and motivational influences affecting engagement among
acquired employees of Koufax Supply Management Group (KSMG)?
3. What is the relationship between the organizational culture of Koufax Supply
Management Group (KSMG) and acquired employees’ engagement?
Overview of Methodology
A multi method approach using qualitative interviews and document analysis was
selected to study the research questions. Qualitative interviews were selected to best understand
past experiences and gather the views of participants (Creswell & Creswell, 2018) who fit the
description of acquired employees in the research study. These interviews are then combined
with document analysis of presentations and memos to gather a holistic account of the
56
integration of acquired associates. Using a deductive process, the qualitative interviews and
document analysis focused on knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences and
exploring whether or not they exist based on gap analysis theory (Clark & Estes, 2008). See
Table 6 for more information
Table 6
Data Sources
Study questions Qualitative interviews Document analysis
1. What is Koufax Supply Management Group
(KSMG) acquired employees’ perception of
their engagement during the acquisition
process?
X X
2. What are the knowledge and motivational
influences affecting engagement among
acquired employees of Koufax Supply
Management Group (KSMG)?
X
3. What is the relationship between the
organizational culture of Koufax Supply
Management Group (KSMG and acquired
employees’ engagement
X X
57
Data Collection, Instrumentation and Analysis Plan
Completing qualitative interviews with acquired employees and document analysis
allowed me to gain insight into the experience of being a part of an acquired organization, and to
identify the presence of knowledge, motivation and organizational influences. In the next
sections, the methodology of the qualitative interview procedures will be reviewed including the
sampling and recruitment approach, instruments used to collect data, logistical procedures of
capturing the data, the data analysis process, credibility and trustworthiness of the interviews.
Following the review of the interview methodology, the document analysis methodology is
discussed including the data collection procedures and data analysis process.
Method: Interviews
This study incorporated 15 qualitative interviews of members of KSMG who were part of
an organization acquired by KH. To ensure that applicable experiences were discussed, and the
most insight is gained through the interviews, a purposeful sampling technique was used when
selecting participants (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The interview process involved semi-structured
methodology (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).
Participating Stakeholders
The participating stakeholders for the research study are members of KSMG who were
members of an organization acquired by KH within the last 10 years. Utilizing a roster of KSMG
employees, invitations to participate in the study are distributed to associates who were part of an
organization acquired by KH in the last 10 years. Participants were also required to be at the
Analyst level or above within the organization, could not have a reporting relationship (neither
manager or subordinate) with me, and had to be currently employed by KSMG to be considered
for participation in the study. This pool of potential participants included approximately 30-40
58
associates within the organization. Though Merriam and Tisdell (2016) note that it is difficult to
assign an exact number of participants to a qualitative study, they describe a point of saturation
where “no new insights are forthcoming” (p. 101), which was the goal of participant selection in
the research study. I reached this described point of saturation at 15 interviews and concluded the
process at that time.
Instrumentation
Qualitative interviews are completed to gather data on the problem of practice focusing
on knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences. Specifically, a semi-structured
approach was utilized to provide flexibility in the research process (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
This technique uses a deductive methodology to draw conclusions and allows me to truly
understand the meaning of participants' stories holistically and encourage reflection throughout
the process (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). A total of 19 questions (located in Appendix C) along
with follow up questions when necessary were asked to participants to best understand their
perspective on the problem of practice.
Specific questions were developed based on the formalized research questions and the
Clark and Estes (2008) framework utilized as the conceptual framework. Questions two through
six focused on the knowledge the acquired employees gained throughout the integration process
including information, training and resources. Motivation influences consisting of self-efficacy,
value, and interest were probed in questions seven through 10. Questions 11 through 14 focused
on organizational influences, specifically cultural settings and models. Overall, the questions
considered each influence as part of the conceptual framework in relation to the problem of
practice to gather data as effectively as possible.
59
In order to best understand the research questions, the qualitative interviews used
elements of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale as a method to explore engagement of acquired
employees (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004). The Utrecht Work Engagement Scale has been tested
numerous times to confirm accuracy levels, and uses vigor, dedication, and absorption as a three-
factor model to understand work engagement (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004). As part of the
qualitative interviews in this research study, vigor, dedication, and absorption were included as a
proxy for understanding work engagement based on the success of the Utrecht Work
Engagement Scale (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004).
Data Collection Procedures
To effectively recruit participants into the research study, I distributed an informational
email to all KSMG acquired associates explaining the purpose and goal of the interviews.
Additionally, I used the informational email to describe the comprehensive efforts to maintain
confidentiality including the use of pseudonyms, password protected documentation, and the
method of presenting results. This communication was then followed with a targeted email
detailing the expectations of participants, my positionality, and asked that any interested
associates contact me to begin the interview scheduling process.
When the subject agreed to participate in the interview process, I confirmed a time and
date that was convenient for the participant (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Additionally, I
provided a Zoom link for the interview session to be completed remotely as remote interviews
are currently required under University of Southern California’s research guidelines. The
interview time slot was scheduled for 60 minutes. However, a concerted effort was made by me
to finish the event in 55 minutes to allow for questions and to ensure that participants have a few
minutes to collect themselves if they have another appointment immediately following the
60
interview. After the interview was scheduled, I verified that the Zoom platform would properly
record the event and prepare a notebook and multiple pens to record notes from the interview
(Bogdan & Biklen, 2007). As a final step of preparation, I confirmed that the Zoom platform
would successfully transcribe the interview and verify that it would provide the data in an
appropriate format.
As the interview process began, each participant was first asked permission to record the
interview and was provided an overview of what the interview will entail. Additionally,
confidentiality was briefly discussed and the ability for the interview to conclude at any point in
time should the participant become uncomfortable (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Following the
confirmation that the participant was okay with the described circumstances of the interview, I
provided an opportunity to ask any initial questions. Once the participant was ready to begin, I
began recording and started with the first question.
During the interview, I used a notebook and pen to capture notes and specific quotes as a
backup to the recording (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). As the participant answered each question,
I utilized probes as necessary to follow up and learn additional details as well as clarify the
statements (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Finally, as the interviews came to a close, I thanked the
participant for their time, stopped recording on the zoom platform, and verified that the video
was saved and backed up as appropriate.
Data Analysis
Data analysis for the semi-structured interviews was analyzed using qualitative
techniques. As described by Maxwell (2013), the qualitative analysis process does not begin
when the data collection ends but is an ongoing process. To ensure that the interview data is
analyzed as effectively as possible the process began immediately following the first interview
61
and did not stop until the research questions were satisfactorily answered. Additionally, this
simultaneous data analysis strategy allowed for me to remain focused on the task at hand without
being overwhelmed (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Finally, this technique is the preferred method of
data analysis for qualitative research according to Merriam and Tisdell (2016).
Along with using an ongoing process, the data analysis process included a structured
method of coding, interview commentary, and memos. Coding helped to manage the data and is
described by Merriam and Tisdell as “assigning some sort of short-hand designation to various
aspects of your data so that you can easily retrieve specific pieces of the data '' (2016, p. 199). In
addition to coding, thorough fieldnotes and interview commentary were completed directly
following each interview session in a quiet environment and without the burden of a tight
schedule to allow for plenty of time for reflection (Bogdan & Bilken, 2007). Also, when
appropriate, I wrote a memo as a reminder of a specific thought or conjecture that occurred
during the data analysis process (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016. Overall, the data analysis process is
focused on the goal of answering the defined research questions by understanding the “categories
or themes or findings'' (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016, p. 203) that are developed throughout the
research.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
To address potential credibility and trustworthiness issues of the study, the research
design included member checks, a peer review process, and adequate engagement in data
collection to better understand the event. As described by Merriam and Tisdell (2016), member
checks require that I “solicit feedback on [their] preliminary or emerging findings from some of
the people that [they] interviewed” (p. 246). This ensured that information was not
misinterpreted leading to false conclusions. Additionally, the peer review process was used as a
62
part of the research design to verify that the case study was completed appropriately. In this
strategy, credibility and trustworthiness were checked through a process where other researchers
provided feedback on the research design, data collected through the interview process, and the
proposed findings to “assess whether the findings are plausible” (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016, p.
250). Specifically, this research study utilized doctoral students in the Organizational Change
and Leadership program at the University of Southern California to help review the research
findings. Finally, to make sure that the event is properly understood, the research design included
adequate engagement in data collection to look for conflicting opinions and unique answers to
interview questions to ensure that a saturation point was reached where answers continued to be
similar (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). To establish adequate engagement in data collection, I
continuously analyzed the data and looked for patterns to verify that no new information
surfaced prior to ending the data collection process.
Method: Document Analysis
In addition to qualitative interviews, this study incorporated document analysis of
presentations and memos from previously completed acquisitions. These public documents
provided additional context for the research study and served as written evidence of items
presented (Creswell & Creswell, 2018) to acquired employees containing the exact language
used by KH and KSMG during the acquisition process. Each of the presentations and memos
was created by a KH or KSMG employee coming from firsthand experience; thus, they are a
primary data source (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Data Collection Procedures
To conduct a thorough document analysis process, documents of importance were
collected for me to study. Specifically, I collected published documentation prepared by KH and
63
KSMG related to the purpose of the study and the knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences discussed in the conceptual framework. The documents of focus in the collection
process were memos created by KH and KSMG to announce the acquisition of another
organization and presentations created by KSMG for acquisition kick-off.
The document collection procedures were based on the permission of KH and KSMG. As
specified by the organization, any document distributed or presented to acquired employees
during the integration process was approved for analysis, and was searched for, identified, and
saved as needed. In the case of documentation not distributed or presented to acquired
employees, special permission was obtained by me from the organization prior to collection.
Finally, each document collected by me was password protected in order to ensure secured
storage.
Data Analysis
After collecting documents for analysis, I first catalogued each document by recording
the date collected, acquired organization, and the date of presentation or distribution. Following
this initial step, the content analysis process began to help me to better understand the type of
material being analyzed (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The content analysis process included
searching for themes, meaning, symbolism and in general what was being communicated to the
recipient (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). In addition to the exploring described above in the analysis
process, I focused on identifying any knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences
within the documentation using a priori codes. Similar to the data analysis completed for the
interviews, the data analysis completed for the documents was an ongoing process to allow for
continued learning (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This continuous process also allowed me to
64
compare findings between the qualitative interviews and the document analysis to best
understand the problem of practice (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Ethics and Role of Researcher
In preparation for completing the research study, ethics and rationale was an important
consideration for me. Specifically, numerous issues were navigated throughout the study
including consent, confidentiality, incentives, and power dynamics. Confidentiality in the
research study was critically important as participants are critiquing the processes currently used
by the organization (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). In order to ensure confidentiality, pseudonyms
replaced the names of all participants in the study, documentation and recordings were password
protected to ensure that identities were not exposed to anyone beyond me, and all documentation
was scrubbed prior to distribution to verify confidentiality. Also, I addressed power dynamics in
the interview process. This issue was observed through an explanation of the purpose of
supporting integration of acquired employees in the future state and thorough explanation of my
positionality.
The issue of consent was also critically important to respect participants throughout the
study (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). To begin the interview process, each participant was first
asked permission to record the interview and provided an overview of what the interview would
entail. In addition to asking permission to record, I confirmed consent to begin the interview
process and explained that the interview can conclude at any point in time should the participant
become uncomfortable (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Once I confirmed that they had consent to
begin the interview and that the participant was comfortable with the process, I began asking
questions that pertain to the study.
65
Underlying ethics is also an important aspect of the research study. Reflecting on the
underlying ethics of the study forced me to think beyond the surface level and answer difficult
questions about the impact of their work. One applicable question for me included who benefits
from the study? As named in the purpose statement, the focus of the study was aimed at the
acquired employees experiences throughout the acquisition process to analyze the impact of
culture integration on engagement, which suggests that the research benefits future acquired
employees. Though it is true that an underlying assumption is that future acquired employees
benefit from the study, it was also a goal that the organization improved, including support for
existing associates, business practices as well as profitability. To ensure transparency throughout
the process, it was important that all key stakeholders including participants understand the
underlying assumption that multiple parties benefit from the study and that my positionality
would not affect the realization of any potential improvements.
Another key component of underlying ethics of the study was how results would be
disseminated. Though the primary purpose of the study was to explore the experience of
acquired employees within an organization following an acquisition to understand influences that
impact employee engagement, the results were also used in the requirements for completion of
the USC Organizational Change and Leadership program which involved presenting the findings
in front of professors, and other researchers. Since the results would be shared within the
organization, as well as externally, my underlying assumptions were made clear, and I stated that
the goal of disseminating the information was to provide a better environment for all parties
throughout the acquisition process. The assumption that a better environment would occur is
based on the potential for solutions which decrease stress for all associates, and in general ease
the process of cultural integration through my positioning in the study.
66
In an additional ethics consideration, it was essential for me to think about my role in the
organization. Specifically, I have been employed by KSMG as a Supply Chain Consultant and
Operations Integration Manager over the last five years. These duties required me to participate
in the acquisition of organizations analyzing processes and procedures and developing a strategy
to transition to the future state. Though it is this work that has significantly contributed to my
passion around the acquisition process it was imperative that I mitigate any biases that might
occur due to my role. In order to mitigate these potential biases, I only interviewed participants
that do not report to me in any capacity. Additionally, the protocol for the qualitative interviews
and document analysis were created based on the findings in the literature, and they were not
derived from my previous knowledge alone in order to reduce potential bias. Finally, the peer
review process using other student researchers and the dissertation committee provided feedback
on research design, data collection, and proposed findings supplied another opportunity to
eliminate potential biases (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
67
Chapter Four: Findings
The purpose of this study was to explore the experience of acquired employees within an
organization following an acquisition to understand influences that impact employee
engagement. The study achieved its purpose by interviewing acquired employees within Koufax
Supply Management Group (KSMG), a subsidiary of Kershaw Health (KH), and analyzing
documents and artifacts published by KSMG. The focus of this chapter is to present the findings
collected during the research study. The following research questions guided the study and the
findings associated with each research question are discussed throughout the rest of the chapter.
1. What is Koufax Supply Management Group (KSMG) acquired employees' perception of
their engagement during the acquisition process?
2. What are the knowledge and motivational influences affecting engagement among
acquired employees of Koufax Supply Management Group (KSMG)?
3. What is the relationship between the organizational culture of Koufax Supply
Management Group (KSMG) and acquired employees’ engagement?
Participating Stakeholders
The stakeholder group for the study was acquired employees within KSMG, a subsidiary
of KH. Acquired employees were selected as the key stakeholders for the research study as their
actions and behavior determine the success or failure of achieving the organizational goal and the
acquired employee goal. As explained in Chapter 3, the interview participants are members of
KSMG who were employed by an organization acquired by KH within the last 10 years.
Additional criteria included that the interview participants be at the Analyst level or above within
the organization, could not have a reporting relationship (neither manager or subordinate) with
me, and had to be currently employed by KSMG to be considered for participation in the study.
68
Following the distribution of 15 targeted emails to acquired employees detailing the
expectations of participants and my positionality, each of the 15 recipients responded willing to
conduct an interview. All 15 respondents subsequently completed an interview. As planned
throughout the research study, each interview was scheduled to take place virtually using the
video conferencing software Zoom due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Each of the interview
participants were considerate, friendly, and cooperative throughout the entire process even under
the restrictions of the virtual environment.
Table 7 provides a summary of the interview participants, specifically the gender and
position of each participant. To protect the identity of the participants, individuals will be
referred to by their gender and position only; their location (Illinois, Kansas, Oklahoma, or
Wisconsin) will remain anonymous. Though the locations of each participant will remain
anonymous, participants were acquired employees from five different hospital systems: one
system in Illinois, one system in Kansas, one system in Oklahoma, and two systems in
Wisconsin. Additionally, the participants were part of different hospitals within each system and
held different positions. As shown in Table 7, 11 out of the 15 participants interviewed were
women and four were men. The sample of participants slightly overrepresented women in the
Operations Director, Operations Manager, Associate Operations Manager, and Critical Products
Manager roles compared the KSMG population; however, the Operations Data Specialist role is
proportionately represented, and the Analyst role was overrepresented by men.
69
Table 7
Interview Participants
Participant code Gender Position
ODS1 Female Operations Data Specialist
OD2 Female Operations Director
OM3 Female Operations Manager
AOM4 Female Associate Operations Manager
ODS5 Male Operations Data Specialist
CPM6 Female Critical Products Manager
CPM7 Female Critical Products Manager
CPM8 Female Critical Products Manager
OM9 Female Operations Manager
AOM10 Female Associate Operations Manager
OM11 Male Operations Manager
CPM12 Female Critical Products Manager
OM13 Male Operations Manager
OM14 Female Operations Manager
A15 Male Analyst
Document and Artifact Analysis
To complement the qualitative interviews, this study incorporated document and artifact
analysis focused on presentations and memos from acquisitions previously completed by KH.
This element of the research study included the collection and analysis of 10 total artifacts. The
artifacts collected and analyzed included four presentations used during acquisition kick-off
meetings with acquired employees. The documents consisted of six memos communicating the
acquisition to key stakeholders. After a thorough review of the documents and artifacts, they did
not contribute any data relevant to the research study. Due to the lack of additional insight
70
provided by the documents and artifacts, this piece of the research study will not be discussed
further in the findings section. Table 8 depicts the documents and artifacts reviewed.
Table 8
Artifacts Collected and Analyzed
Document type Number collected and analyzed
Kick-off presentation 4
Announcement memo 6
71
What Is Koufax Supply Management Group (KSMG) Acquired Employees' Perception of
Their Engagement During the Acquisition Process?
This section presents information from qualitative interviews collected to answer the first
research question about KSMG acquired employees’ perception of their engagement during the
acquisition process. Acquired employees were found to have varying outlooks of each one’s own
levels of engagement during the acquisition process. Analysis of interview data revealed four
themes related to participants’ feelings of engagement during the acquisition process: engaged
throughout the acquisition process, engaged during the beginning of the process, did not feel
engaged at all, and engaged towards the end of the process.
Starting with the most common answer regarding acquired employees’ perceptions of
their engagement during the acquisition process, eight interview participants (53.33%) felt that
they were engaged throughout the entire acquisition process. The reasoning behind their
perceptions of engagement were accompanied by similar rationales. The most frequent rationale
for feeling engaged throughout the acquisition process was that participants felt included by the
acquiring organization in the decision-making process. A female Associate Operations Manager
(AOM4) stated, “when they came here to, you know, review the workflows, you know, they did
include me on every decision or every discussion.” A female Operations Manager (OM9) echoed
a similar sentiment noting, “I was part of every process, nothing happened, nothing changed in
this department unless I was included in it.” A second rationale that was provided by participants
for why they felt engaged during the entire acquisition process was due to the high demand of
their work requirements. Specifically, a female Critical Products Manager (CPM7) noted, “I felt
very engaged in the work, we had a very, very steep timeline.” Separately, a male Operations
72
Manager (OM11) remembered late nights in the office saying, “I listened to the entire world
series in my office every single game while just keying away at a bunch of stuff.”
Four out of 15 interview participants (26.67%) felt that they were engaged during the
beginning of the acquisition process specifically. Participants that felt that they were engaged at
the beginning of the acquisition process often cited initial discovery process where members of
the acquiring organization are focused on better understanding the intricacies of the acquired
organization. For example, a Female Operations Director (OD2) talked about their engagement
with the KSMG associates “really asking a lot of questions about how you do it now and that
type of thing.” She went on to say the interaction “was pretty engaging.” In another example, a
female Associate Operations Manager (AOM10) talked about her involvement with helping to
lead the site tours that start at the receiving dock and end with the doctor (dock to docs) stating
that “I was definitely really engaged in the dock to docs for all the facilities and being able to
answer a majority of the questions.” Additionally, a male Operations Manager (OM13) talked
about the planning phase that occurred during the start of the acquisition noting “that's very
engaging you get to make some big changes to things that you look at every day that are going to
make improvements.”
The four interview participants that only felt engaged at the beginning helped to clarify
the reasons for not feeling engaged at the end of the acquisition process. A male Operations
Manager (OM13) noted that after the beginning of the acquisition he had no further involvement
in the process stating, “that's when it comes to your leadership structure, because I have no
involvement in that right.” Similarly, a female Critical Products Manager (CPM12) mentioned
that the group had to abandon some of the engaging practices that were completed in the
beginning during the implementation phase at the end noting “we had to abandon that because
73
you can't arrange for thousands of samples.” Based on these responses, the acquired associates
felt engaged during the initial discovery period when the acquiring organization was seeking out
information but did not feel engaged as the acquiring organization began to implement the
structure and business practices.
Only two of 15 interview participants (13.33%) stated they did not feel engaged
throughout the acquisition process. In a direct response regarding their perception of engagement
during the acquisition process, a female Operations Manager (OM14) noted that while they were
working a lot, it felt like “I was kind of getting drug along” and that she was “doing things just to
do it and not really understanding what I was doing.” Another female Operations Manager
(OM3) echoed the sentiment that she was very busy throughout the process, but she felt like
“there was no real chance for input, this is how we’re going to do it, and this is the way it’s going
to be.” This feeling of a lack of engagement by participants is concerning as the acquired
associates eventually transition to manages the processes and procedures implemented. If the
acquired associates are not engaged throughout the acquisition, then their success as employees
and success of the acquisition decreases.
Finally, only one participant (7.69%), a male Analyst (A15), felt that he was engaged
only at the end of the acquisition process. Specifically, he stated that he felt that he lacked a
vision of the “bigger picture of the organization” during the integration process; for that reason,
he did not feel engaged until the end. Additionally, when speaking about the vision of the
organization, the analyst stated:
There was none of that it was just taking it day by day and then every day there'll
be something new we're going to do X or we're going to do, Y you know, so it
was kind of a piecemeal kind of process of acquisition, if you will.
74
Though only one individual stated that they only felt engaged at the end of the process, a male
Operations Manager (OM11) who felt engaged throughout the entire integration process noted
that he felt most engaged at the end at a point when he was given the responsibility to maintain
things moving forward. He noted, “my biggest point of engagement, was post ‘go live’ again
when you know you're handed the baton and they said okay, this is yours, keep it alive.” The
engagement of both of these individuals at the end of the acquisition process illustrates that in
these two instances the acquiring organization did a good job of finishing the process effectively,
however, it is concerning that more participants did not share these same feelings.
Participants expressed varying levels of engagement throughout the integration process,
but three participants (20%) seemed to question during the interviews whether they were truly
engaged or just kept busy. A male Operations Manager (OM11) stated that he was engaged
throughout the whole process, talked about the long hours, but then said, “that isn't necessarily
engaged as much as it is, you know, busy.” A male Operations Data Specialist who said that he
was engaged during the entire process added to that sentiment when he described the experience
as being “tuned in” as if he felt like he was watching more than engaged in the experience. Two
other participants who said that they were not at all engaged in the process used this line of
reasoning as well. A female Operations Manager (OM3) stated that she “felt like I was just their
work mule,” and another female Operations Manager (OM14) mentioned that it was “more of a
feeling of checking off tasks.”
Overall, the findings related to acquired employees' perceptions of their engagement
during the acquisition process helped to provide insight into the experiences of acquired
employees. Though nearly half of interview participants felt engaged throughout the entire
integration process, three stated their perception of being engaged may simply because they were
75
simply completing tasks and not truly engaged with their work. Additionally, participants who
stated that they were not engaged during some of the process helped to highlight that during the
implementation of structures and practices they felt like they were just watching or not engaged
with the integration. The investigation of acquired employees’ perception of their engagement
during the engagement process in Research Question 1 helped to establish whether engagement
was present among participants and helped to identify specific challenges. Finally, these key
insights into the current state are interesting, but they also brought to light additional questions
for future research. These opportunities for future research will be discussed in Chapter 5.
What Are the Knowledge and Motivational Influences Affecting Engagement Among
Acquired Employees of Koufax Supply Management Group (KSMG)?
The following sub-sections present findings from qualitative interviews to answer the
second research question about the knowledge and motivational influences affecting engagement
among KSMG acquired employees. The knowledge and motivational influences comprise two
out of the three types of influence types referenced in the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis
model, which serves as the conceptual framework for the study. According to Clark and Estes,
several different tools, including information, job aids, training and education, can be used to
influence the knowledge of organization members. Additionally, attainment of organizational
goals is subject to the three motivational indexes where employees choose to aspire towards a
goal, persist through difficulties towards a distinct goal, and expend mental effort to advance
towards the goal (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Through the completion of the qualitative interviews, data was gathered on each of the
different assumed knowledge and motivational influences presented in Chapter 2. The analysis
required that the information be first sorted by question, and then by influence. After multiple
76
rounds of coding to ensure that any applicable elements of the interview were sorted into the
correct influence, I then evaluated each influence for each participant to determine whether the
influence was an asset or a gap for that participant. Once each influence had been determined to
be either an asset or a gap for each participant, I required that nine or more participants must
have been scored as an asset for the influence to be considered as an asset overall. Nine
participants were selected as the cut off point as it was equal to 60% of total participants which
seemed appropriate to confirm presence of the influence. Each of the sections below review the
findings associated with the knowledge and motivational influences with a focus on whether the
influence was found to be an asset or gap.
Knowledge Findings
The knowledge influences introduced in Chapter 2 were considered an important element
of answering Research Question 2 focused on knowledge and motivational influences affecting
engagement among KSMG acquired employees. These four assumed knowledge influences were
further divided into knowledge types, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive, based on the
focus of each influence. After further investigation into the knowledge influences, the conceptual
aspect of the knowledge of the business practices of the acquiring organization was determined
to be a gap. The procedural aspects of acquired associates being able to access resources and the
ability of acquired associates to execute processes and procedures used by the acquiring
organization were found to be assets. Finally, the metacognitive aspects of acquired associates’
abilities to reflect on their strengths and weaknesses in relation to organizational expectations of
the new organization was also determined to be an asset. Table 9 presents a summary of the
knowledge influences and findings, and additional detail can be found in the sections below
focused on each of the specific knowledge influences.
77
Table 9
Summary of Knowledge Influences and Findings
Assumed knowledge
influence
Knowledge type Validation
Acquired employees need
knowledge of the business
practices of the acquiring
organization.
Conceptual Gap
Acquired employees need to
know how to access the
resources available to
support their engagement
in the new organization.
Procedural Asset
Acquired employees need to
know how to execute the
processes and procedures
utilized by the acquiring
organization that
contribute to their
engagement.
Procedural Asset
Acquired employees need to
reflect on their strengths
and weaknesses in
relation to organizational
expectations of the new
organization.
Metacognitive Asset
Acquired Employees Lacked Knowledge of the Business Practices of the Acquiring
Organization
The first knowledge influence analyzed was the knowledge of business practices of the
acquiring organization. Based on the data collected, this influence was found to be a gap as only
78
six out of 15 (40%) participants provided evidence of the presence of the influence during the
interview process. Through the review process, several rationales for both the presence and
absence of the influence were discovered.
A review of the data collected during the interviews showed some interesting rationales
for why the influence was a gap in the current state. A common rationale for a lack of knowledge
of the business practices of the acquiring organization was attributed to the acquiring
organization failing to explain its business practices. All nine participants who did not provide
evidence of the influence clarified that they were not familiar with the business practices of the
acquiring organization from the beginning of the acquisition. A female Operations Manager
(OM3) specifically stated, “it was about I would say, a year or two after we were acquired that it
was like okay now this is starting to make sense.” Similarly, a female Associate Operations
Manager (AOM10) spoke to the lack of explanation noting, “there were areas where things, they
weren't explained fully.” Finally, a male Operations Data Specialist (ODS5) spoke about the first
two years following the acquisition saying “nobody knew what was happening, we had no idea
of [KH] moving in.” Reviewing the data shows that participants were not familiar with the
acquiring organization’s business practices early in the acquisition and that this clearly impacted
their ability to be engaged and effective during the acquisition.
Alternatively, other associates rationalized their familiarity with the business practices of
the acquiring organization based on the similarity of the acquired and acquiring organizations.
Focusing in on the similarity of the mission, a female Operations Data Specialist (ODS1)
commented “we moved into a bigger organization, but their principles, the way they did things is
very, very similar.” In another example, a female Critical Products Manager (CPM12) also
79
commented on the alignment of business practices between the acquiring and acquired
organizations as confirmed by the outgoing leadership team:
The [previous leaders] made some recordings that are still accessible, and it was a
first-hand account of why they chose [KH], and I reflect on those to this day,
simply because it was their choice, it was not a takeover they wanted to continue
their mission and they knew that to do that they needed to become part of a bigger
organization.
Finally, a male Operations Manager (OM11) spoke about their experience learning the business
practices early in the transition when said “everything had to be on contract and everything had
to be converted, you know there's so many little rules [KSMG] had.”
The findings associated with the acquired employee knowledge of business practices
confirm that this influence is a gap. Participants made it clear that in many instances, practices
were not explained early enough in the transition and left them confused for a long period of
time after the start of the integration process. Though the similarity of mission, vision, and values
between their prior organization and the new organization helped some acquired associates
become comfortable with the practices, this clearly did not ensure appropriate individual
knowledge of business practices for a majority of participants.
Acquired Employees Successfully Accessed the Resources Available to Support Their
Engagement in the Acquiring Organization
After analyzing the knowledge of business practices, the next knowledge influence of
focus was acquired employee’s ability to access the resources available to support their
engagement in the acquiring organization. A review of the information collected during the
interview process confirmed that this influence was an asset as 10 of 15 participants provided
80
evidence of the presence of the influence. The review process helped to better understand the
rationales of participants for both the presence and absence of the influence.
Evaluation of the responses where participants provided evidence of the presence of the
influence highlighted a few specific rationales for acquired employees. The most common
rationale focused on the knowledge and access of the operations playbook distributed by KSMG,
where five participants mentioned access to the specific resource. Acquired employees saw this
as a valuable source of informational knowledge as a female Operations Director (OD2) stated,
“if you had a question on a process, you know we had some job aids or what have you for
PeopleSoft, but you know the playbook really outlines everything.” A male Operations data
specialist (ODS5) also noted the value of the playbook, but offered a suggestion for
improvement noting, “the playbook is good, but if we don't know where the information that we
need within the playbook is, then the playbook is not as useful as it could be.” Finally, the
discussion of the playbook was complemented by a male Analyst (A15) who spoke of his
exposure to other KH facilities where he got to observe the alignment of the different sites
stating, “I got to see the ERP system, and how everybody was on the same platform.” The
comments from participants clearly show the impact on engagement of certain resources
provided by the acquiring organization.
Though many interview participants provided evidence of the presence of the influence,
an analysis of the answers that did not also provided an interesting insight. Specifically, of the
five participants who did not provide evidence of the influence, four cited that they did not know
where to go or how to access information or resources. A female Associate Operations Manager
(AOM4) mentioned this lack of direction for resources in her answer stating, “it kind of makes
you feel like you don't know what you're doing, you know not having the communication and
81
knowing who to reach out to you kind of feel lost at times.” In a similar statement, a female
Critical Products Manager (CPM7) echoed the feeling of needing knowledge of how to access
resources when she discussed what might have been helpful saying, “someone to bring us into
that leadership world to start that intentional connectivity and build those relationships.” Overall,
the insights gained from further investigation into the knowledge of acquired employee’s ability
to access resources showed that while acquired associates understand and know how to access
the playbook, some felt that they did not know how to access other resources or guidance from
the acquiring organization. This lack of understanding of how to access resources outside of the
playbook is critical as it shows how important it is for acquired employees to be able to stay on
task and provide value throughout the integration process.
Acquired Employees Knew How to Execute the Processes and Procedures Utilized by the
Acquiring Organization
The next knowledge influence explored whether acquired employees knew how to
execute the processes and procedures utilized by the organization. This influence was considered
an asset as 13 out of 15 (86.67%) participants provided evidence of the presence of the influence.
Further investigation into the influence helped to better articulate the reasons why this was
considered an asset.
Participants who provided evidence of the presence of the influence focused on their
experiences learning the KH way of business through the operations playbook as eight
participants referenced this rationale during the interview. Speaking about using the operations
playbook, a female Operations Data Specialist (ODS1) noted “you had to be familiar with the
playbook and the teams helped us make it through it.” Similarly, a female Operations Director
(OD2) mentioned the effectiveness of the operations playbook stating, “the playbook is very
82
definitive and a great tool to go to if you have a question on a process.” The focus of acquired
employees on the playbook shows the importance of the resource in helping them execute
processes and procedures.
In addition to using the playbook to understand the KH way of doing business, the help
of the business transformation team and current KSMG employees was discussed by five
participants. A male Operations Data Specialist (ODS5) discussed the strategy of using current
KSMG staff to assist with the integration process in a program called ‘lend-a-hand,’ “the lend-a-
hands were probably the biggest asset, because I got to meet operations data specialists and they
got to tell me about the job, and they got to show me the things that they did.” Though this male
Operations Data Specialist (ODS5) and a female Operations Manager (OM14) specifically
mentioned the ‘lend-a-hands,’ they were the only participants to do so likely indicating that this
practice was not completed at all acquisitions. Similarly, a male Operations Manager (OM11)
spoke of specific processes that the business transformation team took the time to teach him
when he noted “everything had to be on contract and everything had to be converted, you know
there's so many little rules that [KSMG] had.” Participants who noted the benefits of the on-site
presence of members of the acquiring organization helped to illustrate the rewards that can come
from interactions between members of each organization throughout the integration process.
Based on the data collected from interview questions associated with acquired employees
knowing how to execute the processes and procedures utilized by the organization there are some
critical findings related to how the organization supported the procedural knowledge of the
acquired employees. First, the operations playbook, which also mentioned in the previous
discussion on procedural knowledge influence 1, provided to acquired employees appears to
have helped many learn the processes and procedures directly. Participants obviously had
83
knowledge of the operations playbook distributed by the acquiring organization, which helped
many to learn the processes procedures directly. Second, the personal support through the
business transformation team and the various methods to connect acquired employees to current
employees was a resource mentioned by participants when discussing their own procedural
knowledge. Combining both elements of documentation and connections within the organization
illustrates why acquired employee knowledge of how to execute the processes and procedures
and engage in the integration process is an important knowledge influence for the organization.
Acquired Employees Thoughtfully Reflected on Their Strengths and Weaknesses in Relation
to Organizational Expectations of the New Organization
In a review of the final knowledge influence, an analysis of acquired employees’
reflections on their strengths and weaknesses in relation to the organizational expectations of the
new organization was completed. This influence was another example of an asset as all 15
participants were able to identify examples of how they reflected on their own strengths and in
relation to the expectations of the new organization during the acquisition process. The
completion of the analysis process provided further insight into why this influence was an asset.
Reviewing the data collected during the interview process showed that each participant
was aware of their strengths in relation to organizational expectations of the new organization.
The most prominent rationales of participants focused on their strength of being open to change.
A female Associate Operations Manager (AOM4) was one of seven participants who
concentrated on her openness to change when she stated, “I think one of the biggest strengths,
probably was being able to be willing to change there's a lot of changes that go with an
acquisition and you have to be open to change.” Separately, a female Critical Products Manager
(CPM6) noted that this was also the biggest strength for her noting, “I think the first one that
84
comes to mind is the ability to be flexible and adaptable in changing situations.” As expressed by
these participants, the idea of recognizing the need to be adaptive in the face of change was an
important finding that emerged during the analysis process as it helps acquired employees to
remain engaged and effective in their work during the integration process.
In addition to the rationale of being open to change, six participants focused on
maintaining a willingness to learn. A female Associate Operations Manager (AOM10) discussed
her willingness to learn mentioning that she “didn't have a lot of managerial experience but
learning from the other Associate Operations Managers really helped my skills.” A male
Operations Data Specialist (ODS5) added to this acknowledging “if there is something that you
can't do, you have to be willing to own up to that and ask for help.” This willingness to learn
mentioned by some participants is important as it helps them to succeed in the many new tasks
and responsibilities that acquired employees are often asked to complete during the integration
process.
Each participant was able to reflect on their strengths in relation to the organizational
expectations of the new organization, but only three participants reflected on a weakness during
the interview process. A female Critical Products Manager (CPM8) commented about her
weakness of having difficult conversations stating, “a weakness for sure was having to have
those hard conversations and knowing that I couldn't please every single person.” Additionally, a
female Operations Manager (OM9) also reflected on one of her weaknesses noting, “one of my
weaknesses would be that, sometimes the stress of everything weighs heavily on my shoulders
and I'm very much an open book type person.” Though the reflection on weaknesses of these
individuals is interesting, it is disappointing that more acquired associates did not comment on a
85
reflection of their weaknesses. This shows the importance for the acquiring organization to
promote self-reflection of acquired associates during the integration process.
The interviews completed during the data collection process were reflective in nature, so
the acquired associates were not currently participating in an acquisition. Due to this aspect of
the interviews, I was limited in the ability to ask participants about how their experiences
impacted other acquisitions throughout their career. Finally, the fact that each individual had
reflected on their strengths likely shows why they have succeeded in the organization during and
after the integration process.
Motivation Findings
Similar to the knowledge influences, the assumed motivational influences introduced in
Chapter 2 were an important aspect of answering Research Question 2. Each of the three
assumed motivational influences were distinguished into specific constructs: self-efficacy, utility
value, and interest. An analysis of the self-efficacy construct of acquired employee’s confidence
that they can remain engaged in the combined organization was determined to be a gap. Different
from the self-efficacy construct, the utility value of acquired employees participating as an
associate in the new organization was found to be an asset. Finally, the interest construct of
acquired employees need to be interested in engaging as an associate in the new organization
was also determined to be an asset. In addition to the three assumed motivational influences, a
new influence was discovered with an emotion construct that focused on the fear of acquired
employees that they would lose their jobs during the integration process. Table 10 presents a
summary of the motivation influences and findings, and additional detail can be found in the
sections below focused on each of the specific motivation influences.
86
Table 10
Summary of Motivation Influences and Findings
Motivation influence Motivation construct Validation
Acquired employees need to
be confident they can remain
engaged in the combined
organization.
Self-efficacy Gap
Acquired employees need to
value participating as an
associate in the new
organization.
Utility value Asset
Acquired employees need to
be interested in engaging as
an associate in the new
organization.
Interest Asset
New Influence Identified:
Acquired employees feared
losing their jobs as part of the
acquisition.
Emotion Gap
Acquired Employees Lacked Confidence That They Could Remain Engaged in the Combined
Organization
The first assumed motivation influence analyzed was the confidence of acquired
employees that they could remain engaged in the combined organization. Based on the data
collected, this influence was found to be a gap as only six out of 15 (40%) participants provided
evidence of the presence of the influence during the interview process. Through the review
process, rationales for both evidence of the presence and absence of the influence were
discovered.
87
Participants who identified that they were not confident highlighted their nervousness and
uncertainty due to the large amount of change that took place as a part of the acquisition.
Specifically, a female Associate Operations Manager (AOM14) noted that she spent time
“wondering what was going to happen” and that she had levels of “uncertainty for a while.”
Similarly, a female Operations Data Specialist (ODS1) noted that she “was really nervous” as
she did not know what was to come. Others including a female Operations Director (OD2)
mentioned that she “felt anxious” due to the changes in leadership in the organization which may
impact her success. Additionally, a female Operations Manager (OM9) discussed that she was “a
little overwhelmed” working with a new leader with different expectations. These feelings of
nervousness around the changes occurring as part of the acquisition show the distractions and
confusion that can take place during an acquisition which are detrimental to the engagement of
acquired employees.
Though there were several examples of the absence of the influence provided by the
participants, four participants were confident that they could succeed when certain KSMG
leaders provided them opportunities, showed trust in them, or connected with them based on an
alignment of goals. Specifically, a male Operations Data Specialist (ODS5) noted that he felt
confident when he established a relationship with a KSMG leader stating, “I had an executive
director who gave me his full confidence and really helped coach me along through the process.”
Overall, the key finding taken from this influence is the negative impact that the unknown and
uncertainty can have on the confidence of acquired employees and positive elements that occur
when leaders within the acquiring organization invest time into the engagement of acquired
employees.
88
Acquired Employees Valued Participating as an Associate in the New Organization
Next, acquired employee utility value in participating as an associate in the new
organization was analyzed. This influence was considered an asset as 14 out of 15 (93.33%)
participants provided evidence of the presence of the influence. Further investigation into the
influence helped to better understand the reasons why this was considered an asset.
The participants who provided evidence of the presence of the influence focused largely
on two rationales: the mission, vision, and values of the new organization and the organization’s
focus on associates. Eight participants mentioned that the mission, vision, and values of the new
organization was a reason why they valued participating in the new organization. Specifically, a
male Operations Data Specialist (ODS5) commented, “I love the mission, I really do, I think that
[KH] is doing great work, I think [KSMG] is doing phenomenal work.” A female Critical
Products Manager (CPM8) also discussed the impact of the mission, vision, and values. She
specifically noted that she enjoyed “playing a part in an organization that looked for the greater
good and looking to do something to improve other’s lives.” In a final example, a female
Operations Manager (OM9) noted that that she starting valuing participating in the organization
when she gained an “understanding of what [KSMG] stood for, and what KH was trying to
accomplish.” The examples provided by participants illustrate the positive influence that the
mission, vision and values of the organization can have on the engagement of acquired
employees.
Similar to participants validating their value in participating in the acquiring organization
with the mission, vision, and values of the organization, four participants cited KH’s focus on
their associates. A female Operations Director (OD2) commented on the focus on associate
growth stating, “you hear it everywhere, even like from my leader, all the way up to [the CEO],
89
you know they really focus on that, which I think is very different from kind of my past
experiences.” In a similar statement, when asked about the value in participating in the acquiring
organization a male Analyst (A15) said, “They had the best for our associates in mind. That was
the driving factor.” As with the mission, vision and values, these comments show the positive
influence that a focus on associate growth can have on the engagement of acquired employees.
Leveraging the mission, vision, and values has clearly helped to provide motivation for
acquired associates to help them find value in the tasks they complete as it relates to future goals
in working for the new organization. Additionally, acquired associates valued KSMG’s focus on
its people as a reason they valued participating in the new organization. Interview data suggest
KSMG made it obvious to acquired associates that they care about them as employees, which
complemented the use of the mission, vision, and values statements and helped to increase
engagement of acquired associates during the acquisition.
Acquired Employees Were Interested in Engaging as an Associate in the New Organization
The final assumed motivational influence concentrated on acquired employee interest in
engaging as an associate in the new organization. Like the influence focused on utility value, this
influence was an asset as 12 out of 15 (80%) participants provided evidence of the presence of
the influence. Further investigation into the influence helped to better articulate the reasons why
this was considered an asset.
The most divisive finding pertaining to acquired employee interest in engaging as an
associate in the new organization was the participants thoughts on the large size of the new
organization. As a national organization, KH has well over 100,000 employees, which typically
dwarfs any acquisition resulting in mixed feelings of acquired employees. Size of the
organization as a factor of the participants interest came up in eight out of 15 (53.33%)
90
interviews; however, in five instances this was perceived positively, and in three instances this
was perceived negatively. Those who felt that this had a positive impact on their interest in
engaging as an associate in the new organization were excited about the new opportunities
associated with the size of KH. Specifically, a male Operations manager (OM11) stated, “when
you are able to go from 3,000 employees to an 11,000 employee base obviously there's more
opportunity.” Additionally, a female Associate Operations Manager (AOM4) commented on the
size being a positive impact noting, “I was definitely interested because I knew it was a bigger
organization.” Alternatively, the three out of 15 (20%) acquired employees who felt that the
larger size of the organization compared to their former company was a negative had anxiety
about becoming a part of such a large organization. A female Operations Data Specialist (ODS1)
talked specifically about this anxiety stating, “it was nerve racking because we didn't know what
that was going to be like.” Similarly, A female Critical Products Manager (CPM8)
acknowledged that the large size was a “deterrent” saying “I think there was a lot of anxiety of
what's that going to look like what's that going to do.” The mixed feelings with respect to the size
of the acquiring organization show that some acquired associates may not see the benefits of
joining a larger organization which may impact their engagement.
In addition to the commentary on the size of the organization, four participants also
focused on KSMG’s focus on employees. A female Operations Director (OD2) stated that she
was interested in the acquiring organization because “they were very professional, very associate
focused.” Similarly, a female Associate Operations Manager (AOM10) talked about the
onboarding process during the interview when she said, “it was very enlightening to see that
were really built around the person.” Though the size of the organization was clearly impactful to
the interest of acquired employees, this finding is likely not as meaningful as other knowledge
91
and motivation influence findings since there is little that can be done to change the size of an
organization. Alternatively, the comments surrounding the focus on the employee is a more
meaningful finding showing the impact that this aspect of the organization had on acquired
employee engagement and the overall success of the acquisition.
Acquired Employees Feared Losing Their Jobs as Part of the Acquisition
One new influence discovered during the data analysis process was the acquired
employees fear of losing their jobs as part of the acquisition. Based on the data collected, this
influence was found to be a gap as 11 out of 15 (73.33%) participants provided evidence of a
fear of job loss during the interview process. Through the review process, rationales for both
evidence of the presence and absence of the influence were discovered.
Participants who identified that they feared job loss as part of the acquisition noted that
they simply felt like they were not needed. A female Operations Manager (OM3) talked about
these fears stating, “you're sitting there wondering, okay, do I get my letter next, why do they
need me?” This feeling was discussed again by a female Associate Operations Manager
(AOM10) who also sensed uncertainty, “it was a little bit of wondering, what was going to
happen once they no longer needed me, so it was a little bit of uncertainty for a while.”
Additionally, these fears came to fruition for a separate female Associate Operations Manager
(AOM4) as she stated, “they actually let me go because of the fact that I didn't have my degree.”
Though she was hired back into the role eventually, this experience clearly stuck with her as she
spoke to the uncertainty and unknowns during the acquisition period. As evidenced by the
interview data, fear of job loss clearly had an impact on the engagement of the acquired
employees during the integration process and is potentially detrimental to the success of the
acquisition
92
The comments described by the participants related to job loss connect with several
descriptions in the literature. As described by Degbey et al. (2020), human issues related issues
cause a breakdown of an estimated one-third to one-half of all acquisitions and are thus an
important aspect of acquisitions to understand. Many researchers noted that throughout the
merger or acquisition process, employees of the acquired organization are faced with increased
stress that can have a tremendous impact on productivity and engagement (Galpin et al., 2013;
Gelfand et al., 2018; Marks & Mirvis, 2010). Based on the multiple examples of stress related to
potential job loss provided by the participants, there is a potential impact on engagement which
can influence the motivation and overall success of the acquired employee (Catteeuw et al.,
2007).
What Is the Relationship Between the Organizational Culture of Koufax Supply
Management Group (KSMG) and Acquired Employees’ Engagement?
The following sections present information from qualitative interviews collected to
answer the third research question regarding the relationship between the organizational culture
of KSMG and acquired employees’ engagement. The organizational influences that are the focus
of the third research question are the third type of influence referenced in the Clark and Estes
(2008) gap analysis model, which serves as the conceptual framework for the study. As reported
by Clark and Estes (2008), organizational influences include processes and procedures of the
organization as well as supplies and resources. Additionally, organizational influences have a
critical influence on how the stakeholder group is able to perform in their role and determine
whether or not they will be able to accomplish the goals of the organization (Clark & Estes
(2008).
93
Using the same methodology as previously described in the introduction to Research
Question 2, the qualitative interviews provided data on each of the assumed organizational
influences. The analysis required that the information be first sorted by question, and then by
influence. After multiple rounds of coding to ensure that any applicable elements of the
interview were sorted into the correct influence, I then evaluated each influence for each
participant to determine whether the influence was an asset or a gap for that participant. Once
each influence had been determined to be either an asset or a gap for each participant, I required
that nine or more participants must have been scored as an asset for the influence to be
considered as an asset overall. Nine participants was again selected as the cutoff point as it was
equal to 60% of total participants which seemed appropriate to confirm presence of the
influence. Finally, each of the sections below reviews the findings associated with the
organizational influences with a focus on whether each is an asset or gap based upon the analysis
of all interview data.
Organizational Findings
Four assumed organizational influences were identified in Chapter 2 based upon analysis
of the literature to explore the relationship between the organizational culture of KSMG and
acquired employees’ engagement. Each of the four organizational influences were classified into
two groups: cultural models (one influence) and cultural settings (three influences). The cultural
model addressing the acquiring organizations culture of acceptance towards the contributions of
acquired employees was determined to be an asset. The cultural settings of the acquiring
organization utilizing industry best practices in merging cultures to promote engagement,
highlighting model examples of engaged acquired employees, and clearly articulating the
responsibilities of acquired employees were all found to be gaps. Table 11 presents a summary of
94
the organizational influences and findings, and additional detail can be found in the sections
below focused on each of the specific organizational influences.
Table 11
Summary of Organizational Influences and Findings
Organizational influences Organizational influence
category
Validation
The acquiring organization needs a
culture of acceptance towards the
contributions of acquired
employees.
Cultural Model Influence 1 Asset
The acquiring organization needs to
utilize industry best practices in
merging cultures to promote
engagement during acquisition.
Cultural Setting Influence 1 Gap
The acquiring organization needs to
highlight model examples of
engaged acquired employees from
previous acquisitions.
Cultural Setting Influence 2 Gap
The acquiring organization needs to
clearly articulate the
accompanying responsibilities of
acquired employees under the
transition plan throughout the
acquisition process
Cultural Setting Influence 3 Gap
95
The Acquiring Organization Successfully Fostered a Culture of Acceptance Towards the
Contributions of Acquired Employees
The first organizational influence analyzed was the culture of acceptance towards the
contributions of acquired employees. Based on the data collected, this influence was found to be
an asset as 10 out of 15 (66.67%) participants provided evidence of the presence of the influence
during the interview process. Through the review process, several rationales for both evidence of
the presence and absence of the influence were discovered.
Participants who provided evidence of the presence of the influence focused on the on-
site presence, salary increases, and the welcoming nature of the position communities which is
the group of associates who perform the same role at the different hospital systems around the
country. These position communities meet regularly and help to facilitate discussion regarding
relevant topics to all associates in the specific position and provide support to all new associates
as needed.
The most common rationale for articulating a cultural model of acceptance, cited by nine
interview participants, was the on-site presence of members of the acquiring organization. A
female Operations Data Specialist (ODS1) noted, “they came and saw us and they talked to us,
we had lots of meetings you know and they then had us join on the system so that we could start
working in our areas.” Additionally, a female Critical Products Manager (CPM6) commented on
the onsite presence of members of the acquiring organization stating, “I think that having them
there physically was a good thing.”
In addition to the on-site presence, four participants mentioned the welcoming nature of
the position communities. Position communities consist of members of the same position from
around the country who meet regularly and help to facilitate discussion regarding relevant topics
96
to all associates in the specific position and provide support to all new associates as needed.
Specifically, a female Critical Products Manager (CPM6) mentioned that during the interview
process she found the leader focused on community stating that “the critical products role was a
welcoming environment, a community.” Similarly, a male Operations Data Specialist (ODS5)
called out the overall benefit of the position communities stating, “it was nice having those
communities.”
A final rationale included three participants who focused on the salary increases that
occurred when the participant was onboarded into the new organization. The male Analyst (A15)
stated that in the previous organization “A lot of our associates were not paid according to
standard, so they adjusted, a lot of salaries.” These salary adjustments, along with the better
benefits that came with the new organization, were perceived as a way of acknowledging the
important work that the individuals completed. Overall, the participants interviewed helped to
communicate the key insights that personal, on-site interactions are a big part of fostering a
welcoming environment as well as actions that elevate the importance of supply chain and
operations in the acquired organization which KSMG currently does in an effective manner.
Alternatively, the five participants who did not provide evidence of the presence of the
influence discussed the intimidating nature of the organization and job requirements of specific
positions in the acquiring organization. Specifically, a female Critical Products Manager (CPM8)
discussed the intimidating nature of the dress code of the acquiring organization stating, “you
don't see people in a three-piece suit usually in a rural hospital.” Similar to the intimidation, the
job requirements of the new organization, in particular the requirement of a college degree for all
positions, caused two participants to feel unwelcome. One female Associate Operations Manager
(AOM4), who was initially impacted by these requirements, stated, “I was not very welcomed
97
when the acquisition took place, they actually, they actually let me go because of the fact that I
didn't have my degree.” These retention requirements and the example of an associate who was
initially let go further illustrate the fear of job loss that occurred throughout the interviews. A
final rationale for those who did not provide evidence of the presence of the influence was the
feeling that instead of taking the time to welcome the acquired associates, they were forced to
“hit the ground running.” These key insights show that while the culture of acceptance towards
the contributions of acquired employees is an asset, the acquiring organization often does not
take the time to appropriately engage with new associates as they are welcomed into the
organization.
The Acquiring Organization Did Not Utilize Industry Best Practices in Merging Cultures to
Promote Engagement During Acquisition
The next organizational influence analyzed was the utilization of industry best practices
in merging cultures to promote engagement during the acquisition. As outlined in Table 2 in
Chapter 2, the mergers and acquisitions literature highlights many best practices that should be
used by the acquiring organization in merging cultures to promote employee engagement during
the acquisition. The analysis process reviewed the data collected during the interview process to
determine if participants provided evidence that these best practices were present in the
integration process. After analyzing the data collected, this influence was found to be a gap as 10
out of 15 (66.67%) participants did not provide evidence of the presence of the influence during
the interview process. During the review process, several rationales were provided for both
evidence of the presence and absence of the influence.
Those who did not provide evidence of the influence felt that nothing was done to
integrate the groups. A male Operations Manager (OM13) stated “I don't think happened much
98
to be honest” when asked about actions that were taken by the acquiring organization to integrate
the cultures of the combining organizations. Similarly, a female Operations Manager (OM9)
answered, “there isn’t anything that I can think of, that's one thing that probably made it
somewhat difficult is that we really just kind of got thrown together.” This common sentiment of
10 out of 15 (66.67%) participants clearly illustrates that utilizing best practices in merging
cultures is a major gap in the current state processes.
The participants who provided evidence of the presence of the influence focused on the
similarities in culture, specifically in the mission, vision, and values of the organization. A
female Operations Manager (OM3) believed the cultural integration improved after learning
about the mission, vision, and values of KH: “when we started really learning the values and the
vision and the mission of [Kershaw Health], it was like okay, so it's not much different than what
we are.” Similarly, a female Critical Products Manager (CPM12) mentioned that the analogous
mission, vision, and values helped the process “I mean their mission was our mission, serving the
poor and vulnerable.” This similarity in cultures is a critical aspect of the due diligence process
as discussed by numerous experts in the literature (Denison & Ko, 2016; Galpin & Herndon,
2014; Marks & Mirvis, 2010), and even suggests the use of a tool, such as the competing values
framework (CVF), to determine compatibility between organizations early in the due diligence
process. Using a tool such as the CVF to find suitable acquisition targets during the due diligence
process is critical as it can help to predict levels of engagement between the two organizations
and potential success of the acquisition.
99
The Acquiring Organization Failed to Highlight Model Examples of Engaged Acquired
Employees from Previous Acquisitions
The third organizational influence focused on the acquiring organization’s need to
highlight model examples of engaged acquired employees from previous acquisitions. A review
of the information collected during the interview process confirmed that this influence was a gap
as no participants provided evidence of the presence of the influence. The analysis process
helped to better understand the rationales of participants for the absence of the influence.
Participants who confirmed that the acquiring organization did not highlight model
examples of engaged acquired employees from previous acquisitions elaborated on their
experiences during the interview process. A female Associate Operations Manager (AOM10)
specifically mentioned that examples would have been helpful stating, “that's where if they were
able to speak to other markets that may be recently went through it or had been established, just
to give us that confidence that this does work, it’s just painful in the beginning.” Another female
Associate Operations Manager (AOM4) added to this sentiment noting “all we kept hearing was
they had 100 and something hospitals and they were all successful.” She went on to explain that
she did not feel that the organization provided any specific details, “I don't think I could tell you
one success story that I heard.” This lack of use of model examples of engaged acquired
employees from previous acquisitions misses an opportunity for the acquiring organization to
increase engagement by showing acquired associates a path towards success in the new
organization.
Though no participants felt that the acquiring organization highlighted model examples
of engaged acquired employees from previous acquisitions, a few participants did comment on
how KSMG had used lessons learned from past acquisitions to improve the process. A male
100
Operations Data Specialist (ODS5) commented on these improvements and the necessary buy-in
to the process stating, “they told us that there were false starts in other deployments, but they got
it, so they have the process, the process would work, we had to buy into the process in order to
be successful.” Additionally, a female Operations Manager (OM9) commented on a specific
change made by the acquiring organization to provide more support in the integration process
noting, “they employed, the business transformation teams, and the additional consultant help
because of the failures that they had happen in previous go-lives.” Though the organization
missed an opportunity to use model examples of acquired employees from previous acquisitions,
they were able to influence engagement by communicating how they had learned from prior
experience to ensure a smooth transition.
Overall, the analysis of participant interview data illustrated why this organizational
influence is a gap. No model examples of engaged acquired employees from previous
acquisitions were provided to the acquired employees during the integration process. Though the
examples of improvements to the process clearly resonated with participants, there is an obvious
gap in the influence. Another key area of focus for this influence is the relationship to the fear of
job loss previously discussed. As mentioned, 11 out of 15 (73.33%) participants mentioned a fear
of themselves or other acquired employees losing their jobs, which shows the prevalence of these
fears. Since no examples of engaged acquired employees from previous acquisitions were
utilized, it appears KSMG did not take the opportunity to address the feelings of uncertainty to
increase acquired employee engagement and increase the potential for success of the acquisition.
101
The Acquiring Organization Did Not Clearly Communicate the Responsibilities of Acquired
Employees Under the Transition Plan
Finally, an analysis of the articulation of the responsibilities of acquired employees under
the transition plan was completed. The analysis of the interviews resulted in only seven of the 15
participants providing evidence of the presence of the influence. The completion of the analysis
highlighted the rationale of participants who did not provide evidence of the influence, which
focused on their perception that the organization did not provide a vision of the future state as
part of the acquisition process. This specific rationale will be further explored in the section
below to better understand the feelings of participants that they did not feel that they had a vision
of the future state and the resulting lack of understanding of their responsibilities to reach that
future state as a result.
The eight participants who did not provide evidence of the presence of the influence
focused on the lack of communication from leaders within the acquiring organization and the
lack of understanding of the future state. Seven of these eight participants concentrated on the
lack of vision of the future provided by the acquiring organization. Specifically, a female
Associate Operations Manager (AOM10) acknowledged that the acquiring organization asked
the acquired employees to complete tasks but did not help the acquired employees to understand
what they were working towards. She believed that this could have been fixed by “allowing us to
go to established sites to really see how it functions and flows.” This sentiment was echoed by a
male Operations Manager (OM13) who further clarified the importance of the acquiring
organization providing a vision of the future state for acquired employees to comprehend the
goal of the acquisition. He mentioned that it would be a great thing for acquired employees from
several different positions to visit a site that has already completed the integration process
102
noting, “I’m not just talking about myself I’m talking about like my Cath Lab coordinators and
operations guys, like those guys would really like to see that.” The rationale for not
understanding responsibilities under the transition plan also focused on a lack of communication
as a female Operations Manager (OM3) stated that there was “more questions than answers.”
Overall, the gap of the influence of articulation of the responsibilities of acquired employees
under the transition plan highlighted a major weakness in that acquired employees do not have a
vision of the future state and because of that they don’t truly have an understanding of their
responsibilities to reach that future state. Acquired employees who don’t have an understanding
of their responsibilities are unlikely to be engaged in the integration process making it difficult
for the acquisition as a whole to succeed.
The seven participants who provided evidence of the presence of the influence discussed
the communications from leadership and the position communities. Position communities consist
of members of the same position from around the country who meet regularly and help to
facilitate discussion regarding relevant topics to all associates in the specific position and provide
support to all new associates as needed. A male Operations Data Specialist (ODS5) recalled the
communication that occurred during the position community calls stating:
They got to tell me about the job, and they got to show me the things that they
did, and then I could figure out what I was doing to how to get to what they did on
a daily basis.
This appreciation for the position community calls was echoed by a female Operations Director
(OD2) who mentioned that she specifically “learned a great deal during the national community
call.” In addition to the appreciation of the position community calls, two participants
complemented the direction provided by leadership. One female Critical Products Manager
103
(CPM8) even went as far as to say, “I would say that they were very transparent in front of what
our expectations would be.” Though the data collected certainly shows that this influence is a
gap in the current state, the community calls provided a tool for the organization to connect
acquired associates with members of their equivalent position within the acquiring organization.
The participants who identified the utility of the community calls felt this practice supported
their understanding of their responsibilities and allowed them to be engaged in the acquisition
activities and participate in helping the combined organization reach success. This is a
potentially important finding that will be discussed further in Chapter 5.
Summary
The analysis of the participant interviews resulted in key findings for each of the three
research questions. This section summarizes those findings. The document and artifact analysis
process was completed, but since the process did not contribute any data relevant to the research
study it will not be discussed in this section.
The first research question focused on the acquired employees’ perceptions of their
engagement during the acquisition process. The main theme of this research question was that all
acquired employees felt that they were engaged during the acquisition, but they expressed that
they felt engaged at different parts of the acquisition. Specifically, eight of 15 participants felt
engaged throughout the entire process, four felt engaged at the beginning of the process, two did
not feel engaged at any point during the process, and one felt engaged at the end of the
acquisition. Nearly half of interview participants felt engaged throughout the entire integration
process, but three participants questioned that their engagement may have come in the form of
staying busy and not truly being engaged with their work. When participants discussed the parts
of the integration process where they felt most engaged, they discussed being involved in the
104
decision-making process, helping to provide the acquiring organizations leadership team with
information, and assisting with the transformation process.
The second research question explored the assumed knowledge and motivational
influences affecting engagement among acquired employees of KSMG. An absence of evidence
was found for two influences including: acquired employee knowledge of the business practices
of the acquiring organization and acquired employees confidence that they can remain engaged
in the combined. Assets discovered during the analysis process included: the importance of
acquired employees’ ability to access the operations playbook, their use of the playbook to be
able to execute processes and procedures, and the importance of encouraging acquired
employees to reflect on their strengths and weaknesses as they join the new organization. Finally,
participants noted that both the mission, vision, and values of KSMG and the organization’s
focus on the employee were sparked their interest in the new organization.
The final research question was centered around the relationship between the
organizational culture of KSMG and acquired employees’ engagement. The key insight that was
found to be an asset when investigating the organizational related influences was the importance
of the culture of acceptance towards the contributions of acquired employees that exists in the
current state. Alternatively, there were several gaps identified: failure to use of industry best
practices in merging cultures to promote engagement, lack of model examples of engaged
acquired employees from previous acquisitions, and not communicating job responsibilities to
acquired employees. Table 12 presents a summary of the influences and findings analyzed.
105
Table 12
Summary of Influences and Findings
Influences Influence Category Validation
Acquired employees need knowledge of the business
practices of the acquiring organization.
Conceptual Gap
Acquired employees need to know how to access the
resources available to support their engagement in the
new organization.
Procedural Asset
Acquired employees need to know how to execute the
processes and procedures utilized by the acquiring
organization that contribute to their engagement.
Procedural Asset
Acquired employees need to reflect on their strengths
and weaknesses in relation to organizational
expectations of the new organization.
Metacognitive Asset
Acquired employees need to be confident they can
remain engaged in the combined organization.
Self-efficacy Gap
Acquired employees need to value participating as an
associate in the new organization.
Value Asset
Acquired employees need to be interested in engaging as
an associate in the new organization.
Interest Asset
New Influence Identified: Acquired employees feared
losing their jobs during the acquisition.
Emotion Gap
The acquiring organization needs a culture of acceptance
towards the contributions of acquired employees.
Cultural Model
Influence 1
Asset
The acquiring organization needs to utilize industry best
practices in merging cultures to promote engagement
during acquisition.
Cultural Setting
Influence 1
Gap
The acquiring organization needs to highlight model
examples of engaged acquired employees from
previous acquisitions.
Cultural Setting
Influence 2
Gap
The acquiring organization needs to clearly articulate the
accompanying responsibilities of acquired employees
under the transition plan throughout the acquisition
process
Cultural Setting
Influence 3
Gap
106
Chapter Five: Recommendations and Discussion
Chapter 4 focused on presenting the findings discovered from the analysis of the
interviews conducted with acquired employees within Koufax Supply Management Group
(KSMG), a subsidiary of Kershaw Health (KH). The analysis of the findings helped to answer
the three research questions concentrated on the acquired employees’ perception of their
engagement during the acquisition process, the knowledge and motivational influences affecting
engagement, and the relationship between organizational culture and acquired employees’
engagement. The focus of this chapter is to identify recommendations that improve the
engagement of acquired employees based on the findings associated with the knowledge,
motivation and organizational influences. Along with the discussion of each recommendation, an
integrated recommendation plan is introduced as well as limitations and delimitations of the
study and recommendations for future research.
Discussion of Findings
To further explore the information discovered during the analysis of the qualitative
interview data, this section intends to provide additional discussion and insight into the findings.
Specifically, the analysis below attempts to connect the findings with information discovered
during the literature review conducted in Chapter 2 as well as the Clark and Estes (2008) gap
analysis framework that serves as the conceptual framework for the study. The connections
analyzed are concentrated on findings that are the focus of the recommendation detailed later in
the chapter.
Operations Playbook Key Source of Procedural Knowledge but Additional Sources Needed
As part of the analysis process, it was noted that five of 15 participants discussed the
importance of the operations playbook as a source of procedural knowledge; however, four of 15
107
participants noted that they lacked the procedural knowledge of how to access specific resources.
The playbook was specifically identified by participants as a tool that outlines procedures and
was considered the go to source of information to understand the processes of the acquiring
organization. The importance of the acquired organization providing procedural knowledge to
acquired employees and the positive impact on the outcome of the acquisition is noted
throughout the literature. Lakshman (2011) and Weber and Tarba (2012) discuss the procedural
types of knowledge describing the know-how and methods of accomplishing tasks that are
critical information for acquired employees. Finally, multiple authors noted that to ensure that
the integration process is successful, it is important that acquired associates are able to
implement the processes and procedures of the new organization to participate in the integration
activities, including supply chain, finance, human resources, and technology activities
(Appelbaum et al., 2017; Marks & Mirvis, 2011a).
Adaptation in the Face of Change Is Important to the Engagement of Acquired Employees
When asked about personal strengths or weaknesses that helped them when joining the
new organization, seven out of 15 (46.67%) participants commented on their ability to adapt in
the face of change as a strength. The participants who discussed adapting in the face of changed
noted the importance of staying flexible during the many aspects of change that occur during an
acquisition. The literature recognizes the importance of acquired employees assessing how they
will succeed in the new organization with a focus on understanding their duties and creating a
plan to perform and remain engaged throughout the acquisition (Catteeuw et al., 2007; Marks et
al., 2017; Sinkovics et al., 2011). In addition to acknowledging the value of practicing
metacognition in the acquisition process, the literature noted the importance of maintaining an
openness to change during the acquisition process (Dirva & Radulescu, 2018; Weber & Tarba,
108
2012). Finally, several other researchers commented on the role of the acquired organization in
this process through the use of one-on-one discussion with managers and team building activities
(Dirva & Radulescu, 2018; Marks & Mirvis, 2010; Oehler, 2019; Thach & Nyman, 2001).
Many Acquired Employees Were Afraid of Losing Their Job During Acquisition
The analysis process confirmed that 11 out of 15 (73.33%) interview participants
mentioned a fear of themselves or other acquired employees losing their jobs during the
acquisition process. Specifically, participants talked about the uncertainty during the time period,
and they recalled wondering if they would have a position in the new organization. These
comments regarding job loss connect with several descriptions in the literature. Degbey et al.
(2020) described the human issues related issues that cause a breakdown of an estimated one-
third to one-half of all acquisitions and are thus an important aspect of acquisitions to
understand. Complementary to the impact of human related issues, many researchers noted that
throughout the merger or acquisition process, employees of the acquired organization are faced
with increased stress that can have a tremendous impact on productivity and engagement (Galpin
et al., 2013; Gelfand et al., 2018; Marks & Mirvis, 2010). Finally, consistent with the multiple
examples of stress related to potential job loss provided by the participants, research has found
there is a potential impact on engagement that can influence the motivation and overall success
of the acquired employee (Catteeuw et al., 2007).
The Mission, Vision, and Values of the Acquiring Organization Are Valued by Many
Acquired Employees
During the interview process, eight out of 15 (53.33%) participants mentioned that the
mission, vision, and values of the new organization was a reason why they valued participating
in the new organization. In the interview process, participants spoke about taking ownership in
109
the “phenomenal work” that the organization was doing, and specifically having the opportunity
to “improve other’s lives.” In the literature, Degbey et al. (2020) concluded that psychological
ownership of the combined organization is positively related to employee commitment
involvement in mergers and acquisitions. Additionally, other studies acknowledged the
importance of the acquiring organization using the principles and philosophies including the
mission, vision, and values to develop a new identity for acquired employees to help them find
value in their work (Bouchikhi & Kimberly, 2011; Bouchikhi & Kimberly, 2012; Lee et al.,
2015).
It Is Important for Members of the Acquiring Organization to Engage at the Acquired
Organization Site During the Acquisition
The analysis process confirmed that nine out of 15 (60%) interview participants
mentioned the importance of members of the acquiring organization engaging on-site at the
acquired organization. Participants specifically noted that the physical presence of members of
the acquiring organization at the acquired organization site helped them to engage in the
integration process and feel welcomed into the new organization. A review of applicable
literature confirms the benefits of these interactions as numerous researchers discuss the
importance of embracing and welcoming acquired associates through building positive and
meaningful relationships to improve engagement, motivation, and productivity (Appelbaum et
al., 2017; Cesario & Chambel, 2019; Galpin & Herndon, 2014; Kaetzler et al., 2019; Marks &
Mirvis 2010; Oehler, 2019; Vital & Alves, 2010). Finally, another benefit of positive interactions
between acquired employees and members of the acquiring organization is the importance of
avoiding us vs them competitions, which result in decreased engagement on integration tasks due
110
to the time and energy spent quarreling with associates who are now on the same team (Amiot et
al., 2012; Lee et al., 2015; Marks & Mirvis, 2010; Sarala, 2009).
The Acquiring Organization Did Not Utilize Industry Best Practices in Merging Cultures
to Promote Engagement During Acquisition
In the data analysis process, it was found that 10 out of 15 (66.67%) participants did not
provide evidence of the presence of best practices found in literature in merging cultures during
acquisition. Those participants who did not provide evidence that the acquiring organization used
best practices felt that nothing was really done to integrate the cultures of the organizations, and
instead the organizations “kind of got thrown together.” As outlined in Table 2 in Chapter 2,
numerous sources in the literature highlight specific best practices that should be used by the
acquiring organization in the integration process. Specifically, no due diligence tools (Chesley,
2019, 2020; Ovseiko, 2015), such as the competing values framework (CVF) that helps to
determine cultural differences in the existing and desired end state for organizations, were found
to be utilized based on participant interviews. The literature also discussed various exercises as
best practices for merging cultures that were not utilized by KSMG, including a role reversal
activity between the acquiring and acquired organizations discussed by Marks and Mirvis
(2010). Finally, intentional cultural discussions focused on the perceptions and viewpoints of
each organization on the other organization as well as themselves were highlighted in the
literature but not completed by KSMG (Galosy, 1990; Weber & Tarba, 2012).
The Acquiring Organization Failed to Highlight Model Examples of Engaged Acquired
Employees from Previous Acquisitions
Another result of the data analysis process found that zero out of 15 (0%) participants
presented evidence of the acquiring organization highlighting model examples of acquired
111
employees from previous acquisitions. Though participants acknowledged that this action would
have been helpful, no specific examples were recalled in any of the interviews. In the mergers
and acquisitions literature the importance of using the strategy of highlighting model examples
of acquired employees from previous acquisitions was discussed. For example, many researchers
noted that an opportunity to provide the model of success is to use examples of career
opportunities and the career path of other acquired employees who have succeeded within the
organization (Cartwright & Cooper, 1990; Georgiades & Georgiades, 2014; Marks et al., 2017;
Oehler, 2019). Using these examples of opportunity and success, the acquiring organization
increases engagement, which plays an important part in the success of the acquisition
(Appelbaum et al., 2017; Bouchikhi & Kimberly, 2011; Degbey et al., 2020).
The Acquiring Organization Failed to Provide a Vision of the Future State for Acquired
Employees, Resulting in a Lack of Understanding of Their Responsibilities
When asked about the communication of responsibilities from the acquiring organization
to acquired employees under the transition plan, seven participants commented on the lack of
vision of the future state and the resulting lack of understanding of their responsibilities to reach
that future state. Participants who cited this lack of vision of the future state noted that it would
have been helpful for them to visit established sites so that they could better understand what
they were working towards. The literature focuses a great deal on the proper communication of
responsibilities to acquired employees to ensure an understanding of the tasks associated with the
acquisition. Several authors commented on the importance of the communication of the details
due to the tremendous impact on their daily life as an employee (Galosy, 1990; Georgiades &
Georgiades, 2014). Additionally, researchers noted the consequences of inappropriately
articulating the information to acquired employees, which include fear and anxiety along with
112
distrust and suspicion that can impact productivity, commitment, and even employee health
(Dirva & Radulescu, 2018; Sinkovics et al., 2011).
Recommendations for Practice
The four recommendations identified below help to address the key findings discovered
during the data analysis process by constructing applicable recommendations grounded in
research. Each of the four recommendations help to close knowledge, motivation, and
organizational gaps based on the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis framework that serves as
the conceptual framework for the study. In the following recommendations, KH is presented as
the parent company responsible for determining which company is acquired, and KSMG is
presented as the subsidiary responsible for completing the supply chain and operations aspects of
the acquisition. Finally, the information below reviews each recommendation, provides
references to support why the recommendation is an appropriate solution based on the context of
the research study, and presents a comprehensive plan to implement the solutions.
Recommendation 1: Leverage the Competing Values Framework During the Due Diligence
Process to Determine Organizational Compatibility
In the data analysis process, it was determined that two-thirds of participants did not
provide evidence of the organization using best practices found in peer reviewed literature in
merging cultures during integration. Along with this organizational gap, the data analysis process
also noted that over 50% participants mentioned that the knowledge of the mission, vision, and
values of the new organization was a reason why they valued participating in the new
organization. Based on these findings, it is recommended that KH leverage the competing values
framework (CVF) as a best practice in merging cultures during the due diligence process to bring
the acquired organizations’ values in line with the acquiring organization. Achieving alignment
113
of values is an important part of supporting acquired employees to understand the value in the
work that KH and KSMG complete; Instilling this knowledge will ensure employees are
motivated to succeed in their position in the new organization.
Several researchers have successfully used the CVF framework in healthcare industry
mergers and acquisitions. Originally developed by Robert Quinn and Kim Cameron (1983), the
CVF provides a method of measuring organizational culture along two axes and four quadrants
and has been used by numerous researchers as a framework for organizational culture (see
Appendix E). Ovseiko and Buchan (2012) successfully utilized the CVF in order to develop a
vision for the favored culture of a merger between two hospital systems in the United Kingdom.
Additionally, Ovseiko et al. (2015) leveraged the CVF to better understand the cultural
differences between two legacy members of a National Health Service Trust to develop a plan to
improve integration of the two organizations. Finally, in two distinct studies focused on using the
CVF as part of the due diligence process, Chesley (2019, 2020) successfully analyzed the
differences in culture between different employee types in both the acquired and acquiring
organization and investigated the preferred post-merger culture of two combining organizations.
These previously completed research studies illustrate the potential benefits for KH if the CVF
were to be implemented into the due diligence process.
To implement the CVF within KH and KSMG, collaboration will need to occur between
KSMG and the KH Strategic Initiatives Team. The KH Strategic Initiatives Team conducts the
due diligence process for all potential acquisition targets, and due to the confidential nature of
the process, this team would be responsible for owning and operating any tool utilized as part of
the CVF process. In order to develop these tools, the KSMG Deployment Team would work with
the KH Strategic Initiatives Team to build easy to use documents that would create actionable
114
output data based on the inputs discovered by the KH Strategic Initiatives Team during the due
diligence process.
Recommendation 2: Utilize Facility Visits and the “Lend-a-Hand” Program to Provide a
Vision of the Future State
The data analysis process showed that seven out of 15 (46.67%) participants commented
on the lack of the vision of the future state and the resulting lack of understanding of their
responsibilities to reach the future state within the acquired organization. In addition to the lack
of vision of the future state, nine out of 15 (60%) interview participants mentioned the
importance of members of the acquiring organization engaging on-site at the acquired
organization. Based on gaps identified during the data analysis process and the Clark and Estes
(2008) gap analysis framework, it is important for KSMG to implement facility visits and
leverage the “lend-a-hand” program to ensure that acquired employees have the procedural
knowledge necessary to engage in the acquisition, and that the organization clearly articulates the
responsibilities of acquired employees during the transition.
As discovered during data analysis, facility visits are an important aspect of the
acquisition process. Participants noted that when members of the acquiring organization engaged
on-site at the acquired organization, they felt like they were more involved in the integration
process and felt like the acquiring organization cared about the success of the acquired
organization within the combined organization. To ensure that these visits occur, the KSMG
Deployment Team will collaborate with the KH and KSMG Leadership Teams to develop a
schedule where these leaders will come on site and interact with the acquired employees.
In addition to facility visits conducted by the leadership team, the “lend-a-hand” program
is an important aspect of the acquisition process. During the “lend-a-hand” visits, members of the
115
acquiring organization come on-site to the acquired organization to participate in the acquisition
activities and work alongside acquired employees. These visits allow members of the acquiring
organization to show acquired employees what will be required in the future state, and also
provide a contact for acquired employees to reach out to as the acquisition progresses. Similar to
the facility visits, the Deployment Team will collaborate with the KH and KSMG Leadership
Teams to develop a schedule where associates can come on-site and engage with the acquired
employees.
In the mergers and acquisitions literature multiple authors discuss the value of the on-site
presence of members of the acquiring organization and providing a vision of the future state
through appropriate communication of responsibilities to acquired employees. In their book on
mergers and acquisitions, Marks and Mirvis (2010) specifically call out the importance of on-site
presence, such as facility visits by leadership, in reducing culture clash and developed a checklist
for acquisitions that contains several reminders about on-site engagement of members of the
acquiring organization. Similarly, Appelbaum et al. (2017) discussed the benefits of on-site
interactions between acquired and acquiring employees to develop a sense of belongingness
reduce resistance to change. The on-site interactions described by Appelbaum et al. (2017) align
with the goal of the “lend-a-hand” program and show the importance of building these
relationships. Bouchikhi and Kimberly (2011) added to the discussion of on-site engagement
noting that a focus should be placed on understanding the identity and culture between both
organizations to improve the cultural integration process. As part of a study on the role of
emotions in mergers and acquisitions, Sinkovics et al. (2011) noted the benefits of detailed
communication to acquired employees including a reduction of fear and anxiety. Additionally,
Georgiades and Georgiades (2014) discussed the tremendous positive impact that an
116
understanding of what to expect during and after the acquisition process can have on the daily
life of an acquired employee. Finally, Dirva and Radulescu (2018) added to the discussion noting
that detailed communication can reduce distrust and suspicion towards the acquiring
organization and can improve productivity and commitment. The examples in the literature
discuss many of the same goals as the recommendation of implementing facility visits and the
“lend-a-hand” program. Specifically, this recommendation hopes to help build relationships
between members of the acquired and acquiring organization, reduce fear and anxiety by
showing the importance of a successful acquisition, and improve communication of
responsibilities through on-site interactions.
Recommendation 3: Create an Onboarding Packet with Job Aids Designed for Acquired
Employees to Practice the Procedures of How to Access Resources in the Organization
Interview participants appreciated the clarity of the operations playbook as a source of
procedural knowledge as five out of 15 (33.33%) participants discussed the importance of the
document. Unfortunately, four participants commented that they felt like they lacked the
procedural knowledge of how to access specific resources. To address this lack of procedural
knowledge KSMG should develop job aids designed for acquired employees to understand the
procedures of how to access resources in the organization that complement the operations
playbook already in use.
An onboarding packet with job aids would provide acquired associates with an easy,
quick reference tool to remind them of existing trainings that illustrate how to access resources in
the organization. Based on the findings in the participant interviews, the onboarding packet
should contain links and phone numbers to contact departments such as information technology
and human resources. Additionally, this packet should contain an organizational structure chart
117
that provides contact information for their manager and peers to assist with developing a network
within the organization. Finally, critical information pertinent to the position of the acquired
employee such as dashboard links, database access points, and helpful intranet sites should be
included in the job aid.
As discussed by Clark and Estes (2008), job aids build on basic levels of information by
providing self-help details that are used to accomplish a task. Additionally, Clark and Estes noted
that “job aids can be provided to people who have completed training and need reminders about
how to implement what they have learned” (p. 58). In the context of mergers and acquisitions,
many researchers discuss the importance of providing job aids to acquired employees. Lakshman
(2011) proposed the importance of knowledge sharing through personalized approaches and the
criticality of knowledge transfer in reducing ambiguity of processes in the new organization.
Similarly, multiple authors noted the importance of providing acquired employees with the tools
necessary to utilize resources on the success of the acquisition process (Appelbaum et al., 2017;
Marks & Mirvis, 2011a).
Recommendation 4: Highlight Model Examples of Engaged Acquired Employees from
Previous Acquisitions During Acquisition
When asked about the acquiring organization highlighting model examples of engaged
acquired employees, zero participants were able to confirm that this practice occurred during the
integration, and 11 out of 15 (73.33%) participants mentioned a fear that they or other acquired
employees would lose their jobs in the acquisition process. When considering the numerous
acquisitions that KH has completed over the past several years, the organization has missed an
opportunity to showcase acquired employees that have succeeded in the new organization. To
118
address this gap, KSMG should implement a program that highlights model examples of engaged
acquired employees from previous acquisitions during the acquisition process.
To implement a program that highlights model examples of engaged acquired employees
from previous acquisitions, KSMG would first need to identify acquired employees from
previous acquisitions that would be willing to participate. With a group of acquired employees
from previous acquisitions selected, their biographies would be shared with acquired employees
in an ongoing acquisition to provide examples of individuals who have succeeded in the
organization. Acquired employees from previous acquisitions would share their experiences
from the acquisition process, provide reasoning to processes that they found confusing, discuss
career opportunities within KH and KSMG, and share some resources that they found
particularly useful. In addition to in-person interactions, the acquired employees from previous
acquisitions would share their contact information to provide an ally to acquired employees who
are currently involved in an acquisition.
The mergers and acquisitions literature provides examples of organizations using the
strategy and discusses specific instances where the technique is most helpful. In their study on
General Electric (GE), Ashkenas et al. (1998) found that acquired employees from previous
acquisitions are often hired into GE Capital Services. This entity within the organization then
completes the integration process for the organization and was able to successfully acquire over
100 organizations in the five years prior to the study. Ashekenas et al. highlighted the advantage
that the Capital Services Team provided to the organization through the acquisition experience
that members have and providing the perspective of those who are an acquired employee
themselves. Additionally, the literature notes that model examples of engaged acquired
employees from previous acquisitions can help to illustrate the career opportunities and paths of
119
the new organization (Cartwright & Cooper, 1990; Georgiades & Georgiades, 2014; Marks et al.,
2017; Oehler, 2019). Finally, several researchers noted the opportunity and success of these
model examples of engaged acquired employees from previous organizations increases
engagement, which plays a role in the success of the acquisition process (Appelbaum et al.,
2017; Bouchikhi & Kimberly, 2011; Degbey et al., 2020).
Integrated Recommendations
To implement the recommendations detailed above, a comprehensive plan should be
developed that includes a timeline and strategy. Using the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis
framework as a framework, this comprehensive plan aims to address the findings from the
qualitative interviews conducted with the KSMG acquired employees. This section intends to
propose a timeline for implementation as well as discuss a strategy for a successful deployment.
As the first members of KSMG on-site at any acquired health system and leaders of the
supply chain and operations integration, the KSMG Deployment Team will be primarily
responsible for the development of each recommendation. Starting with Recommendation 1, the
KH Strategic Initiatives Team, who conducts the due diligence process for all potential
acquisition targets, should leverage the competing values framework to determine organizational
compatibility during the due diligence phase of any potential acquisition. Using the framework
originally developed by Robert Quinn and Kim Cameron (1983), the Deployment Team will
create a tool that allows information to be input into a document then then measures
organizational culture along two axes and four quadrants. With this tool created, the KSMG
Deployment Team will conduct trainings with the KH Strategic Initiatives Team to instruct them
how input data should be collected from potential acquisition targets, how the information should
be entered into the tool, and finally how to understand and utilize the output information created
120
by the tool. After the KH Strategic Initiatives Team has been trained on how to use the tool, they
will implement this additional step into the due diligence process and proceed to collect input
data for any potential acquisition targets, correctly enter the information into the tool, and utilize
the output data to determine if there is an alignment of values between KH and the potential
acquisition target.
Next, for Recommendation 2, the Deployment Team will collaborate with the leaders of
each of the different communities within KSMG to create a template calendar for facility visits
and the “lend-a-hand” program. Based on the findings during the data analysis process, the
Deployment Team will collaborate with the leaders of each community to suggest facility visits
near the beginning of the acquisition to ensure that acquired employees understand the
importance of the success of the acquisition and suggest “lend-a-hand” visits a few months into
the acquisition process to help clarify processes and procedures. Specifically, the template
calendar should distinguish between the suggested weeks during the acquisition timeline when
leaders will visit the acquired organization and when lend-a-hands will provide assistance to
acquired employees. A unique calendar will need to be created for each acquisition, but the
template will serve as a starting point to reference.
To implement Recommendation 3, the onboarding packet with job aids will be developed
by the Deployment Team in collaboration with the leaders of each of the different communities
within KSMG. Leaders in each of the different communities within KSMG will be paired with a
member of the Deployment Team in order to create a one-page document filled with specific
instructions of how to access and use resources that are most pertinent to the community. Prior to
each new acquisition process, each of these documents will be updated and customized for the
specific acquired organization
121
Finally, the Deployment Team will work with the KSMG Leadership team to implement
the process of highlighting model examples of engaged acquired employees from previous
acquisitions during acquisition. This process will start by the two groups collaborating to
determine a list of acquired associates that should be highlighted. After creating a list of acquired
employees to highlight, the Deployment Team will work with each acquired employee to
develop a short biography that contains basic personal details, previous organization, career path,
contact information, and a few questions about their experiences during the acquisition process.
With biographies created, the KSMG Deployment Team will share this information through
emails and bulletin board announcements with acquired employees during acquisitions.
Additionally, the model examples of engaged acquired employees from previous acquisitions
will come on-site to visit and interact with acquired employees of the current organization, as
well as join virtual meetings to introduce themselves and their experiences.
In addition to the development of each recommendation, it is important for KSMG to
determine a timeline of when each solution will be utilized. Table 13 presents the timeline for
implementing the integrated recommendations. Starting with Recommendation 1, the
implementation timeline will span from pre-combination phase through the post-combination
phase. Specifically, Recommendation 1 will be utilized as an initial step in the due diligence
process to ensure that there is potential for cultural compatibility before any other work is
completed. Next, Recommendation 2 should be completed immediately following the
announcement of the acquisition in order to begin welcoming acquired employees into the
organization, provide direction regarding next steps, and ensure that acquired employees know
what to expect over the next several months. Then, Recommendation 3 is completed to provide
acquired employees with a tool to help them participate as effectively as possible in the
122
acquisition process. Finally, Recommendation 4 will be conducted throughout the acquisition
process as necessary to ensure that acquired employees understand the path to success in the new
organization.
Table 13
Recommendation Implementation Timeline
Recommendation Implementation timeline
Leverage the competing values framework
during the due diligence process to
determine organizational compatibility
Initial step in the pre-combination phase
Utilize facility visits and the “lend-a-hand”
program to provide a vision of the future
state
Initial step in the combination phase
Create an onboarding packet with job aids
designed for acquired employees to practice
the procedures of how to access resources in
the organization
Subsequent step in the combination phase
Highlight model examples of engaged acquired
employees from previous acquisitions
during acquisition
Throughout the combination phase
Note. During mergers and acquisitions, progress is typically measured in three distinct phases:
the pre-combination phase, the combination phase, and the post-combination phase (Denison &
Ko, 2016; Galpin & Herndon, 2014; Lakshman, 2011; Marks & Mirvis, 2011a; Marks & Mirvis,
2011b). In the pre-combination or due diligence phase a focus is placed on researching potential
acquisition targets and negotiating the integration between the organizations (Denison & Ko,
2016). Next, in the combination or integration phase the transformation process occurs as the
organizations merge from separate entities to a single firm (Arce & Araujo, 2017). Finally, in the
123
post-combination phase the combined organization continues to drive toward the desired end
state and attempts to establish practices and procedures for the future (Lakshman, 2011).
The solution development process and timelines described aim to implement the
recommendations based on the findings in the qualitative interview process. The
recommendations were also selected based on their connection to the Clark and Estes (2008) gap
analysis framework, which serves as the conceptual framework of the study. Specifically, Table
14 outlines the connection of each recommendation to the type of gap addressed based on the
Clark and Estes gap analysis framework.
Table 14
Recommendation Conceptual Framework Crosswalk
Recommendation Type of gap addressed
Leverage the competing values framework during
the due diligence process to determine
organizational compatibility
Knowledge: conceptual
Organizational: cultural setting
Utilize facility visits and the “lend-a-hand”
program to provide a vision of the future state
Knowledge: procedural
Organizational: cultural setting
Create an onboarding packet with job aids
designed for acquired employees to practice the
procedures of how to access resources in the
organization
Knowledge: procedural
Highlight model examples of engaged acquired
employees from previous acquisitions during
acquisition
Motivational: emotion
Organizational: cultural setting
124
To monitor progress towards the organizational performance goal of implementing
solutions that increase engagement for associates of acquired organizations by 10% as compared
to the current state by December 2023, a detailed evaluation system should be created and
tracked by the KSMG Deployment Team. As part of the measurement towards the goal, the
Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004) will be utilized to gather data on
any future acquisitions made by KH. Along with the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale, additional
questions focused on the expected behavior changes will be appended to the survey to validate
improvements within the context of the organization. These questions appended to the survey
will focus on identifying behaviors such as: questions asked by acquired associates during
integration meetings, application for new positions in the combined organization, retention of
associate within the combined organization, usage of job aids provided, interactions during lend-
a-hand and facility visits, and participation in KSMG and KH team events. Specifically, the
KSMG Deployment Team will be responsible for conducting this survey for at least 50% of all
acquired supply chain and operations employees upon announcement of the acquisition to
determine a baseline. Following the capture of a baseline, the survey will be conducted with at
least 50% of all acquired supply chain and operations employees every six months during the
acquisition as well as three months following the completion of the acquisition to measure
improvement. These survey responses will be kept anonymously and following the completion
of the last set of surveys prior to the December 2023 deadline, results will be calculated to
determine whether KH and KSMG have reached their goal.
Limitations and Delimitations
Throughout the course of the research study, I was aware of limitations and delimitations
that influenced the process. Specifically, limitations included factors that could not controlled
125
during the course of the study (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Some of the limitations in this study
were the dependence on participants to volunteer to participate in the study and the number of
participants available to interview. Another limitation of the study was the truthfulness of
respondents in the interview process. Upon completion of this study, I believe that the
truthfulness of participants was addressed during the data analysis process through member
checks, the peer review process and thorough engagement in the data collection process. Similar
to the truthfulness of respondents, an additional limitation would be the interpretation of
engagement among interviewees since no formal definition was provided and thus the accuracy
of their self-reported engagement levels. Furthermore, since interviews were conducted at
various points in time from the completion of the acquisition, participants' abilities to remember
events and experiences is a limitation. Alternatively, to the ability to address the truthfulness of
respondents, the limitation of conducting interviews at various points in time from the
completion of the acquisition was not able to be addressed due to the lack of ongoing
acquisitions by KH and KSMG and the timing of the research study. Two final limitations
include the lack of triangulation and member checking as part of the completed research study
Alternatively, delimitations included decisions that I made that established the limitations
of the study (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). One example of a delimitation in this study was the
use of KH and specifically KSMG associates for interview subjects. Moreover, the decision to
only interview acquired associates that are current employees of KSMG, excluding employees
who are no longer with the organization, limited the insight on the full scope of perspective in
relation to the acquisition and was considered a delimitation of the research study. Another
delimitation included the use of the KMO gap analysis framework (Clark & Estes, 2008) to
investigate the problem of practice. Though the KMO gap analysis framework provided an
126
interesting lens to view the problem of practice, the decision limited the additional perspectives,
such as the Bronfenbrenner Ecological Model (Bronfenbrenner, 1979) or the Burke-Litwin
Model of Organizational Performance and Change (Burke & Litwin, 1992) that could have been
used to identify other unique solutions. Finally, the use of qualitative interviews and document
analysis as research methods constitutes a delimitation. Similar to the selection of the conceptual
framework, the decision to utilize qualitative interviews and document analysis, limited the
ability to discover unique insights that could have been obtained if a different methodology was
selected.
Recommendations for Future Research
As the global volume and value of mergers and acquisitions has increased from 2,676
mergers and acquisitions with a value of $347 billion in 1985 to 49,481 mergers and acquisitions
with a value of $3.7 trillion in 2019, research on the topic has become increasingly popular
(Institute of Mergers, Acquisitions and Alliances, 2020). Though the increase in overall research
on mergers and acquisitions has helped to expand knowledge into new areas within the topic,
there are many aspects yet to be explored. Specifically, many researchers have focused on the
hard aspects of mergers and acquisitions, which include finance, operations, marketing, and
sales; however, limited discovery has been completed in the soft aspects of mergers and
acquisitions. As noted by Mirc (2013), these aspects include “the way people inside the merging
organizations deal with and react to the deal” (p. 2); these aspects are focused on engagement,
productivity, and cultural integration (Vedd & Liu, 2017). This study aims to contribute to the
research in the soft aspects of mergers and acquisitions, and it adds possibilities for future
research.
127
One major delimitation of the study was the decision to only interview acquired
employees that are current employees of KSMG and not include employees who are no longer
with the organization. This decision creates an opportunity for further exploration into associates
who left prior to the completion of the acquisition process. Studying employees who are no
longer with the organization would help to gain additional perspectives of what occurred during
the acquisition process. Specifically, acquired employees who left prior to the completion of the
acquisition process likely had different levels of engagement during the acquisition as compared
to acquired employees who are current employees of KSMG and could help to provide additional
insights as to why they felt more or less engaged. Additionally, another area for further research
is the opportunity to study acquired employees who were kept on throughout the acquisition but
left the organization shortly after the formation of the new organization. Similar to the different
perspective of acquired employees who left prior to the completion of the acquisition process,
employees who were kept on throughout the acquisition but left shortly after would also have a
unique perspective. These associates likely had different experiences that both current acquired
employees and employees who left prior to the completion of the acquisition and could also help
to provide additional insight into other gaps throughout the process.
Other opportunities for future research include longitudinal studies throughout the
acquisitions process. Specifically, interviewing acquired employees at numerous points
throughout the acquisition process would provide an interesting perspective and would help to
provide better insight as to the levels of engagement at different points in time. Finally, more
concentrated areas of study into different positions, including the acquired leadership team
members, acquired managers, and acquired front-line employees, would also provide visibility
into levels of engagement at different levels within the acquired organization.
128
In addition to opportunities for future research related to the limitations and delimitations
of the study, several interesting areas of research that were outside the scope of my study provide
other unique opportunities for future research. One example includes how different types of
retention strategies could be used to increase the success of the acquisition process. Another area
for future research that was discovered in the data analysis process is the opportunity to explore
the fear of job loss specifically on the emotions of acquired employees. A final opportunity for
future research would examine what types of communication with acquired employees are most
effective at varying points during the acquisition process.
Conclusion
Each year around the world tens of thousands of mergers and acquisitions are conducted
disrupting the lives of millions of individuals and their families. Though these events often start
with the intentions to increase profits for organization, they are too often paired with confusion,
anxiety, increased stress, and a fear of job loss for a significant number of acquired employees.
The quality of life during the acquisition process for these acquired employees and their families
is determined by the ability of the acquiring organization to effectively engage the acquired
associates and weave them into the fabric of the combined organization. Based on this
understanding, this study hopes to provide a small push to any organization pursuing an
acquisition to deliver on their mission by uniting all of their associates and providing value to the
world.
The purpose of this study was to explore the experience of acquired employees within an
organization following an acquisition to understand influences that impact employee
engagement. The study achieved its purpose by interviewing acquired employees within KSMG,
a subsidiary of KH, and analyzing documents and artifacts published by KSMG. As a tool to
129
better understand the problem of practice, the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis model was
utilized as the conceptual framework for the study. Specifically, the gap analysis model provided
a methodology to determine the gap between the current performance level and the desired
performance level for knowledge, motivation, and organizational needs. Though the document
analysis process did not contribute any data relevant to the research study, several key findings
were discovered during the qualitative interview process. The analysis of the qualitative
interviews helped to highlight assets of the current organization, including the operations
playbook as a key source of procedural knowledge; the mission, vision and values as a source of
value for acquired employees; on-site participation of members of the acquiring organization;
and a culture of acceptance towards the contributions of acquired employees. Alternatively,
several gaps were found during the data analysis process, including a lack of use of industry best
practices in merging cultures to promote engagement during integration; a failure to highlight
model examples of engaged acquired employees from previous acquisitions; and a lack of vision
of the future state resulting in acquired employees not truly understanding their responsibility in
the acquiring organization. To address the gaps found during the data analysis process, several
key recommendations were developed. First, KH should utilize the CVF during the pre-
combination phase to verify that potential acquisition targets share similar values with the
organization. Next, facility visits, and the “lend-a-hand” program should be coordinated to
ensure that acquired employees have a vision of the future state. Additionally, KSMG should
create an onboarding packet with job aids designed for acquired employees to practice the
procedures of how to access resources in the organization. Finally, KSMG should highlight
model examples of engaged acquired employees from previous acquisitions during the
acquisition. These recommendations provide actionable solutions to resolve the gaps found
130
during the exploration of the influences on acquired employee engagement in an organization
following an acquisition.
131
References
Agrawal, S., & Chatterjee, S. (2020). Recent training trends: Learning and
effectiveness (No. 2392). EasyChair.
Ajagbe, A., Cho, N.M., Ekanem, E.U., & Peter, F. (2016). How organizational structure aids
business performance. International Journal of Research in Commerce and Management,
7(8), 64–68.
Allen, J. A., Reiter-Palmon, R., Crowe, J., & Scott, C. (2018). Debriefs: Teams learning from
doing in context. American Psychologist, 73(4), 504–516.
Ambrose, S. A., Bridges, M. W., DiPietro, M., Lovett, M. C., Norman, M. K., & Mayer, R. E.
(2010). How learning works: Seven research-based principles for smart teaching (1st
ed.). Jossey-Bass.
American Health Association. (2019). The value of hospital mergers: How patients benefit
[PowerPoint Slides]. https://www.aha.org/system/files/media/file/2019/03/infographic-
the-value-of-hospital-mergers.pdf
Amiot, C. E., Terry, D. J., & Mckimmie, B. M. (2012). Social identity change during an
intergroup merger: The role of status, similarity, and identity threat. Basic and Applied
Social Psychology, 34(5), 443–455. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01973533.2012.712016
Appelbaum, S., Karelis, C., Henaff, A. L., & McLaughlin, B. (2017). Resistance to change in the
case of mergers and acquisitions: Part 3. Industrial and Commercial Training, 49(3),
146–150. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ICT-05-2016-0034
Arce, E., Araujo, A. (2017, June 18–21). Key factors in an organizational culture transformation
process for innovation during a merger, The XXVIII ISPIM Innovation Conference,
Vienna, Austria.
132
Aristos, D., Georgios, S., Miltiadis, C., & Grigorios, K. (2018). The impact of mergers and
acquisitions on corporate culture and employees: The case of Aegean & Olympic Air.
Academy of Strategic Management Journal, 17(1), 1–7.
Ashkenas, R., DeMonaco, L. J., & Francis, S. (1998). Making the Deal Real: How GE Capital
Integrates Acquisitions. Harvard Business Review, 76(1), 165–178.
Baldoni, J. (2013). Employee engagement does more than boost productivity. Harvard Business
Review: https://hbr.org/2013/07/employee-engagement-does-more/
Bandura, A. (2000). Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Current Directions in
Psychological Science, 9(3), 75–78. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.00064
Barkema, H., & Schijven, M. (2008). Toward unlocking the full potential of acquisitions: The
role of organizational restructuring. Academy of Management Journal, 51(4), 696–722.
https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2008.33665204
Bayerle, L. & Scanlon, M. R. (2017, June 18–21). FiERCE: Empowering girls in engineering
through role-models and mentoring, Mid-Atlantic ASEE Conference, State College,
Pennsylvania, United States.
Bergh, D. D. (2001). Executive retention and acquisition outcomes: A test of opposing views on
the influence of organizational tenure. Journal of Management, 27(5), 603–622.
https://doi.org/10.1177/014920630102700506
Bersin, J., Geller, J., Wakefield, N., & Walsh, B. (2016). The new organization: Different by
design. Global Human Capital Trends, 2016, 1–17.
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Chapter 4: Qualitative data. In Qualitative research for
education: An introduction to theories and methods (5th ed.) (pp. 117–129). Allyn and
Bacon.
133
Borgogni, L., Dello Russo, S., & Latham, G. P. (2010). The relationship of employee perceptions
of the immediate supervisor and top management with collective efficacy. Journal of
Leadership & Organizational Studies, 18(1), 5–13.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051810379799
Bouchikhi, H., & Kimberly, J. (2011). Making 1 1=1: The central role of identity in merger
math. SSRN Electronic Journal, 2012, 1–24. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2312378
Bouchikhi, H., & Kimberly, J. R. (2012). Making mergers work. MIT Sloan Management
Review, 54(1), 63–70.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The Ecology of Human Development. Harvard University Press.
Chapter 1: Purpose and Perspective.
Brown, D., Bersin, J., Gosling, W., & Sloan, N. (2016). Engagement: Always on. Global Human
Capital Trends, 2016, 47–54.
Brown, T. C., Jr., Werling, K. A., Walker, B. C., Burgdorfer, R. J., & Shields, J. J. (2012).
Current trends in hospital mergers and acquisitions. Healthcare Financial Management,
66(3), 114–120.
Buckingham, M. & Coffman, C. (1999). First break all the rules. Simon and Schuster, pp. 25-49,
53–67.
Burke, W. W., & Litwin, G. H. (1992). A causal model of organizational performance and
change. Journal of Management, 18(3), 523–545.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/014920639201800306
Cartwright, S., & Cooper, C. L. (1993). The psychological impact of merger and acquisition on
the individual: A study of building society managers. Human Relations, 46(3), 327–347.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/001872679304600302
134
Cartwright, S., & Cooper, C. L. (1994). The human effects of mergers and acquisitions. Journal
of Organizational Behavior, 1, 47–61.
Cartwright, S., & Cooper, C. L. (1995). Organizational marriage: “Hard” versus “soft” issues?
Personnel Review, 24(3), 32–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/00483489510089632
Catteuw, F., Flynn, E., & Vonderhorst, J. (2007). Employee engagement: Boosting productivity
in turbulent times. Organization Development Journal, 25(2), 151–157.
Cesario, F., & Chambel, M. J. (2019). On-boarding new employees: A three-component
perspective of welcoming. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 27(5),
1465–1479.
Chesley, C. G. (2019). Merging organizational cultures in healthcare: Lessons from the USA in
differentiation among tiers in a health system merger. International Journal of
Healthcare Management, 13(1), 1–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/20479700.2019.1602367
Chesley, C. G. (2020). Merging cultures. Journal of Healthcare Management, 65(2), 135–150.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/JHM-D-18-00213
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. CEP Press.
Clement, TJ & Varón, L. (2018). What are the best practices to follow in order to establish and
spread culture for a newly formed company post-merger? Executive Summaries on
Current HR Topics. 6640(1), 1-5.
Clifton, D.O., & Harter, J.K. (2003). Investing in strengths. In A. K.S. Cameron, B. J.E. Dutton,
& C. R.E. Quinn (Eds.), Positive organizational scholarship: Foundations of a new
discipline (pp. 111–121). Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.
135
Corporate Leadership Council. (2004). Driving performance and retention through employee
engagement: A quantitative analysis of effective engagement strategies [PowerPoint
Slides].
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Abdul_Saboor5/post/Hi_Does_anyone_know_of_an
y_good_scientific_studies_linking_employee_engagement_to_different_organizational_o
utcomes/attachment/59d63ff9c49f478072ea9fbe/AS%3A273783812755466%401442286
555442/download/Employee+engagement.pdf.
Cosack, S., Guthridge, M., & Lawson, E. (2012). Retaining key Employees in times of change.
McKinsey Quarterly, Fall 2012, 1–6.
Creasy, T., Stull, M., & Peck, S. (2009). Understanding employee-level dynamics within the
merger and acquisition process. Journal of General Management, 35(2), 21–42.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/030630700903500203
Creswell, J. W. & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches. Sage Publications.
Cunningham, P., Garfield, R., & Rudowitz, R. (2015). How are hospitals faring under the
Affordable Care Act? Early experiences from Ascension Health. The Kaiser Commission
on Medicaid and the Uninsured, April 2015, 1–18.
Davis, W. B. (2009). The importance of due diligence investigations: Failed mergers and
acquisitions of the United States' companies. Ankara Bar Review, 1, 5-17.
Datta, D. K., G. Puia. 1995. Cross-border acquisitions: An examination of the influence of
relatedness and cultural fit on shareholder value creation in U.S. acquiring firms.
Management International Review. 35(4), 337–359.
136
Degbey, W. Y., Rodgers, P., Kromah, M. D., & Weber, Y. (2020). The impact of psychological
ownership on employee retention in mergers and acquisitions. Human Resource
Management Review, 30(1), 1–63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2020.100745
Deloitte. (2020). The state of the deal: M&A trends 2020 [PowerPoint Slides].
https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/us/Documents/mergers-acqisitions/us-
mna-trends-2020-report.pdf
Denison, D. R., & Ko, I. (2016). Cultural due diligence in mergers and acquisitions. Advances in
Mergers and Acquisitions, 15, 53–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/S1479-
361X20160000015004
Dirva, C., & Radulescu, A. S. (2018). Managing resilience to change in merger and acquisitions.
The Romanian Economic Journal, XXI(68), 145-160.
Deutsch, C., & West, A. (2010). A new generation of M&A: A McKinsey perspective on the
opportunities and challenges. Perspectives on Merger Integration, June 2010, 1–7.
Eddy, E. R., Tannenbaum, S. I., & Mathieu, J. E. (2013). Helping teams to help themselves:
Comparing two team-led debriefing methods. Personnel Psychology, 66(4), 975–1008.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/peps.12041
Engert, O., Kaetzler, B., Kordestani, K., & MacLean, A. (2019). Organizational culture in
mergers: Addressing the unseen forces. McKinsey Perspectives, March 2019, 1–7.
Gallimore, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect
minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational Psychologist,
36(1), 45–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3601_5
Galosy, J. (1990). The human factor in mergers and acquisitions. Training & Development
Journal, 44(4), 90–95.
137
Galpin, T. J., & Herndon, M. (2014). The complete guide to mergers and acquisitions: Process
tools to support M & A integration at every level. Jossey-Bass.
Galpin, T. L., Whittington, J. L., & Maellaro, R. L. (2013). Identifying, retaining and re-
engaging key talent during mergers and acquisitions: A best practices framework. Human
Resource Management International Digest, 21(2), 42–48.
Galpin, T., & Whittington, J. L. (2010). Merger Repair: A conceptual framework for restoring
employer/employee relationships. Institute of Behavioral and Applied Management,
12(1), 48–69.
Gelfand, M., Gordon, S., Li, C., Choi, V., & Prokopowicz, P. (2018). One reason mergers fail:
The two cultures aren't compatible. In Harvard Business Review (pp. [1–4]).
https://hbr.org/2018/10/one-reason-mergers-fail-the-two-cultures-arent-compatible
Georgiades, G., & Georgiades, S. (2014). The impact of an acquisition on the employees of the
acquired company. Journal of Business and Economics, 5(1), 101–112.
Giddings, D. (2020). The effects of cognitive reflection exercises on employee engagement: A
positive intervention and study of the role of cognition in increasing engagement in the
workplace. University of Minnesota.
Gilsdorf, K., Hanleybrown, F., & Laryea, D. (2017). How to improve the engagement and
retention of young hourly workers: More than half of them plan to leave within the year,
survey reveals. HRNews, December 2017, 1–4.
Goette, L., Huffman, D., Meier, S., & Sutter, M. (2012). Competition between organizational
groups: Its impact on altruistic and antisocial motivations. Management Science, 58(5),
948–960. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1110.1466
138
Hanaysha, J. (2016). Improving employee productivity through work engagement: Evidence
from higher education sector. Management Science Letters, 6(1), 61–70.
http://dx.doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2015.11.006
Harackiewicz, J. M., & Knogler, M. (2017). The role of self-efficacy and related beliefs in self-
regulation of learning and performance. In A. J. Elliot, C. S. Dweck, & D. S. Yeager
(Eds.), Handbook of Competence and Motivation (pp. 313–333). The Guilford Press.
Harding, D., & Rouse, T. (2007). Human due diligence. Harvard Business Review, 85(4), 124–
131.
Harter, J. K., Schmidt, F. L., Agrawal, S., Plowman, S. K., & Blue, A. (2016). The relationship
between engagement at work and organizational outcomes: 2012 Q12 meta-analysis.
Gallup Inc.
Institute of Mergers, Acquisitions and Alliances (2020). M&A Statistics - Worldwide, Regions,
Industries & Countries. https://imaa-institute.org/mergers-and-acquisitions-statistics/
Kaetzler, B., Kordestani, K., O'Loughlin, E., & Van Oostende, M. (2019). Managing and
supporting employees through cultural change in mergers. McKinsey Perspectives,
January 2019, 1–9.
Kastor, J. A. (2010a). Failure of the merger of the Mount Sinai and New York University
Hospitals and Medical Schools: Part 1. Academic Medicine, 85(12), 1823–1827.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181f65000
Kastor, J. A. (2010b). Failure of the merger of the Mount Sinai and New York University
Hospitals and Medical Schools: Part 2. Academic Medicine, 85(12), 1828–1832.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181f65019
139
Kotter, J. P. (2007). Leading change: Why transformation efforts fail. Harvard Business Review,
73(2), 96–103.
Kotter, J. P. (2012). Leading change. Harvard Business Review Press.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice,
41, 212–218. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2
Kular, S., Gatenby, M., Rees, C., Soane, E., & Truss, K. (2008). Employee engagement: A
literature review. Prabandhan: Indian Journal of Management, 8(7), 1–28.
Kummer, C. (2008). Motivation and retention of key people in mergers and acquisitions.
Strategic HR Review, 7(6), 5–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14754390810906373
Laguado, R. I., Florez, E. G., & Hernández, F. Y. (2018). Organizational philosophy as a vehicle
of action in the competitive development of SMEs. Journal of Physics: Conference
Series, 1126, 012067. http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1126/1/012067
Lakshman, C. (2011). Postacquisition cultural integration in mergers & acquisitions: A
knowledge-based approach. Human Resource Management, 50(5), 605–623.
https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.20447
Lewin, K. (1947). Frontiers in group dynamics. Human Relations, 1(1), 5–41.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/001872674700100201
Lee, S.-J., Kim, J., & Park, B. I. (2015). Culture clashes in cross-border mergers and
acquisitions: A case study of Sweden’s Volvo and South Korea’s Samsung. International
Business Review, 24(4), 580–593. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2014.10.016
Lee, E., & Park, H. J. (2013). What are best practices for retaining employees during mergers
and acquisitions? Cornell University ILR Collection, 1–9.
140
Lynch, J. G., & Lind, B. (2002). Escaping merger and acquisition madness. Strategy &
Leadership, 30(2), 5–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/10878570210422094
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Chapter 5: Methods. In Qualitative research design (pp. 96-104). Sage.
Markos, S., & Sridevi, M. S. (2010). Employee engagement: The key to improving performance.
International Journal of Business and Management, 5(12), 89–96.
Marks, M. L., & Mirvis, P. H. (2001). Making mergers and acquisitions work: Strategic and
psychological preparation. Academy of Management Perspectives, 15(2), 80–92.
http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/ame.2001.4614947
Marks, M. L., & Mirvis, P. H. (2010). Joining forces: Making one plus one equal three in
mergers, acquisitions, and alliances. Jossey-Bass.
Marks, M. L., & Mirvis, P. H. (2011a). A framework for the human resources role in managing
culture in mergers and acquisitions. Human Resource Management, 50(6), 859–877.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hrm.20445
Marks, M. L., & Mirvis, P. H. (2011b). Merge ahead: A research agenda to increase merger and
acquisition success. Journal of Business and Psychology, 26(2), 161–168.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10869-011-9219-4
Marks, M. L., Mirvis, P., & Ashkenas, R. (2017). Surviving m&a. Harvard Business Review,
March-April, 145–149.
Mendes, F., & Stander, M. W. (2011). Positive organisation: The role of leader behaviour in
work engagement and retention. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 37(1), 1–13.
http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/sajip.v37i1.900
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation. (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
141
Mielly, M., Alain Rouault, F., & Richards O’Reilly, K. (2016). Merging and diverging cultures
in m&a. Strategic Direction, 32(9), 7–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/SD-05-2016-0082
Miller, F. D., & Fernandes, E. (2009). Cultural issues in mergers and acquisitions. Leading
through transition: Perspectives on the people side of m&a, March 2009, 41–45.
Mirc, N. (2013). Human impacts on the performance of mergers and acquisitions. Advances in
mergers and acquisitions, 12, 1-31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/S1479-
361X(2013)0000012004
Nahass, G., & Suidan, M. (2017). M&A integration: Choreographing great performance. PwC's
2017 M&A Integration Survey Report, 2017, 1–29.
Nemanich, L. A., & Keller, R. T. (2007). Transformational leadership in an acquisition: A field
study of employees. The Leadership Quarterly, 18(1), 49–68.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2006.11.003
Oehler, K. (2019). Getting real about creating a high-performance culture. Kincentric Insights,
November 2019, 2–13.
Ovseiko, P. V., & Buchan, A. M. (2012). Organizational Culture in an Academic Health Center.
Academic Medicine, 87(6), 709–718. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e3182537983
Ovseiko, P. V., Melham, K., Fowler, J., & Buchan, A. M. (2015). Organisational culture and
post-merger integration in an academic health centre: a mixed-methods study. BMC
Health Services Research, 15(1), 1–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-014-0673-3
Pandita, D., & Ray, S. (2018). Talent management and employee engagement – a meta-analysis
of their impact on talent retention. Industrial and Commercial Training, 50(4), 185–199.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ICT-09-2017-0073
142
Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010, Pub. L. No. 111–148, 124 Stat. 119 (2010),
Codified as Amended 42 U.S.C. § 18001.
Perry, J. S., & Herd, T. J. (2004). Reducing m&a risk through improved due diligence. Strategy
& Leadership, 32(2), 12–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/10878570410525089
Petro, C. S. (2013). The impact of employee engagement on organization’s productivity,
international conference on managing human resources at the workplace, Mysore,
Karnataka, India, 13-14 December 2013.
Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in
learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 667–686.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.4.667
Pradabwong, J., Braziotis, C., Tannock, J. D. T., & Pawar, K. S. (2017). Business process
management and supply chain collaboration: Effects on performance and
competitiveness. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 22(2), 107–121.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/SCM-01-2017-0008
Quinn, R. E., & Cameron, K. (1983). Organizational Life Cycles and Shifting Criteria of
Effectiveness: Some Preliminary Evidence. Management Science, 29(1), 33–51.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.29.1.33
Rocco, T. S., & Plakhotnik, M. S. (2009). Literature reviews, conceptual frameworks, and
theoretical frameworks: Terms, functions, and distinctions. Human Resource
Development Review, 8(1), 120–130. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1534484309332617
143
Rubin, D.P., Oehler, K. & Adair, C. (2013). Managing employee engagement during times of
change [White Paper]. Aon Hewitt. www.aon.com/human-capital-consulting/thought-
leadership/talent_mgmt/2013_Managing_Engagement_During_Times_of_Change_White
_Paper.jsp
Sadri, G., & Lees, B. (2001). Developing corporate culture as a competitive advantage. Journal
of Management Development, 20(10), 853–859.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02621710110410851
Salanova, M., Agut, S., & Peiró, J. M. (2005). Linking organizational resources and work
engagement to employee performance and customer loyalty: The mediation of service
climate. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(6), 1217–1227.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.6.1217
Sarala, R. (2009). The impact of cultural differences and acculturation factors on post-acquisition
conflict. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 26(1): 38–56.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scaman.2009.07.001
Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B. (2004). Utrecht Work Engagement Scale: Preliminary manual.
Utrecht University
Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., & Salanova, M. (2006). The measurement of work engagement
with a short questionnaire. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66(4), 701–
716. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0013164405282471
Schein, E.H. (2017). Organizational culture and leadership, 5th Edition. Jossey-
Bass.
144
Schweizer, L., & Patzelt, H. (2012). Employee commitment in the post-acquisition integration
process: The effect of integration speed and leadership. Scandinavian Journal of
Management, 28(4), 298–310. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scaman.2012.02.003
Shook, L., & Roth, G. (2011). Downsizings, mergers, and acquisitions. Journal of European
Industrial Training, 35(2), 135–153. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/03090591111109343
Simoneaux, S. L., & Stroud, C. (n.d.). A strong corporate culture is key to success. Journal of
Pension Benefits, 22(1), 51–53.
Sinkovics, R. R., Zagelmeyer, S., & Kusstatscher, V. (2011). Between merger and syndrome:
The intermediary role of emotions in four cross-border M&As. International Business
Review, 20(1), 27–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2010.05.002
Stafford, D., & Miles, L. (2013). Integrating cultures after a merger. Bain Insights, December
2013, 1–5.
Stahl, G. K., & Voigt, A. (2008). Do cultural differences matter in mergers and acquisitions: A
tentative model and examination. Organization Science, 19(1), 160–176.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1070.0270
Stempniak, M. (2014). The art of blending cultures. Hospitals and Health Networks, 88(7), 48–
52.
Strengthsquest (2020). What is the research behind the CliftonStrengths assessment?
https://www.strengthsquest.com/help/general/142457/research-behind-cliftonstrengths-
assessment.aspx.
Teerikangas, S., & Thanos, I. C. (2018). Looking into the ‘black box’ – unlocking the effect of
integration on acquisition performance. European Management Journal, 36(3), 366–380.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2017.06.002
145
Teerikangas, S., P. Very. 2006. The culture-performance relationship in m&a: From yes/no to
how. British Journal of Management, 17, S31–S48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-
8551.2006.00477.x
Thach, L., & Nyman, M. (2001). Leading in limbo land: The role of a leader during merger and
acquisition transition. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 22(4), 146–150.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01437730110395033
Thier, S. O., Kelley, W. N., Pardes, H., Knight, A. W., & Wietecha, M. (2014). Success factors
in merging teaching hospitals. Academic Medicine, 89(2), 219–223.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000000094
Trkman, P. (2010). The critical success factors of business process management. International
Journal of Information Management, 30(2), 125–134.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2009.07.003
Ullrich, J., & Dick, R. V. (2007). The group psychology of mergers & acquisitions: Lessons
from the social identity approach. In Cooper, C. L., & Finkelstein, S (Eds.), Advances in
Mergers & Acquisitions (pp. 1–15). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Vedd, R., & Liu, D. (2017). The effect of cultural integration on financial performance post-
merger. Global Journal of Business Research, 11(1), 71–84.
Vestring, T., King, B., & Rouse, T. (2003). Should you always merge cultures? Harvard
Management Update, May 2003, 1–4.
Vital, F., & Alves, H. (2010). The importance of welcoming new health care employees and its
impact on work motivation and satisfaction. Asia Pacific Journal of Business and
Management, 1(1), 15–28.
146
Weber, Y., & Tarba, S. (2012). Mergers and acquisitions process: the use of corporate culture
analysis. Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal, 19(3), 288–303.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13527601211247053
Welch, J., & Welch, S. (2009). Winning: The ultimate business how-to book. HarperCollins.
Wigfield, A., Rosenzweig, E. Q., & Eccles, J. S. (2017). The role of self-efficacy and related
beliefs in self-regulation of learning and performance. In A. J. Elliot, C. S. Dweck, & D.
S. Yeager (Eds.), Handbook of Competence and Motivation (pp. 313–333). The Guilford
Press.
Xenikou, A., & Simosi, M. (2006). Organizational culture and transformational leadership as
predictors of business unit performance. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 21(6), 566–
579. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02683940610684409
Zambrana, R. E., Ray, R., Espino, M. M., Castro, C., Douthirt Cohen, B., & Eliason, J. (2015).
“Don’t leave us behind.” American Educational Research Journal, 52(1), 40–72.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/0002831214563063
Zimmerman, B. J., Schunk, D. H., & DiBenedetto, M. K. (2017). The role of self-efficacy and
related beliefs in self-regulation of learning and performance. In A. J. Elliot, C. S.
Dweck, & D. S. Yeager (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 313–333).
The Guilford Press.
Zhu, J., Boyaci, T., & Ray, S. (2016). Effects of upstream and downstream mergers on supply
chain profitability. European Journal of Operational Research, 249(1), 131–143.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.08.030
147
Appendix A: In-Depth Review of Acquisition Process
In the mergers and acquisitions process, progress is typically measured in three distinct
phases: the pre-combination phase, the combination phase, and the post-combination phase
(Denison & Ko, 2016; Galpin & Herndon, 2014; Lakshman, 2011; Marks & Mirvis, 2011a;
Marks & Mirvis, 2011b). To illustrate the immense amount of change that takes place during the
phases, Marks and Mirvis (2011a) use the three-stage change model of Kurt Lewin (1947) to
explain the unfreezing, changing, and refreezing that occurs. During the pre-combination or due
diligence phase an intense focus is placed on researching potential acquisition targets and
eventually negotiating the integration between the organizations (Denison & Ko, 2016). Next, in
the combination or integration phase the transformation process occurs as the organizations
merge from separate entities to a single firm (Arce & Araujo, 2017). Finally, in the post-
combination phase the combined organization continues to drive toward the desired end state and
attempts to establish practices and procedures for the future (Lakshman, 2011).
Pre-Combination Phase
In any merger or acquisition, a tremendous amount of work is done prior to the official
announcement of the deal (Denison & Ko, 2016). This preparation work includes research into
numerous companies and covers nearly every aspect of potential organizations and is defined as
the pre-combination or due diligence phase of the merger or acquisition process (Marks &
Mirvis, 2010). As discussed by Deutsch and West (2010), during the pre-combination phase the
firm is forced to ask themselves “When we own this asset, what are all the ways we could create
value with it?” (p. 4). This point made by Deutsch and West illustrates the importance of
completing a thorough due diligence process for the overall success of the merger or acquisition,
and many other sources confirm the criticality of the pre-combination phase as a foundation for
148
achievement (Aristos, et al., 2018; Davis, 2009; Harding & Rouse, 2007; Marks & Mirvis,
2011b; Perry & Herd, 2004).
As part of the research completed during the pre-combination phase, analytics are often
completed to determine the potential for success with regard to both hard and soft aspects of the
merger (Cartwright & Cooper, 1995). During the investigation of the hard aspects, modeling and
projections are completed to assist in determining potential synergies of combining organizations
and to settle on a purchase price (Davis, 2009; Lynch & Lind, 2002; Marks & Mirvis, 2011a).
Similarly, when evaluating the soft aspects, analytics are used in determining organizational
compatibility, which often includes the use of the competing values framework or other
measurement of psychological and sociological perspectives (Chesley, 2019; Mirc, 2013; Weber
& Tarba, 2012). Finally, in the last step prior to the completion of the pre-combination phase and
contract signing, an integration plan is completed to ensure that following the announcement of
the transaction all parties are engaged and on task (Arce & Araujo, 2017; Kaetzler et al., 2019).
Combination Phase
Following the legal announcement of the merger of the firms, the combination phase
begins when the separate organizations join forces into a single business (Cartwright & Cooper,
1995; Galpin & Herndon, 2014). At this point in time company leaders often look to illustrate the
ending of the separate firms with an event such as a funeral, which is then followed by a
celebration for the birth of the new combined organization (Marks & Mirvis, 2011a). This type
of creative symbolic event looks to set the stage for the upcoming months when a focus is placed
on unfreezing mindsets connected to the past and molding behaviors for the future (Kaetzler et
al., 2019; Marks & Mirvis, 2011a). During the acquisition, the combined organization will look
to use past merger and acquisition experience (Barkema & Schijven, 2008; Galpin & Herndon,
149
2014), as well as learn from the acquired organization(s) in order to develop the most effective
processes and procedures for completing the integration and moving forward (Datta & Puia,
1995).
To utilize the combination period as efficiently as possible, it is imperative that key
performance indicators are tracked to show progress towards completing the integration plan
(Engert et al., 2019; Miller & Fernandes, 2009). Maintaining a focus on adhering to the
integration plan and properly communicating the ongoing changes within the organization will
help to prevent individuals and groups from falling behind pace and placing the success of the
acquisition in jeopardy (Arce & Araujo, 2017; Dirva & Radulescu, 2018; Kaetzler et al., 2019).
Though the length of the integration phase is highly dependent upon the combining
organizations, the consensus within current literature acknowledges that a focus should be placed
on keeping the length as condensed as possible while allowing for the needed change to occur
(Galpin & Herndon, 2014; Schweizer & Patzelt, 2012; Thach & Nyman, 2001). Finally, when
the integration plan is completed and the combination phase comes to a close, it is important to
celebrate the success of the organization without claiming victory to ensure that participants
realize there is work still to be completed (Kotter, 2012; Marks & Mirvis, 2011b).
Post-Combination Phase
With the integration phase of the merger or acquisition complete, the combined
organization must remain focused on reaching the desired end state of the integration and
maintaining the changes put in place during the combination period (Kaetzler et al., 2019;
Lakshman, 2011). The emphasis on maintaining change is described by Marks and Mirvis
(2011a) as refreezing, which aptly specifies the required behavior in order to achieve success. In
contrast to the relatively short length of the combination phase, the post-combination phase is
150
considerably longer and can extend to seven to 10 years to ensure that changes are entrenched in
the behavior of members of the organization (Kotter, 2007; Kotter, 2012, Lee et al., 2015).
During the post-combination phase, members of the organization often experience merger
syndrome (Marks & Mirvis, 2010). According to the literature, merger syndrome comes as a
result of long periods of stress and increased expectations and can take a significant toll on
employees detrimental to the success of the integration (Denison & Ko, 2016; Marks & Mirvis,
2011a; Sinkovics et al., 2011). Finally, when the desired end state has been reached, and all
changes have been institutionalized in the fabric of the organization, the merger or acquisition is
considered complete (Kotter, 2012; Lakshman, 2011).
151
Appendix B: Utrecht Work Engagement Scale
This study uses the work of Schaufeli and Bakker (2004) and the Utrecht Work
Engagement Scale (UWES) to define the concept of engagement. Schaufeli and Bakker (2004)
proposed that engagement can be defined as the opposite of burnout, and that three factors
including vigor, dedication, and absorption can be used to measure engagement. The UWES
scale targets these three factors with a variety of questions in an effective survey that has been
tested for accuracy by numerous studies (Mendes & Stander, 2011, Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004).
To administer the UWES survey, each of the 17 statements are read to the participant who
indicates how often, if at all they have the feeling. The scale contains answer of zero (never), one
(a few times a year or less), two (once a month or less), three (a few times a month), four (once a
week), five (a few times a week), and six (every day).
152
Table B1
Utrecht Work Engagement Scale
Statement Factor measured
1. At my work, I feel bursting with energy
Vigor
2. I find the work that I do full of meaning and purpose
Dedication
3. Time flies when I’m working
Absorption
4. At my job, I feel strong and vigorous
Vigor
5. I am enthusiastic about my job
Dedication
6. When I am working, I forget everything else around me
Absorption
7. My job inspires me
Dedication
8. When I get up in the morning, I feel like going to work
Vigor
9. I feel happy when I am working intensely
Absorption
10. I am proud on the work that I do
Dedication
11. I am immersed in my work
Absorption
12. I can continue working for very long periods at a time
Vigor
13. To me, my job is challenging
Dedication
14. I get carried away when I’m working
Absorption
15. At my job, I am very resilient mentally
Vigor
16. It is difficult to detach myself from my job
Absorption
17. At my work I always persevere, even when things do not go well
Vigor
Note. Adapted from “Utrecht Work Engagement Scale: Preliminary manual,” by W.B. Schaufeli
and A.B. Bakker, 2004, Utrecht University. Copyright 2003 by Schaufeli & Bakker.
153
Appendix C: Qualitative Interview Protocol
This study plans to incorporate 15 qualitative interviews of members of KSMG who were
part of an organization acquired by KH. To ensure that applicable experiences are discussed, and
the most insight is gained through the interviews, a purposeful sampling technique will be used
when selecting participants (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The interview process involves semi-
structured methodology (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). See the following introduction:
“Good morning Jane and thank you so much for agreeing to speak with me today! As I
mentioned previously, I am hoping to discuss your experiences of the acquisition process when
you joined Kershaw Health and the Koufax Supply Management Group, is that still okay with
you?”
“In order to later transcribe our conversation and best understand your answers to each
question, I will be recording our conversation, and taking notes. The recording and notes will all
be password protected and your identity will be protected to ensure complete confidentiality so
you can answer openly and honestly. Is that okay with you?”
“I also wanted to remind you that your participation in this interview is voluntary, and if
there are any questions you do not want to answer or you want to stop at any time that is fine. Do
you have any questions before we begin?”
154
Table C1
Interview Questions
Interview questions Potential probes Research question
crosswalk
KMO
influence
0. Could you please tell me a
bit about your history with
the organization and the
integration process?
1. Thinking back to when the
acquisition process started,
in what ways were you
familiar, if at all, with the
business practices, such as
principles, structures, and
business philosophies, of
the acquiring organization?
How long did it take to
get comfortable with
the business practices
of the acquiring
organization?
In what ways or at all
did you struggle with
learning?
If you struggled, were
there particular
principles, structures,
and business
philosophies that you
struggled with
understanding?
2 Knowledge:
conceptual
2. What are some examples of
resources that would help
employees during an
acquisition?
How were you able to
use these resources, if
at all, during the
acquisition process?
2 Knowledge:
conceptual
3. Tell me about some
specific processes and
procedures you learned
during the acquisition
process.
How did this knowledge
help to ensure your
ability to succeed, if
at all?
2 Knowledge:
procedural
4. When joining the new
organization what personal
strengths or weaknesses
helped you to be
successful?
2 Knowledge:
metacognitive
5. What aspects of the
integration process were
particularly challenging?
How did you use the
knowledge gained
during those
challenging aspects
throughout the rest of
the event?
2 Knowledge:
metacognitive
155
Interview questions Potential probes Research question
crosswalk
KMO
influence
6. What aspects of the
integration process, if any,
were energizing to you as
an employee?
How did you use that
energy to succeed
during the event?
1 Knowledge:
metacognitive
7. How did you feel about
your ability to succeed as
an employee in the new
organization?
Why did you feel this
way?
3 Motivation:
self-efficacy
8. What, if anything, made
you personally value
participating in the new
organization?
Why was this aspect(s)
valuable to you
personally?
2 Motivation:
value
9. Thinking back to when the
acquisition began (or was
announced), how would
you describe your interest
in succeeding in the new
organization?
What influenced this
level of interest in
succeeding in the new
organization?
2 Motivation:
interest
10. What aspects, if any, of
the acquiring organization
made you interested or
uninterested in succeeding
in the new organization?
How could aspects of
the acquiring
organization be
improved to increase
your interest in
succeeding in the new
organization?
2 Motivation:
interest
11. What, if anything, did the
acquiring organization do
to welcome you or other
acquired associates into the
new organization?
How did this/these
action(s) help you to
contribute as an
employee in the new
organization?
What could be done to
increase the welcome
process of acquired
employees into the
new organization?
3 Organization:
cultural model
12. What, if anything, did the
acquiring organization do
to integrate the cultures of
the combining
organizations?
How could these
strategies or activities
be improved to
integrate the
organizations better
culturally?
3 Organization:
Cultural
Setting
Influence 1
156
Interview questions Potential probes Research question
crosswalk
KMO
influence
13. How, if at all, did the
acquiring organization
provide success stories of
past integrations that
influenced your perception
that you could succeed in
the new organization?
What examples were
provided to illustrate
opportunities for
success?
If none, what examples
could have been
provided that would
have made you more
positively view your
potential success in
the combined
organization?
3 Organization:
Cultural
Setting
Influence 2
14. What, if anything, did the
acquiring organization do
to communicate the
responsibilities of acquired
associates during the
integration?
In what ways did the
acquiring
organization
communicate the
transition plan, if at
all, to acquired
employees?
How could this
communication
process be improved,
if at all?
3 Organization:
Cultural
Setting 3
15. What if anything, did the
acquiring organization do
to stimulate dedication of
acquired employees
towards the combined
organization?
1
16. What, if anything, did the
organization do to promote
a feeling of absorption into
the tasks that you were
asked to complete during
the integration?
1
17. During what parts of the
acquisition process, if any,
did you feel like you were
engaged in the integration?
Conversely, during what
parts of the
acquisition process, if
any, did you feel like
you were disengaged
in the integration?
1
157
Interview questions Potential probes Research question
crosswalk
KMO
influence
18. Is there anything about
your experience with the
acquisition process that I
have not asked that you
think is important to know?
158
Appendix D: Document Analysis Protocol
The documents that will be analyzed for this study include the following:
1. Memos created by Kershaw Health and the Koufax Supply Management Group to
announce the acquisition of another organization
2. Presentations created by the Koufax Supply Management Group for acquisition kick-off
Memo Prompts:
1. How does the memo address employee retention? (RQ3)
2. What next steps does the memo dictate to acquired employees? (RQ2, RQ3)
3. What is the intended audience of the memo? (RQ3)
4. Does the memo use welcoming language for the acquired employees? (RQ3)
Presentation Prompts:
1. What resources do Kershaw Health and the Koufax Supply Management Group highlight
in the presentation to engage acquired employees? (RQ2, RQ3)
2. Does the presentation address the cultural integration process? (RQ3)
3. How does the presentation attempt to motivate acquired employees to gain interest in the
acquisition process? (RQ3)
4. Does the presentation inspire confidence in the acquired employees ability to succeed in
the organization? (RQ3)
159
Appendix E: Critical Values Framework
Originally developed by Robert Quinn and Kim Cameron (1983), the CVF provides a
method of measuring organizational culture along two axes and four quadrants and has been used
by numerous researchers as a framework for organizational culture.
Figure E1
Critical Values Framework
Note. Adapted from “Organizational Life Cycles and Shifting Criteria of Effectiveness: Some
Preliminary Evidence,” by R.E. Quinn, and K. Cameron, 1983, Management Science, 29(1), 33–
51. Copyright 1983 by The Institute of Management Sciences.
160
Appendix F: Information Sheet for Exempt Research
STUDY TITLE: Acquired Employee Engagement: Exploring The Experience Of Acquired
Employees Within An Organization Following An Acquisition
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR: Skylar Morris
FACULTY ADVISOR: Dr. Jennifer Phillips
You are invited to participate in a research study. Your participation is voluntary. This
document explains information about this study. You should ask questions about anything that is
unclear to you.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this study is to explore the experience of acquired employees within an
organization following an acquisition to understand influences that impact employee
engagement. We hope to learn what supports are needed to improve productivity and retention of
acquired employees during future merger and acquisition processes. You are invited as a possible
participant because you were a part of an organization acquired by Kershaw Health over the last
10 years and are currently employed by Kershaw Health.
PARTICIPANT INVOLVEMENT
You will be asked to participate in an interview lasting approximately one hour, focused on your
experiences during the business acquisition process. The interview will be captured using the
Zoom platform with video recording based on your approval. If you do not wish to be recorded,
the interview will be completed without video recording.
161
If you decide to take part, you will be asked to provide your availability over the next few weeks
to complete the interview. On the day and time of the scheduled interview you will sign into the
zoom platform and participate in the interview.
CONFIDENTIALITY
Only me and the University of Southern California Institutional Review Board (IRB) may access
the data. The IRB reviews and monitors research studies to protect the rights and welfare of
research subjects.
When the results of the research are published or discussed in conferences, no identifiable
information will be used.
In order to ensure confidentiality, pseudonyms replace the names of all participants in the study,
documentation and recordings are password protected to ensure that identities are not exposed to
anyone beyond me, and all documentation is scrubbed prior to distribution to verify
confidentiality.
Interview data will be kept one year following the completion of the research study and then
deleted to reduce the potential for a breach of confidentiality.
Video recordings captured during the interview process will be deleted following the
transcription of the data no less than one week after the interview. If you would like to review
the video recording or transcription (whatever is available at the time of the request) you should
reach out to Skylar Morris (SkylarMo@usc.edu; (217) 494-1613) for a copy of the information.
162
INVESTIGATOR CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions about this study, please contact:
Skylar Morris (Investigator)
Email: SkylarMo@USC.edu
Phone: (217) 494-1613
Jennifer Phillips (Faculty Advisor)
Email: JLP62386@USC.edu
Phone: (662) 312-7367
IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions about your rights as a research participant, please contact the
University of Southern California Institutional Review Board at (323) 442-0114 or email
irb@usc.edu.
Abstract (if available)
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to explore the experience of acquired employees within an organization following an acquisition to understand influences that impact employee engagement. The study achieved its purpose by interviewing acquired employees and analyzing documents and artifacts. The Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis framework was used to determine the gap between current and desired performance levels among employees post-acquisition. The data analysis process helped to highlight assets of the organization including the operations playbook as a key source of procedural knowledge; the mission, vision and values as a source of value for acquired employees; on-site participation of members of the acquiring organization; and a culture of acceptance towards the contributions of acquired employees. Alternatively, gaps within the organization were found during the data analysis process, including a lack of use of industry best practices in merging cultures to promote engagement during integration, a failure to highlight model examples of engaged acquired employees from previous integrations, and a lack of vision of the future state resulting in acquired employees not truly understanding their responsibility in the acquiring organization. Four recommendations were developed to address the gaps discovered. These recommendations include the use of the competing values framework during the pre-combination phase, utilizing facility visits and the “lend-a-hand” program to ensure that acquired employees have a vision of the future state, creating an onboarding packet with job aids for acquired employees, and highlighting model examples of engaged acquired employees during the acquisition process.
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Keeping virtual team members engaged in their roles: an impossible task or a paramount necessity for an increasingly globalized world
PDF
Addressing employee retention in the technology industry: improving access to corporate social responsibility programs
PDF
Building employee engagement through human resources transition planning in mergers and acquisitions
PDF
Leadership in times of crisis management: an analyzation for success
PDF
Early to mid-career employee development: an exploratory study
PDF
Addressing physician burnout: is there a relationship with leadership behaviors?
PDF
Increasing workplace civility in higher education: a field study
PDF
Influencing and motivating employee engagement: an exploratory study on employee engagement in organizational injury-prevention programs
PDF
Lean construction through craftspeople engagement: an evaluation study
PDF
Role understanding as a pillar of employee engagement: an evaluation gap analysis
PDF
Factors influencing first-term naval aviator career continuation: a gap analysis
PDF
The path to satisfaction, connection, and persistence: implementing a strategic and structured employee onboarding program: an innovation study
PDF
The lack of gender diversity in executive leadership ranks within higher education
PDF
Clearing the way: pathways to retention of women in engineering
PDF
Supporting the marching arts: the salience of parent volunteer booster training
PDF
Corporate America after Ursula Burns: building a pipeline of Black female executives
PDF
Recruiting police diversity
PDF
Employee standardization for interchangeability across states: an improvement study
PDF
Achieving the educational mission: are Connecticut K-12 school nurses valued?
PDF
Executive succession planning: a study of employee competency development
Asset Metadata
Creator
Morris, Skylar Martin
(author)
Core Title
Exploring the experience of acquired employees within an organization following acquisition
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)
Degree Conferral Date
2021-12
Publication Date
11/08/2021
Defense Date
11/08/2021
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
engagement,mergers and acquisitions,OAI-PMH Harvest,organization
Format
application/pdf
(imt)
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Phillips, Jennifer (
committee chair
), Donato, Adrian (
committee member
), Wilcox, Alexandra (
committee member
)
Creator Email
Skylarmo@usc.edu,skylarmorris91@gmail.com
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC16659547
Unique identifier
UC16659547
Legacy Identifier
etd-MorrisSkyl-10208
Document Type
Dissertation
Format
application/pdf (imt)
Rights
Morris, Skylar Martin
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Access Conditions
The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright. The original signature page accompanying the original submission of the work to the USC Libraries is retained by the USC Libraries and a copy of it may be obtained by authorized requesters contacting the repository e-mail address given.
Repository Name
University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location
USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA
Repository Email
cisadmin@lib.usc.edu
Tags
mergers and acquisitions
organization