2025 Year-in-Review: What This Year Taught Us About M&A, Leadership, Blockchain & the Future of Work

/in , ,

2025 was a year of clarity.

A year where integration leaders started saying out loud what many have felt privately for years: post-deal success isn’t about the slide deck — it’s about the operators who show up on Day 1 and actually build the new company.

Across dozens of conversations on M&A+ The Art After the Deal, we broke down what really drives value in transition, what derails integrations, and why the industry is undergoing a shift toward practicality, intelligence, and human-centered leadership.

This year’s guests—operators, legal experts, procurement strategists, technology innovators, and blockchain leaders—revealed a shared theme:

M&A is entering a new era: faster deals, more carve-outs, higher complexity, and a rising convergence between traditional corporate integration and emerging digital-asset infrastructure.

Here are the key learnings of 2025.

1. Integration Is Not Project Management — It’s Architecture

One of the biggest takeaways from this year is that integration leaders are no longer simply “project managing” a deal. They are architecting a new operating model while stabilizing the old one.

Guests like Aaron Mikulsky and Don Yakulis emphasized that true integration requires:

  • Real sequencing, not wishful timelines
  • A foundation built before acceleration
  • The ability to see both the entire company and the interdependencies that define it

The message was clear: checklists don’t integrate companies — people who can anticipate consequences do.

2. Carve-outs Are the New Normal — and They Demand a Different Skillset

With mega-firms and private equity increasing carve-outs in 2025, we saw a surge in:

  • Transition Services Agreements (TSAs)
  • Standalone readiness efforts
  • Operational disentanglement
  • Regulatory and data-privacy complexity

Our discussions revealed that carve-outs succeed only when someone owns the messy middle—contracts, data, legal, procurement, back office, and the invisible systems most companies underestimate.

This is where the industry’s top operators shine.

3. The Future of M&A Belongs to Operators, Not Theorists

Several guests, from Visa to Microsoft to PayPal to SAP veterans, reiterated that the era of over-engineered frameworks is fading.

What’s replacing it?

  • Hands-on execution.
  • Honest risk assessment.
  • Clear decision rights.
  • Rapid problem solving.

A recurring insight:

Integration is a human sport. The people who can calm chaos, align teams, and push decisions forward are the ones who create real value.

4. Value Creation Is Shifting Toward Long-Tail Operational Excellence

This year reinforced that the real value isn’t captured in the first 100 days. It’s captured in:

  • Contract optimization
  • Procurement strategy
  • Data privacy and security hygiene
  • Vendor consolidation
  • Workforce integration
  • Operational modernization

In other words: what happens after the deal closes matters more than the deal itself.

This has been the biggest shift in private equity expectations in 2025.

5. AI Is Quietly Transforming M&A Behind the Scenes

This was the year AI went from “interesting” to “operationally essential.”

Our guests highlighted how AI now accelerates:

  • Contract analytics
  • Pre-integration discovery
  • TSA assessment
  • Clause extraction
  • Cross-functional risk modeling
  • Due diligence insights

But we also heard the caution:

AI is a multiplier — not a replacement.

It enhances great operators; it cannot compensate for weak ones.

6. Leadership in M&A Requires Humility, Strength, and Self-Reflection

Unexpectedly, this was one of the strongest themes across nearly every conversation.

Whether discussing talent retention, navigating fear during transitions, or managing cross-functional conflict, our guests acknowledged:

  • Great leaders over-communicate
  • They admit what they don’t know
  • They lead with steadiness, not ego
  • They elevate people’s strengths rather than force conformity

2025 reminded us that integrations don’t fail for technical reasons — they fail for human ones.

7. Crypto, Blockchain & the New Digital Frontier Are Reshaping M&A

This year also marked a pivotal turn toward the digitization of value, bringing crypto and blockchain out of the fringe and squarely into mainstream M&A conversations.

Episodes featuring blockchain leaders and policy experts revealed:

  • Tokenization is coming to contracts, vendors, assets, invoices, and supply chains.
  • Smart contracts will eventually reduce the operational drag of traditional TSAs.
  • On-chain auditability is set to transform compliance and risk tracking.
  • Digital custody and treasury strategy are becoming essential conversations for enterprises and portfolio companies.
  • Private equity firms are exploring blockchain-based operational efficiencies they can apply across their portfolios.

A key takeaway:

We are entering an era where legacy systems and emerging decentralized systems will coexist — and M&A operators will need fluency in both.

This is not a crypto story.

This is a corporate modernity story.

2025 was the first year M&A leaders openly acknowledged that blockchain isn’t speculative — it’s inevitable.

8. The Industry Is Getting Faster — and More Human

Deals are closing faster. Transitions are compressing. Expectations are rising.

But something else is happening too:

Leaders are becoming more open, more candid, and more willing to share what actually works.

Our conversations this year captured a turning point — a shift toward community, transparency, and collaboration across companies, regions, and industries.

2025 was the year M&A became more human.

2025 Episode List + Links

From Resilience to Leadership: Ivan Golubic on Bridging Gaps in M&A

Guest: Ivan Golubic. He has worked across several large companies: previously in corporate-development / M&A roles at Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company, and also earlier in his career at companies like Whirlpool Corporation, Deloitte, and Ford Motor Company. Ivan shares how his career across finance, operations, and cross-border dealmaking shaped his philosophy of resilience in leadership. He breaks down how M&A leaders can bridge cultural, strategic, and communication gaps—especially in high-stakes integrations. The episode emphasizes people-first transformation during periods of intense change.

From Chaos to Clarity: Best Practices in M&A Integration

Guest: Don Yakuilis is a Global M&A Integration Executive Leader and has worked at corporations such as Light and Wonder, Visa and SAP. He has also provided M&A consulting services at KPMG. This episode distills best practices for turning messy or fast-moving acquisitions into structured, successful integrations. You cover alignment, early decision-making, communications discipline, and how leaders can create clarity for teams when timelines and information are uncertain.

Tech, Transformation & M&A: Lessons in Execution with Michael Richards

Guest: Michael Richards. Michael is a transformational leader with deep expertise in private equity, technology, and software. His background includes senior leadership roles (CFO, COO, Chief Transformation Officer at major firms including Symphony Technology Group. In this episode, Michael discusses the intersection of technology transformation and M&A execution—what actually derails integrations and what enables them to succeed. He shares lessons from working with complex systems, global teams, and large-scale change programs, highlighting how tech strategy must support the business narrative of the deal.

M&A Moves That Matter: Leading with Questions in Times of Change with Bob Tiede

Guest: Bob Tiede. Bob Tiede is a leadership expert and author, known for his work on effective leadership through questioning. Publications include “Great Leaders Ask Questions” and “Now That’s a Great Question”. In this episode, Bob introduces his signature “Leading with Questions” framework and applies it to M&A environments. He explains how curiosity-driven leadership improves trust, reduces resistance, and accelerates alignment during restructurings, integrations, or major organizational shifts.

Decision-Ready Boards, Growth Mindset, and the Fog of Change – with Tom Doorley

Guest: Tom Doorley. Tom Doorley is founder of Sage Partners and co-founder of Braxton Associates. He is a long-time advisor to boards and large companies. Tom breaks down how boards and executives can stay “decision-ready” when faced with incomplete data, shifting markets, and organizational fog. He also explores growth mindset as a practical tool for leaders navigating disruptive change, M&A pipelines, and strategic pivots.

Crypto’s Next Frontier: Policy, Power & M&A with Lee Bratcher

Guest: Lee Bratcher. Lee is the Founder and President of Texas Blockchain Council (TBC). Under his leadership, the TBC counts 75+ member companies and has been influential in shaping blockchain and crypto-related policy and regulation in Texas. Lee also serves as a Captain in the U.S. Army Reserves, working as a “Tech Scout” for the 75th Innovation Command. Lee explores the rapidly evolving crypto landscape—from state-level policy initiatives to national regulatory pressures. He explains how these forces are shaping the next generation of digital-asset M&A, and why institutions are moving from experimentation into strategic acquisition.

From Tax Partner to Bitcoin Builder: Tim Savage on Value Creation Post-M&A

Guest: Tim Savage. Tim Savage is a CPA and Tax Partner at Weaver, where he leads the firm’s Blockchain & Digital Assets practice. In this role, he works at the intersection of tax, crypto, and M&A, reflecting a shift from traditional tax practice into digital-asset tax advisory. Tim discusses his shift from a traditional tax career into the Bitcoin and digital-asset ecosystem. He highlights how value creation principles apply to post-merger environments in this sector, including governance, capital allocation, and the challenges of scaling emerging-technology businesses.

From DOJ to Digital Assets: Joshua Smeltzer on Deals, Courts & Crypto

Guest: Joshua Smeltzer. Joshua Smeltzer is a Texas-based attorney specializing in tax and digital assets. He is currently a partner at Gray Reed law firm. Publicly he writes about crypto, taxation and regulatory issues, often for outlets like Forbes. Joshua shares how his background at the U.S. Department of Justice informs his work in the digital-asset and crypto legal space. He examines regulatory enforcement, litigation risk, and how these realities shape dealmaking, valuations, and structuring in crypto-focused acquisitions.

AI, Law & the Deal: Rob Taylor on Risk, IP, and Post-Merger Reality

Guest: Rob Taylor. Rob is a tech-lawyer focused on AI, IP, risk and post-merger legal reality. He is currently Of Counsel at Carstens, Allen and Gourley and a co-founder of NXTsolve. Rob dives into the legal and IP complexities emerging at the intersection of AI and M&A. He unpacks risk management, data rights, and the IP pitfalls that often surface only after a merger closes. The episode blends AI practicality with post-deal legal realities.

Closing Message

As we look toward 2026, the mission of M&A+ The Art After the Deal remains clear:

  • Make the invisible work visible.
  • Elevate the operators.
  • Lean into the future — including blockchain, digital assets, and AI.
  • Show how real integration gets done.

Thank you for being part of this journey — and for pushing the industry forward with me.

Here’s to another year of clarity, execution, innovation, and value creation.

— Lisa Scott

CEO, In2edge

Host, M&A+ The Art After the Deal

AI Is No Longer a Side Project: What M&A Operators Need to See Before and After the Deal

/in , ,

If you’re an operating partner or deal professional, you’ve probably heard some version of:

“Don’t worry, we’re already using AI.”

“We’ve got an AI governance committee.”

“Our vendor will indemnify us if anything goes wrong.”

Those three sentences should not make you feel better.

AI has moved beyond “innovation theater.” It’s now embedded in revenue engines, underwriting models, pricing tools, hiring platforms, customer service, and back-office processes. For M&A professionals, that means AI is now part of enterprise value—and part of the risk surface you’re taking on every time you close a deal.

The question is no longer: Are they using AI?

The right question is: How? Where? With what guardrails? And at whose risk?

This article is about how to think like an operator in an AI world—before and after the ink dries.

1. Stop Asking “Do You Use AI?” and Start Asking “Where Is AI in the Critical Path?”

Almost every portfolio company will say they’re using AI somewhere: marketing copy, a chatbot, maybe a sales tool. That’s not helpful.

For M&A operators, the key is to find where AI actually touches the critical path of the business:

  • Revenue: Is AI scoring leads, setting prices, making credit decisions, or prioritizing outreach?
  • Operations: Is it routing tickets, automating workflows, monitoring systems, or reading contracts?
  • People: Is AI screening resumes, ranking candidates, or making promotion or compensation recommendations?
  • Product: Is AI embedded into the core platform delivered to customers?

Where AI is “nice to have,” you have more time and optionality.

Where AI is in the critical path, it becomes a due diligence and integration priority.

Operator’s question set:

  • “Show me the top 3 workflows where AI is already essential.”
  • “If we turned off all AI tomorrow, what breaks first—revenue, operations, or customer experience?”
  • “Who owns these AI-enabled processes today—not the tool, the outcome?

2. AI Risk Isn’t Theoretical Anymore—It’s Operational

Many management teams still think of AI risk as abstract: hallucinations, generic bias, or “someday we might get regulated.”

From an operator’s seat, AI risk is much more concrete:

  • Bad decisions at scale – A flawed model can deny the right customers, misprice contracts, or quietly push the wrong candidates out of the hiring funnel.
  • Invisible bias – The team thinks they’ve “scrubbed” protected characteristics, yet the model learns to discriminate through proxies (schools, zip codes, etc.).
  • Data leakage & IP exposure – Shadow AI use (free tools, unsanctioned apps) silently moves sensitive information outside the company’s control.
  • Regulatory and litigation exposure – Employment claims, consumer protection actions, state AG investigations, or future AI-specific enforcement.

Most of these risks show up post-deployment, after the solution is in production and people begin relying on it. That’s why “we tested a POC and it worked great” is not enough.

Operator’s question set:

  • “What decisions has AI actually changed in the last 90 days?”
  • “How do you test for bias, error, or drift over time—not just at launch?”
  • “Who is responsible for shutting an AI system down if it misbehaves?”

3. Due Diligence: You Can’t Assess Risk You Don’t Understand

There’s a dangerous pattern in deals right now:

  • The tech team says, “It’s just an LLM, nothing special.”
  • The legal team says, “We got an indemnity clause, we’re covered.”
  • The operators assume the risk is under control.

In reality, you can’t meaningfully assess AI risk if you stay at the slideware level. Someone on the diligence team (internal or external) needs to dive into the actual solution:

  • What data is being ingested? From where? Under what rights or consents?
  • What models are being used (proprietary, third-party, fine-tuned)? Under what licenses?
  • Where are outputs going? Do they feed other systems, or retrain models downstream?
  • Who is monitoring performance, bias, and unexpected behavior over time?

This doesn’t mean operators need to become engineers. It means you need people on your team who can sit with the engineers and actually follow the threads.

Operator’s question set:

  • “Walk me through this AI solution end-to-end like I’m a new hire responsible for it.”
  • “Which external providers do you depend on—and what happens if they change their terms?”
  • “If we wanted to unwind or replace this AI component, how hard would that be?”

4. Indemnities Don’t Replace Oversight

One of the most common myths is:

“If we’re using a third-party AI solution, we’re safe as long as the vendor indemnifies us.”

In practice:

  • Most vendors will narrow their indemnities as much as possible.
  • Even with good contractual protection, regulators and courts increasingly expect deployers (the company using the AI) to exercise care and oversight.
  • You can’t outsource your duty to monitor how a system behaves on your data, in your environment, with your customers and employees.

From an M&A and operating perspective, that means:

  • You still need governance: approved tools, clear rules, human-in-the-loop where it matters.
  • You still need logging, monitoring, and escalation pathways.
  • You still need to show you took reasonable steps to prevent harm.

Indemnities can help with who pays, but they do not erase who’s responsible.

Operator’s question set:

  • “What are we personally on the hook to monitor with this solution?”
  • “Where is the human-in-the-loop today, and where are we considering removing it?”
  • “If regulators or plaintiffs asked for our AI governance story, what would we actually show them?”

5. Integration: AI Is a Change Management Problem, Not Just a Tech One

Post-close, AI can be a huge unlock:

  • Faster onboarding of new teams and customers
  • Smarter and more consistent contract review
  • Streamlined support and back-office processes
  • Better visibility across the combined data landscape

But there are also hidden integration costs:

  • Conflicting tools and policies – One company has sanctioned solutions and guidelines; the other has shadow AI everywhere.
  • Duplication and drift – Multiple models solving similar problems, each trained differently, each with its own risk and behavior.
  • Talent friction – Some teams are excited by AI; others are resistant, frustrated, or afraid.

An integration plan that treats AI as “just another system” will miss the bigger picture: AI changes how people work, how decisions are made, and how value is created (or destroyed).

Operator’s question set:

  • “Which AI-enabled processes do we standardize first across the combined entity?”
  • “Where do we need clear, simple guardrails so people know what’s allowed?”
  • “What training or communication do leaders need so they don’t default to either blind fear or blind adoption?”

Where This Leaves M&A Operators

For operating partners and M&A professionals, AI doesn’t require you to become a data scientist.

It does require you to:

  1. Treat AI as part of core enterprise value, not a side experiment.
  2. Demand specificity—about use cases, data, risk, and accountability.
  3. Pull AI into your playbooks—from diligence checklists to integration plans and board reporting.
  4. Bring in the right expertise—legal, technical, and operational—early enough to shape decisions, not just paper over them.

AI is here, with or without governance. The operators who lean in now—ask better questions, design thoughtful guardrails, and connect AI to real-world outcomes—will quietly create a new edge in value creation.

And that’s exactly what the art after the deal is all about.

If you’d like to go deeper on this topic, I recently sat down with Rob Taylor, JD, Of Counsel and Head of the AI Triage Center at Carstens, Allen & Gourley, to talk through real-world AI risk, due diligence, and where the law is heading. You can listen to that episode of M&A+: The Art After the Deal link below.

And as always, if you’re facing a transition or integration where AI, contracts, and operations are colliding, my team at In2Edge is in the business of making sure the “after the deal” actually works.

When One Person Holds Up Progress: Why Structured Consultants Become Long-Term Partners

/in , ,

In every transition or carve-out, the success of the project depends on more than just the playbooks and timelines—it depends on the people at the table. Even the best-designed process can stall when a single individual creates roadblocks, delays decisions, or resists collaboration.

We’ve all seen it. A project that should move quickly suddenly slows down. A bottleneck forms because one person refuses to align, or simply lacks the structure and discipline required to manage complexity. Procurement and contract transitions, in particular, are highly vulnerable—where every week of delay translates into higher costs, missed savings, and frustrated stakeholders.

Why People Matter as Much as Process

That’s why the type of people executing a transition is just as important as the process itself. A structured, professional consultant brings something critical: the ability to cut through noise, keep the team aligned, and drive steady progress no matter how challenging the dynamics may be. Over time, this professionalism and consistency build trust—not only with the client’s executives, but also with the portfolio companies who experience the difference firsthand.

Jim Collins, in his classic book Good to Great, wrote about “getting the right people on the bus.” The same lesson applies in M&A transitions. The right people don’t just execute tasks—they set the tone for collaboration, bring clarity where there is uncertainty, and keep momentum when others hesitate. The wrong person, even if technically capable, can hold up an entire project.

Lessons from the Field: Big Firms vs. Boutique Specialists

Large consulting firms know this too. Bain & Company, for example, often emphasizes putting A-players on integration teams because they understand that speed and structure are as valuable as strategy.

Accenture offers another instructive case. On a complex carve-out, they stepped in with structured program managers who brought clarity and order where one internal stakeholder had been creating delays. The difference was immediate, momentum picked back up, milestones were met, and the client took notice. That structured approach earned Accenture more business in the long run, while the individual who had been blocking progress quietly exited. The lesson was clear: structured consultants create efficiency, and inefficiency eventually eliminates itself.

Boutique firms like In2edge deliver the same level of structure and execution discipline—but without the unnecessary cost or bureaucracy. That’s why private equity sponsors increasingly look to specialists who know how to move fast, scale resources up or down, and adapt to the dynamics of a live deal.

The Long-Term Payoff

At In2edge, we’ve seen it repeatedly: structured consultants who combine expertise with process discipline become the long-term partners our clients turn to deal after deal. Because when you have the right team in place, efficiency goes up, cost goes down, and results follow naturally.

It’s a reminder that in carve-outs and transitions, you don’t just need someone in the seat. You need the right person—someone who brings clarity instead of chaos, structure instead of delays, and partnership instead of politics.

Tax Strategy, Digital Assets, and the Future of M&A: A Conversation with Tim Savage

/in , ,

In our latest episode of M&A+ The Art After the Deal, I had the pleasure of speaking with Tim Savage, Tax Partner at Weaver, who also leads the firm’s Blockchain and Digital Assets practice. With more than 14 years of experience advising public companies, closely held businesses, and investment funds, Tim brings a rare blend of technical tax expertise and forward-thinking leadership in digital finance.

This conversation was rich with insights for dealmakers navigating today’s fast-changing landscape. Here are a few of the key takeaways:

Tax Strategy as a Value Lever in M&A

Tim emphasized that tax isn’t just a compliance exercise—it’s a driver of value in mergers and acquisitions. Thoughtful tax structuring can materially impact deal outcomes, reduce risk, and create new opportunities for buyers and sellers. Especially in uncertain economic times, getting the tax strategy right can be the difference between a good deal and a great one.

Digital Assets in the Deal Process

A standout point from our discussion was the role of digital assets in M&A. Acquiring a company that holds cryptocurrency, tokens, or blockchain-based IP adds new layers of complexity—particularly around custody transfer, valuation, and regulatory compliance. Tim underscored that deal teams must plan for these challenges early, as failing to address them can lead to post-close headaches or even value erosion.

Stagflation and Resilience

Tim also shared his perspective on macroeconomic conditions, particularly the risks of stagflation—a mix of stagnant growth and inflation. For dealmakers, this environment demands a greater focus on resilience, diversification, and careful scenario planning. Buyers and investors alike need to think not just about immediate synergies, but also about how a business can withstand economic turbulence.

The New Economy Mindset

Finally, Tim noted that the companies thriving in today’s landscape are those thinking ahead—integrating digital finance, exploring blockchain applications, and treating tax strategy as a source of competitive advantage. In his words, “the future belongs to those who prepare for it, not those who wait to react.”

Podcast

🎧 Listen to the full conversation with Tim Savage here: YouTube

At In2edge, we see these themes play out daily in carve-outs and integrations. Whether it’s contract clarity, transition execution, or helping clients navigate new frontiers like digital assets, our mission is to make complexity simple and turn strategy into outcomes.

Why Carve-Out Success Starts with Strategic Structure

/in , ,

Carve-outs are among the most compelling—yet risky—value opportunities in private equity. A deep dive into 25 carve-outs completed between 2013 and 2024 by Bain & Company revealed a striking insight: top-performing deals are those where the value-creation thesis is built into the operational structure of the new entity, not added as an afterthought. In other words, the most successful carve-outs intentionally align the strategic driver with the way the new company is designed.

The Cost of “Separate First, Fix Later”

Many carve-outs follow a common but flawed two-step model: first stand up the new entity, then worry about linking it to strategic outcomes. Bain warns this approach merely layers “complexity on top of complexity,” draining momentum, introducing misalignment, and putting value at risk.

In contrast, high-return sponsors embed value delivery into the structure itself:

  • During due diligence, they define a value-creation plan (VCP) intertwined with operational requirements.
  • They align document handoffs, contract assignments, and process blueprints around strategic moves—ensuring Day 1 readiness isn’t just operational, but strategic.

Strategic Structure Drives Better Outcomes

When structure echoes strategy, carve-out performance improves materially:

  1. Strategic operational continuity – Critical contracts, vendor agreements, and systems transition coherently, minimizing service disruptions and compliance risk.
  2. Faster time-to-value – Teams move from “keeping the lights on” to growth execution quickly, supported by governance, contract clarity, and compliance baked in.
  3. Risk mitigation built-in – Thoughtful mapping of contracts (customer, supplier, licensed IP) ensures nothing falls through the cracks.

Bain reiterates: deals built this way don’t just “go live”—they thrive, backed by structural alignment to value.

What This Means for Operating Partners

If you’re guiding carve-outs, the imperative is clear: validate not just the deal thesis—but also how the new entity is structured to deliver on it.

Success requires frameworks that include:

  • A contract triage process that preserves value and avoids renegotiation;
  • Procurement frameworks separating legacy dependencies while supporting speed;
  • Process and systems classifiers ensuring cash collection, invoicing, and payroll continue seamlessly;
  • Blueprints for compliance and governance tied to strategic KPIs—not just legacy obligations.

Bringing It Home: In2Edge’s Strategic Edge

At In2Edge, we turn theory into execution. We build carve-outs not as stand-alone projects, but as purpose-built structures aligned to value thesis and operational clarity.

  • We map and prioritize contract flows, identifying which agreements need rewrite, realignment, or seamless assignment for continued performance.
  • We enable procurement continuity, isolating legacy sourcing funnels and standing up independent vendor relationships without delay.
  • We integrate compliance protocols early, embedding DPAs, privacy obligations, and metadata governance proactively—not reactively.

In short, we don’t just manage carve-outs—we design and build them to win.

Final Thought

If you’ve been operating under the assumption that carve-outs succeed based on price or agility alone—think again.

As Bain’s research shows, value isn’t unlocked post-operational setup—it’s baked into it. A rigid structure aligned to strategic drivers is the only way to ensure carve-outs don’t just survive—but become high-performing portfolio companies.

Click here for the full Bain Article

In2Edge at a Glance

In2Edge builds carve-outs that mirror your value-creation plan—by designing contracts, procurement, governance, and execution from Day 0. We don’t just deliver model after carve-out. We deliver operational success that lasts.

The Death of Executive Presence: Why Adaptability Beats Authority in the AI Era

/in , ,

For decades, leadership was measured by something called “executive presence.” It was the polished confidence, the ability to command a room, and the aura of authority that made people listen—even when substance was thin. If you could speak with certainty, hold the posture, and project gravitas, you were often rewarded with influence and advancement.

But the rules have changed. AI has flipped the equation.

The Old Model: Authority Over Execution

The old executive presence model thrived on hierarchy. Leaders didn’t need to execute with precision—they needed to set direction, inspire confidence, and appear in control. The “doers” were usually lower in the org chart, carrying out the vision with little recognition.

That separation worked in a slower world, where information was scarce and experience equaled advantage. But today, AI collapses those gaps. Anyone with the right tools can surface insights, automate execution, and deliver results faster than traditional leadership chains ever allowed.

The New Reality: Results Over Rhetoric

AI has exposed the hollowness of presence without adaptability. The people who cling to the old model—confident, resistant to change, convinced their polish still holds weight—are being outpaced by employees who are simply faster learners and sharper executors.

Your assistant who builds a polished deck in hours with AI? She’s more valuable than the high-priced “strategist” who takes weeks and still delivers average work.

The junior analyst who leverages AI to model scenarios in minutes? He outshines the manager who spends days poring over spreadsheets.

The playing field has tilted. It’s not about who talks the loudest. It’s about who delivers, and AI puts execution power directly into the hands of the doers.

The Paradox of Confidence

Many strong, “know-it-all” leader types will not adapt. Their confidence—once their greatest strength—is now their greatest liability. They double down on what worked before, projecting authority while falling further behind.

Meanwhile, the adaptive ones—often less polished but more curious—are reshaping the definition of leadership. They ask: How can I use these tools to solve problems faster, smarter, better? And then they do it.

Why This Matters for Companies

This shift isn’t just cultural—it’s financial. Companies that cling to the old model risk slower execution, higher costs, and missed opportunities. Those that embrace AI-driven adaptability see:

  • Faster cycle times: decisions move at the speed of information, not the speed of hierarchy.
  • Better margins: cost leakages are caught early, inefficiencies removed.
  • Smarter leadership pipelines: rising talent proves value through results, not rhetoric.

In short: the AI-enabled workforce doesn’t wait for permission. They create clarity, move fast, and deliver measurable outcomes.

The New Differentiator: Adaptive Execution

In this new era, the differentiator isn’t presence—it’s adaptability. The ability to learn, experiment, and apply AI to real business challenges will define the leaders of tomorrow.

“Executive presence” is no longer enough. Confidence without execution is hollow. True leadership will belong to those who pair vision with speed, authority with adaptability, and presence with proof.

Closing thought:

The age of AI has made one thing clear: the era of leadership by projection is over. Results have replaced rhetoric. And the leaders who fail to adapt will soon find their presence no longer commands the room—it empties it.

From Chaos to Confidence: Why Carve-Out Success Hinges on Embedded Execution

/in , ,

Carve-outs are high-stakes, high-speed events. Every operating partner knows this. But while most firms focus heavily on due diligence and deal close, the true value creation—or erosion—happens in the messy, complex middle: the transition.

That’s where we live.

At In2Edge, we’ve spent years in the trenches of post-close transitions, embedded directly into carve-outs across industries. And here’s what we’ve learned: the difference between a struggling carve-out and a thriving portfolio company isn’t just leadership or capital. It’s execution infrastructure.

The Problem with the Traditional Model

In the typical carve-out scenario, there’s a flurry of activity to stand up a new business:

  • Contracts must be assigned or recreated
  • Privacy and compliance obligations must be documented and mapped
  • Procurement has to separate from shared systems and build a standalone vendor ecosystem
  • Business units are scrambling to meet TSA deadlines without breaking continuity

And yet, too often, this transition work is treated as administrative. It’s handed to internal teams already stretched thin—or worse, farmed out to law firms that are excellent at drafting, but not at driving outcomes.

This is where deals stumble.

Embedded Execution Is the Advantage

What we’ve seen firsthand is that carve-outs succeed when they treat transition not as a burden, but as a strategic accelerator.

When you embed specialized operators from day one—experts in contracts, legal operations, procurement frameworks, and privacy compliance—you don’t just check the boxes. You create a foundation for performance.

Here’s what that looks like in practice:

  • Customer and vendor contracts are triaged, transitioned, and streamlined with consistent clause positioning—reducing risk and renegotiation.
  • Procurement playbooks and “starter” policies are created for newly independent teams—so sourcing doesn’t grind to a halt.
  • Privacy compliance is embedded early with DPA and PIA protocols, often before the portfolio company even builds its legal team.
  • Executive teams receive clean reporting, simplified dashboards, and visibility across contract status and critical obligations.
  • And when applicable, AI-ready metadata is structured from the beginning—paving the way for smarter portfolio governance.

It’s not magic. It’s a repeatable process, born from working across carve-outs of all shapes and sizes.

The Proof Is in the Portfolio

We’ve now supported numerous carve-outs where the portfolio company is not only surviving—but thriving. Not one failure. Not one fire drill six months post-close. Just solid, functional businesses that are growing from a strong operational core.

When that pattern repeats across deals, it’s not luck. It’s structure.

Why Operating Partners Should Care

If you’re an operating partner looking across your pipeline, you might be asking:

  • How do we shorten the time to standalone?
  • How can we reduce the legal and operational noise so management can focus on growth?
  • How do we prepare for AI, audit, and exit readiness from day one?

The answer is embedded execution.

It’s faster, more cost-effective, and often far more scalable than internalizing every function or hiring Big Law to backfill what portfolio companies can’t yet do. It’s also why some firms are now standardizing this approach as part of their post-close playbook.

Looking Ahead: Beyond the Transition

What’s also exciting is that firms are now expanding beyond the carve-out phase, asking us to support:

  • Customer agreement reviews to enable faster GTM motions
  • Procurement 101 toolkits to mature sourcing at speed
  • Use cases for AI that go beyond buzzwords—think contract analysis, DPA flagging, and supplier trend detection

That’s the future of value creation. Transition is just the starting line.

Final Thought

If your firm is managing carve-outs—or planning for one—ask yourself this:

“Do we have an execution partner that brings structure, scale, and embedded accountability on Day 1?”

If the answer is no, the opportunity cost might be greater than you think.

At In2Edge, we’re not just building processes. We’re helping build successful companies.

Let’s talk.

Leveraging Procurement Agreements and Contract Data in Private Equity: A Strategic Imperative

/in ,

In the high-stakes world of private equity (PE), the strategic management of procurement agreements and contract data across portfolio companies can significantly influence overall investment success. Yet, the extent to which PE firms are harnessing this potential varies widely, with some firms leading the charge in strategic procurement management, while others are yet to tap into this reservoir of value.

The Current Landscape

The integration and strategic management of procurement agreements across portfolio companies present a formidable opportunity for PE firms to drive cost synergies, enhance operational efficiencies, and unlock hidden value. Despite this, the practice is not universally adopted. The challenge often lies in the complexities of aggregating, analyzing, and leveraging contract data that is disparate, unstructured, and housed across multiple entities with varying degrees of technological sophistication.

The Untapped Potential

For PE firms that invest the effort to track and understand the terms and conditions of suppliers across their portfolio companies, the rewards can be substantial:

Cost Reduction and Synergy Realization

By consolidating procurement volumes and negotiating more favorable terms based on the aggregated demand, PE firms can achieve significant cost reductions. Furthermore, understanding overlapping suppliers across portfolio companies allows for the renegotiation of contracts under more favorable terms, driving direct bottom-line impact.

Risk Mitigation 

Centralized visibility into contract terms across portfolio companies enables PE firms to identify and mitigate risks associated with supplier dependencies, contractual liabilities, and compliance issues. This proactive approach to risk management can safeguard against potential disruptions and financial liabilities.

Strategic Supplier Relationships 

An in-depth understanding of procurement agreements facilitates the development of strategic supplier relationships, enabling PE firms to negotiate not just on price, but on value-add services, innovation, and flexibility – factors that can contribute significantly to competitive advantage.

Data-Driven Insights

Leveraging advanced analytics on contract data can provide PE firms with insights into spending patterns, contract lifecycle management, and supplier performance. These insights can inform strategic decisions, from identifying cost-saving opportunities to guiding post-merger integration strategies.

The Cost of Inaction

PE firms that overlook the strategic management of procurement agreements and contract data risk leaving significant value on the table. The lack of a centralized procurement strategy can result in fragmented purchasing activities, suboptimal contract terms, and missed opportunities for cost synergies. Additionally, inadequate oversight of contract terms and supplier relationships can expose portfolio companies to increased operational and compliance risks.

Embracing the Opportunity

To capitalize on the opportunities presented by strategic procurement management, PE firms need to:

– Implement technology solutions that enable the aggregation, analysis, and management of contract data across portfolio companies.

– Develop centralized procurement capabilities that can drive strategic negotiations and manage supplier relationships at scale.

– Foster a culture of collaboration and information sharing across portfolio companies to maximize synergistic opportunities.

– Leverage data analytics to inform procurement strategies, identify cost-saving opportunities, and monitor supplier performance.

Conclusion

As PE firms navigate an increasingly competitive landscape, the strategic management of procurement agreements and contract data emerges as a critical lever for value creation. The firms that excel in harnessing this potential will not only realize significant cost efficiencies and risk mitigation benefits but will also position their portfolio companies for sustainable, long-term success. In the end, the question isn’t whether PE firms can afford to invest in strategic procurement management, but whether they can afford not to.

Strategic Procurement in M&A Transitions: Parts 1-3

/in ,

Part 1 available at https://papermine.com/pub/33981734/

Part 2 available at https://papermine.com/booklet/33990117/

Part 3 available at https://papermine.com/pub/33991518/

 

 

Harmonizing Commitments: Centralizing Customer and Procurement Contracts with a Focus on Flow-Down Terms

/in ,

In the intricate tapestry of business contracts, there’s a unique dance between customer requirements and supplier commitments. This dance becomes smoother and more synchronized when both customer and procurement contracts are managed under one centralized system, especially when customer requirements necessitate the flow-down of terms to suppliers. Let’s delve into the power of centralized management in such scenarios.

1. Crystal Clear Visibility

Centralizing contracts offers a transparent view of commitments made to customers and the corresponding obligations to suppliers. This clarity is invaluable, ensuring that the terms agreed upon with customers are seamlessly reflected in the contracts with suppliers.

2. Ensuring Compliance and Reducing Risks

Flow-down terms, by their nature, are often non-negotiable and critical for compliance. Centralized management ensures that these customer-driven requirements are consistently met in supplier contracts, minimizing potential legal or operational risks.

3. Streamlined Communication

With a unified system, communication between procurement and sales teams becomes more fluid. As customer requirements change or evolve, these can be instantly relayed to suppliers, ensuring that the entire value chain remains aligned.

4. Efficient Response to Market Dynamics

When customer requirements shift due to market changes, businesses need to adapt quickly. Centralized contract management allows for rapid adjustments in supplier contracts, ensuring businesses remain agile and responsive.

5. Cost Savings

Mismatched terms between customer and procurement contracts can result in unexpected costs. By ensuring alignment through centralized management, businesses can avoid these unforeseen expenses and better manage their financial commitments.

6. Enhancing Customer Trust

Customers trust businesses to fulfill specific requirements, especially when they are contractually agreed upon. A centralized system, by ensuring that these terms are effectively flowed down to suppliers, builds and solidifies this trust.

7. Simplified Audits and Reviews

Centralized contract management facilitates easier audits. With flow-down terms, auditors can quickly verify compliance across the value chain, from customer requirements to supplier deliverables.

8. Innovation and Value Addition

Understanding the nuances of customer requirements and ensuring they are met by suppliers can lead to innovative solutions. A centralized system can spotlight areas where value can be added, fostering better products or services.

Conclusion

In an ideal business scenario, the synchronization of customer and supplier commitments is not just a boon but a necessity. Centralized contract management, especially focused on the flow-down of terms, not only ensures operational excellence but also builds a foundation of trust and compliance. This alignment results in a business environment where commitments are not just met, but exceeded, leading to long-term growth and sustainable success.