Share this

Use the icons below to share this page with associates that you think would be interested in BST10.


Contact BST Global

First Name
Last Name
Job Title
0 /
Yes! I would like to receive occasional email updates about products, services, news, and events from:
By submitting this form, you are agreeing to the terms of our Privacy Policy. To learn more about how we protect and manage your submitted data, please visit our Privacy Policy.

 Contact Us By Phone 

Eddie Shasek

Eddie Shasek

Eddie Shasek has spent the past 20 years focused on systems development, implementation and integration. Eddie joined BST Global in 2006 and has helped define BST Global’s project delivery methods focusing on efficient and predictable results for software implementation and system integration projects. Prior to joining BST Global, Eddie was an executive at Andersen Consulting and Accenture focused on software development of large scale billing system implementations for multi-billion dollar public utility and energy firms. This fostered Eddie’s passion for process-driven technical work that brought him to BST Global. At BST Global, Eddie is currently a Project Director focused on delivering strategic and high-risk systems integration projects. In addition to Eddie’s project delivery oversight and leadership responsibilities, he often acts as a direct project manager on system and data integration projects supporting the success of corporate mergers for both acquired and acquiring firms. In this capacity, Eddie manages risk and ensures that BST Global’s methods are applied and continuously refined.

A&E Mergers Best Practices: Driving Joint Success

Eddie Shasek
Project Director
BST Global
The documents are signed, ownership has shifted…the challenge of joint success just got real. After ownership shifts the success of the joint entity becomes the mission. It is incumbent on both firms to quickly stabilize and start to grow in the new normal of joint operations regardless of how smooth or rocky the negotiation, due diligence, and closure process was. Plan → Communicate → Execute → Refine What is the game plan? Planning a program to address overall success vs just systems consolidation makes all the difference. It is way too easy to just dive right in to a straight data conversion project to get to one system. With this approach, one of the two entities will end up suffering major gaps in understanding and possibly even capabilities. It is better to first focus on a plan for the alignment of the corporate structure, processes and people; then let the system integration tasks follow that lead. In my next post, I dive deeper into Systems Integration Planning. Talk to me Every good integration plan must include a solid communication plan, including an outline of who will participate, when and how. Your people have to be on board for organization to reach its full joint potential. Ensure there is clear ownership of the communication plan for each company. Plans should address: What will happen when Communications should start with a summary notification to all people affected at all levels. Craft a unified message of what the objectives, major milestones, and general timeline are expected to be. Let your people know when they will start to feel their daily life, processes, and systems change. Participation of each entity and key roles Follow up with more targeted and strategically timed messages from various group leaders to specific audiences addressing concerns or anticipated questions relevant to that group. Internal marketing for a positive change As the integration project progresses, these messages may evolve. Because of this, each message should set the expectation that adjustments of timing, content, and decisions may occur throughout the process. The changes should be equally communicated, demonstrating management’s ability to adjust as progress is made. Don’t fall in to the trap of driving to a goal that is no longer appropriate based on new information. Be sure to brand the initiative and leverage many forms of communication beyond email to align with what is typical and effective in your firm. It is about getting the word out with no surprises. During a merger your people will naturally question how the changes affect their role. Be open to reduce anxiety in the organization. What is it that you do here? As previously mentioned, the systems consolidation should follow the lead of a process integration or at least follow a detailed analysis of overlaps and gaps in how the separate entities were run. In the process analysis be sure to: Identify overlaps and gaps early Identify adjustments by role and process Clearly define what the recommended process is going forward in the joint environment on both sides Identify how the systems integration project needs to enable the intended new process in the near and long term To build an integration plan that joins not only systems but also process, the fulcrum should be a business process catalog. This can be leveraged when identifying the general approach to each process area for each entity that will be integrated. Focus on elements of the process that are most likely to be disconnected. You must define: What roles are involved and the level of detail that is managed at each level? Is the process manual/paper based vs. automated workflow or even an email based process? Who has what access to data and decision making authority to execute the process efficiently? Is there a material difference in volume or other factor in one entity driving the process differences that cannot be adjusted? Leaving disconnects unsolved or dictating process will just result in the process unraveling in the future. Everyone involved needs to believe that the new way is the right way for joint business success at some level or it really won’t amount to much other than a shelf full of optimistic unused documents. There can be only one. Often there is a need to integrate the systems and data of the two entities on an accelerated schedule for joint reporting. This is commonly a contingency of the deal or an investor’s way to see progress on the efficiencies that are expected as the business costs are consolidated. One tactic that should be considered to take time pressure off of the implementation is to create a bridge reporting pack. Find ways to commingle the separate systems’ reporting data manually or via similar outputs from each system that can be summarized and collated outside the system on a temporary basis. This allows the proper amount of time that you need to follow good process when consolidating processes, roles, data, and systems in thoughtful steps. You are never really done. After go-live on your joint system with commingled data, the focus should shift to finding the inevitable data issues in the details of individual project, billings, or other records. Plan to have some project core team members transition into a temporary support group accessible to the new users. Resist the urge to add more functionality and customizations or to kick off a phase two of implementation for at least a few months. This allows for operational stabilization. Be sure to reserve some ad hoc time from your software vendor’s consulting or technical staff to be available on-call or even on-site to address any technical business interruptions quickly. Leverage the experience of your vendor at this time; they do this for a living. Understand your cost of down time and recovery plan should larger issues surface in the weeks following your go-live date. And finally, continue to ensure daily tasks are done prior to starting a second phase of implementation. Do you have an industry standardization M&A success story? Let us know in a comment below.

Systems Integration Planning: Plan Twice, Cut Once

Eddie Shasek
Project Director
BST Global
Have you ever felt like you are swimming in a pool of sharks? Take back control of your software integration project and feel like the customer again. It is a disadvantaged position to be reviewing a project plan from your software vendors trying to look for savings without being really sure if the cuts you are making are actually trimming fat, introducing risk, or destroying future shareholder value.  Below are some things to think about when reviewing a plan and deciding if it will bring value to your organization beyond the basics of software integration. Not all projects are created equal. The shortest and least expensive plan often has unexpected costs that accumulate well into the future in the form of rework and possibly re-implementation, depending on the severity of the oversight created in an overly accelerated process. Gaining upper management’s support with a short-sighted or smaller estimate may make it much more difficult and possibly painful to expand the plan and cost expectations later in the project when additional needs or risks are discovered. In addition to the unanticipated hard costs that could surface later, an under-developed implementation plan can also result in very damaging soft costs after go-live. A poorly planned project can result in attrition of employees, dislike of the new software, and loss of confidence in leadership at the front lines. To avoid these pitfalls, think about the following points when evaluating the integration project plan from your external software providers, consultants, or hired gun project managers: Does the plan allow time for data clean up? If the project is part of an acquisition, there is often overlap across the two companies of client and vendor data. Avoid Data Duplication - Data duplication can leave you with a messy system and diluted reporting. Set Boundaries and Ownership – If mergers are involved, the two companies could have worked together previously in a sub-consultant relationship. There could even be employee overlap in the data. Take action early - Data should be cleaned up ahead of any integration. Make a choice - What system is the master for duplicate data? Again in acquisition projects, allow time for process adjustments. How will you clarify processes to avoid marketing to same prospects, and maintain one face to common clients? Is there a clear milestone in the plan marking the end of configuration decision making? This allows for a stable system during data migration and process testing prior to training. Is the training within 30 days of the live date? Earlier trained knowledge will fade in your staff if it is not reinforced with use within 30 days. Have your payroll cycles been considered when scheduling the go-live date? Has the go-live been planned on a Year End? Year End is typically not a good time to open a new system due to accounting staff overload. Has a project governance process been established to ensure that the initial version of the joint system is not overly customized and that the implementation team is accountable to the milestones in the plan? Integration time is also a great opportunity to refresh and expand the knowledge of the existing staff alongside the initial training of the people who are new to the system. Leveraging internal experienced users for new user training to reduce consulting cost, and will help strengthen and expand the knowledge of experienced users.   Do you have an industry standardization M&A success story? Let us know in a comment below.