[Saeedeh Sadjadi]

Due diligence is supposed to reduce risk – yet so many surprises still emerge after closing. As deals become more complex, DD has expanded from financials and legal checks to cybersecurity, culture, ESG, digital maturity, supply‑chain resilience, and even technical debt. But despite this broader scope, many acquirers still treat DD as a box‑ticking exercise rather than a true predictor of post‑deal success.

Which area of due diligence do you believe is still the most underestimated – the one that silently determines whether the integration will thrive or fail – and why?

[Ami Desai]

I believe culture and organizational alignment are still one of the most underestimated areas of due diligence. Even if the financials and strategy look strong, differences in leadership style, decision-making, and employee culture can create major challenges during integration.

[Andre Council]

I agree with Ami. I recently visited a business that had been acquired 12 months prior to my visit. In speaking with the manager and one other staff member, they did not hesitate to share with me how their previous culture was greatly interrupted due to the acquisition and the new owner’s changes to operations. They seemed disgruntled and unhappy and given they were so willing to share their experience with me, someone whom they had just met, this speaks volumes. This poses such risk and some acquirers may dismiss culture, thinking they can just plug-and-play. In my experience culture should take priority and planning should start during due diligence and carried out post sale.

[Sarah]

I agree that culture is often underestimated, but I would also highlight integration readiness and technology due diligence as areas that can significantly influence post-deal success. During the deal process, buyers often focus on financial performance and strategic fit, while assuming that systems, data, and processes can be integrated relatively easily.

In reality, legacy systems, poor data quality, cybersecurity vulnerabilities, and incompatible processes can delay integration, increase costs, and prevent the realization of expected synergies. These issues may not appear material during the transaction but can become major obstacles after closing.

For that reason, I believe due diligence should not only identify risks but also assess how prepared the target is for integration. The most successful acquisitions are often those where DD findings are directly linked to the integration plan from the beginning rather than treated as separate exercises.

[Priyanka Chauhan]

Even today, due diligence often focuses more on financial, commercial, and operational factors, while cultural due diligence and post-merger integration are not given enough importance. A deal may look good on paper, but if the two organizations do not align culturally or are not integrated well after closing, the merger can fail. In my view, companies need to look beyond the numbers and assess whether the people, culture, leadership style, and operating model can successfully come together after the deal.

[Dr. Jesse Core]

I agree with many of the comments about culture and integration, but coming from the beverage industry, I would also emphasize commercial due diligence. Financial statements tell you where a business has been, but they don’t always tell you where it’s going. Before acquiring a beverage company, I would want to know sales velocity by SKU, trends in retail distribution, customer concentration, changes in shelf space, and whether retailers are expanding or reducing distribution. Those metrics often provide an early indication of consumer demand and future performance. A brand can look healthy on paper while quietly losing shelf space and retailer confidence. In my experience, the strongest acquisition decisions come from combining traditional financial due diligence with a clear understanding of what is actually happening at the shelf.

[Shih-Hung Ting]

In my view, technical debt and legacy architecture due diligence remains the single most underestimated area that silently makes or breaks an integration. While deal teams often check the box on standard IT audits and cybersecurity compliance, they routinely fail to assess the invisible friction of monolithic systems, fragile data pipelines, and proprietary workarounds. A company can look highly efficient and digitally mature on the surface, but if its core infrastructure cannot scale or integrate without a complete, multi-million-dollar re-platforming, the projected operational synergies evaporate instantly—derailing the integration timeline and paralyzing both innovation and daily execution post-close.

[Author]

Posts