The Problem
The client had decided that acquiring a firm was the fastest way into a new analytics business for its bank and credit-union clients. What it needed next was a defensible way to choose which firm, and a case its board could act on. A shortlist from earlier work was a starting point, but a board-level decision needed more than a ranking. It needed criteria everyone agreed on, candidates evaluated in depth, and a clear read on which acquisitions the company could actually absorb and turn to advantage.
The difficulty was that attractiveness and feasibility are not the same thing. A compelling target can still be a poor acquisition if it cannot be integrated or its capabilities cannot be put to use. The work had to weigh both at once, on evidence instead of impression, and present the result in a form a board could decide on.
The Results
The engagement delivered a structured diligence and a board-ready recommendation.
It began by defining and weighting the evaluation criteria, balancing each candidate's attractiveness against the company's ability to acquire, integrate, and leverage it. The candidate universe was widened beyond the original list to include adjacent data and platform firms, then profiled and ranked on the agreed criteria. The leading few went through on-site diligence visits, which tested each firm's claims against what the team could see for itself. The findings were assembled into materials for the board, laying out the options in a single comparable view so leadership could decide on the path forward with the trade-offs visible. The company went on to acquire one of the firms the diligence had evaluated, the outcome the work was built to inform.
Key Techniques
- A weighted scoring model that balanced candidate attractiveness against the probability of a successful acquisition and integration.
- A widened search that pulled in adjacent data and platform firms the original screen had missed.
- Candidate profiling and ranking against explicit, agreed criteria, so comparisons were like for like.
- On-site diligence visits to check each firm's claims against direct observation.
- A board-ready synthesis that presented the options and trade-offs in one comparable view for the decision.