Managerial biases during a merger process in a government-controlled organization

This paper explores which managerial biases that are present during the negotiation period of a merger influence post-merger integration. With a longitudinal case study, this paper explores which managerial bias constituencies influence the integration process. The paper presents a longitudinal case study of a merger of two listed French companies. The data were collected from participant observation, interviews, and archival documentation over two years. The case involves retrospective (premerger negotiation period) and real-time (merger period) data. Our study reveals three managerial biases during the negotiation period: (1) Anchoring bias with availability bias: a disappointing past experience for the acquiring firm; (2) Temporal bias: temporal pressure on the CEO and stakeholders; (3) Hubris bias and brakes: schizophrenia/ambiguity from the leaders of the acquired company. We also identified two factors reinforcing these biases during the integration process: (1) Social pressure of a major project: Greater Paris; (2) Expert's role: failure to take into account the contributions of the other company. The study provides insight into organizational change in a merger context. The study contributes to the merger literature by highlighting managerial biases and reinforcing mechanisms during negotiation and integration periods.