A New Era in Legal Journalism and Expertise
Q&A
In the complex world of international mergers and acquisitions, cultural differences can make or break a deal. This article explores the critical ways in which cultural nuances impact cross-border M&A transactions, drawing on insights from industry experts. Readers will discover practical strategies for bridging cultural gaps and engineering effective communication protocols to drive successful integrations in global mergers.
Daria Turanska; Val Narodetsky; Nikita Sherbina; Mohammed Kamal
Daria TuranskaLegal Manager, Faster DraftOne instance that stands out involved a cross-border transaction between a European tech firm and a U.S. buyer. The European side placed a strong emphasis on building personal trust and taking a more deliberate, consensus-driven approach, while the U.S. buyer was more transactional and time-sensitive, focusing heavily on deal speed and clear-cut terms.
This difference initially created tension—deadlines felt rushed to the European team, while the U.S. side perceived delays as a lack of commitment.
To bridge this gap, we facilitated a series of joint workshops where both teams could openly discuss their priorities and working styles. We also encouraged using a shared communication platform that promoted transparency and allowed questions and concerns to be raised without judgment.
By acknowledging and respecting these cultural nuances upfront, we aligned expectations and created a negotiation rhythm that honored both sides. This not only smoothed the process but also built stronger relationships, which was critical for post-deal integration.
Val NarodetskyCEO, OdesaWe worked with a US company acquiring a Ukrainian software firm, and the technology integration immediately stalled. The American executives expected their new engineers to openly challenge ideas in meetings, viewing vigorous debate as a sign of engagement. The Ukrainian team, however, comes from a culture where you show respect to leadership by listening carefully and providing feedback through more formal, private channels. The US side saw their silence as passive and uncooperative, while the Ukrainian engineers saw the American style as chaotic and disrespectful.
To bridge this gap, we created a new, explicit communication protocol for the combined entity. We structured meetings so that every engineer had a dedicated time to speak, removing the cultural pressure around interrupting senior leaders. We also formalized the written feedback loop, making it a required, respected part of the process. By engineering how we communicated, we shifted the focus back from cultural friction to the technical work itself. The integration was back on track within weeks because we gave them a shared system instead of asking them to change their values.
Nikita SherbinaCo-Founder & CEO, AIScreenOne of the biggest cultural differences that impacted an international M&A was between a US-based company and an Indian company. The US company's culture was open, flat, and quick in decision-making, while the Indian company was hierarchical, consensus-driven, and valued relationship building and respect for authority. Initially, this led to misunderstandings and slow integration as employees from both sides struggled to align on leadership, communication style, and decision-making.
To bridge the gap and ensure deal success, we conducted cultural due diligence early on and assigned cultural "owners" who were familiar with both cultures to facilitate dialogue and integration. We also set clear, measurable cultural integration goals and created forums for open sharing of concerns and feedback. By respecting both cultures and fostering mutual understanding, we built trust and collaboration that smoothed the transition, preserved the strengths of both sides, and drove long-term value. This demonstrates that cultural competence and intentional integration are key to international M&A success.
Mohammed KamalBusiness Development Manager, OlavivoCultural differences significantly impact the success of international mergers and acquisitions, as seen in a merger between a North American tech company and a European firm. The North American team, driven by a fast-paced, results-focused approach, aimed to close the deal quickly. In contrast, the European firm prioritized relationship-building and consensus. This clash led to misunderstandings, with Americans viewing Europeans as indecisive and Europeans seeing Americans as overly aggressive.
