Abstract
In each of the previous four chapters, each of the POMICS elements was extensively discussed in relation to the integration efforts taking place in the World of TUI. Interestingly enough, it has been shown that a large part of the analysis results apply to the entire sector as defined in the scope of this dissertation (i.e. large integrated tourism groups). The aim of this chapter is to bring all the results together and to clarify how they can be brought to action, while at the same time bringing forward the advantages of doing so.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
It may well be that such issues have been extensively discussed and researched. There is no evidence however, suggesting that decisions / consensus have been reached, formalised, and communicated
Large overlaps augment the advantages of common / pooled purchasing, while no overlaps render them minimal. In other words, the advantage of having ‘one face to supplier’ is of importance when referring to the’ same supplier’. Otherwise, purchasing together or separately makes no significant difference (except perhaps saving administration / coordination costs, which are by far offset by the costs of integrating anyway)
For those responsible for, committed to and long-involved in the integration effort, this scenario is extremely difficult to even consider, let alone openly discuss
Both Thomas Cook and TUI are currently preoccupied with slimming down their product portfolio, trimming down their workforces, reducing their flight and bed capacities, and in general redirecting their business models. During the last year, the integration taking place in parallel has very seldom been mentioned in the press, in interviews / corporate communication
TUI UK and TUI D both produce separate P&L accounts and their performance is controlled and measured by the holding on that basis. At the same time the cost and responsibility for synergies are split between the two companies, who are required to make them visible in their individual operational results. This may often create a prisoner’s dilemma” situation, when it comes to group synergies and / or benefits
Laartz, Sonderegger & Vinckier (2000). In relation to this point, Laartz, Monnoyer & Scherdin (2003), claim that during the 1990s many companies, especially those in information-intensive industries, who attempted such large-scale IT-landscape transformations have experienced enormous delays and costs, which offset the promised returns. As an alternative they offer the option of organising applications in business domains (e.g. product domain, channel domain) and then proceeding with standardisation / consolidation at domain level. The aim is a reduction of complexity at an acceptable cost and risk (conceptually this solution) stands midway between leaving the landscape / architecture as-is and between a full-scale architecture transformation
Laartz, Monnoyer, & Scherdin (2003) argue that IT-landscape transformation should be considered every time a business faces an urgent business challenge. (They place particular emphasis on post-merger integration)
Kiani-Kress (2003), Scharrer (2003b), Treuherz (2003), Knape (2003)
Schütz (2003), Bieker (2003), Eberle & Krummheuer (2003b), Krummheuer (2003a), Krummheuer (2003b)
Dzierzon & Bereszewski (2002) claim that 30–50% of outsourcing efforts fail to meet expectations. In that respect, the selection of appropriate outsourcing partners and management of the contractual relationship with the external supplier are essential capabilities. Nevertheless, this kind of competence is frequently missing
All Apollo project leaders and the programme director are employed by either TUI Germany or TUI UK
It should be noted that the various organisational parties developing and making those tools available, also have a vested interest in their widespread adoption and usage. Programme management and project leaders are likely to be receiving political pressure (coming from higher hierarchical levels demanding the utilisation of those tools) to adopt them. It may well be that each tool has advantages and is useful in its own right. The problems mentioned here are related to the multiplicity of reporting tools used
See relevant recommendation in section 8.1.2.2
Instead of performing a large-scale audit at the end of the year, a series of smaller-scale audits could be conducted at the end of each release, phase, or even iteration. The advantage is that methodology misapplication and / or lack of discipline could be revealed early enough to be effectively dealt with
Appendix C: SR 8001 to SR 8042 — From September 2001 to April 2003
The overall programme was meant to last for 2 years with an estimated cost of € 20 million [Gammel (2003)]
At this point it is important to note that the ‘weak spots’ may not originate from the current standard due diligence procedure / process of TUI itself, but from its actual implementation (i.e. lack of adherence to the standard). The importance of conducting due diligence in a disciplined manner is a prerequisite, almost a dogma, for any acquisition. The starting point for the recommendations made for this case study is that a due diligence process actually took place
As defined by the POMICS proposition
Appendix C: SR 8044
Appendix C: SR 8043
Appendix C: SR 8045
See interview with M&A respondent — Appendix D7
Appendix D7 — This is usually the case with direct sales tour operators, internet tour operators, and with software houses. In those cases, the business models contain a significant ICS component and therefore an ICS due diligence is compulsory
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2004 Deutscher Universitäts-Verlag/GWV Fachverlage GmbH, Wiesbaden
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Papathanassis, A. (2004). Synthesis and recommendations. In: Post-Merger Integration and the Management of Information and Communication Systems. Strategie, Marketing und Informationsmanagement. Deutscher Universitätsverlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-322-81879-9_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-322-81879-9_8
Publisher Name: Deutscher Universitätsverlag
Print ISBN: 978-3-8244-8245-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-322-81879-9
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive