Every company – and there are no exceptions – must periodically deal with incompatible but necessary missions. Most common, I think, are the frequent needs to reduce costs and increase the quality of customer service. Another is the need to build low-cost, worldwide operations while preserving/enhancing local relationships and (often delicate) corporate cultures.

A pair of recent studies conducted by Accenture demonstrate the widespread presence of such conflicts. Results of the first initiative – an Accenture survey of 300 executives from North America, Europe and Asia-Pacific – showed that mergers and acquisitions are seen as the most important way for companies to increase the scale of their global operations. More important than investing in new production and distribution capabilities. More important than building contract manufacturing or logistics relationships. Even more important than finding new markets or suppliers.

However, a second research effort revealed that costly procurement and supply chain disruptions are extremely common in the aftermath of a corporate merger. In effect, corporate executives concur that M&A is key to achieving a global presence and that M&A efforts are among the most common contributors to operational instability.

In the second study, we observed that 67 percent of respondents think their companies' recent M&A activities were the cause of increased product-launch disruptions, and 62 percent reported that mergers resulted in a loss of talent from their supply chain organizations. But that's not all. Following their most recent M&A activities:

• 53 percent noted diminished product or service quality.
• 52 percent noted problems with order-fill rates.
• 46 percent noted stock outs.
• 44 percent noted inventory build-ups.
• 36 percent noted increases in supply disruptions.

And what was the most frequently cited cause of these problems? Corporate management’s fixation on cost savings and paying too little attention to supply chain issues and prospective synergies. Apparently, many execs are confident that supply chain issues can be handled later in the merger process and they de-emphasize important service-oriented metrics such as quality, inventory turns and order-fill rates. Their reward, in Accenture's experience, is potentially compromised service and at-risk revenues-greater dangers than failing to capture every last quick-hit cost reduction.

The obvious conclusion is that early involvement of senior supply chain executives in the merger-planning process is among the most critical M&A considerations. Accenture's own experience is that the supply chain often accounts for 30 percent to 50 percent of the savings a merger or acquisition ultimately generates. It's the last thing companies should postpone or overlook.

These findings have raised much more evidence that 1) M&A is a core strategy of companies seeking to quickly expand their global presence and 2) supply chain mastery may be the best way to capture and lock in M&A's benefits. No conflict there.