The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1356-3289.htm
CCIJ
13,1
56
Corporate Communications: An
International Journal
Vol. 13 No. 1, 2008
pp. 56-67
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
1356-3289
DOI 10.1108/13563280810848193
Hearts at stake
A theoretical and practical look
at communication in connection with mergers
and acquisitions
Nana Balle
IBM, Denmark
Abstract
Purpose – The paper aims to present a model for communicating mergers and acquisitions.
Design/methodology/approach – The paper is a case study of a corporate merger.
Findings – Communication is a crucial strategic tool in the integration process that follows a merger
or an acquisition. M&As differ from other changes as virtually everything is at stake – both practical
issues as well as the corporate identity. Hence, the identity issue must be addressed specifically, as a
change in corporate identity is expected to affect the employees seriously due to the identification with
the corporate identity. The paper also emphasizes the importance of empowering and enabling middle
managers for the communication task in order to act as change agents, as the middle manager has
reason to feel as “endangered” by the acquisition as his/her employees.
Originality/value – The paper offers a practical model for integration communication.
Keywords Acquisitions and mergers, Corporate communications
Paper type Research paper
Acquisitions and mergers[1] are a national as well as global trend. They occur
everywhere – in organizations, administrative units and businesses in all industries
and of all sizes. Many people are at stake. And a great deal of money as well.
So it is daunting that numerous studies find that only half of all mergers – or in the
most dramatic studies one out of four – can be considered to be successful since it is
often not possible to realize the required synergies.
The question is: are the executives in the finance department who made the
calculations for due diligence wrong, or is the cause found in what happens after
the acquisition – the subsequent integration process where one of the issues is to make
the employees accept the new company?
This paper does not provide the answer. But it does present an approach, based on a
case study, that one of the most important integration tools is post-acquisition
communication. This paper combines a theoretical approach with some practical
advice regarding the good communication process in an integration and ultimately
gathers all the points in a graphic model. The purpose of the model is to provide an
overview of the relations between the factors that affect the result of the
post-acquisition communication in order to help incorporate all matters in the
planning of the communication.
Communicating a merger in real life – a challenge that matters . . .
In 2004, approximately 3,200 employees in a division of a major multinational, but
country-based family owned company woke up to the news that their division had
been acquired by a major publicly traded multinational corporation. This was the kick
off for a major integration project that would affect the employees of both companies Hearts at stake
for several years to come.
With the “buying” company employing 3,500 employees in the country concerned,
this would be a merger of two equally large organizations. Nevertheless, the relative
strength of the companies was not comparable. Also, this meant a merging of 40 legal
units into one, a merger of a hierarchical organization into a complex matrix
organization – and a rather anarchical organization with a strong national culture with 57
a very process-oriented global company.
Not an easy task – but nevertheless a project where a solid communication effort
proved to be an important strategic tool in the integration process.
A framework for the communication effort was planned by selected communication
officers from both companies, putting the main emphasis on the delicate period around,
and after the announcement of the intent to merge the companies. After the
announcement of the intent to go through with the acquisition there was a three month
black-out period while awaiting the approval of the EU competition authorities.
A mixture of central and local media was chosen for the communication process.
Central media offered were:
.
Town hall meetings on significant dates, hosted by core executives.
.
An intranet media, offering among other things a FAQ, a possibility to post
questions and relevant interviews and articles concerning the integration.
.
A printed company magazine distributed to employees in both companies. The
magazine contained interviews, features, vox pops and portraits with
the intention to partly inform about the integration process, partly introduce
the “acquired” employees to the acquiring company’s business and culture.

Local media were middle managers in the acquired company, being counted on as
change agents to explain the integration efforts and keep employees “warm”. These
managers were supported by an intranet-based, closed manager’s lounge, frequently
updated with relevant information for the middle managers.
Later in the integration process a number of other communication officers from both
companies were involved in planning and executing the communication process. This
allowed for an elaboration of the communication strategy, involving the experiences
and local knowledge of the newly involved officers.
The employee perception of the communication effort was subsequently measured
by a survey that looked at, for example, the use and usefulness of the media. Among
other things the survey found that:
.
About 80 percent of the employees would go to their middle manager to find an
answer to questions about the integration process. This, in spite of the fact that
the middle managers often were not able to answer these questions, simply
because the issue was not resolved yet or that the manager lacked basic
knowledge about the new mother company.
.
The intranet and the FAQ only enjoyed the support of, respectively, 56 and a
mere 6 percent of the employees.
.
The interest in the magazine for informational purposes was limited. This is in
accordance with the framework presented below, underlining the importance of
CCIJ the middle manager as a change agent, able to create relevance and even having
13,1 a therapeutic role in relation to his/her employees.
.
Employees requested more information about (ranked) future job areas, own
position in the organization, terms and conditions, processes and procedures,
culture and value, and the integration process. This partly reflects the above
emphasis on creating a common corporate identity and communicating about
58 corporate culture. Nevertheless, this need may not be acknowledged explicitly by
the employees.
.
Approximately, 66 percent of the employees expressed satisfaction with the
communication, which must be considered a satisfying level in such a complex
process.

Finally, integrating new members in the shared communication organization, as well

as allowing the communication strategy to develop over time, supports the adaptive
approach outlined in this paper.

Acquisitions as transformation category

As compared with other types of transformation in a company, the characteristics of an
acquisition is that it can include almost all other transformation categories.
It is probable that the employees in the acquired organization must go through a
number of technical changes: new frame of reference, new organization, new business
model, new rules and processes, working conditions, privileges, etc. Because of the
complexity, turbulence, and even chaos that may characterize the extensive process
that an acquisition is, it is far from certain that all questions can be answered during the
first long period of time – even simple questions like – “Where will I be tomorrow?”
and “What will my work day be like?” It is evident that the employees fear that the
acquisition will mean worse conditions after the integration.
Another feature characterizing acquisitions is that the integration will most often
imply a consideration re-evaluation of the company’s values and identity. Recently, “The
Good Employees” as described by Danish Sociologist Højrup (1983), identify with their
place of work – and even attach their own identity to that of the company; so when
changes are made in the company’s identity, it affects the individual employee. In an
integration, the company has to take on a new identity. The employees have to take leave
their old identity. They see this as a loss, and find it difficult to embrace the new identity.
Uncertainty and a fear of loss can make employees inefficient and reluctant to
accept the integration. Thus, identity comes into play – and this transformation is
usually not handled well. The company will perhaps survive this – but the risk of
failure has increased because there is a risk of mismanaging the work force, which was
perhaps the actual purpose of the investment in the first place.
What are the real risks if an integration is not handled well enough when it comes to
the more personal issues?
Dissatisfied/fearful employees typically react in one of two ways, they either:
(1) exit – especially the most competent who get external offers – disappear and
thus deprive the company of value in the form of intellectual capital, customer
relations, or added costs when the position has to be filled again; or
 (2) stay – but at reduced level of performance because time is spent on talking – Hearts at stake
which results in the flight of ideas, reluctance to engage in new initiatives, and
perhaps even sickness or absenteeism.

The result is:

(1) Internal consequences that diminish the bottomline and undermine the business
goals. 59
(2) External consequences, for example:
.
Customers experience poorer service, which in the worst case can lead to
choosing another supplier.
.
Perhaps customers and vendors have such close relations with the
company’s employees that they are told of the company’s lack of control,
lack of spirit, incompetent management. Dissatisfied representatives hardly
strengthen relations with customers.

This may affect the business case behind the acquisition.

Some of the negative and unintended consequences of what was to be a profitable
and positive acquisition can be solved mechanically with the right management
decisions. But the work with post-acquisition communication is one of the important
strategic tools to help employees understand, accept and ultimately act in accordance
with the acquisition.

Central issues in integration communication

The communication can almost never be better than the actual integration process –
but the communication can help handle insecurity and fill the voids. The
communication function should be involved in the integration process. Studies show
that focus is often on finances, hardcore business and legal issues – and to a lesser
degree on communication and identity (Balmer and Dinnie, 1999). Therefore,
communication ought to play a large part.
When working with post-acquisition communication, you can ask a basic question
from the communication planning: How are you to communicate what to whom in an
acquisition situation?

How? selection of strategy

In this connection, the question of “How” is about the selection of communication
channels in the post-acquisition communication. Here, the development of
a communication strategy based on central, top-down communication or local
communication based on line communication from the mid-level manager is primarily
to be described.
A company has a wealth of communication channels at its disposal, which it can use
in a transformation situation – a continuum of channels ranging from an informal,
close dialog with the immediate superior, over the intranet and internet, to perhaps
staff magazines and the CEO’s speech from the auditorium platform. The balance
between central and local communication is very important, and even though the
optimum combination will vary from one company to another, there are some basic
considerations that should be incorporated in the communication planning.
CCIJ Central media: joint frame of reference and cultural agent
13,1 In the literature on transformation communication (Larkin and Larkin, 1994), the
central media are not assessed at the same high level as the local communication. But
the central media are certainly necessary in a post-acquisition connection – provided
they are used correctly.
Central media, such as the large employee meeting, the staff magazine, and the
60 intranet, are typical pull media – the employee has to actively select them. This means
that you cannot base your need-to-know information on the central media. But these
media can do other things, such as providing a uniform, joint message across the
organization.
The question of identity and culture is critical in an integration situation
because of the individual employee’s identification with the company. In many
ways, the central media are ideal bearers of culture as they create a joint frame of
reference for the employees and can use instruments and communication genres
such as storytelling, exposition of role models, putting words on loss, phrasing
joint thoughts – the are bearers of visual identity, a tone of voice, and they can
make values visible and operational and support joint assumptions in the
organization.
The central media, however, seldom provide the possibility of dialog.

Local media: the mid-level manager’s role as an agent of change

Both technical literature (Petersen, 2000) and many studies (GCI Mannov and
ACNielsen AIM, 2002) attach great importance to the local/decentralized
communication, typically in the form of line communication with the local first-line
manager as change agent. This involves many advantages: the possibility of
translation, targeting at stakeholders, high credibility, relevance.
However, there are certain matters that have to be examined before you choose the
local strategy in an integration.
The criterion for successful post-acquisition communication is that the local
communicator/change agent is capable of handling the task, that is, both a good
communicator and an enthusiastic change agent. A department manager of few words
may well be a good communicator if it fits the department’s culture, and also performs
the task to the employees’ satisfaction.
But enthusiasm may easily be jeopardized in an acquisition, which is often, as
mentioned before, marked by uncertainty concerning the identities of the company and
the employees.
Imagine two relatively complementary merging organizations, each is running
well. Each has a number of parallel functions or business areas such as products
or customers that are merged in order to realize possible synergies. If the
organizations are sufficiently aligned before the acquisition, the rank and file
employees form the critical mass that is needed to serve the customers. But in
such a situation, there is especially one group that is in danger – the managers.
Only a limited number of managers is probably needed, so individual managers
feel their personal territories are at stake. There is a pronounced danger of a loss
of domain.
This issue does not diminish further up in the management hierarchy as the number
of lucrative functions is limited. Even in an integration based on a growth scenario, top
management will be reduced, especially at the very top where the CEO in the acquired Hearts at stake
company can hardly expect to remain CEO. Likewise, many staff and management
functions are unlikely to double, for instance the CFO, HR manager, or communications
manager.
So how motivated can mid-level managers be? Can and will they talk
enthusiastically about the acquisition, influence attitudes positively and translate
messages – if they are basically afraid for themselves and their domains? Line 61
communication is never stronger than its weakest link.
Basing some post-acquisition communication on mid-level managers or other local,
selected people requires a targeted effort to equip them for the change agent role – a
task which at some points is outside the sphere of the communication department, but
which it will often be advantageous for the communication department to be involved
in. Some of the tools would be:
.
Co-opting. Make sure that all mid-level people managers get integrated in the
new company very quickly. Equip them thoroughly for things related to the
organization and business processes and rules in the new company. Also equip
them culturally with a thorough introduction and training in the company’s
values, history, culture, and management principles.
.
Facilitating mid-managers’ communication with the employees. Issue regular
manager’s updates with information on management decisions, how to explain
them, and with Q&As. Define the mid-level managers’ role and obligations
clearly about passing on the information. For instance, create a closed manager’s
lounge on the intranet with a collection of material, information packages, an
integration wikipedia, a question feature, a blog, success stories, cases.
.
Talking with the mid-level managers. Discuss and translate the messages and
give them a real chance of understanding and identifying with the organization
that they are to “sell” to the employees.
.
Empowering. Make sure that the mid-level managers are informed of
management decisions before they are issued centrally.
.
Peer networking. Make mid-level managers mix company blood and introduce a
buddy/partner arrangement, if possible, with peers across the companies.

Dialog is a natural element of local communication that makes it possible to translate a

message, to answer questions right away, to reflect, and to let off “hot steam.” It is
essential that the dialog that takes place is factual.

What? messages and content

Two types of communication are needed in an integration process:
(1) factual information –handling rational issues; and
(2) identity communication – handling cultural and identity questions.

Factual information
Especially during the initial phases of the integration, the members of the organization
have numerous questions about their own situation, employment, the organization’s
form and purpose, staff conditions, and company policies. Many of them cannot be
answered right away, and the uncertainty leads to concern.
CCIJ Clear, consistent, and continuous communication is excellent support in this time of
13,1 uncertainty:
.
Clarity is about easy-to-grasp and understand messages. Make sure that the
communication is understood in the entire organization. Roles, concepts,
abbreviations, and references may have very different meanings and
implications in the different organizations. And put the news at the top – say
62 what has to be said – in plain words.
.
Consistency is about maintaining the rationale of the important decisions from
beginning to end. This ensures credibility.
.
Continuity is about suitable dosages of communication. Be careful not to
carpet-bomb with information right at the beginning of the integration period –
and then let the information dwindle. Maintain a suitable flow of information and
create recognizable, recurring elements in the communication – this makes it
easier to get your bearings.
.
The communication of factual matters is also a slow training in the art of
navigating in the new organization. Communicate roles and organization
properly and understandably – and do not be afraid of repetition to help people
understand.

Identity communication
Not all changes in an acquisition are tangible. Like other changes, an acquisition
implies a number of losses (Visholm, 2004) – or at least the fear of loss, even though
those involved may not realize it at first. Perhaps, not only a loss in terms of loss of
income, but also a loss of rights, routines, knowledge, qualifications, position, comfort,
colleagues, social relations, traditions, identification, or even private life (if for instance
a new location or working hours require adjustments at home).
But the loss may also be something not so tangible – and more difficult to define
– for instance what in the literature is called the established social defense
mechanisms in the organization (Jaques, 1953; Menzies, 1967; Visholm, 2004). These
are small rituals, habits, and behavior patterns that have no professional cause and
which may be irrational or even wrong, but in a larger perspective serve to “make it
all work” such as flex time or the cleaning ladies’ unofficial coffee break in the
changing room.
The handling of these losses and the move towards a new company identity are
essential issues in an integration situation (van Riel, 1992; Balmer and Dinnie, 1999).
The old cultures are abandoned and a new one eventually adopted. Employees must
start to get their bearings in the new company culture.
In this connection, the communication task is to:
.
Put the loss into words. Make it clear what employees are leaving. They must
say goodbye to what is lost in order to accept the new, changed reality. For
example, put into words the ambivalent feelings that may exist in connection
with a company integration. All the management talk in the world cannot
eliminate a deep-rooted sense of loyalty towards the “dying” culture.
.
Prepare the employees mentally for the change process.
 .
Build a bridge between the merging companies’ identities and thus facilitate the Hearts at stake
transition.
.
In the long term, build a joint corporate identity.

Some of the communication genres that can be based on the joint frame of reference
may be:
63
.
Storytelling – successes from the integration – but also stories addressing
problematic issues – preferable with a constructive ending.
.
Exposition of change agents and role models
.
Visualization – exposition of a joint graphic identity that recognizes old
elements in connection with the new. A brand-supporting, known logo can
probably not be changed, but the development of new integration media such as
a magazine could try to combine graphic elements from former media in the
merging organizations.

Who? stakeholders and differentiation

The question Who is about differentiation of target groups in relation to their
experience of and interests/feelings regarding the acquisition. The stakeholder idea
is probably known by most people, but for the sake of good order it is about
recognizing that many others than the traditional shareholders may have an
interest in what happens within and to a company. Management literature suggests
many ways of identifying and handling these groups. One traditional, functional
division is into customers, interest groups, creditors, shareholders, employees,
management, etc. (Printz, 2001). And other models differentiate between
stakeholders like owners or non-owners of the company, owners of capital and
of less tangible values, players or those who are subjected to the play, participants
in voluntary or involuntary relations, primary or secondary stakeholders, etc.
(Mitchell et al., 1997).
But it is not at all certain that these predefined boundaries are of any great
value in an acquisition. In an integration it is very likely that a series of
technical/practical/concrete factors are changed, but also factors such as identity
and culture. And it can be a challenge to establish a clear overview of the interest
groupings that these changes will give rise to. It is also about identifying the
factors that gather groups of people around some of the issues that are most
discussed.
There is no doubt that for instance a well thought out questionnaire study can map
stakeholders fairly clearly, but it is outside the scope of this paper to present a detailed
analysis design. However, one could choose to test the validity of some of the possible
boundaries below against some potential interest constellations through focus group
interviews or broader questionnaire studies.
Some possible boundaries that could turn out to affect the attitude to the acquisition
and which thus should be handled through targeted communication, might be:
.
Profession. What does your own or the group’s competencies look like in the new
organization? Are you (still) part of the company’s core service or are your
competencies and way of doing business threatened by the new company
structure?
CCIJ .
Organizational position. Have your business unit been the leading unit in the
13,1 organization? Or a more peripheral branch? And what are your expectations –
positive or negative – for the future position?
.
Seniority – or perhaps rather your past experience in the organization. Have you
been through a merger or acquisition before, and, if so, what was the outcome
and experience at the time?
64 .
Location. Is there a geographic strengthening with for instance new units? Or are
you suddenly at the periphery of the business’ activities? Or is the center of
power perhaps suddenly moved to another part of the world?
.
Hierarchical and career positioning. Are you a “practician”? Or part of
management? And how does it affect your attitude? Are career opportunities on
the increase? Or are you afraid of being left out when management members are
to be selected? Or do not you really care as long as you have a job?
.
Incentive structure or form of payment. Do you lose for instance a bonus scheme?
Or do you get one?
.
Employment terms and conditions in general. Are they seen as being better or
poorer after the transition?
.
And what else you think might be relevant in the organization in question.

The “raw material” that these assumptions are based on can be supplied by top
management, mid-level managers, employee representatives on the board, the
integration organization, HR, and the communication department that must be
assumed to have insight into the company – but other “data” can also be included:
what is written on the intranet chat page, what does people talk about in the canteen,
etc.
When the boundaries for the individual stakeholder groups, or individuals
significant to the integration, have been defined, a concrete way of describing or
“unfolding” the individual stakeholders can be to evaluate each individual group based
on dimensions like:
.
level of influence on the integration;
.
expected change/degree of change;
.
expectations/concerns/issues/conflicts;
.
expected reaction; and
.
role in change process.

Note that an acquisition is a dynamic process, and in step with the process – and the
knowledge that the employees should preferably accumulate along the way – attitudes
and communities change. Some groups will become more positive, others more
negative. Some will split or change focus often without notice. It is good practice, then
to continuously test the state of the stakeholder dimensions to follow the development
in stakeholder issues.

Model for integration communication

The answer to the question “How do you communicate What to Whom” is illustrated in
the below model.
 (Below, parts of the model are written in italic to facilitate nagivation.) Hearts at stake
In an acquisition, a large number of issues of various kinds are raised. They concern
both practical matters, culture, insecurity, etc. Some are rational, some less rational.
These issues are interpreted by the employees based on personal experience, the
current situation, attitudes, etc. and allow the employees to be divided into a number of
stakeholder groups with differing interests and concerns.
The change process is communicated through a large number of key messages, some 65
of which are constant, such as the rationale for the acquisition. But in order for the
messages to reach the employees where they are, and to guide them in the direction of a
new identity, the messages must be communicated in the light of a number of joint
references (cultural common starting points, CSPs) that are defined through a cultural
analysis to some extent.
The communication of these messages must be directed toward the stakeholders
through a mix of central (CM) and local (LM) communication. Typically, the local
translation takes place with the local mid-level manager, but due to the special
character of the acquisition where for instance personal domains are at stake, it is not
certain that the mid-level manager is the right change agent unless thoroughly enabled
and empowered to fill out this role. Therefore, it is recommended to also use central
media, for instance to put into words the goodbye to the old culture and as bearers of a
new, joint culture. However, local change agents (k) in the form of role models,
advocates, representatives of new times and competent communicators are to be used
where possible, both centrally and locally.
In the end, an acquisition is a dynamic process, both because of the implicit change,
and because the process is so complex that there will invariably be unpredictable
elements, reactions, and consequences that make it impossible to make inflexible
long-term plans. The outcome of the communication, then, must be monitored on a
continuous basis – both through actual studies, but also in the form of random
feedback from department managers and through random observation. The results
may initiate a reevaluation (adaptation) of stakeholder constellations, communication
strategy, messages, and the division of communication between central and local
media.

Final remarks
Communicating the integration of one or more companies into another company is
not rocket science. It is more complex. Virtually everything is at stake in an
integration process – practicalities, corporate identity, individual identity, job
security, emotion. Such massive change calls for a meticulously thought-through
communication process.
The integration communication model shown in Figure 1 is intended to identify
some of the most crucial elements in the communication process. In doing so it
emphasizes the importance of supporting the building of a common corporate
identity., as well as underscoring the value of accepting and enabling the mid level
manager as a critically important communicator and change agent in this process.
Understanding this role of the middle manager, combined with a range of
qualitative – but certainly valuable – tools such as common sense and the right
gut feeling, should prove to be a useful model for the difficult art of
communicating mergers and acquisitions.
 66
13,1
CCIJ

Figure 1.

communication
Model for integration
FUSION
KEY MESSAGES: K0, K1, K2, K3, K4, Kn

Kulturelle CSP's

Central Kommunikation Lokal Kommunikation

CM1 CM2 CM3 CM4 CMn LM1 LM2 LM3 LM4 LMn ADAPTION
ISSUES:
X X
Kultur S1
Identitet X X X
S2
Struktur X X X X
S3 OUTCOME/
Usikkerhed X X X X EVALUERING
Teknik
S4
X
Integration Sn
X X
Etc.

STAKE HOLDER ANALYSE

X X X

ADAPTION

S: Stakesholders
CM: Central medie
LM: Lokale medier
Forandringsagent
Symboliserer dynamikken i fusionen
Note Hearts at stake
1. In this article, the word acquisition is used to cover acquisitions, mergers, joint ventures, etc.
even though the conditions involved and the consequences of the different forms of
agreements vary. This paper deals with an acquisition, or an asymmetric merger in a private
business where one party is dominant in relation to the other party in the integration.

References 67
Balmer, J.M.T. and Dinnie, K. (1999), “Corporate identity and corporate communications: the
antidote to merger madness”, Corporate Communications: An International Journal, Vol. 4
No. 4, pp. 182-92.
GCI Mannov and ACNielsen AIM (2002), Intern kommunikation (Survey).
Højrup, T. (1983), Det glemte folk, Institut for europæisk folkelivsforskning, Statens
byggeforskningsinstitut, København.
Jaques, E. (1953), “On the dynamics of social structure”, Human Relations, Vol. 6, pp. 3-24.
Larkin, T.J. and Larkin, S. (1994), Communicating Change. Winning Employee Support for New
Business Goals, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Menzies, I.E.P. (1967), The Functioning of Social Systems as a Defence Against Anxiety,
Tavistock, London.
Mitchell, R., Agle, B. and Wood, D. (1997), “Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and
salience: defining the principle of who and what really counts”, Academy of Management
Review, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 853-86.
Petersen, H. (2000), Forandringskommunikation, Samfundslitteratur, Frederiksberg.
Printz, L. (2001), Stakeholder Value, Aarhus School of Business, Aarhus, available at: www.asb.dk/
researchprojects/strategy-lab/debatten/ledelsesparadokser/stakeholder/stakeholder_value.htm
van Riel, C.B.M. (1992), Principles of Corporate Communication, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Visholm, S. (2004), “Modstand mod forandring – psykodynamiske perspektiver. (Draft)”, in
Heinskou, I.T. and Visholm, S. (Eds), Psykodynamisk organisationspsykologi, Hans Reitzels
Forlag, København.

Further reading
Bisgaard, P., Kjerulf, S. and Orbesen, A.L. (2004), Vækst gennem opkøb og fusioner, Børsens
Forlag, København.

About the author

Nana Balle (1968) is Communication Adviser with IBM Denmark, specializing in managing
internal and executive communication for a number of Danish and Nordic Executives as well as
advising on communicating major changes and transitions. She is a former Maersk Data
employee, working as Communication Consultant, and became part of IBM at the IBM
acquisition of Maersk Data in 2004. Before joining Maersk, she was a TV Journalist. She holds a
Master Degree in political science (University of Aarhus), is a trained Journalist (Danish School
of Journalism) and Master of Corporate Communication (Aarhus School of Business). She is
appointed External Examiner on the various Danish communication educations by the Ministry
of Science, Technology and Innovation. She also volunteers as a mentor for immigrant and
refugee women. Nana Balle can be contacted at: nab@dk.ibm.com

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints