A cable operator was preparing for one of the largest mergers in US telecom history, with more than a dozen BUs that needed to integrate without disrupting customers. Tristellium stood up the IMO during due diligence and ran it through close, aligning planning across the enterprise, managing hundreds of cross-functional dependencies, and giving leadership a single source of truth for Day 1 readiness across broadband, mobile, and video.
An IMO stood up during due diligence before close, not after
A single governance model that aligned more than a dozen BUs, with consistent artifacts and named owners
Hundreds of cross-functional dependencies mapped and managed through Day 1 and Day 90 gates
A 1,000+ row integrated plan covering Day 1 and Day 90 milestones across the supported verticals
A dual-hat model (enterprise IMO and embedded BU augmentation) so standards got adopted, not just published
A single source of truth for RAID, decision logs, and executive reporting, reducing execution risk through close and improving readiness confidence pre-Day 1
A cable operator was entering a transaction that cut across its broadband, mobile, and video footprint. The mandate was to reach an on-time, incident-free Day 1 while maintaining customer service quality across all three product lines through close.
The complication was operational. More than a dozen BUs, each with its own priorities and operating rhythm, would need to integrate alongside another large enterprise on the other side of the deal. Without a single governance model, the integration could easily fragment into a series of parallel submergers.
Tristellium was brought in to manage this risk.
The challenge was getting more than a dozen BUs, plus a counterpart enterprise, to plan, decide, and report through the same model, on the deal’s timeline. That's a coordination problem. In a merger of this size, coordination problems become customer problems on Day 1.
Mergers of this size move on two parallel timelines. The deal advances on its own schedule. At the same time, integration has to be far enough along by close that Day 1 doesn't surface every unresolved issue at once, especially in front of customers. The cable operator needed:
Everything had to be in place before close.
Tristellium's work unfolded on two tracks: standing up the governance and tooling to carry the program through close, and embedding within priority BUs so the standards were adopted in real time.
Work began with a rapid stand-up of the IMO during due diligence: scope, governance, and engagement rules across internal BUs and the acquired party. The information request intake process was standardized from the start, along with Day 1 and Day 90 planning templates and cross-functional dependency trackers for reporting and tracking.
The goal was to make the IMO the operating layer of the integration rather than a separate reporting function that BUs would route around.
Standards only work when teams use them. Tristellium ran a dual-hat model: IMO at the enterprise level, plus embedded augmentation inside priority BUs: Sales, Marketing, and Network. The standards set centrally were the same standards that the embedded teams translated into deliverables, so what was published in the IMO was what was used on the ground.
Governance ran on two tiers. Operational Steering managed cross-workstream alignment and risk burn-down. Executive Steering made key decisions and signed off. Readiness progressed through four sequenced gates, each of which a workstream had to clear to advance:
That readiness progression changed leadership conversations. Executives stopped sitting through status updates and started spending their time on decisions and trade-offs.
Within each BU, the work followed a clear progression. Every subvertical began with a Day 1 POV: a high-level, direct statement of what had to be true on Day 1 and which activities were critical to getting there. That POV anchored every subsequent data request and detailed planning effort.
From there, subverticals built a Plan of Record, the detailed project plan covering every step required to deliver against the POV.
The combined output across all BUs was a comprehensive Day 1 Operating Model: the cross-functional dependency map and executive view that ran the program through close.
The same framework was then carried forward to Day 90 planning, Transition Service Agreement assessments, and ongoing program management.
By close, the BUs were running the integration through the IMO:
More than a dozen BUs aligned under a single governance model, with consistent artifacts and named owners
Hundreds of cross-functional dependencies were mapped and actively managed through Day 1 and Day 90 gates
Day 1 and Day 90 plans integrated across all BUs, focused on the operator's priority corporate initiatives
A 1,000+ row integrated plan detailing Day 1 and Day 90 milestones and tasks across the supported verticals
A single source of truth for RAID, decision logs, and executive reporting, improving readiness confidence pre-Day 1 and lowering execution risk through close
The IMO ended up as the operating model the BUs used to get to close.
Mergers in this space live or die on operating discipline. The deal terms get the headlines; the integration mechanics decide whether the value actually shows up. Information has to flow through a single front door. Decisions have to be logged where everyone can see them. Readiness has to be gated, not assumed.
The teams running the integration have to be the same teams setting the standards.
The deals that close cleanly are the ones where this work is in place before the announcement and holds through close.
212-470-5850
430 W 14 Street
New York NY 10014
