M&A: Company A acquires Company B. Both have Salesforce. Decisions:
Option 1: Migrate B into A's org.
- Pro: single source of truth.
- Con: complex data migration, business disruption.
- Best when: cultures align, B is small relative to A.
Option 2: Keep both orgs separate.
- Pro: minimal disruption.
- Con: data silos, double licensing, operational complexity.
- Best when: legal separation required, business units autonomous.
Option 3: Hub-and-spoke (multi-org).
- Central org with shared customer master.
- A and B as spokes.
- Mulesoft sync between.
- Best when: long-term coexistence, want unified analytics.
Option 4: Phased consolidation.
- Start separate; migrate over 12-24 months.
- Risk-managed approach.
Considerations:
- Data residency — different regions may force separation.
- Regulatory — HR / financial separation requirements.
- Customer overlap — shared customers benefit from unified view.
- Licensing cost — duplicate often expensive.
- Operational load — managing two orgs is real work.
- Cultural fit — forcing one team to adopt another's patterns is hard.
Architectural blueprint:
- Discovery — understand both orgs.
- Decision with leadership.
- Migration plan if consolidating.
- Sync architecture if keeping separate.
- Long-term roadmap.
Senior insight: most M&A scenarios benefit from eventual consolidation, but the path matters. Phased over 12-24 months is typical. Big-bang migration of one Salesforce org into another is risky and slow.