This Synergy Report is the operational record that bridges the gap between what was promised and what gets delivered. It runs two connected sheets — an Overhead Synergy Estimates sheet that establishes the current-state cost baseline by functional category and a Synergy Tracker that assigns ownership, phasing, risk, and implementation dates to every initiative. Together they give the IMO a clear view on where the M&A integration stands on its cost commitments.
The Overhead Synergy Estimates sheet maps current-state functional costs and headcount across the combined organization — covering financial reporting, technical accounting, company-level accounting, benefits administration, and group-wide support functions. Each category is broken out by labor and non-labor costs, by where the work is currently being done, and by whether the activity is regulatory and required, discretionary, or strategic. That classification matters because it determines which activities can be eliminated or consolidated and which ones have to be preserved regardless of the integration. The year-end estimates with synergies applied show where headcount and cost land after integration decisions are executed, giving leadership a before-and-after picture by function rather than just a total savings number.
The Synergy Tracker captures the full profile of each initiative. Every synergy has a category — eliminating redundancy, increasing revenue, or improving service delivery model — and a phase designation that moves from opportunity identified through approved to implemented. Cost savings are broken out by type: salaries and wages, payroll-related costs, subscriptions and dues, facilities costs, and other non-labor items. Each initiative also carries a risk rating, a difficulty assessment, and a flag indicating whether affected headcount is being eliminated or transferred elsewhere in the organization. Initiatives where people are transferring rather than being separated are tracked differently — the savings are real but the cost profile is different, and the people management approach is entirely different.