In this chapter, multiple cases are used to illustrate ideal, and not-so-ideal, ways to communicate abstract ideas about the structure, style, and procedures that occur in the firms that are undergoing a merger and acquisition (M&A). Throughout the various stages of an M&A, from negotiations to the closing of a deal and beyond, organizational leaders should work towards a new, syncretic “way to get things done” to which each employee can adapt. Since the way that various decision-makers coordinate will lay a foundation for the post-merger integration, these objectives should be at the foreground, and not the background, of strategic decisions.

In the past decades, the Pharma/Biotech industry has experimented with many different partnerships, alliances, and joint venture configurations, which have included an array of health organizations. Simultaneously, many healthcare providers have privatized and created new forms of business acumen. In this chapter, the authors examine the case of a well-known American healthcare provider, a for-profit private firm, that establishes various alliances and then acquires the “best” entity, often based on positively collaborative, long-term relations. The healthcare provider in this case aims to set the leading edge for new products and services, yet this group of actors is often set aside in Pharma/Biotech M&A analyses. As keepers of medical knowledge, and as gatekeepers for many pharma and biotech products, we argue that the role of healthcare organizations in the USA is changing and requires further consideration.

As a concluding chapter, we will examine some of the limitations of the field of scholarship in Pharma/Biotech mergers and acquisitions (M&As) while offering various directions for future research. The chapter concludes with a series of questions that might be studied in future to further enlighten our understanding of the M&A process.