MAIO031
Assess product retention against MiFID II product governance obligations before elimination, documenting customer impact and viable migration paths.
CyberTRIZ analysis · MergersAndAcquisitions contradiction MAIO031 · one of 8,235 worked contradictions published by CyberTRIZ.AI
Regulations
Product Rationalization vs Revenue Preservation
Business ContextCombined companies often have overlapping products and services that increase complexity, cost, and internal competition. Rationalizing the portfolio can generate efficiencies, but eliminating offerings may cause customer attrition or remove profitable niche revenue.
Mergers and Acquisitions TRIZ ResolutionEvaluate products according to customer dependence, profitability, strategic role, and substitutability before elimination. Consolidate genuine duplication while providing migration paths or retaining differentiated offerings where customer or economic value remains significant.
Applicable TRIZ Principles
Principle 2 – Taking Out removes products that add complexity without sufficient value.
Principle 1 – Segmentation differentiates products according to economic and customer importance.
Principle 15 – Dynamics transitions customers progressively where product migration is required.
Expected Outcome
Simpler product portfolio
Higher revenue preservation
Lower operating complexity
Better customer migration
Decision IndicatorsEarly indicators that this contradiction is limiting M&A performance include:
Product elimination is based primarily on apparent overlap.
Customers lack acceptable migration alternatives.
Rationalization savings are measured without revenue effects.
Profitable niche products are removed for standardization.
Customer attrition increases following portfolio changes.
Monitoring these indicators helps reduce product complexity without unnecessarily sacrificing revenue.