When one real estate company acquires another, the deal announcement is just the beginning. If both organizations run Yardi Voyager, which is common in Canadian commercial real estate, someone has to answer a deceptively simple question: what do we do with two separate property management systems?
The options sound straightforward: consolidate into one database, run them separately, or start fresh. In practice, each path carries significant complexity that can delay integration timelines, inflate budgets, and disrupt operations for months or years.
The Three Paths Forward
Option 1: Consolidate into a Single Database
Migrating one company's data into the other's existing Yardi instance creates a unified platform. This delivers consolidated reporting, standardized workflows, and simplified administration eventually.
The challenge: both organizations have configured Yardi differently. The chart of accounts structures differ. Charge codes don't align. Custom reports reference different data fields. Approval workflows follow different logic. Merging databases means reconciling years of configuration decisions made independently.
Option 2: Run Parallel Systems
Keeping both Yardi instances running preserves business continuity. Each team continues to work in familiar environments while leadership decides on the long-term strategy.
The challenge: you're now paying for two systems, maintaining two configurations, and producing separate reports that must be manually consolidated. The "temporary" parallel arrangement often stretches into years because consolidation keeps getting deferred.
Option 3: Start Fresh with a New Instance
Building a new Yardi environment from scratch allows the combined organization to design optimal configurations without legacy constraints.
The challenge: every historical data record must be migrated. Both teams must learn new workflows simultaneously. Implementation timelines extend significantly, and the organization loses operational continuity during transition.
The Hidden Complexity
Regardless of which path you choose, several technical challenges emerge:
Chart of Accounts Alignment. Different COA structures mean transaction history doesn't map cleanly. Do you reclass historical data or maintain dual coding for legacy transactions?
Vendor and Tenant Records. Duplicate records exist across systems. Which one becomes the master? How do you handle different payment terms or credit histories for the same entity?
Lease Abstraction Differences. Different teams entered lease data following different standards. Recovery calculations and CAM pools may be configured inconsistently.
Custom Reports and Integrations. Both organizations built custom reports and integrations over the years. Which survives? Who retrain users?
User Security and Permissions. Merging organizations means merging security models. Role definitions don't match approval hierarchies conflict.
What Most Organizations Underestimate
Timeline. System consolidation isn't a weekend project. Realistic timelines range from 6 to 18 months, depending on portfolio size. Organizations that rush to create data quality problems that persist for years.
Data Cleanup. Merging systems exposes data quality issues in both environments. Budget time for cleanup; it takes longer than expected.
Change Management. One team will work in an unfamiliar system. Training, productivity dips, and resistance to new workflows are predictable but underplanned.
Parallel Operations. During transition, someone must maintain both systems while building the consolidated environment.
Making the Decision
The right approach depends on several factors:
Portfolio similarity. If both organizations manage similar asset types with similar operational models, consolidation makes sense. If portfolios differ significantly (e.g., residential vs. commercial or different geographic markets), parallel systems may be appropriate in the long term.
Integration timeline. Aggressive integration timelines favor keeping systems separate initially. Patient timelines allow proper consolidation planning.
Operational priority. If immediate unified reporting is critical for investors or lenders, prioritize consolidation. If operational stability is more important, move cautiously.
Resource availability. System consolidation requires dedicated internal resources plus external expertise. If teams are already stretched managing the business combination, defer significant system changes.
Where External Expertise Helps
Organizations that navigate M&A system integration successfully typically engage consultants who've done it before. The value isn't just technical knowledge, it's pattern recognition from previous consolidations.
Experienced consultants identify data mapping challenges early, anticipate configuration conflicts, and build realistic project plans. They've seen where consolidations fail and can help you avoid those pitfalls.
They also provide surge capacity during transition, extra hands for data cleanup, migration testing, user training, and parallel system maintenance without permanent headcount additions.
Assetsoft has supported Yardi system integrations for M&A transactions across North America and globally. Our team brings deep Yardi expertise and practical experience navigating the complexities of integrating property management operations. Learn more at www.assetsoft.biz
