An acquisition thesis becomes useful when it changes the decisions people make each week. For a home-services platform, the first 100 days should connect customer continuity, operating accountability, and the economics of growth.

This is a proposed implementation framework, not a client case study or a claim of achieved returns. Adapt the sequencing to the acquired business, the deal thesis, and its capacity to absorb change.

Days 1–30: protect the revenue engine

Map the customer journey from search and referral through answered calls, booking, dispatch, completed work, and cash collection. Confirm ownership of domains, advertising accounts, listings, phone numbers, tracking, and customer data. Test those handoffs before and after any change.

Build a baseline by brand, market, and trade. Separate qualified demand from raw inquiries; separate bookings from completed jobs. Record cancellations, service availability, realized revenue, and contribution using definitions agreed with operations and finance. Note seasonality and data gaps rather than presenting an unreliable comparison as fact.

Exit evidence: a signed-off baseline, an asset and access register, named owners for continuity risks, and a daily exception check for disrupted demand or booking.

Days 31–60: make the operating model explicit

Decide which decisions belong to the platform and which remain local. Shared definitions, account ownership, vendor accountability, and reporting can be standardized while local teams retain input on service areas, capacity, customer promises, and brand recognition.

Treat a rebrand or agency change as an investment decision. Document the expected benefit, transition cost, dependencies, measurement plan, and rollback conditions. A uniform appearance does not by itself establish an economic benefit.

Exit evidence: a decision-rights matrix, a weekly operating review, a prioritized integration backlog, and an approved test plan for each consequential change.

Days 61–100: prove the next growth lever

Choose a bounded experiment that addresses an observed constraint: recovering missed calls, improving qualified booking, activating existing customers, or expanding a service line where capacity exists. Name the owner, starting baseline, cost, success measure, and stop condition before launching.

Compare results with a suitable baseline or comparison group where feasible. Account for weather, seasonality, staffing, and changes in job mix. Reconcile the operating result with finance before describing it as value created. Deduct implementation and recurring costs; do not count the same benefit in two workstreams.

Exit evidence: a measured result, a documented operating procedure, and a decision to scale, revise, or stop.

The Day-100 review

  • What customer or revenue risk was removed?
  • Which decisions became faster or more reliable?
  • What improved relative to the baseline, and what else could explain it?
  • What did the improvement cost to create and sustain?
  • Can the acquired team repeat the result without the integration lead?

The next phase should be funded from this evidence. Day 100 is a decision point, not an arbitrary finish line for every migration or growth initiative.

Reading behind the framework

McKinsey’s How the best acquirers excel at integration argues for tailoring integration to the deal’s sources of value and tracking progress against a granular baseline. This is foundational, cross-sector reading rather than a new home-services report. The phased home-services application above is Soaring Demand’s interpretation.

For the leadership perspective, read Corne Nieuwoudt on measuring integration progress.