Assess the viability of financial actions or entities

Review the proposal to acquire the small supplier and update the financial viability worksheet: run the three-year cash flow scenario using the provided projected sales, include the estimated integration costs of 150,000, and add a sensitivity line showing EBITDA at minus 10% and plus 10% — then send the final viability sheet to Clara in strategy and to Ravi in finance for sign-off by Friday.

Before I show this acquisition model to the executive committee, make the viability analysis easy to judge — place the net present value and payback period at the top, add a clear line that lists the assumptions for revenue growth and integration costs, include a sensitivity table for EBITDA swings of ±10%, and flag the three assumptions that would cause the deal to fail so the committee can approve in one minute.

I ran the three-year acquisition model and the NPV is marginally positive, but I am unsure about the integration cost estimate and future sales growth. The people involved are Clara in strategy who will pitch it and Ravi in finance who signs off. I'm afraid the board will blame me if costs are higher than estimated, but I don't know which assumption is most likely to be wrong. Which sensitivity should I prioritize to stress-test first and what immediate evidence should I seek to reduce the biggest risk?

Across several past acquisitions we keep underestimating integration costs and overestimating first-year revenues, which wastes executive time and erodes trust in our models. We also rework the same sensitivity scenarios each time. What one habit should I change in how we build viability models — require third-party integration estimates, force a conservative revenue ramp template, or a mandatory post-close audit of forecasts — to stop the same mistakes recurring?