After a measured few years, Mergers and Acquisitions (M&A) activity has regained momentum in South Africa. The country, in fact, led the continent in deal value in 2025. It accounted for roughly 35% of Africa’s total M&A value.
Meanwhile, inbound deal value rose by over 40%, and outbound activity increased by nearly 85% year on year.
Each deal reflects growth and receives celebration in the media and across industries. However, every transaction also places new demands on internal systems and teams. Finance teams, in particular, must integrate new businesses into reporting environments that were never designed for this level of complexity. As a result, effective group reporting has become increasingly important as organisations expand.
Transactions such as Woolworths’ acquisition of in2food and Mr Price’s expansion into Europe through the purchase of NKD Group point to a broader trend. We are seeing group structures become more layered and demanding.
Deal activity is often viewed through a strategic or commercial lens, but the operational reality is that every acquisition introduces a new level of reporting complexity. By the time a deal is signed, the pressure shifts almost immediately to how quickly and accurately the new entity can be reflected in group numbers.
When growth outpaces systems
Each acquisition brings a set of variables that complicate consolidation. Many South African finance teams are still working across a mix of legacy platforms, spreadsheets and partially integrated tools. Introducing a newly acquired business often means adding yet another system into the mix, with little standardisation between them.
When organisations operate multiple legal entities, inconsistent systems create fragmented data estates. Finance teams must manually align this data before they can produce any group view. Different charts of accounts, fiscal calendars and currencies require time-consuming mapping and reconciliation. Reliance on spreadsheets also remains common because legacy systems lack seamless integration capabilities.
In many cases, this manual work extends close and consolidation cycles. It also introduces the risk of error and diverts teams away from analysis towards data preparation. Consequently, finance teams spend valuable time preparing information instead of interpreting it. Then there are structural differences. Entities may operate in different currencies or follow different financial year-ends. Even within South Africa, inconsistencies in reporting formats and processes can create friction. Those differences can then multiply across borders.
The result is more fragmented data, and finance teams must reconcile and consolidate information manually. They often have to complete this work under tight reporting deadlines. What should be a straightforward view of group performance becomes a time-intensive exercise in alignment. This makes efficient group reporting increasingly difficult as organisations add more entities.
The visibility gap
Group CFOs and finance directors need a consolidated and accurate view of performance across all entities. This becomes particularly critical in the months following an acquisition.
During this period, leadership assesses whether the deal is delivering on its strategic intent. However, many teams work with systems that cannot easily support comparative views across entities with different systems and operational processes. Producing like-for-like reporting can take days rather than hours. The same applies to tracking performance against forecasts or generating consistent management reports.
This creates a visibility gap at the exact moment when clarity matters most. Decision-making slows. Risk increases. Opportunities to respond quickly to underperformance or inefficiencies are missed. As a result, the challenge extends beyond producing numbers. Finance leaders need timely information that allows them to understand the performance of the entire group and act accordingly.
A shift towards automation
As deal activity accelerates, the limitations of traditional reporting approaches are becoming harder to ignore. Enterprises increasingly recognise that consolidation represents a strategic imperative for successful M&A activity.
Automated group reporting solutions are increasingly entering the conversation. This is particularly true for solutions that can integrate multiple ERP systems, handle multi-currency environments and accommodate different financial year-ends without extensive manual intervention. This includes locally developed platforms like Finnivo. These platforms are designed to support complex, multi-entity group structures while reducing reliance on manual processes.
Automation reduces the risk of error and shortens reporting cycles. It also allows teams to focus on analysis rather than data preparation. Furthermore, automation creates a consistent reporting framework that can scale as organisations add new entities.
Keeping pace with the deal cycle
M&A activity does not slow down to accommodate reporting limitations. Deals are executed when opportunities arise, and integration timelines are often aggressive. In line with this, finance teams must keep pace. They must deliver accurate group insights even while systems and processes remain in the process of being aligned.
This is where the gap between growth and capability becomes most visible. Organisations that continue to rely on manual consolidation or fragmented systems will find it 
increasingly difficult to keep up. This is particularly true as their structures become more complex.
The current wave of M&A activity in South Africa clearly signals that growth strategies are evolving. The underlying finance infrastructure, therefore, needs to evolve alongside them.
Group reporting systems that can adapt to complexity, rather than struggle against it, are becoming essential. Ultimately, the ability to see the full picture quickly and accurately determines whether that growth delivers value.
Alwyn Pretorius | General Manager | Infinitus Reporting Solutions | mail me |
