Designing Succession: Culture, Strategy, Growth

HOW MCCALLUMSATHER, EDGE ARCHITECTS & STUDIOCANOO CAME TOGETHER

Drew Hauser

In the winter of 2023–2024, Hamilton-based sustainability leader mcCallumSather acquired Waterloo-based mass timber specialist Edge Architects—a firm they had long admired for its design excellence and technical innovation. Just a few months later, they deepened their presence in Toronto by acquiring studioCANOO, a frequent collaborator of Edge and a respected force in civic and institutional design.

Matt Bolen

By uniting the complementary expertise and shared values of all three firms, mcCallumSather has established a strong foundation for future growth. This is reflected in its newly integrated leadership team: Drew Hauser has succeeded founder Joanne McCallum as Chair of the firm’s Board; Edge founders Matt Bolen and Michael Trussel now serve as Managing Principals; and the founders of StudioCANOO have joined the team as Principals.

What follows is a candid conversation with Drew Hauser and Matt Bolen about the path to integration—and the deeper strategy, succession planning, and cultural groundwork that made it possible.

APPROACH TO SUCCESSSION PLANNING: THE CULTURE AND TRUST EQUATION

Oomph: Let’s start with the big picture. In today’s rapidly shifting practice environment, there’s no one-size-fits-all approach to succession planning or stable growth.

Some firms take the internal route—identifying gaps, hiring strategically, and developing talent from within. Others grow through acquisition. And some conclude that building the necessary expertise organically will take too long, opting instead to sell and align with the right partner.

You’ve both navigated major transitions—succession, acquisition, and integration—and between you, you’ve experienced all three sides of the equation: acquiring a firm, succeeding a founder, and selling your own practice. That combination is rare in the AEC world, and it gives you a uniquely well-rounded perspective on what succession really involves.

So let’s start there: strategically, why might acquisition be the right move instead of organic growth—or vice versa?

Drew Hauser: The first and most important factor is culture and trust. For us at mcCallumSather succession planning was part of the decision, but the bigger question was: How will another group enhance our culture? What new perspectives and experiences will they bring? What will this team look like, and how will it evolve over time? In the case of Edge, technically it was an acquisition, but in reality, it was the creation of a new team where everyone has a meaningful voice—something that’s especially important from the perspective of the organization joining us.

We wanted to create a place where people could build careers, not just hold jobs. Employee ownership allows people to retire meaningfully, transition responsibilities gradually, and know the firm will remain in good hands. We also wanted a structure that empowered people at every level, not just the executive group. So yes, technically this was an acquisition, but in reality, it was the creation of a new team where everyone has a meaningful voice—something especially important from the perspective of the organization joining us.

Over the years, we’ve been approached by firms of all sizes, but we’ve always asked: Why are they acquiring us? Is it just to add drafting capacity, or do they genuinely want to integrate our perspective into leadership? In our own evolution, we’ve been intentional about moving away from a top-down leadership model toward a round-table approach—empowering more people to make decisions, manage budgets, and shape the firm’s direction.

Matt Bolen: I don’t think you go into this process saying, “I want to sell” or “I want to acquire.” For us at Edge, it was about alignment—strategy and vision.

We started as a scrappy startup with no ambitions beyond survival. Over time, as our profile and portfolio grew, we saw the opportunity to expand beyond our local market. The challenge was we didn’t have the capacity to do it internally, and building it organically would take too long. Acquisition or divestiture are just technical tools—alignment is the real driver. In a volatile industry, aligning goals, strategy, and vision is what matters.

We saw that with the McCallum Sather–Edge combination and again with StudioCANOO in Toronto. That partnership wasn’t the same legal structure, but the concept was identical—two groups with shared objectives coming together. Greg at StudioCANOO wanted to grow, and that aligned perfectly with our goal of establishing a Toronto presence and scaling from there.

Historically, our industry has been competitive and closed off, with plenty of lip service to collaboration but little real openness. We think it’s time for a mindset shift: be transparent about your goals and vision, look for partners who share them, and then choose the right tool—joint venture, partnership, succession plan, acquisition—to make them happen.

Drew Hauser: We were fortunate going into those next steps because we’d already worked with Matt and Mike at Edge and had a great experience. That was critical. This wasn’t about growth for growth’s sake—it was about meaningful expansion. Were we doing work we were proud of? Could we shift toward projects that aligned better with our mission and vision? And how would we integrate an entire team into that? As we grew, we worked hard to avoid an “us vs. them” culture between offices, striving instead to function as one unified company. That means constantly finding new ways to engage people across locations.

That’s why the StudioCANOO partnership also made sense because the relationship and trust were already there. Mike and Matt already had a strong working relationship there, so the move was rooted in trust and shared goals—not just growth for growth’s sake. We kept the process enjoyable, let leadership evolve naturally, and accepted there would be challenges—aligning software, updating standards, clarifying decision-making. We learned to keep questioning and refining.

Finally, We also had to face the scale issue head-on. Ten or fifteen years ago, a $100 million project was considered large. Today, $700 million to $1 billion is the norm for significant work. To compete at that level—especially against multinational firms from the U.S., Europe, or Asia—you need capacity, depth, and breadth of expertise. We already had specialized strengths in lab planning, modular construction, engineered products, and heritage work, but growing those through acquisition made us more valuable partners on large teams. We might start with a narrow role, but once people see the quality, trust builds, and we’re asked to do more.

WHEN TO START PLANNING FOR SUCCESSION: YESTERDAY

Oomph: Thank you both for sharing the motivation, strategy, and thinking behind the coming together of mcCallumSather, Edge Architects, and StudioCANOO—especially your focus on culture, creative values, and the idea of joining forces for the greater good.

Let’s now shift to the more practical side of succession planning and share some insights that readers might find useful as they navigate their own transitions.

A lot of people assume that once you decide to sell your firm it’ll happen fairly quickly—but in reality, it’s a process that often takes far longer than most people imagine.

Drew, you mentioned earlier that your firm has a culture where shares are sold gradually over time, and where senior staff actively mentor and transfer knowledge to the next generation. That kind of succession mindset doesn’t happen overnight.

So, let’s talk about succession as a long-range effort. How do you prepare for it—and how far in advance should you start? Let’s say you're a firm owner who knows you want to sell. How early should you be laying the groundwork?

Matt Bolen: I love this question. When we started Edge, it was actually in response to a succession plan that hadn’t worked out at another firm. So, for us, succession planning wasn’t an afterthought—it was baked in from day one. We knew early on that if we wanted to build something sustainable, we had to think beyond ourselves. So we started setting up structures for internal growth and ownership—modeling off other firms we respected, like McCallumSather.

My advice? It’s never too early. Start immediately. And don’t just focus on one path—learn about all the ways growth can happen: internal, organic, external, acquisition, merger, divestiture.

What we didn’t fully anticipate was how those paths might intersect. When external growth opportunities emerged, we had to recalibrate our internal plans. That created some internal challenges—especially around communication and perception. But the earlier you plan and map things out, the better equipped you’ll be.

FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS

Oomph: Okay, I think that makes a lot of sense—and it builds on what Drew said earlier about embedding a succession mindset into the culture of the firm. But let’s look at a different scenario: what if a firm doesn’t have that culture?

Let’s say one or two people hold most of the shares, they’re now 57, and they realize they need to start planning for an exit. They haven’t laid the groundwork. Based on everything you’ve seen and thought through on this topic, what would you advise them to start putting in place—say, five years out, three years, two years?

Drew Hauser:
It’s a great question, and the answer really depends on a few factors: the size of the firm, how long it’s been around, whether it’s profitable, whether leadership has been compensating itself properly.

People often overestimate the value of their firm based on future potential—"We’re going to win these big jobs next year”—but predicting the future is a dangerous game. Every firm will have strong years and tough ones. Valuing a small firm accurately is challenging.

If you're 57 and just beginning to plan a sale, and the firm is successful, the price tag can be significant. That’s a big outlay for someone buying in. Some owners try to get around that by gifting shares, hoping it will keep people loyal. But that only works if those people are given a real voice at the leadership table, have access to the books, and feel empowered to help shape the firm.

The reality is many firms don’t leave much equity in the business. On good years, partners pull money out rather than leaving it in, so the firm’s capital base is low, which makes financing hard—unless it’s personally secured. That’s a tough sell to someone coming in who doesn’t have decision-making authority.

We’ve seen this play out in different ways. Sometimes, when someone winds down their firm and merges with us, they want to ensure long-time employees are looked after. Sometimes that works beautifully. Other times, those employees are ready to move on too. Either way, these transitions raise important questions about stability, equity, and how to give people a soft landing—or a new runway.

There are also tax implications. Becoming an employee instead of a partner can change how you’re paid—more salary, fewer dividends—and that needs to be understood.

My advice? Start planning as early as possible. Whether you’re thinking about internal succession or a potential acquisition, the sooner you plan, the more professionally you’ll run the firm—and the more options you’ll have when the time comes.

At mcCallumSather, we’re always ready. If a like-minded firm on the West Coast called tomorrow about merging, we have the data, the strategic plan, and the governance structure ready to share with our board and shareholders. That kind of discipline makes the business stronger overall.

One last point: I strongly recommend forming a board, even if it’s just adding a single external advisor to a two-person partnership. Ideally, your board fills in the gaps in your leadership. It might be someone with financial expertise, but it could also be someone with different strategic strengths. What matters is having an outside voice to guide you.

And let’s be honest: most of us didn’t learn any of this in school. Architecture and engineering programs don’t teach HR, finance, or operations. Time and again, I hear leaders say, “I can’t wait to stop dealing with HR.” That’s why, as you grow, it’s a relief to build out a team that handles those areas—so you can focus on what you’re best at.

It really is the school of hard knocks—but we always say: if you’re going to fail, fail fast, and course-correct.

HOW MARKETING AND BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT INFLUENCE FIRM VALUATION

Oomph: You’ve both touched on some of the financial considerations involved in buying or selling a firm, such as profitability, equity, and tax implications. Let’s look at how other factors—particularly marketing and business development—also directly impact a firm’s value.

I bring up marketing and BD in this context because I did a project with a CPA who specialized in valuing professional services firms, and one of the key lessons was that future revenues—especially in the three years following an ownership transition—are a major factor in how a firm is valued. Having a strong business development and marketing infrastructure in place is critical, because, if the principal leaves and the remaining team can’t procure work, the firm’s viability—and its valuation—may decrease considerably.

In our industry, it’s not uncommon for a single Principal to lead business development and generate most of the firm’s revenue. What happens when that person leaves? Can that firm survive? Could you speak to the importance of a structured, broad-based system for generating work in the context of succession planning?

Drew Hauser: Absolutely. That’s a crucial point. When evaluating a firm for acquisition, we do look at future revenue potential—what’s in the pipeline, what relationships are in place, and what’s likely to come in over the next few years. That’s part of the picture.

But at mcCallumSather, we place greater weight on historical performance—typically a three-to-five-year window—because it’s tangible, proven, and less speculative. Pipeline work might look promising, but it’s not guaranteed. You could win all of it—or none of it. That’s why we focus on consistent business development results over time, not just a hopeful forecast.

Then there’s goodwill. That’s a tricky line item. It sits on your books indefinitely, and unless you’re a mid-to-large-sized firm, it’s hard to justify. Goodwill alone won’t carry the valuation—it needs to be backed by real, measurable value.

And that brings us back to marketing and BD. If a firm hasn’t developed a strong team or infrastructure for business development—or hasn’t transferred key client relationships—then its future revenue is far from secure. We’ve seen cases where a founder announces they’re selling the firm to their staff, and the team is surprised… because none of them have been involved in bringing in work. That’s a major risk. Without a plan to sustain BD beyond the principal, the firm’s long-term viability—and value—is at risk.

Matthew Bolen: Exactly—and it highlights one of the biggest risks in transition: assuming that strong technical or project staff will naturally evolve into business leaders.

Not everyone needs to be a rainmaker, but someone in the next generation must have that skill—or be actively trained for it. We’ve seen firsthand just how essential that is.

FROM STRATEGY TO EXECUTION: LESSONS LEARNED

Oomph: Let’s shift now from strategy to execution. Once you’ve made the decision to move ahead with a merger or acquisition, there’s still a long road between that moment and the day the deal is signed—let alone the year of integration that follows. In your case, that early window included everything from crafting internal communications to informing key regulators and clients, well before the public announcement. And once the news is out, the real work of making it all function begins—aligning systems, integrating teams, maintaining momentum.

Looking back, what stands out about that journey—from the pre-signing prep through the first year post-announcement? What worked well, what caught you off guard, and what lessons would you share with others heading into a similar process?

Matt Bolen: One thing that’s stuck with me from early in the transition—around the time I first met you, Johanna—is something you said: “You’ll communicate this deal to your team once. But that’s not the end of the communication—it’s the beginning.”

That really resonated. You have to keep reinforcing the message: why we’re doing this, what challenges we’ll face, and how we’ll work through them together. It’s not a one-and-done announcement—it’s an ongoing conversation that can stretch over a year or more.

Living through that, two big lessons have stood out for me:

First: IT and systems integration.

If your tech doesn’t work—if it’s clunky, fragmented, or poorly aligned—it hurts productivity and morale. It’s not just frustrating; it affects how people collaborate and how they feel about their work. We all need need clarity around systems: where to find files, how to communicate, what tools to use. We’ve had to invest in strong people, systems, and protocols to make that work—and it’s been one of our biggest operational challenges.

Second: human support.

During periods of change, people need someone to talk to. As leaders, we do our best to be available—but we’re stretched thin. Bringing in a skilled HR professional has made a huge difference. They’ve become a trusted point of contact for staff—a sounding board, a feedback loop, a cultural connector. It’s helped us bridge the gap between high-level strategy and everyday experience. Having that dedicated resource to support the human side of the transition has been invaluable.

Drew Hauser: culture also played a role here, because it can’t be dictated from the top down. We began asking teams, “How would you like to do this?” and then letting them share their approaches with other groups. That peer-to-peer exchange has been powerful for evolving our culture organically.

EVOLVING DECISION-MAKING STRUCTURES

Drew Hauser: Adapting to a bigger team and a new group of firm leaders has driven a change in decision-making. One of the biggest shifts has been moving certain decisions from the executive team to what we call “thought centers.” These are groups focused on specific areas of expertise—like sustainability, technology, or design leadership. Each one is given an annual budget and empowered to decide how best to use it—whether it’s attending conferences, investing in continuing education, or launching a new initiative. If a group doesn’t have the funds to do something on its own, they can collaborate with another thought center. Instead of waiting weeks for executive approval, they check the strategic plan and make a call.

For some senior staff, this shift has been a bit uncomfortable—they’re used to decisions coming from above. But it’s developing leadership skills in our mid-levels and encouraging people to think more strategically, beyond their immediate project work.

I like to think of us as a professional sports team. People move positions, sometimes even go to other teams, but everyone is working toward making the team the best it can be. Training and mentoring are essential—you’re only as strong as your weakest player.

SURPRISES AND INTEGRATION CHALLENGES

Oomph: To wrap things up, I’d love to hear a personal reflection from each of you. You’ve both been through a complex, multi-stage transition—planning, integration, cultural alignment, and beyond. Looking back, what surprised you the most about the process? What did you not expect going in?

Drew Hauser: There are always surprises.

One was server capacity—we underestimated what we’d need and had to invest significantly to catch up. With AI and large-model rendering becoming the norm, that infrastructure is more critical than ever.

Another surprise: involving too many lawyers or accountants in every discussion can slow progress and inflate costs. Sometimes, a direct conversation between principals is the fastest, most effective path forward.

Security protocols were another curveball. Certain contracts require specific measures, and being licensed in multiple provinces can trigger the need to license additional shareholders—adding complexity and cost.

The common thread through it all? Communication. Clear, transparent, and ongoing dialogue is essential. Not everyone will get exactly what they want—but with honest communication, you can still build trust and alignment.