Alexandre Grellier, CEO & co-founder, Drooms
Alexandre Grellier is the CEO & co-founder of Drooms, a leading data room provider in Europe.
Whether it's the sale of a property portfolio or the entry of a new investor, many people believe that transactions fail primarily because of capital. In fact, their failure is surprisingly often related to communication.
This is shown by the latest survey that we conducted at Drooms together with Statista. The study shows in black and white what many industry participants know from experience: non-transparent coordination, parallel communication channels and a lack of commitment are the main reasons for slowing down the deal flow.
Communication leads to the greatest loss of efficiency
In the survey, 76 per cent of the property and M&A managers surveyed stated that coordination with stakeholders is the biggest challenge in the transaction process. 89 per cent of respondents reported that they lose more than 30 hours on each deal due to misunderstandings, missed information and unclear responsibilities. In one in five deals, the time lost is even more than 150 hours. This equates to almost four weeks of working time per year, per person. For companies, this is not only a risk for the transaction process, but also a significant cost factor.
There are many reasons for this, but they follow a clear pattern. There are too many communication channels and too little oversight. Emails, phone calls, messengers and platforms are all running simultaneously. Information gets lost, tasks are duplicated and decision-making is delayed, because all deal-related information and communication isn’t centralised in one place. In a business where speed is the key to success, this is a structural problem.
Efficiency becomes a deal breaker
The Drooms Real Estate Trends Report 2025 published earlier this year also highlighted that the pace of the transaction market is slowing. Deals are taking significantly longer today, primarily because internal coordination has become more difficult. The number of stakeholders involved has increased, regulatory requirements, particularly ESG-related due diligence, are becoming more demanding, and transaction processes now require more thorough documentation and verification than ever before.. At the same time, available resources are decreasing, meaning that many teams have to do the same work with fewer staff. The Drooms and Statista survey also confirms this: Processes are becoming more complex and teams are getting smaller.
This changes the rules of the game. The winner is no longer automatically the highest bidder, but the one who can realise a transaction quickly and reliably. Speed is of the essence and this depends directly on the quality of communication.
Fragmented communication is also a compliance risk
The problem of unstructured communication goes far beyond efficiency losses. Anyone working with sensitive information must also take the utmost care when choosing communication channels. Nevertheless, according to the survey, 19 per cent of respondents use messaging services such as WhatsApp. This contradicts current compliance and data protection standards as such messaging services are not automatically protected under the GDPR.
The consequences are serious. In addition to security gaps, specific legal risks also arise. In the USA, the Securities and Exchange Commission has already imposed heavy fines on several occasions because companies have not adequately documented their internal communications processes or have used untraceable channels. These risks could be avoided if communication was treated with the same care as the legal and financial review of a deal.
This is why communication solutions are needed that are not only efficient but also maximise security. If you cut corners in this area, you not only risk penalties in an emergency, but also the loss of sensitive data and the trust of investors.
What is missing is a clear structure
The solution is obvious: communication needs to be centralised. Only if everyone involved works together on the same platform can information losses and coordination problems be avoided. Just as important, however, are clear task allocations, transparent communication channels and secure spaces for the exchange of sensitive information.
Despite this, many companies are still working with fragmented tools. Instead of creating clarity, new silos are emerging. Instead of simplifying processes, complexity is increasing. The survey results clearly show what is needed: more structure, more security and more transparency throughout the entire deal process.
Conclusion
What should actually be simple becomes the biggest obstacle: coordination. If you don't have communication under control, you not only lose time, but end up jeopardising the entire deal, which is why it's high time to see communication not as a side effect but as a critical success factor. It's not more tools that help, but the implementation of better processes. Not more data, but a better overview.
The message is clear: only those who communicate smarter, more securely, and more transparently will stay in the race.