We are acquiring a smaller business and merging it with our own. To make the new business efficient and profitable, we anticipate having to make about 200 redundancies. How can we ensure that we manage these without discrimination across the two companies and at all staff levels?

It may sound obvious, but, first and foremost, it is extremely important to explain why any redundancies are necessary, and then say it again and again.

People will need to hear it many times, as they will be shocked and frightened. The senior managers will have had time to think through the reasons for the changes, so you need to be convinced that the action is necessary and be in control of the process, so the staff need time to absorb it, too. You may need to consider different levels of staff and alter the communications accordingly.

Spend significant time thinking about the criteria that will be used for people in both companies. The smaller one, particularly, will want to know that you will be choosing the best people and that they will not be disadvantaged because of gender, age, ethnicity or because more senior people may remain from the larger company and favour their own staff.

You will need to have thought carefully about your strategic objectives, what the structure will be and which roles are vital. All staff will look carefully at the criteria for those roles, so spend time on them.

There is a danger of using formulaic criteria, such as “must have three years' experience at middle management level”, when there could be some people who have 20 years' experience who may be mediocre and some who have one year and are brilliant.

The “three years' experience” criterion can also disadvantage those individuals who are newer to a company and that might translate to disadvantaging women and ethnic minorities.

If people believe that the criteria are discriminatory, it could lead to employment tribunal costs and long-term cynicism, both of which can be costly.

Timescales for the introduction of the new structures, terms of redundancy and as much detail as possible should be provided to staff in plain English.

Have a communication plan which recognises that some employees work part time or may not have regular access to e-mails, and that the two companies may have different styles of communicating - for example, is e-mail or the spoken word the common practice? It is almost impossible to communicate too often during restructures.

Do not forget the people who are staying. Research shows that they, too, are affected by redundancies and often experience survivor guilt.

They need to be reminded that the changes needed to be made, that the process of who went and who stayed was fair, that you were as generous as you could be to those who were going and that you are determined to support them in their new roles and make the new business successful.

It often takes time for people and businesses to recover from mergers and redundancies. For business reasons - and for reasons of equality and fairness - it is worth attending to what might be seen as the softer issues.

The fact is that if you do not pay attention to these, the consequences for the new business can be harsh and serious, in both economic and reputational terms.

Jane Farrell is the chief executive of Equality Works, a consultancy that specialises in equality and diversity

Explore Management

• MBA