Divestiture is often viewed negatively by business leaders, seen as a sign of failed investment, financial pressure, or withdrawal from an underperforming market, said Deloitte Thailand.
However, this perception is becoming outdated, the analyst firm noted.
As consumer demands shift and technology continues to disrupt traditional business models, Thai companies must recognize that deciding which assets to divest is as important as identifying acquisitions. Divestiture is not simply about exiting a business. It is a strategic decision about where a company wants to compete, where it can create the most value, and where capital and management attention should be focused, said Mr. Khongkiat Jatupornpakdee, Mergers & Acquisitions Partner, Deloitte Thailand
This trend is evident across the region. According to Deloitte’s Divestiture Insights and Outlook for Asia–Pacific 2026, published in February 2026, 70% of Asia-Pacific executives were considering one or more divestments within the next 12–18 months. The report identifies divestitures as a critical mechanism for redeploying capital, refining operational focus, and facilitating large-scale transformation.
Three key considerations should inform the divestiture agenda for Thai companies.
Prioritize the future portfolio over the immediate asset for sale
Leaders should ask, “What company do we want for the future?” not just, “Which assets can be sold?”
A business can be profitable and still not be the right business to own for the future. Leadership needs a clear vision of the company’s competitive landscape, critical capabilities, and where focused capital will deliver the most value. Businesses that no longer support this direction may be candidates for divestiture, even if they remain profitable.
The Deloitte Southeast Asia Divestiture Survey Report 2026, based on insights from 1,550 executives globally and published in April 2026, highlights a shift from defensive disposals towards more deliberate, strategy-driven portfolio decisions. The key question is not simply what can be sold, but which businesses deserve continued capital, management attention, and risk tolerance, and which may create greater value under alternative ownership.
For Thai companies, this means making portfolio review a regular strategic exercise rather than waiting until performance deteriorates or a buyer comes forward.
Readiness creates value before the buyer arrives
Once the strategy is clear, preparation is critical. Divestiture is rarely as simple as transferring a self-contained business. Units often share legal entities, technology, data, employees, supply chains, and services with the larger group.
Deloitte’s 2026 Global Divestiture Survey found that preparation quality significantly influences outcomes, including proceeds, time to close, buyer engagement, and costs incurred. It also highlights continuing challenges around data quality, separation readiness, regulatory planning, and leadership alignment.
For Thai businesses, especially diversified groups, preparation must go beyond historical financials. It should include a clear view of the business’s stand-alone financials, operating models, technology and operational dependencies, tax and legal structures, people requirements, and regulatory considerations.
The objective is not to create a longer checklist, but to provide both sellers and buyers with a clear understanding of what is being sold, how it can operate independently, and where separation risks may arise.
These workstreams are highly interdependent. Simplifying the legal structure can affect tax, licensing, technology, and operations. Identifying these connections early allows management to address issues before they become obstacles to the transaction or sources of value erosion.
Readiness should therefore be viewed as part of the asset’s value, not simply an execution step.
Measure success by the business that remains
A strong sale price matters, but it is not the only measure of success. The real test of a divestiture is not only what the company sells, but what it becomes afterwards.
Management needs to develop an early plan for both sides of the separation. For the business being sold, the priority is to establish operational continuity and a credible route to independent ownership. For the remaining organization, priorities include addressing stranded costs, exiting transition arrangements, sharpening the operating model, and redeploying released capital and management resources towards higher-value opportunities.
An end-to-end perspective is essential in this context. Strategy, deal execution, and separation should be integrated rather than managed as isolated stages by separate teams. The earlier strategic, financial, tax, operational, technology, and people considerations are brought together, the better management can identify trade-offs and protect value through completion and beyond.
Companies should not divest simply to increase activity. They must objectively review portfolios and act decisively when strategy requires change.
For Thai companies, the real issue is not whether divestiture is positive or negative. The more important question is: What kind of company do we aspire to become, and does our current portfolio help us get there?
Answering this requires an objective, forward-looking portfolio review. By making divestiture part of an ongoing portfolio strategy rather than a reaction to underperformance or market pressure, companies can redirect capital, management attention, and capabilities towards the opportunities that matter most for future growth.
