Yes, there is a compelling case for a disciplined process of organization during preclose due diligence.

Three benefits of embedding such a process are:

$1.$ Risk Mitigation: A disciplined due diligence process can help identify potential risks and issues that could affect the deal's value. This could include financial risks, legal risks, operational risks, and more. By identifying these risks early, the buyer can either negotiate a lower price or decide not to proceed with the deal.

$2.$ Informed Decision Making: The information gathered during due diligence can provide a more accurate picture of the target company's performance, prospects, and risks. This can help the buyer make a more informed decision about whether to proceed with the deal and at what price.

$3.$ Smooth Integration: A disciplined due diligence process can also help plan for the post$-$close integration of the target company. By understanding the target company's operations, culture, and systems, the buyer can plan for a smoother integration process, which can help realize synergies and value from the deal more quickly.

Three risks of embedding such a process are:

$1.$ Time and Cost: A disciplined due diligence process can be time$-$consuming and costly$.$ It requires a significant amount of resources, including hiring external advisors, which can increase the cost of the deal.

$2.$ Deal Fatigue: The length and complexity of the due diligence process can lead to deal fatigue, where the parties become frustrated and potentially less cooperative. This can strain relationships and potentially jeopardize the deal.

$3.$ Over$-$reliance on Due Diligence: There's a risk that the buyer may over$-$rely on the due diligence process to identify all potential risks and issues. However, due diligence cannot uncover every potential issue, and there may still be unknown risks that could affect the deal's value.