Search results

Drawing on organizational design theory and organizational learning theory, this paper aims to examine component technology (CT) and the interaction between CT and experiential learning (EL) effects on the degree of integration (DI) of cross-border technological acquisitions.

Using a sample of 267 firms consisting of 229 acquirer firms who started cross-border technological acquisitions from developed economies and 38 acquirer firms who initiated cross-border technological acquisitions from emerging economies over the period of 1993–2016, this study adopts a value chain framework to measure the acquirers’ acquisition integration degree for the investigation of the effects of CT and the interaction between CT and EL.

First, this paper finds CT in cross-border technological acquisitions exerting a positive influence on the acquirer firm’s likelihood of the DI implementation, in line with the organizational design theory. Second, in view of organizational learning theory, this study finds EL and the combined effect of CT and EL to have an inverse influence on the DI.

The results imply that the moderating role of EL significantly optimizes decision choices for an acquirer firm for integration implementation strategies in the form of DI, such as full integration (structural integration), partial integration and no integration (structural separation), which appears to be crucial for cross-border technological acquisitions.

This study contributed to international business strategies by shedding light on the importance of the DI for an acquirer firm that undertakes a cross-border technological acquisition with a CT target firm. This study explains why structural integration might be necessary in cross-border technological acquisitions regardless of the costs of disruption it imposes, as well as the contexts in which it becomes less important or unnecessary. The study disclosed that the increase in the likelihood of DI because of CT depends on the EL of the acquisition company in the host country environment and fluctuates with the prior acquisition knowledge and EL of the host country. Combining two cross-border technological acquisition’s literature streams, such as CT and EL, this study enlightens the importance of organizational learning theory and theory of organization design strategic direction making on acquisition integration implementation strategies.

Technology acquisition is a common phenomenon of acquiring external knowledge, but we have a limited understanding of conditions in which the acquirer integrates the target or not. On one hand, the acquirer may have a policy to integrate the target to benefit from its prior knowledge. On the other hand, the target may face challenges in continuing its knowledge creation and the acquirer may want to provide it autonomy to not disrupt it. This paper aims to identify conditions in which targets tend to be less integrated after acquisitions, allowing them to maintain more autonomy and contribute more to knowledge creation.

We test our arguments in the empirical setting of the global biopharmaceutical industry using a difference-in-difference approach on a longitudinal dataset of matched patents. We examine self-cites received by patents belonging to acquirers and the targets before and after the acquisitions.

We find that, on average, the targets’ prior patents do not receive more self-cites after the acquisition. We conclude that this is because their R&D activities are disrupted, suggesting a higher level of post-acquisition integration. However, more nuanced findings reveal that it may not be the case all the time. When the target has more research experience, is international or is specialized in complementary technologies, prior patents of targets continue to receive more self-cites after the acquisition. It indicates that the targets in such conditions continue knowledge creation, suggesting a lower level of post-acquisition integration.

Our findings contribute to post-acquisition integration research. While post-acquisition integration downside is common, we present conditions in which such a downside may be less likely. We highlight that the context of an acquisition may be an important determinant of the extent of integration of the target. Moreover, we supplement the integration research (cultural, structural and human resource and leadership perspectives of integration) by adding a knowledge-based perspective to it. Such dynamics have important implications for acquirers and targets in deriving value from the acquisition.

The authors investigate the effects of Chinese acquirer’s chief executive officer (CEO) risk preference on mergers and acquisitions (M&A) payment method and the moderating roles played by acquirer’s ownership, industry relatedness and whether the M&A is cross-border.

Using 4,624 worldwide M&A deals conducted by Chinese firms from 2009 to 2021, the authors conduct multiple linear regression and ordered probit regression. And comprehensive indexes constructed based on the observed features of acquirer’s CEOs are used to be the proxy for CEO risk preference.

The results show that the higher-level Chinese acquirer’s CEO risk preference is overall positively associated with using more stock in payment. Moreover, the above relationship is strengthened if the ownership of the acquirer is state-owned.

The authors highlight the importance of the non-economic factors and demonstrate a relationship between the Chinese acquirer’s CEO risk preference and the M&A payment method, providing support for and enriching the upper echelons theory (UET). Moreover, the unique risk priorities of Chinese acquirers’ CEOs are revealed.

We empirically investigate the hypothesis that the less transparent (more difficult to value) the target’s assets are the more likely it is that the acquiring firm can obtain higher short- and long-term returns. We analyze a sample of 1,538 friendly acquisitions partitioned in two separate dimensions: acquisitions of public versus private firms, and acquisitions of a firm’s assets versus acquisitions of a firm’s assets and its management. Using a sample of (nondiversifying) real estate transactions with a public REIT as the acquirer, we find that acquisitions of public firms have insignificant short-term abnormal returns. Acquisitions of private targets have positive and significant short-term abnormal returns. The acquirer’s abnormal returns are higher in both cases when the transactions involve acquisition of the target firm’s management. We find parallel results when analyzing the acquirer’s Q over the merger year and the three following years. Our conclusions are robust to the type of financing (cash, stock, or a combination) used in the acquisition.

We consider conditions under which firms hire an intermediary advisor in acquisition deals. Although acquirers pay large advisory fees to investment banks for their assistance in acquisitions, we know little about the conditions under which acquirers form a relationship with an investment bank for an acquisition deal. Specifically, we examine the role of overall acquisition experience, acquisition experience specific to the target’s industry, prior relationship-specific experience, and deal size in relationship formation and continuation. We test their hypotheses using a dataset of US-based acquirers and targets between 1991 and 2015. Our findings provide nuanced insights into the role of acquisition experience for acquirer–investment bank pairing up on acquisition deals.

In this study, the authors examine acquirers’ selection of legal advisors for mergers and acquisitions (M&A) transactions. The authors first confirm the importance of their own prior experience and imitation within this context. Then, the authors propose and find that firms with less experience in performing M&A deals place more emphasis on imitating others while firms with more experience with a particular legal advisor focus less on others’ experience with this advisor. The authors further find that when they imitate, firms selectively, rather than broadly, imitate others by focusing on their industry or state peers. The authors present corroborating evidence for these hypotheses through analyzing a matched sample of acquirer – legal advisor pairs developed from an initial dataset of 29,398 domestic and cross-border acquisitions performed by US firms between 2000 and 2010.

Based on the event study methodology this chapter tests value creation, buying growth, and hubris hypotheses on the sample of 62 Japanese mergers with announcement in period 1993–2005. We find an average 1.19% cumulative abnormal return in 3 days surrounding the merger announcement. The findings suggest that differences in financial resources allocation pattern may provide a source of value gain. Further, mergers with fast-growing target are value enhancing when acquirer has prior ownership in target. Announcement returns are adversely related to acquirer's past performance, implying that well-performing acquirers possibly overestimate the true value of deal and overpay target.

This study uses cross-border mergers as a test of the ability of foreign directors to provide effective strategic advising. We find that firms with foreign directors on their boards are more likely to engage in cross-border mergers, pursue a higher number of cross-border mergers, and invest more in those mergers. We further determine that firms with foreign directors are more likely to undertake nondiversifying mergers, enjoy friendly mergers, and acquire privately held targets. Moreover, we find that firms with foreign directors have higher announcement period returns and pay less for their cross-border targets.

Research on acquisition performance has not considered the customer perspective for a long time. Based on associative network theory, we propose two spillover effects – forward and reverse – to reflect the effect of acquirer and target reputation on customer responses toward a horizontal acquisition. The reputation of both the acquirer and target can transfer to acquisition and affect customer attitudes toward the post-merged corporation and target customer retentions. However, the influence of the acquirer reputation (forward spillover effect) is stronger than that of the target reputation (reverse spillover effect). Because of asymmetric spillover effects from the acquirer and target, we suggest that the performance effects of A acquiring B may not be the same as that of B acquiring A, given that A and B are highly related firms. The level of post-acquisition brand integration moderates the asymmetric spillover effect on acquisition performance. A higher level of post-acquisition brand integration indicates a stronger asymmetric spillover effect on acquisition performance.

While earlier acquisition research often focused on either the acquirer or the target side of analysis, recent work has increasingly emphasized the need to understand the dyadic interrelationship between the target and the acquirer. This review aims at synthesizing research progress in the area of target–acquirer interrelationships and understanding what questions remain unanswered. The author organizes this review into three dimensions of target–acquirer interrelationship: (a) their relative attributes (what both parties are relative to each other), (b) their connections (what both parties have with each other), and (c) their interactions (what both parties do to each other). Based on the review, the author then identifies critical research gaps and opportunities for developing a more comprehensive understanding of the interrelationship between the target and the acquirer in acquisitions.