Search results

Mergers and acquisitions are frequent occurrences in the world of business. While a merged firm may convert an acquired asset to other brands, the restaurant industry tends to acquire the same brand name and does not change the name of the acquired assets. Acquisitions can prove to be a risky proposition in any industry. This study attempts to determine if a product-diversified acquisition in the restaurant industry is a value-creating decision. By comparing focused and diversified acquisitions, we try to find if focused acquisitions create value and that diversified acquisitions do not. Our initial expectation was that focused acquisitions create more shareholder value. We find that both focused and diversified acquisitions make significant positive abnormal returns for acquirers.

Acquisition is one of key corporate strategic decisions for firms’ growth and competitive advantage. Firms: (1) diversify through acquisition to balance cash flows and spread the business risks; and (2) eliminate their competitors through acquisition by acquiring new technology, new operating capabilities, process innovations, specialized managerial expertise, and market position. Thus, firms acquire either unrelated or related business based on their strategic motivations, such as diversifying their business lines or improving market power in the same business line. These different motivations may be related to their assessment of market growth, firms’ competitive position, and top management’s compensation. Thus, it is hypothesized that firms’ acquisition decisions may be related to their industry growth potential, post-acquisition firm growth, market share change, and CEO’s compensation composition between cash and equity. In addition, for the two alternative acquisition accounting methods allowed until recently, a test is made if the type of acquisition is related to the choice of accounting methods. This study classifies firms’ acquisitions as related or unrelated, based on the standard industrial classification (SIC) codes for both acquiring and target firms. The empirical tests are, first, based on all the acquisition cases regardless of the firm membership, and then, deal with the firms acquiring only related businesses or unrelated businesses exclusively.

The type of acquisitions was more likely related to industry growth opportunities, indicating that the unrelated acquisition cases are more likely to be followed by higher industry growth rate than the related acquisition cases. While there were a substantially larger number of acquisition cases using the purchase method, the related acquisition cases used the pooling-of-interest method more frequently than in the unrelated acquisition cases. The firm-level analysis shows that the type of acquisition decisions was still related to acquiring firms’ industry growth rate. However, the post-acquisition performance measures, using firm’s growth and change in market share, could support prior studies in that the exclusive-related acquisitions helped firms grow more and get more market share than the exclusive-unrelated acquisitions. CEO’s compensation composition ratio was not related to the types of acquisition.

Merger and acquisition activity generates a substantial amount of discussion within business circles among academics, analysts, and the media. Even though research and experience demonstrates that many mergers and acquisitions fall short of the intended goal of creating shareholder value, mergers and acquisitions still persist in the marketplace. The purpose of this discussion is to suggest that a potential explanation for this dilemma can be found by applying the resource-based rationale of acquisition within an evolutionary framework of business dynamics.

Emerging market multinationals often face a variety of legitimacy challenges as they engage in cross-border acquisitions in developed countries, which requires an assortment of legitimacy strategies best aligned with the legitimacy challenges they face. This study advocates for a configurational perspective that examines how different configurations of legitimacy challenges, organizational characteristics, and legitimacy strategies influence the likelihood of deal completion in cross-border acquisitions by emerging market multinational enterprises (EMNEs).

Based on 328 cross-border acquisition cases by Chinese firms, this study adopts the fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis to examine the combined effects of institutional distance, political affinity, equity sought, architecture design, sensitive·industry and state-owned and enterprise (SOE) on cross-border acquisition completion.

This study identifies six pathways with different configurations for deal completion, suggesting that a deal's overall legitimacy falls at the intersection of the country-level institution and the firm-level characters and strategy evaluations.

This study investigates how nested legitimacy influences cross-border acquisition completion by offering a holistic and configurational understanding of the deal completion of cross-border acquisitions by EMNEs and yields useful insights for future research on cross-border acquisition completion and legitimacy.

Drawing on the literature on technological acquisition and the knowledge-based view , this study examines how technological overlap between acquiring and target firms influences acquisition premiums. We further explore how the resulting synergies are contingent on the dynamic characteristics of the target firm, specifically its technology clockspeed and industry munificence. Technology clockspeed indicates the pace of technological evolution, reflecting internal dynamic resources, while industry munificence represents the abundance of external resources. These boundary conditions illustrate the dynamics of synergies, explaining their moderation effects on acquisition premiums.

We analyze a sample of 369 technological acquisitions by publicly traded U.S. firms between 1990 and 2011. To test our hypotheses, we used the ordinary least squares regression model with robust standard errors clustered by acquiring firms. In the robustness checks, we applied the generalized estimating equations to account for non-independent observations in our sample and verified that the results were robust to an alternative two-way clustering approach.

We suggest that a low level of technological overlap between an acquiring firm and its target firm leads the acquiring firm to offer a high acquisition premium because of the expected synergistic potential that evolves from combining two distant technological bases. We further find that this effect is contingent on the target firm's technology clockspeed and industry munificence. Specifically, the negative effect is amplified when target firms exhibit a rapid pace of technological evolution, whereas it is weakened when target firms operate in highly munificent industries characterized by robust growth and abundant resource flows.

This study has several limitations, but it offers opportunities for future research. First, our sample is limited to domestic acquisitions between U.S. publicly traded firms, which may restrict generalizability. Cross-border acquisitions could reveal different dynamics, as technology leakage and national security concerns might make technological overlap a more sensitive factor. Additionally, private firms were not included, and their distinct strategic considerations could provide further insights. Future research could explore post-acquisition data to validate these synergies and expand the scope to include international contexts and private firms for a comprehensive analysis.

Our findings highlight important implications for managers in technology sector acquisitions. This study underscores the need for a thorough evaluation of target firms to avoid misjudging synergies. Low technological overlap can heighten expectations for value creation, making it crucial for executives to accurately assess potential synergies to prevent overestimation. Managers should consider both internal resources and external industry conditions when evaluating synergies. Ultimately, these insights help managers offer informed prices that reflect true strategic synergies, adopting effective valuation practices to mitigate risks of financial overpayments and poor post-merger performance.

The social implications of our findings emphasize the broader impact of acquisition decisions on innovation and competition within the technology sector. By ensuring accurate valuation and avoiding overpayment, companies can allocate resources more efficiently, fostering sustainable growth and innovation. This diligent approach can reduce the risk of corporate failures.

This study makes two key theoretical contributions. First, it identifies technological overlap as a critical determinant of acquisition premiums in technological acquisitions, addressing gaps in the literature that focused on CEO characteristics and managerial attention. Second, it expands the theoretical framework by highlighting the dynamic nature of synergies, influenced by the target firm's technology clockspeed and industry munificence. By integrating both acquiring and target firm characteristics, this study provides a relational perspective on value creation, explaining why firms pay high premiums and offering a more comprehensive understanding of the strategic motivations in technological acquisitions.

First of two articles outlining the role of Internal Audit (IA) in acquisitions activity. The independence and objectivity of IA mean that it can contribute significantly to acquisitions activity, provided it has sufficient organizational status, and business awareness. In screening acquisition candidates, scrutiny of the business environment is as important as the analysis of results to date. The potential “fit” between the prospective parent and the subsidiary should be reviewed, as well as the suitability and readiness of the acquirer to manage diversified activities. Acquisitions provide a “high‐risk, high growth” path and IA should participate as early as possible in preparations for diversification.

Despite the euphoria surrounding 1992, the recent international expansion of British retail organisations has been oriented mainly towards the US. Such expansion has predominantly taken the form of the acquisition of US retailers, rather than through the establishment of greenfield stores. As a consequence of their US acquisitions, a number of British retailers are now well established across the Atlantic. Some reorientation of the geographical focus of British retail acquisitions abroad, however, may be necessary to reap the expected benefits of the Single European Market. British retail acquisitions in the US are examined in the years between 1984 and 1989 with particular emphasis on acquisition strategy, motivations, performance and the impact of 1992.

This paper aims to focus on Tata Motors, an automobile company from an emerging market, and its successful acquisition of two global marquee car brands in Jaguar and Land Rover (JLR). It traces the evolution of JLR under the stewardship of Tata Motors over an eight-year long period and examines the strategic reasons for the success of the acquisition.

The paper approaches strategic issues in cross-border acquisitions using an illustration of a successful deal. It is based on statements of leaders and secondary data about the acquirer and acquired organizations. The paper explores the strategic challenges faced when emerging market firms carry out cross border acquisition deals. It recommends the short-term and long-term strategies that acquirers can follow to improve the chances of a successful acquisition.

Any acquisition is challenging. Cross-border acquisitions face greater challenges, especially if the acquirer is from an emerging market country while the target company is from a developed country. Success of the acquisition, especially over the long run, depends on both internal factors that are under the control of the acquirer’s management, as well as external environmental factors that it needs to address. Both patience and luck are required ingredients for success in such contexts.

While the general temptation in any acquisition is to extract synergies as quickly as possible, the Tata Motors’ acquisition of JLR is an exception. Tata Motors carefully handled short-term challenges and continued to invest in the core competencies of JLR and reaped benefits over the long run. It was also fortunate that a variety of factors in the external environment turned favorable for Tata Motors and JLR in the eight years since the deal took place.

It concedes that during an M&A deal, the leaders of a seller organization may be nervous about their future. JLR trade union leaders were initially not sure whether jobs in UK would remain secure. To ensure success of the deal, the leaders of the acquirer firm need to balance the interests of multiple stakeholders, both in the short-term, as well as over a longer-term perspective.

The paper considers the Tata Motors’ acquisition of JLR. It is an example of a large, difficult cross-border acquisition by an emerging market based company. While the acquisition proved difficult in the short term, it has yielded excellent dividends to the parent company over the long term. This paper explores the reasons why this cross-border acquisition succeeded and recommends strategies that other companies considering cross-border acquisitions can consider to improve their chances of success.

To examine Australian corporate acquisitions data in the context of contemporary acquisitions theory.

Empirical analysis using event study procedures.

The study of Australian acquisitions shows that domestic acquisitions are more likely to produce favourable market responses for acquirers than foreign direct investment actions. Companies with recent upwards price momentum are also more likely to engage in successful acquisitions. However, the relative “valuation” of acquirers appears to be unimportant in the Australian acquisitions process. The results are linked to the smaller, more isolated, nature of the Australian economy.

A long horizon event study methodology could be used. Alternative treatments could be used to assess relative value and competitive advantage. Other smaller isolated markets, similar to Australia, could be considered.

The use of international corporate acquisitions data, from Australia, supports both Competitive Advantage Theory and Market Driven Acquisitions Theory. There is little evidence to suggest that Cheap Capital motivates a large number of acquisition actions. The results are linked to the smaller, more isolated, nature of the Australian economy, and show that recent price momentum and the location of the investment are important. This latter finding suggests a form of market segmentation still prevails.

Is the average M&A adventure just an executive ego trip? Is it management folly, or can it be done so that it reliably produces growth? A model presented here may help executives who are engaged in making acquisitions and making them work navigate the shoals of mergers and acquisitions more successfully.