Search results

Corporate diversification is a strategy that enables corporations to expand their core business into other businesses. In Malaysia, corporate diversification continues to represent a fundamental organizational structure. Some two-thirds of Malaysian firms are diversified. However, when compared to developed countries such as the US and the UK, we find that firms are moving toward non-diversification. The study is based on the population framework consisting of all of the public limited companies (PLCs) listed on the Bursa Malaysia stock exchange from 2007 to 2012. A dynamic panel model system generalized method of moments (GMM) was used to analyze the diversification and firm’s performance theories.

The empirical findings demonstrated that diversification is better than non-diversification firms for the curvilinear relationship between diversification and firm’s performance (ROA and Tobin-Q) when using the entropy index and relatedness is taken into consideration. The research further concluded that related and unrelated diversification also has a positive relationship with performance, but diversification must be the dominant (focused) and cannot be too broad in nature. Diversification that is too broad may cause a positive relationship to turn in to a negative relationship toward performance in both related and unrelated instances of diversification.

This paper aims to explore the explanations of “information effect” and “agency effect” of corporate diversification with cross-industry knowledge under a crisis situation.

Based on an event study of 203 public companies’ crises in China between 2008 and 2018, the authors verify the information and agency effects of corporate diversification under a crisis situation by, respectively, examining the effects of interactions of corporate unrelated diversification with corporate transparency and knowledge deficiency attribution on the stock market’s responses to the crises.

It is found that corporate unrelated diversification serves as a buffer in protecting firm value while attribution of knowledge deficiency can be a burden. The buffering effect is stronger when the corporate transparency is higher but weaker when the crisis is attributed to be caused by corporate tacit knowledge deficiency.

Unrelated diversified firms should strengthen information communication with stakeholders so as to break down the stakeholders’ cross-industry knowledge barriers, and thus protect their own value at the crisis’ onset. Also, they can further buffer the loss by reducing stakeholders’ perceptions of the corporate tacit knowledge deficiency revealed in the crisis.

This study is the first to illustrate that the information and agency effects of corporate diversification strategy can be partially explained under a crisis situation, which provides meaningful insights about how firms can conduct knowledge management in their daily operations to deal better with corporate crises.

The main purpose of this paper is to introduce a comprehensive model explaining what affects the scope of the firm and also to find out its impact on firm performance.

This paper is based on an empirical analysis of a sample of 312 hardware manufacturing companies in Taiwan.

The research findings indicate that capability exploitation and upgrading will exert a positive influence on corporate diversification. In addition, corporate diversification will exhibit a curvilinear effect on firm performance.

Under the logic of capability‐based growth, managers should manage portfolios of capability upgrading and capability exploitation; and then, managers have to conduct econometric analyses to find out a firm's optimal level of corporate diversification for performance maximization.

This study attempts to propose a dynamic capabilities perspective, which suggests that the successful growth of a firm hinges on a strategic logic of capability‐based growth management containing both capability exploitation and capability upgrading, for exploring the antecedents and consequences of corporate diversification.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the impact of internal corporate governance mechanisms, including interest alignment and control devices, on the unrelated diversification level in Vietnam. Additionally, the moderation of free cash flow (FCF) on these relationships is also tested.

The study is based on a balanced panel data set of 70 listed companies in both stock markets, Ho Chi Minh Stock Exchange and Hanoi Stock Exchange, in Vietnam for the years 2007–2014, which gives 560 observations in total.

The results show that if executive ownership for CEOs is increased, then the extent of diversification is likely to be reduced. However, the link between unrelated diversification level and executive stock option, another interest alignment device, cannot be confirmed. Among three control devices (level of blockholder ownership, board composition and separation of CEO and chairman positions), the study finds a positive connection between diversification and blockholder ownership, and statistically insignificant relations between the conglomerate diversification level and board composition, or CEO duality. Additionally, this study discovers a negative link between diversification and state ownership, although there is no evidence to support the change to the effect of each internal corporate governance mechanism on the diversification level of a firm between high and low FCF.

The research can be a useful reference not only for investors and managers but also for policy makers in Vietnam. This study explores the relationship among corporate governance, diversification and firm value in Vietnam, where the topics related to effectiveness of corporate governance mechanisms to public companies has been increasingly attractive to researchers since the default of Vietnam Shipbuilding Industry Group (Vinashin) happened in 2010 and the Circular No. 121/2012/TT-BTC on 26 July 2012 of the Vietnamese Ministry of Finance was issued with regulations on corporate governance applicable to listed firms in this country.

This research, first, enriches current literature on the relationship between corporate governance and firm diversification. It can be considered as a contribution to the related topic with an example of Vietnam, a developing country in Asia. Second, the research continues to prove non-unification in results showing the relationship between corporate governance and conglomerate diversification among different nations. Third, it provides a potential input for future research works on the moderation of FCF to the effects of corporate governance on diversification.

To show that differences in the extent to which firms engage in unrelated diversification can be attributed to differences in ownership structure.

We draw on longitudinal data and use a panel analysis specification to test our hypotheses.

We find that unrelated diversification destroys value; pressure-sensitive Anglo-American owners in a firm’s equity reduce unrelated diversification, whereas pressure-resistant domestic owners increase unrelated diversification; the greater the firm’s free cash flow, the greater the negative effect of pressure-sensitive Anglo-American owners on unrelated diversification.

We contribute to corporate governance and strategy research by bringing in owners’ institutional origin as a shaper of owner preferences in particular with regards to unrelated diversification. Future research may expand our investigation to more than one home institutional context, and theorize on institutional origin effects beyond the dichotomy between Anglo-American and non-Anglo-American (not oriented toward shareholder value maximization) owners.

Policy makers, financial analysts, owners, and managers may want to reflect about the implications of ownership structure, as well as promoting or joining corporations with particular ownership configurations.

A shareholder value-destroying strategy, such as unrelated diversification has adverse consequences for society at large, in terms of opportunity costs, that is, resources could be allocated to value-creating activities instead. Promoting an ownership configuration that creates value should contribute to social welfare.

Owners may not be exclusively driven by shareholder value maximization, but can be influenced by normative beliefs (biases) stemming from the institutional context they originate from.

Drawing on the literature on corporate diversification, the purpose of this paper is to shed light onto the influence of geographic dispersion on the effectiveness of control mechanisms in related diversified corporations. This research contends that control mechanisms implemented by corporations and the extent of geographic diversification play a role in the synergies expected from related diversification being realized.

This study uses OLS regression to analyze data collected through surveys from managers of 193 Iranian corporations and their 2,704 subsidiaries to examine the relationship between relatedness, corporate performance, geographic dispersion, and emphasis of strategic controls.

The author finds that a triple interaction effect between corporate strategy (diversification approach), controls mechanisms, and the extent of geographic diversification influences the overall performance of corporations. Findings of this research suggest that the positive effects of strategic controls in related diversified corporations are most when there is less geographic dispersion and will attenuate as corporations become more geographically disperse.

The findings of this research, have contributed to the extant literature in several ways. First, the findings further establish the superiority of related diversification to unrelated diversification in achieving economic performance in corporations. The findings reveal that, ceteris paribus, the more relatedness between activities of subsidiaries in corporations exists, higher performance can be expected at the corporate level. Second, the findings show once more that to achieve the higher performance that results from synergies in related diversified corporations, emphasis of strategic controls play a crucial and important role. Third, the author find that although the emphasis of strategic controls in essential to realizing the potentials in related diversified corporations, greater geographic dispersion attenuates the positive effects expected from stricter enforcement of strategic control mechanisms.

An important consequence of findings of this research is that managers should be more aware of the implications of selecting the geographic location of the subsidiaries that they either acquire or establish. While the literature focusing on corporate diversification has mainly focused on the differences between related and unrelated diversification, this paper brings a new factor into light. Therefore, the findings of this research provide the author with a better understanding of the factors that define success or failure in achieving financial objectives of corporations.

There has been very little done to investigate the factors that influence effectiveness of strategic controls in related diversified corporation. Much of this shortcoming has resulted due to difficulties in measurement of strategic controls their operationalization in empirical studies. This study has taken a step to that direction and therefore, provides a more coherent and clear picture of the factors that influence the overall performance in corporations.

The purpose of this study was to explore the motives (especially the agency motives) for corporate diversification from the perspective of corporate executives who make such strategic decisions and manage the diversified firms daily.

A qualitative research approach was adopted, and 12 chief executive officers (CEOs) of diversified firms in Nigeria were interviewed for their perspectives on the motives for corporate diversification.

Stewardship motives – diversification to use excess capacities in assets and resources to exploit opportunities in the market and defend against adverse environmental developments – were the most cited reasons for diversification. The relevant agency problem related to corporate diversification motive in Nigeria is the principal–principal (majority shareholder-minority shareholder) one. CEOs with substantial holdings in their firms indicated that they use diversification to reduce their investment risk and retain control of their portfolio.

The findings suggest that in corporate environments such as Nigeria that feature blockholding prominently, the corporate strategy-related agency problem that policymakers should pay greater attention to is the principal–principal conflict rather than the traditional agent–principal problem that has influenced corporate governance over the years. There is also a need to revise the dominant view that diversification is a value-destroying strategy motivated by the self-seeking behavior of managers who have little or no shares in the companies they manage.

The few studies on motives for corporate diversification that incorporated the perspectives of corporate executives did not address the agency motives of diversification. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study that has done so.

From the attention-based view, the purpose of this paper is to examine how structural autonomy of a corporate venture capital (CVC) program influences its CVC managers’ investment decisions with regard to investment portfolio diversification.

This study collects data from VentureXpert, Compustat, and the US Patent Office. The final sample consists of 868 CVC portfolio-year observations from 1990 to 2004. Panel linear regressions and hierarchical linear regressions are used in the analysis.

The major finding of this study reveals that that structural autonomy of a CVC program is significantly related to its investment portfolio diversification. In addition to the direct effect, the authors also find that CVC structure autonomy moderates the relationship between corporate investor’s strategic attention and its CVC portfolio diversification. Specifically, when the autonomous level of a CVC program is high, the negative relationship between its parent’s relative growth potentials and CVC portfolio diversification will become positive, and the positive relationship between its parent’s business diversification and CVC portfolio diversification will become negative.

The CVC literature has suggested the impact of CVC portfolio diversification on value creation for corporate investors (e.g. Yang et al., 2014), however, few studies have investigated why some corporate investors diversify their portfolio of venture companies while others do not. To fill such a gap, this study identifies antecedents of CVC portfolio diversification such as CVC structural autonomy and corporate investor’s strategic attention as well as their interactive impacts. The finding also provides valuable managerial implications on CVC program designs.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate whether, and to what extent, corporate diversification into related and unrelated businesses affects capital structure choices, and whether ownership structure is germane to the understanding of corporate diversification strategies and debt‐equity financing choices.

Univariate approaches include the parametric two‐sample t‐test, non‐parametric Kolmogorov‐Smirnov test and Kruskal‐Wallis rank test, and cluster analysis. Multivariate approaches include panel data regressions to identify the sign and magnitude of the effect of diversification on capital structure, after controlling for a number of industry and firm characteristics as suggested in the literature.

Corporate diversification into related or unrelated industries has opposite effects on capital structure, after controlling for ownership structure and corporate governance mechanisms. Consistent with the prediction of organizational economics, an increase in the degree of business relatedness is associated with a reduction in debt while an increase in business unrelatedness is associated with an increase in debt. In addition, there is strong evidence that government‐controlled firms use less debt financing and that government ownership weakens the positive relationship between unrelated diversification and leverage. The results are robust to different measures of capital structure.

Traditional finance literature has not been able to provide conclusive evidence on what affects corporate capital structure decisions. This paper shows that a corporate strategy perspective, with its emphasis on a managerial decision‐making process, can provide a behavioral basis for understanding capital structure choices.

This paper aims to examine empirically the relationships among industry environment, diversification motivations and corporate performance for a sample of Taiwanese automobile enterprises.

A 55‐item survey questionnaire was developed to obtain the responses from companies in the automobile industry in Taiwan. Independent sample t‐test and χ² tests were employed to confirm the homogeneity between the respondents and non‐respondents by firm's characteristics, including by industry, number of employees, and capital.

The results suggest that industry environment has positive and significant impact on diversification motivations, and has positive but not significant impact on corporate performance. Diversification motivations has positive and significant impact on corporate performance. The results also indicate that firms of higher capital amounts have greater influence on diversification motivations and corporate performance, firms of publicly listed have greater influence on industry environment, diversification motivations and corporate performance and firms of higher degree of diversification have greater influence on diversification motivations only.

Several limitations exist in this study. This study adopts the cross‐sectional research design and examines firms at one point time and because of the constraints of time and data availability, longitudinal research was not viable in this study. Also the amount of variation for some regression models is low.

The paper's results not only provide researchers with a theoretical basis for further research, but also provide top management teams with important data when engaging in diversification.