Search results

Are divestitures really just the “flip side” of acquisitions? Both divestiture and acquisition are important processes for firm scope change. Frequently, these processes are considered to be “two sides of the same coin” wherein a divestiture is simply an acquisition performed “in reverse.” In contrast to this perspective, the authors submit that these two corporate strategic processes have fundamental differences in their motivations, implementation, and ramifications. Failure to recognize and address these differences could have serious consequences for firms, especially in the domains of capability development and deployment. In this chapter, the authors begin by recognizing the similarities between divestitures and acquisitions that have contributed to their “mirror image” reputations. The authors then identify and categorize the major differences between divestitures and acquisitions and explain how these distinctions can present significant challenges to firms when building and utilizing their corresponding divestiture and acquisition capabilities. Finally, the authors leverage these insights to develop not only suggestions for future research but also recommendations for firms to avoid succumbing to the fallacy of sameness between divestitures and acquisitions – and perhaps even successfully exploit it – when building, wielding, and honing the tools in their capability portfolios.

This paper aims to review the latest management developments across the globe and pinpoint practical implications from cutting-edge research and case studies.

This briefing is prepared by an independent writer who adds their own impartial comments and places the articles in context.

If a firm can characterize its upper echelon with creativity, innovation, and foreign knowledge, it will find far more success outside the local market.

The briefing saves busy executives, strategists and researchers hours of reading time by selecting only the very best, most pertinent information and presenting it in a condensed and easy- to-digest format.

This study aims to examine the role of returnee managers that can affect the strategic-divestment decision of emerging-market firms (EM firms). Drawing on arguments from the upper echelons theory and international human resource mobility perspectives, this study aims to propose that returnee managers influence corporate divestitures when the business outlook is negative. In addition, this study aims to examine the interplay between returnee managers and CEOs, whose characteristics can foster or undermine the efforts of returnee managers to engage in corporate divestments.

This study examines 278 firms from nine emerging economies. The negative binomial regression was employed to estimate the model. In the robustness checks, the logistic regression was adopted to confirm the earlier findings.

The empirical results support the notion that returnee managers strengthen the relationship between firm performance and divestments. Because of the limited liabilities of foreignness and outsidership, returnee managers can gain social trust and credibility through communication and social interaction. Furthermore, the results provide mixed support for the moderating effect of CEO characteristics on the performance–divestment relationship.

This study reveals that returnee managers are a great asset for EM firms that aim to find synergies and upgrade their capabilities through asset reconfiguration, which is an essential activity of emerging market firms to integrate themselves into the global competition. Meanwhile, CEO characteristics can foster (through their education level) or hinder (due to their age) divestment attempts, influenced by returnee managers.

This study explores an understudied phenomenon in international business (IB): strategic divestment of EM firms. The literature that examines strategic divestment and corporate refocusing in emerging markets is extremely limited. Furthermore, this study explores the novel topic that intersects the international business (IB) and international human resource management (IHRM) research areas. Specifically, this study investigates the impact of returnee managers on strategic divestments.

The case was developed from secondary sources and interviews with a security analyst. The secondary sources include company annual reports, news reports, analyst reports, industry reports, company websites, stock exchange websites and databases such as Bloomberg and CMIE Prowess.

Increasing competition in product and capital markets has put tremendous pressure on managers to become more cost competitive. To address their firms' uncompetitive cost structures, managers may have to consider dramatic restructuring of their businesses. During 2014–2017, Tata Steel Ltd (TSL) UK considered a series of divestitures and a merger plan to nurse the company back to health. The case considers the economics of the restructuring plan. The case is designed to help students analyze a corporate downsizing program undertaken by a large Indian company in the UK and to highlight the dynamic role of the CFO and governance issues in family firms. It introduces students to issues surrounding a typical restructuring and provides students a platform to practice the estimation of value creation in a restructuring exercise. While some cases on corporate restructuring in the context of developed economies are available, there are very few cases written in an emerging market context. This case bridges that gap. TSL presents a unique opportunity to study corporate restructuring necessitated by a failed cross-border acquisition. It illustrates the potential for value loss in large, cross-border acquisitions. It shows how managerial hubris can prompt family firm owners to overbid in acquisitions and create legacy hot spots. In addition, the case can be used to discuss the causes of governance failures such as weak institutional monitoring and poor legal enforcement in emerging markets that could potentially harm minority shareholders.

The case was developed from secondary sources and interviews with a security analyst. The secondary sources include company annual reports, news reports, analyst reports, industry reports, company websites, stock exchange websites and databases such as Bloomberg and CMIE Prowess.

Dominant quality standards are present in all industries. Implicit in their use is the assumption that once adopted, there is little or no reason to replace them. However, there is evidence that, under certain circumstances, such standards do get replaced. The reasons for this action are not well-understood, either as they pertain to the displacement decision or to the selection and adoption of the alternative standard. The purpose of this study is to identify and explore these two issues (displacement and replacement) by drawing on data from the American healthcare system. This study is viewed through the theoretical lens of legitimacy theory. In addition, the process is viewed from a temporal perspective. The resulting findings are used to better understand how this displacement process takes place and to identify directions for interesting and meaningful future research.

This is an explanatory study that draws on data gathered from quality managers in 89 hospitals that had adopted a new healthcare quality standard (of these, some fifty percent had displaced the dominant quality standard – the Joint Commission – with a different standard – DNV Healthcare.

The combined literature review and case study data provide insights into the displacement process. This is a process that evolves over time. Initially, the process is driven by the need to meet customer demands. However, over time, as the organizations try to integrate the guidelines contained within the standards into the organization, gaps in the quality standard emerge. It is these gaps that motivate the need to displace standards. The legitimacy perspective is highly effective at explaining this displacement process. In addition, the study uncovers some critical issues, namely the important role played by the individual auditors in the certification process and the importance of fit between the standard and the context in which it is deployed.

The data for the propositions in this case study were derived from interviews and survey data from 89 healthcare organizations. It would be interesting to examine similar relationships with other quality standards and industries.

Our findings provide new insights related to motivations to decouple from a dominant quality standard. Results provide a cautionary tale for standards that hold a dominant market share such that perceived legitimacy of such standards is not as stable as originally thought.

This study illuminates the fragile nature of the stability of dominant standards and emphasizes the linkages between legitimacy concerns and divestiture of such standards.

Strategic decisions leaders make involving organizational changes such as mergers and acquisitions (M&A), divestitures, and downsizing, which can influence and/or interact with other organizational factors. For example, within the context of M&A, changes impact financial performance, firm behaviors, and organizational culture. In addition, strategic decisions for these types of change can also interrelate with other more intrapersonal factors, including both leaders’ and employees’ health and well-being. Employee stress, also referred to as “merger syndrome,” outlines individual negative impacts of the changes including, but not limited to, cynicism and distrust, change wariness, and burnout, all accumulating to psychological effects including increases in detachment to work, stress, and sick leave. In this chapter, the authors outline the different impacts M&A phases have on stress and well-being and how they interrelate with the strategic decisions leaders make. The authors also outline future research opportunities and practical implications for how leaders and employees could better manage future major changes such as M&A activities.

Corporate changes not only impact the firms involved but also have consequences for their ecosystems. However, the existing literature on ecosystem change is limited. This paper describes and discusses the interconnected patterns between corporate and ecosystem change, shedding light on the various forms these changes take.

The empirical part of the paper is based on the case study of two previously merged organizations' separation.

The paper reveals intensifying and dissipating change patterns, illustrating the linkages between rapid and gradual corporate and ecosystem changes within and across various ecosystem spheres. Three spheres are conceptualized: sphere of control, sphere of interdependency and sphere of negotiation, each indicating a separate change pattern.

The contribution of this paper lies in its discussion on interconnected corporate and ecosystem changes, offering valuable insights for situating corporate change within the ecosystem and establishing a vocabulary for ecosystem change. Moreover, through the empirical study of a corporate divorce, the paper enhances our understanding of this specific form of change.

Applying the concept of “entrepreneur managers” from dynamic capabilities theory to the question of how some Japanese managers develop and use their relationships with foreign investors, this article explores organizational contexts in which Japanese managers use foreign shareholders as resources to enhance firm capabilities in the global marketplace, deploy assets effectively and implement changes to traditional organizational customs. The article asks why and how some top managers implemented institutional changes and adopted customs that are common in the shareholder-based system while others did not.

We conducted qualitative interviews with 11 inverstor relations (IR) managers of large, listed Japanese firms in Kyoto and Tokyo.

First, by inviting a hedge fund partner and using their human capital and social capital, a Japanese CEO committed to strengthening his firm’s competencies in the global market and introduced changes that are common in the shareholder-based system. Second, a CEO with an MBA degree and exceptional communication skills in English and Japanese dedicated himself to executing much of the strategic advice suggested to him by foreign shareholders and altered some of his firm’s traditional Japanese management practices. Third, even though many Japanese firms welcomed and used foreign shareholders as advisors to help them streamline and/or acquire firm assets, their top leaders’ implementation of organizational changes was limited. Fourth, the top leaders of family-owned firms were reluctant to initiate dialogue with foreign investors.

This article adds some useful organizational context to existing scholarship on institutional theory by examining Japanese leaders’ strategic management in their relations with foreign investors. Using the concept of dynamic capabilities, it addresses the role of innovative strategic managers in firms’ institutional changes.

Wockhardt Ltd. is a global, research-based pharmaceuticals and biotechnology company headquartered in India. The company went through an ambitious period of growth, mainly using acquisitions as its primary inorganic growth strategy until the 2008 financial crisis. This period saw Wockhardt struggling to meet its financial obligations while at the same time confronting legal and regulatory challenges. Post this period, the company executed several strategic changes to its businesses to facilitate a recovery. The case asks students to assess Wockhardt’s strategic response to the crisis and its future success as a pharmaceutical company in an industry marked by intense competition.

The case is based on secondary data sources and publicly available information. The company’s data and its history over the past six decades have been examined. Newspaper articles, journal articles, company annual reports and analyst firm reports have been used to gather information and have been cited accordingly. Financial data have been obtained from the Centre for Monitoring Indian Economy (CMIE) Prowess database.

The case highlights some interesting findings from Wockhardt’s handling of its financial problems and subsequent recovery process. Key insights come from its multi-pronged strategy to first stabilize and then continue to expand its core pharmaceuticals business by identifying new markets for its products and alternate channels for growth.

Previous cases on Wockhardt have focused on the financial aspects of the crises, particularly the corporate debt restructuring (CDR) process that was undertaken, the challenges of hedging foreign currency risk and the drawbacks of using foreign currency convertible bonds (FCCBs). In this case, we emphasize the unique aspects of Wockhardt’s business strategy, from its initial acquisition-based inorganic growth, its crisis response and management and finally the strategic execution of its recovery and continued expansion.