Search results

The purpose of this paper is to enlighten the intriguing process of industry asset consolidation. It is critical for firms to manage their business acquisitions strategically for survival in this industry life cycle process, which develops through multiple company mergers. The companies extensively acquiring industry assets have utilized acquisition programs consisting of both pre-acquisition strategizing and post-acquisition integration; however, the existing literature on acquisition programs focuses on post-acquisition integration activities. This study aims to bridge this gap.

This study focuses on pre-acquisition strategizing of acquisition programs and proposes a model in which an acquiring company could manage its acquisitions for industry asset consolidation over the industry evolution.

Empirically, in the multi-case study of telecommunications infrastructure companies, the authors collect an extensive set of archival records accumulated over the whole industry life-cycle, spanning more than 30 years, and they apply a qualitative data analysis to reveal strategic actions within the companies.

The discoveries elaborate on activities comprising the acquisition process model: social legitimacy, strategic alignment, resource fulfillment, consolidation pursuit and merging.

The counterintuitive findings are that the companies strived to ensure legitimacy early in the telecommunication infrastructure markets before they reached strategic alignment with their owners.

The results extend the understanding of industry asset consolidation as an organization-level phenomenon and show how contextual factors connected to industry life-cycle phases, such as regulatory regimes and financial cycles and industry evolution, influence the attributions of an acquisition program.

Building on behavioral agency theory, the authors explore the role played by corporate governance characteristics as drivers of the diversification strategies of family firms. Specifically, this study aims to investigate the effects of board size and board gender diversity on the likelihood that family firms will execute a diversifying acquisition vis-à-vis a related acquisition. Furthermore, the authors investigate the contingency effects played by foreign directorship and the firm’s listing status.

The hypotheses are tested on an original sample of 213 cross-border acquisitions executed by Italian family firms between 2008 and 2021.

The findings suggest that both large board sizes and greater gender diversity positively affect the diversification of family firms. While the presence of foreign directors magnifies the positive effect of board size, gender diversity discourages diversification in the case of listed firms.

The originality of this study is twofold. First, while prior literature has mostly focused on the family vs nonfamily dichotomy, this paper contributes to an emergent line of research investigating the heterogeneity among family firms’ corporate strategy decisions. Second, by exploring the corporate governance-diversification link in the context of family business, the authors answer to recent calls that diversification by family firms deserves further investigation in light of its highly controversial nature in terms of socioemotional wealth implications and potential mismatch among multiple objectives.

While existing literature extensively explores manufacturing firms expanding into services, little is known about the modes of servitisation, the means by which they carry it out. This paper concentrates on acquisitions as a mode of servitisation. Post-acquisition integration is when the potential of an acquisition is realised. The paper therefore aims to categorise types of integrations following the acquisition of servitised firms and discusses their consequences for servitisation.

The empirical part of the paper is based on two case studies, each involving the acquisition of servitised firms. Both acquirers changed their integration approach over time.

The paper conceptualises three types of integrations: rhetorical, insulated and transformative integrations, indicating whether and how the acquirer becomes servitised following the integration. These highlight the analysis of integration based on business models and customer orientation in relation to servitisation.

This paper contributes to research on servitisation by emphasising acquisitions as a mode of servitisation and conceptualising three integration types related to business models and customer orientations. Furthermore, the paper highlights how an acquirer's servitisation leads to new offerings targeting new customers, as opposed to strengthening existing relationships.

This paper aims to address the question: What is the distribution of value (in pounds) created in a sample of domestic takeovers in the United Kingdom from 2013 to 2020 among acquirer and target stockholders?

The author employs a traditional event study methodology to calculate the percentage excess returns of companies on the announcement date. These returns are then converted into pound-denominated excess returns using the companies' market capitalizations. This allows the author to estimate the synergies of the mergers and acquisitions (M&As) and how they are allocated between acquirers and targets. This innovative transformation from percentage to pound excess returns establishes a new ratio methodology for addressing the paper's objective.

This paper reveals that in UK takeovers, 40 percent of the synergies in pounds are allocated to the stockholders of acquiring companies, while 60 percent go to the stockholders of target companies. In other words, acquirers retain a significant portion—more than half—of the synergies generated in these domestic deals. This original finding is statistically significant at the one percent level and strongly contradicts the hypothesis that acquirers, at best, merely break even.

The evidence that UK takeovers distribute value gains nearly equally between domestic deal parties challenges the enduring conventional insight in the M&A literature. This conventional wisdom suggests that the value created by business combinations is entirely distributed to target company stockholders. Consequently, this reexamination may have broader implications, offering an alternative perspective on the motives behind business combinations. This perspective differs from the “managerial hubris hypothesis,” which aligns with the prevailing conventional insight but receives limited support in the original finding reported here.

By providing equal weight to buyers and sellers, the purpose of this paper is to enhance our understanding of the determinants underlying successful mergers and acquisitions (M&As) involving a specific segment of firms involved in such undertakings, i.e., knowledge-intensive innovative and entrepreneurial (KIE) firms.

A multiple case study, based on eight semi-structured interviews with CEOs representing acquirers and the acquired firms, investigates the focal phenomenon this study addresses.

The results suggest that knowledge-intensive, innovative and entrepreneurial firms promote entrepreneurial intentions and allow value creation of M&As through four overarching measures. These are buyer–seller fit, aligned incentives, long-term thinking and perpetual alliance.

The outcomes of this research may have limited generalizable due to the chosen research methodology. Therefore, this study recommends future studies testing the validity of these findings.

The authors have clarified the drawbacks of integration when being involved in M&As with KIE firms. These drawbacks primarily revolved around not eliminating the entrepreneurs’ autonomy and their routines, but it is also partly related to letting them keep their identity (i.e. their brand) as well as retaining employees’ trust in the new owner.

Contrary to most papers, this study has taken an approach giving equal weight to both buyers and sellers. In doing so, this study clarified the drawbacks of integration when it involves M&As with KIE firms.

This study examines the impact of China’s mixed-ownership reform on the innovation of non-state-owned acquirers, with a particular focus on the impact on firms with high financing constraints, low-quality accounting information or less tangible assets.

We use a proprietary dataset of firms listed on the Shanghai and Shenzhen Stock Exchanges to investigate the impact of mixed ownership reform on non-state-owned enterprise (non-SOE) innovation. We employ regression analysis to examine the association between mixed ownership reform and firm innovation.

The study finds that non-state-owned firms can improve innovation by acquiring equity in state-owned enterprises (SOEs) under the reform. Eased financing constraints, lowered financing costs, better access to tax incentives or government subsidies, lowered agency costs, better accounting information quality and more credit loans are underlying the impact. Additionally, cross-ownership connections amongst non-SOE executives and government intervention strengthen the impact, whilst regional marketisation weakens it.

This study adds to the literature on the association between mixed ownership reform and firm innovation by focussing on the conditions under which this impact is stronger. It also sheds light on the policy implications for SOE reforms in emerging economies.

The authors propose and test a theoretical framework that develops and analyzes precursors to firm acquisitions to determine if acquirers differ from other firms.

The authors use longitudinal, archival data from a sample of the largest firms in the global pharmaceutical industry from 1991 to 2012 with 1,327 firm-year observations.

The authors integrate prior research to show that the firm characteristics involving (1) R&D investment, (2) prior experience and (3) network centrality influence the likelihood that a firm will complete an acquisition.

In contrast to research focusing on the performance of acquiring firms, the authors show that firm characteristics predict acquisition activity by highlighting that acquiring firms differ from other firms. The authors also develop how network synergies can be realized by acquirers that have information advantages from more central network positions.

Cities remain an understudied unit of analysis for understanding the motives of multinational enterprises’ (MNE) foreign direct investment (FDI), with subnational locations in International Business (IB) research to date predominantly captured via the phenomenon of agglomeration. As regional integration projects, such as the European Union and to a lesser degree NAFTA, increasingly reduce the importance of national institutional environments, this paper argues regional and subnational levels become more important for studying MNE location choice. This paper aims to evaluate the explanatory contribution of regional and subnational levels of analysis to understanding MNE location choice.

A qualitative deductive bottom-up multiple-case study research design is adopted to study the city location choices and FDI motives of six automotive and six commercial banking companies. These purposefully sampled manufacturing and service MNEs have different home countries and regional orientations. Data on their foreign investments across the extended Triad of Europe, North America and Asia-Pacific were collected for the time period of 2000–2021.

Findings suggest that different classes of city tend to attract specific types of FDI and that these patterns might vary across sectors and be influenced by the regional strategic orientations of MNEs. Industry-specific findings reveal the importance of related and support industries and partners in a city location for the automotive MNEs, while the commercial banks seek investment opportunities in cities that allow acquisition targets that have an attractive customer based and will improve their local market knowledge.

The findings provide evidence in support of MNEs in manufacturing and service industries perceiving the attractiveness of three city types in different ways across the Triad regions.

This paper aims to contribute to overcoming the gap existing in the supply chain literature related to digital servitization by bridging digital servitization with knowledge management and identifying the rise of digital knowledge servitization as a driver for changes in the supply chain business model towards open innovation.

The study follows an inductive grounded theory approach for theory building. To analyse the impact of digital knowledge servitization, in-depth interviews of managers in the main business units of the Volvo Group supply chain ecosystem were carried out.

The results show how the digital servitization process affects the supply chain business model, highlighting the central role of knowledge in the service ecosystem and the rise of the theoretical concept of digital knowledge servitization. In particular, through the Innovation Lab (Volvo Group) study, the paper contributes to bringing together the theoretical knowledge-based view of servitization with the digital servitization concept, which demonstrates the role of this combined perspective in the transformation of the supply chain; this is carried out by introducing a new business model based on open innovation in inbound and outbound processes.

The research offers interesting insights from a managerial perspective, as increasingly advanced and complex digital solutions require shorter times in supply chain management (SCM). Companies need to be able to quickly manage information and knowledge flows deriving from internal and external interactions and involvement with external actors upstream and downstream of the supply chain ecosystem. Therefore, the digital knowledge servitization of the supply chain also highlights implications for managers in terms of human resources management.

The novel research goal is to contribute to the supply chain literature by integrating the digital servitization with the knowledge view and analysing the impact on the inbound and outbound supply chain through the introduction of an open innovation business model.

Healthcare systems receive criticism from both providers and recipients. The diversity in these systems throughout the world makes innovation and change difficult. However, a structured analysis of healthcare systems is crucial to identify areas for improvement and to share best practices for the betterment of healthcare throughout the world.

The paper uses organizational theory as an unbiased tool for evaluating healthcare systems. This theory analyses healthcare systems across five dimensions: environment, culture, social structure, physical structure and technology. This analysis provides an in-depth understanding of the organization's surroundings, formation and function. It offers a lens through which healthcare systems can be envisioned and establishes a vocabulary for communication.

Organizational theory presents a multifaceted approach to initiate assessments aiming to enhance existing healthcare systems and customize them to serve all stakeholders within the focused ecosystem. It alters the dynamics of criticism and presents an opportunity to sustainably address unforeseen healthcare challenges in the future. As the author proceeds to understand healthcare organizations through the perspective of organizational theory, the author also uncovers subtle yet crucial issues such as resource dependence, cultural clashes, organizational silence, bureaucracy, hierarchy, ethics, values, engagement and burnout.

This paper was crafted from a collaborative paper for the final of a master's degree. A collaboration was conceptualized using organisation theory as the tool to align processes and achieve successful outcome. The narrative of the collaboration has been edited and paper presented highlighting the importance of the tool of organisation theory in healthcare systems.