Search results

The public sector worldwide is under pressure to downsize, which has led to mergers of public sector organisations. This paper seeks to bridge the unstudied gap of what happens to organisational reputation after a merger. The paper discusses change and reputation in the public sector, and reports findings of a longitudinal study on stakeholder assessments of four public sector organisations undergoing mergers recently.

Following a theory-driven content analysis, this longitudinal study compares stakeholder assessments of four public sector organisations' reputations a year before an organisational merger with assessments of the two resulting organisations' reputations two years after the merger.

The paper finds that the mergers did not really re-shape reputation, but the once established reputation persevered. Although the organisations faced greater expectations after the merger, only minor changes in reputation were detected post-merger: the reputation for expertise, heavy bureaucracy and trustworthiness remained strong after the merger, but certain traits, such as being international and esteemed, were lost. In both cases, one organisation's prior reputation slightly dominated the new reputation.

The findings may be limited to Finland and other Nordic countries, as well as those countries where trust in the public sector is high.

Mergers may not change once-established reputations, and hence the improvements desired by mergers may go unnoticed by the different stakeholders. Organisations merging must prepare for increased stakeholder expectations, as the new organisations arise questions. Previous organisational traits may remain in stakeholders' assessments despite any achieved improvements.

This paper addresses the gap in studying organisational reputation after public sector mergers, and contributes to both theory and practice by providing insight into the stability of once-established reputations.

The objective of the study is to explore legitimation dynamics in a public–private integration process and to gain insights on the specific role of CSR in triggering public–private logics.

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is part of firms' strategy in gaining legitimacy from their stakeholders in a merger context. However, little is known about the role of CSR in triggering diverse dynamics from public or private logics during post-merger integration. This study aims at exploring the specific role of CSR in triggering such diverse logics. A qualitative research design based on a single case study of a public–private merger of two French listed companies in the urban planning sector was opted for. The analysis was pursued in real time from the signing of the agreement and then over two years.

The results show that public–private legitimation is a process that proceeds in stages. The authors emphasize the key factors that characterize it: align on external concerns: reflecting societal and institutional pressures (public legitimation); readapt to make sense internally in relation to the merger through managerial innovation (private legitimation) and CSR as a form of corporate self-storying: combining the social and societal aspects of CSR within the organization (hybrid legitimation). Three major actions were identified in activating a CSR legitimation strategy: identifying and responding to local needs; building a unified brand, culture, and employee commitment to the organization; and creating sustainable programs.

The first major contribution is linked to triggers influencing legitimation dynamics and in particular the role of CSR operating as a legitimation strategy in the merger integration process. A second theoretical contribution is linked to the evolutionary nature of the post-merger integration process. The processual study shows how stakeholder legitimacy demands can escalate and change over time.

First, three major actions were identified as key steps in activating a CSR legitimation strategy (identifying and responding to local needs; building a unified brand, culture, and employee commitment to the organization; and creating sustainable programs). These missions can be understood as key steps for managers in implementing CSR within an organization in a post-merger integration context. Second, this study increases our comprehension of legitimation as a dynamic micro-process. The different stages described in the study can be considered by the managers involved in the merger process as learning experiences to understand the complex phenomenon that is the integration process.

This study enriches the legitimacy-as-process perspective in providing insights on the specific role of CSR in triggering public–private logics.

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.

This paper investigates the emphasis placed on different managerial roles by the project manager in a public merger and change project.

A research model was designed based on six management roles: leader, resource allocator, spokesman, entrepreneur, liaison and monitor. Empirical data were collected using in-depth interviews. The studied case concerns a large public merger and change project between two municipalities in Norway.

The paper reveals that the project manager emphasized the externally oriented entrepreneur role mostly. The internally oriented resource allocator role that focuses on managing the project was least emphasized. The research identifies a gap between needed and actual competence in basic project management as a barrier to exercise the resource allocator role more thoroughly.

Future research should investigate other public merger and change projects so that these findings may be generalized.

This research concludes that project managers in public change projects should be more internally oriented towards the resource allocator role. Furthermore, public project managers need to make sure that they possess the necessary technical project management competence to practice the resource allocator role effectively.

Rather than stressing the importance of leadership in general to manage a project, this paper is original as it applies a set of management roles to empirically study what a public project manager practice.

Against the backdrop of European eGovernment (eGov) and new public management strategies, public sector mergers are the ultimate transformation after collaboration and integration. The land administration domain is useful to evaluate how and why mergers occur or not. The domain usually comprises two types of organizations, cadastres and land registries. There are both national and international calls to merge these two types, yet some countries have opted to merge these, while others persist in maintaining two separate ones. How and why this occurs is the key question.

This study applies a mixed-methods approach of data collection and a co-evolutionary perspective on organizational changes. Agencies change alongside perceptions of staff members and external stimuli of policies. These are exposed through narrated personal vignettes and international benchmarking surveys of land agencies.

Decisions on mergers are primarily embedded in local organizational cultures, and follow non-linear paths and are historically path-dependent. Internal staff members tend to disfavour mergers. Contrastingly, external stimuli such as the benchmark surveys act as national and international stimuli which favour mergers. The common narrative of both perspectives is an increased relevance of “simplicity”, which does not however have an effect on merger decisions.

The land administration domain is perhaps idiosyncratic. It has a long history with discussions on merging collaborating organizations. Still, other domains affected by eGov strategies have so far only focused on operational interoperability and database integration, and less on the potential for institutional or organizational mergers. Therefore, experiences from land administration will be useful in the future.

During the formulation of new eGov projects which foster further collaboration and integration in the public sector, it is necessary to take the merger experiences of land agencies into account. It is especially necessary to be aware of implicit norms which are fostered by positive feedback loops of social networks during mergers, which may influence discretionary decisions. In addition, international benchmarks and ranking need to reconsider their benchmarking criteria which currently only focus on efficiency measures.

Mergers may not be a next logical step when collaborating and integrating. Instead, mergers need to be rooted in personal long-standing collaboration practices. Furthermore, individual staff members may only be willing to engage in the operational aspects of mergers if it significantly makes their own tasks simpler and the quality of their work better appreciated by external customers.

The speed of integration has been a salient and longstanding topic in the literature on managing mergers and acquisitions. Yet over the decades, speed has also been the subject of extensive debate. While many have advocated for fast integration, others have recommended a more measured pace. In this chapter, the authors reflect on the discussion by canvasing the variety of views on the speed of integration. The work is positioned at the nexus of the literature on mergers with that on stakeholders, in particular its attention to urgency in stakeholder management. It approaches urgency in mergers and acquisitions as a “dilemma of stake,” a new lens on a well-established but challenging topic. The study draws on ethnographic research to examine accounts of speed of integration in a New Zealand public sector merger. The chapter juxtaposes varied views on the topic against the respective arguments within the merger literature. It examines the overarching themes of “go slow” and the “need for speed” by attending to the tensions between a prosocial service ethos on the one hand and a managerialist ethos on the other. The explication of the respective dilemmas of stake shows how participants articulate their views on urgency both in terms of its effects on their individual professional role, their own stake, as well as in terms of the effects on employees as internal stakeholders. The analysis also explores the role of internal and external context in shaping the views on urgency in merger integration. The work concludes by outlining an agenda for future research.

The purpose of this paper is to examine how and why a decision to merge two university hospitals in a public context might occur by using an in‐depth case study of the pre‐merger process of Karolinska University Hospital.

Based on extensive document analysis and 35 key informant interviews the paper reconstructed the pre‐merger process, searched for empirical patterns, and interpreted those by applying neo‐institutional theory.

Spanning nearly a decade, the pre‐merger process goes from idea generation through transition to decision, and took place on two arenas, political, and scientific. Both research excellence and economic efficiency are stated merger motives. By applying a neo‐institutional perspective, the paper finds that the two initial phases are driven by decision rationality, which is typical for political organizations and that the final phase demonstrated action rationality, which is typical for private firms. Critical factors behind this radical change of decision logic are means convergence, uniting key stakeholder groups, and an economic and political crisis, triggering critical incidents, which ultimately legitimized the formal decision. It is evident from the paper that merger decisions in the public sector might not necessarily result from stated and/or economic drivers only.

This paper suggests that a change of decision logic from decision to action rationality might promote effective decision making on large and complex issues in a public context.

This is the first systematic in‐depth study of a university hospital merger employing a decision‐making perspective.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a historical account of four unsuccessful merger attempts between Australia’s two major professional accounting bodies over a 30-year period (1969 to 1998), each of which ultimately failed. An analysis of the commonalities and differences across the four attempts is provided and social identity theory is used to explain the differences between members level of support for these merger bids.

This study adopts a qualitative approach using a historical research methodology to source surviving business records from public archives and other data gathered from oral history interviews.

The study found that, across all four merger attempts between Australia’s two professional accounting bodies, there was strong support from society members (the perceived lower-status group) and opposition exhibited by institute members (the perceived higher-status group). This study also found that the perceived higher-status organisation always initiated merger discussions, while its members rejected the proposals in the members’ vote.

This paper focusses on the Australian accounting profession, considering a historical account of merger attempts. Further research is required that includes interviews and surveys of those involved in making decisions regarding merger attempts.

This paper is the first to examine in detail these four unsuccessful merger attempts between the largest accounting organisations in Australia.

This chapter examines the importance of stakeholder relationships to merger and acquisition (M&A) processes, using a case study of the AUD11 billion mega-merger in 2017 between Australian gaming groups Tabcorp and Tatts. The case study approach is adopted to consider the relevance of stakeholder management to the merger process from deal announcement to completion using documentary and semi-structured interview data. It is found that by managing critical stakeholder relationships through anticipating, pre-empting and negotiating potentially deal-breaking stakeholder conflicts, the merging parties ultimately won support for the deal from nearly all key stakeholders, thus ensuring its completion. The merger process both affected stakeholders and was in no small part affected by various stakeholder groups.

The chapter argues the need for a dynamic and dialectic understanding of how M&A processes relate to stakeholders. It offers deeper insight into how stakeholder theory can be used to enrich understanding of the broader economic, social and political implications of M&A, which enables researchers and practitioners to understand M&A outcomes for all stakeholders. The findings expand on the benefits of stakeholder analysis in relation to how stakeholders both affect and are affected by M&A processes, challenging the view that stakeholder relationships are unidirectional, static, or linear but evolve in complex patterns and along interconnected dimensions between and among stakeholder groups. This approach facilitates historical analysis, forward assessment, future planning and proactive responding, both for academics in devising theories and explanations, and for practitioners in considering, designing and implementing M&A strategies.