Search results

Given the sudden increase in plant investments across the manufacturing sector due to recent disruptions in the global supply chain caused by the COVID pandemic, the Ukraine/Russian war, ocean piracy incidents, and others, there is a need to strategically align the investments decisions with the overall business strategy. This study aims to establish whether strategic alignment enhances the effect of plant investments on operational performance.

Using the fifth version of the Global Manufacturing Research Group (GMRG V) dataset, we employ a structural equation model (SEM) to establish the moderating role of strategic alignment in plant investments-operational performance relationships.

The results suggest that strategic alignment enhances the positive effect of plant investments on operational performance, especially in cost, delivery, flexibility, and innovation. However, we found partial support for the moderating role of strategic alignment on quality performance.

Although the study was based on the GMRG global dataset and numerous papers have been published using the same dataset, the use of a convenience sample on a select group of companies may limit the generalizability of the results. With the increase in new plant investments in computer chip manufacturing, electronics, and electrical in recent years, the findings could help corporate executives maximize the benefits of their investment decisions. Companies should ensure that their plant investment decisions are strategically aligned with their overall business strategy to achieve optimal outcomes.

With the increase in new plant investments in computer chip manufacturing, electronics, and electrical in recent years, the findings could help corporate executives maximize the benefits of their investment decisions. Companies should ensure that their plant investment decisions are strategically aligned with their overall business strategy to achieve optimal outcomes.

The study comprehensively demonstrates that the extent of improvement in operational performance depends on how closely plant investment decisions align with the overall company strategy. Manufacturers should align major investment decisions with competitive priorities driven by market requirements to enhance operational performance.

Mergers and acquisitions (M&A) are arguably one of the CEOs greatest challenges, and there is a critical need to get these decisions right. It is clear that no single theory is adequate to describe or inform how M&A are evaluated in uncertain conditions, but there are several that offer partial explanations or at least contribute toward our understanding of how managers can deal with the uncertain environment and assess the likely risks associated with M&A. The literature suggests how relevant theories might be aggregated to make sense of strategic investment decision and investment appraisal techniques in an organizational context and considers the implications for further research in this important area of M&A. This chapter focuses on strategic investment appraisal, and draws together a variety of theoretical perspectives, especially from the field of psychology, which may be unfamiliar to both scholars in and practitioners.

Mergers and acquisitions strategies are not risk-free, potential problems in achieving success include integration difficulties, inadequate evaluation of target, inability to achieve synergy, and complexity. Such strategies can fail for many reasons including inadequate evaluation of targets or inadequate pre-decision control mechanisms. Mergers and acquisitions are reviewed in this chapter as strategic investment decision-making perspective. Established financial analyses remain important in appraising investment choices, despite their limiting assumptions and their recognised shortcomings in capturing strategic project dimensions. However, managers balance these economic analyses with less-structured, strategic analyses underpinned by informed judgement. The fact that empirical studies reveal a continued reliance on judgement by investment decision-makers does not mean that rational economic analysis is a futile exercise. What studies of practice do seem to suggest is that the theory and practice of strategic investment decision-making need to take into account both economically rational and intuitive decision processes. Reflecting on the research evidence, we conclude that strategic investment appraisal will be best supported by approaches that (i) couple sound economic analysis with the development of managerial judgement and (ii) take account of the broader decision-making context within which both economic and strategic analyses are used.

It is well recognized that Mergers and Acquisitions (M&A) are important and popular ways of achieving corporate growth. Motivations include a search for monopolistic power and growth, desire to respond to a low level of profitability in the existing business portfolio, improvement of market position, filling out product line, protection of supply or distribution, gain of control, acquire what is available, to internationalize, or to reduce risk. However, M&A strategies are not risk-free, and arguably one of the CEOs greatest challenges. The last several decades have witnessed a surge of interest in top executives. The strategic choice ranks as one of the dominant roles and responsibilities of senior management. Executives’ experiences, values, and personalities greatly influence their interpretations of the situations they face and, in turn, affect their choices (Hambrick, 2007).

Over the past few years, sad stories of M&A failures have been reported and that can be attributed to poor synergy, bad timing, cultural issues, hubris, complexity, and ineffective strategic control mechanisms including poor due diligence process. M&A strategies require a series of choices made over time by actors at various organizational levels; therefore, it cannot be seen as an independent activity but as an integral part of the formal rational procedure as well as the cognitive process. Strategic cognition plays a very important role in the diagnosis of strategic issues and the formulation of problems (Schwenk, 1988). Pre-decision control mechanisms permeate all levels of strategic investments process to ensure that the investment decision aligns with organizational strategy (Alkaraan & Northcott, 2007). Due diligence processes are comprehensive appraisal of strategic investment opportunities undertaken by a prospective buyer, especially to establish its assets and liabilities and evaluate its commercial potential. Due diligence processes refer to verification, investigation, or audit of a potential deal or investment opportunity to confirm all facts, financial information, and to verify anything else that was brought up during an M&A deal or investment process.

This chapter explores the influence of due diligence processes on strategic investment decision-making (SIDM) processes. Further, it provides strategic insights and practical thinking that have influenced some of the world’s leading organizations. Furthermore, the chapter adopts a strategic perspective on M&A, particular attention has been paid to the influence of due diligence and other related strategic control mechanisms on SIDM processes.

This paper aims to examine the adoption of conventional and emergent analysis techniques in Strategic Investment Decision-Making (SIDM) practices in large UK manufacturing companies. It aims to update the current knowledge on SIDM practices in large manufacturing companies. The research question underlying this study: Are recently developed analysis techniques (i.e. those that aim to integrate strategic and financial analyses) being used to evaluate strategic investment projects?

The research evidence underpinning this study was made up of primary and secondary data, quantitative and qualitative. Firstly, a survey consisting of a mailed formal standard questionnaire was conducted where each respondent is required to answer the same questions based on the same system of coded responses. Secondly, qualitative data was collected using the annual reports of selected companies. Disclosures were used as supplementary source of information using the explanatory notes and parenthetical disclosures accompanying companies’ financial reporting. Sources for these disclosures included management discussions, analyses of company strategy and risk and forward-looking reports regarding future performance and growth opportunities (such as mergers and acquisitions activities). Accordingly, companies’ disclosures were used in this study as an alternative method to semi-structured interviews to collect qualitative data. More recently, companies such as Rio Tinto have prepared strategic annual reports for 2017 against the UK Corporate Governance Code (version 2016).

The choice and use of financial analysis techniques and risk analysis techniques depend on the type of project being evaluated. Decision makers in large UK companies do not appear to use emergent analysis techniques widely. Pre-decision control mechanisms have significant influence on SIDM practices. This includes the changes of internal and external contextual factors, including organisational culture, organisational strategies, financial consideration, comprising formal approval governance mechanisms, regulatory and other compliance policies interact with companies’ internal control systems. Companies incorporate non-financial factors alongside quantitative analysis of strategic investments opportunities. Energy efficiency and carbon reduction are key imperatives of companies’ environmental management. These factors viewed by decision makers as significant factors relevant for compliance with legislation as well as maintaining companies’ legitimacy issues, sustainable business, experience with new technology and improved company image.

High risk, ambiguity and complexity are key characteristics embedded in SIDM processes. Macroeconomic issues remain crucial factors in scanning and screening investment opportunities, as reported by this study. The early stage of SIDM processes requires modelling under macroeconomic scenarios and assumptions of both internal and external parameters. Key assumptions include: projections of economic growth; commodity prices and exchange rates, introduction of technological and productivity advancements; cost and supply parameters for major inputs. SIDM practices rooted on comprehensive knowledge and experience of the industry and markets to draw subjective judgements about the riskiness of prospective projects, but these are rarely formalized into their SIDM processes. Findings of this study, however, remain within the context of UK companies. This study has its own limitations due to its time, location, respondents and sample selection, the size and the sector of the selected companies and questions addressed. Findings of this study raise a call for future research to examine SIDM processes in different settings to explore the relative impact of various organisational control mechanisms on SIDM practices. Also, to examine the influence of contextual factors (such as national culture, political, legal and social factors) on organisational control mechanisms. SIDM practices and processes have received significant attention from researchers, yet there is a lack of evidence in the literature about how companies approach strategic decision-making regarding divestments of some of their strategic investments. This type of strategic decision-making is not less important than other types of SIDM practices.

SIDM practices reflect the art and science of steering and controlling organisational resources to achieve a desired strategy. To understand the factors that shape SIDM practices and align them to organisational strategy, more attention is required to the choice and design of pre-decision controls and to the important role of strategic management accounting tools over the more traditional financial analysis techniques that have formed the focus of much prior empirical research.

Key environmental issues viewed by decision makers as significant factors relevant for compliance with legislation as well as maintaining companies’ legitimacy issues and company image.

Despite their perceived importance in this study, quantitative accounting controls may fail to connect with the kind of investment decision-making required to bring strategic success. Indeed, it has been widely noted that financial evaluation techniques are inadequate for assessing strategic investment proposals; they can only function as a guideline, as SIDM practices involve so many uncertainties, risks and judgements. A key insight from this study is that the achievement of integration between the firm’s strategic investment projects and the overall organizational strategy forms a critical pre-decision control on managerial behaviour at an early stage in SIDM practices. As many strategic investment decisions are one-off, non-repeatable decisions, the information needed to support their evaluation is likely to be similarly unique. Sound SIDM practices require the support of a large amount of varied information, a significant proportion of which is collected and analysed prior to potential capital investment projects being considered, such as information related to strategic goal setting, risk-adjusted hurdle rates and the design of appropriate organisational decision hierarchies.

This study brings together cognitive and organizational aspects of the strategic investment decision-making process. It focuses on the early stages of strategic investment decision-making. This paper aims to augment the limitations of previous survey-based research through an archival case study that describes pre-decision screening in detail.

This paper draws on archival data covering an investment decision undertaken by a large brewing company. The data cover a period of about six years, focusing on the decision to invest in West Africa. A rational/intuitive orientation model of the process is used as a framework to help analyze the archival evidence.

Strategic investment decisions are non-programmed, complex and uncertain. For some companies (e.g. those with a strategic focus on new expansions), certain non-programmed decisions may become semi-programmed in the course of time by applying knowledge learned from having successfully handled non-programmed decision situations in the past. However, other companies without such a focus may not be able to programme part of their strategic decisions. Pre-decision control mechanisms constitute a form of strategic control by detecting potential problem areas in the investment option before formal approval.

Given the narrow scope of this paper – a single case study – the findings are used for theorization rather than offering generalizable results. There is a need for unified models to enrich our understanding of the influence that contextual factors have on strategic investment decision-making. Effective strategic pre-decision control mechanisms that maintain a good balance between rational and intuitive approaches are matters that remain open for debate in future research.

Research on organizational and cognitive aspects of the strategic investment decision-making process is inherently practical. To achieve successful strategic investment decisions, it is essential to devote more attention to the choice and design of strategic control mechanisms.

The framework of this study can help practitioners to gauge the strengths and weaknesses of their decision-making practices. It focuses on three aspects that are relatively absent in the literature: the strategic problem, the strategic choice and the chronological relations between the five stages of the strategic investment decision-making process. The use of historical data is suited to providing illustrations of intuitive/heuristic-based practices that would otherwise be hard to capture.

This paper seeks to explore how aspects of pre‐decision control mechanisms impact managerial decision‐making behaviour with regard to strategic investment projects.

This study adopted a mixed‐method research approach. Research evidence was collected using a questionnaire survey of 320 large UK companies and eight semi‐structured follow‐up interviews with financial directors who responded to the questionnaire.

The study offers insights into the use and impact of pre‐decision control mechanisms such as: organizational strategy and operating objectives; expectations regarding the involvement of organizational personnel; formal approval procedures; financial evaluation requirements; pre‐determined hurdle rates; established authorization levels and the influence of managerial intuition.

This study adds to prior understandings of capital investment practice by employing mixed methods to examine how pre‐decision controls shape the outcomes of strategic investment decision making. Pre‐decision controls have received little attention within the prior literature, which focuses primarily on project financial analysis.

This study aims to explore how managers exercise agency in strategic investment decisions (SIDs) by drawing on their knowledgeability of the strategic context. Specifically, the authors address the role of position–practice relations and irresistible causal forces in this conduct.

The authors examine SID-making (SIDM) practices in four case organisations operating in highly competitive markets, conducting interviews with managers at various levels and analysing company documents. Drawing on strong structuration theory, the authors show how managerial decision makers draw upon their knowledge of organisational context when exercising agency in SIDs.

The authors provide insights into how SIDM behaviour, specifically agents’ conduct, is shaped by a combination of position–practice relations and the agents’ comprehension of their organisation’s context.

The authors extend the SIDM literature by surfacing the issue of how actors’ conjuncturally-specific knowledge of external structures shapes the general dispositions they draw on in exercising agency in practice.

The authors extend the SIDM literature by surfacing the issue of how actors’ conjuncturally-specific knowledge of external structures shapes the general dispositions they draw on in exercising agency in practice. Particularly, the authors contribute to this literature by identifying irresistible causal forces and illuminating why actors might not resist in SIDM processes, despite having the potential to do so.

Until recently little attention has been given in Accounting and Finance literature to the problem of linking the results of financial evaluation techniques such as Net Present Value (NPV) and Shareholder Value Analysis (SVA) to managers’ cognitive evaluation of strategic factors and the risk profile of projects. Various authors have called for research in this area, but very little has so far been published. This paper reports on a field‐based study carried out in the logistics industry. It builds on earlier research, which elicited constructs that managers use to assess project risk using a repertory grid technique. It provides an insight into how a project risk analysis process can be linked with project returns in strategic investment appraisal (SIA) in a divisionalised organisation. An action research approach was taken to develop a decision matrix to link the risk assessment results to expected project returns as an aid to management in strategic investment decision‐making. It is now embedded in the investment appraisal procedures across the European group of companies that participated in the research. It is suggested that the framework adopted in this experimental study is transferable to other organisational contexts.

Real options theory begins by drawing an analogy between real options and financial options. A financial option is a derivative security whose value is derived from the worth and characteristics of another financial security, or the so-called underlying asset. By definition, a financial option gives its holder the right, but not the obligation, to buy or sell the underlying asset at a specified price (i.e., the exercise price) on or before a given date (i.e., the expiration date). Financial economists Black and Scholes (1973) and Merton (1973) pioneered a formula for the valuation of a financial option, and their methodology has opened up the subsequent research on the pricing of financial assets and paved the way for the development of real options theory.