Repeating a familiar pattern in a new way: The effect of exploitation and exploration on knowledge leverage behaviors in technology acquisitions

Research Summary: We identify two types of knowledge leverage behaviors undertaken by acquiring firms: integrated and independent knowledge leverage. We address how the prior exploitation or exploration orientation of acquirers influence these two modes of knowledge leverage behaviors. The degree of exploitation of acquirers promotes integrating their existing knowledge with acquired knowledge in innovative actions. In contrast, the degree of exploration of acquirers increases the likelihood that new innovations will use acquired knowledge without integrating it with their prior knowledge. In addition, the firm's prior acquisition rate moderates the relationship between the acquiring firms’ previous exploitation or exploration orientation and their knowledge leverage mode. The findings of this article suggest that pre‐acquisition innovation capabilities are distinct from but influence the post‐acquisition innovation actions. Managerial Summary: Firms often undertake acquisitions to gain access to new knowledge, but they can differ dramatically in how they leverage acquired knowledge. We show that the firm's prior innovation patterns drive this choice. Firms that have previously focused on incremental innovations in their internal innovation efforts tend to integrate acquired knowledge with their own prior knowledge. In contrast, firms that have previously pursued bold innovations tend to leverage acquired knowledge alone in new innovations. Thus, we show that firms use acquisitions as a means to extend their internal innovation patterns—firms that have focused on incremental innovations extend that with acquisitions by linking new innovations to their prior knowledge while firms that have pursued bold initiatives use acquired knowledge to move in new technology directions.     

Acquisitions of private vs. public firms: Private information,target selection,and acquirer returns

The acquisition of privately held firms is a prevalent phenomenon that has received little attention in mergers and acquisitions research. In this study, we examine three questions: (1) What drives the acquirer's choice between public and private targets? (2) Do acquisitions of private targets elicit a more positive stock market reaction than acquisitions of public targets, which, on average, destroy value for acquirers' shareholders? (3) Do acquirers gain when their selection of a public or private target fits the theory? In this paper, we argue that the lack of information on private targets limits the breadth of the acquirer's search and increases its risk of not evaluating properly the assets of private targets. At the same time, less information on private targets creates more value‐creating opportunities for exploiting private information, whereas the market of corporate control for public targets already serves as an information‐processing and asset valuation mechanism for all potential bidders. Using an event study and survey data, we find that: (1) acquirers favor private targets in familiar industries and turn to public targets to enter new business domains or industries with a high level of intangible assets; (2) acquirers of private targets perform better than acquirers of public targets on merger announcement, after controlling for endogeneity bias; (3) acquirers of private firms perform better than if they had acquired a public firm, and acquirers of public firms perform better than if they had acquired a private firm. These results support the expectation that acquirer returns from their target choice (private/public) are not universal but depend on the acquirer's type of search and on the merging firms' attributes. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

A darker side of knowledge transfer following international acquisitions

We consider a knowledge flow that dominates the international acquisition context but can actually harm foreign acquired firms' performance: non–location‐specific knowledge transfer from acquirers to acquired firms (N‐LSKT). Considering its behavioral consequences, we argue that such knowledge transfer often may destabilize existing power structures in foreign acquired firms prompting conflict and power struggles, and as a result negatively affects their performance. We find support for this adverse knowledge transfer effect. Only at very high levels of N‐LSKT, when acquirers are likely to extend their own capabilities and associated power structures more completely, do the performance effects improve. Further, predeal success of acquirers and post‐deal functional integration amplify, while acquirers' strategic control over the acquired firm alleviates the generally negative effects of N‐LSKT. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The relevance of political affinity for the initial acquisition premium in cross‐border acquisitions

Research summary : In the context of economic nationalism, we investigate the relevance of political affinity between countries to the initial acquisition premium offered in cross‐border acquisitions. Political affinity is defined as the similarity of national interests in global affairs. We argue that political affinity affects how foreign acquirers anticipate their bargaining position in their negotiations with domestic target firms. With decreasing political affinity, the host government becomes increasingly likely to intervene against foreign firms in an acquisition deal. Consequently, foreign acquirers need to provide a more lucrative initial offer to dissuade target firms from leveraging government intervention to oppose the acquisition. Our prediction is supported by strong evidence that political affinity, as revealed by UN general assembly voting patterns, leads to lower initial acquisition premiums. Managerial summary : Media reports suggest that politics plays an important role in international business transactions. However, we still know very little about how bilateral political relations affect corporate decision‐making. In this article, we analyze the influence of the quality of bilateral political relations on the bidding behavior of foreign acquirers in cross‐border acquisitions. We argue that the host government is more likely to intervene against the foreign acquirer during deal negotiations if the quality of bilateral political relations is poor. A lower political affinity between countries therefore decreases the bargaining power of the acquirer and pushes up the initial bid premium the acquirer has to offer to the local target. Our empirical results confirm our argument. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Incubation of an industry: Heterogeneous knowledge bases and modes of value capture

Research summary : We examine firms' technological investments during an industry's incubation stage—the period between a technological breakthrough and the first instance of its commercialization. Using the agricultural biotechnology context, we develop stylized findings regarding the understudied knowledge evolution preceding product evolution in an industry's life cycle, the trend and diversity of firms undertaking technological investments in anticipation of industry emergence, their leverage of markets for technology and corporate control, and their use of alternative modes of value capture. We juxtapose these stylized findings with existing literature to identify new theoretical insights, and set the stage for future scholarly work to develop and test new theories for the incubation period, examine its existence in other industries, and study its impact on subsequent firm and industry evolution. M anagerial summary : New technological breakthroughs present managers of existing firms and aspiring entrepreneurs with opportunities to create altogether new industries. During the vibrant incubation period, we find that multiple firms capitalize on diverse knowledge bases to shape the industry's knowledge evolution and also capture economic value in diverse ways. Existing firms in the obsolescing industry are more likely to become targets in acquisitions given their complementary knowledge. Science‐based start‐ups are more likely to engage in acquisitions and collaborations with established firms. Diversifying firms are more likely to commercialize products after leveraging of internal development, acquisitions, and alliances. Our study highlights the importance for managers to think about “success” and “failure” across multiple yardsticks of performance, rather than only as product commercialization as the sole goal. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Cross‐border mergers and acquisitions: The role of private equity firms

Research summary: We show that private equity ownership (“PE backing”) of the acquirer is a signal of deal quality in cross‐border takeovers. As such, PE‐backed acquirers experience higher announcement returns in cross‐border takeovers, but only if targets are in poor information environments. We show that PE backing is a positive market signal because of PE firms' experience and networks that result from prior deals in target countries. We document that the market correctly anticipates that operating performance of PE‐backed acquirers increases as a result of cross‐border mergers and acquisitions (M&A). Managerial summary: We study cross‐border acquisitions by acquirers that are partially owned by private equity firms (“PE backing”). Cross‐border acquisitions are challenging as acquirers often have little information about targets. We document that investors react positively to cross‐border deals of PE‐backed acquirers—their stock prices increase upon deal announcements. However, this is only the case if targets are in countries with poor information environments. This is because PE backing allows acquirers to access PE firms' deal experience and networks. This makes it easier to identify and evaluate good targets, making it more (less) likely that a deal eventually creates (destroys) value. Consistent with this, we find that earnings of PE‐backed acquirers increase after buying targets in poor information environments. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Make,buy, organize: The interplay between research,external knowledge,and firm structure

We bridge current streams of innovation research to explore the interplay between R&D, external knowledge, and organizational structure—three elements of a firm's innovation strategy, which we argue should logically be studied together. Using within‐firm patent assignment patterns, we develop a novel measure of structure for a large sample of American firms. We find that centralized firms invest more in research, and patent more per R&D dollar, than decentralized firms. Both types access technology via mergers and acquisitions, but their acquisitions differ in terms of frequency, size, and integration. Consistent with our framework, their sources of value creation differ: while centralized firms derive more value from internal R&D, decentralized firms rely more on external knowledge. We discuss how these findings should stimulate more integrative work on theories of innovation. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Do newly public acquirers benefit or suffer from their pre‐IPO affiliations with underwriters and VCs?

We examine whether pre‐IPO affiliations affect post‐IPO corporate events, namely acquisitions. On the one hand, newly public acquirers may benefit from their pre‐IPO affiliations through residual signaling value or/and resource‐related benefits. On the other hand, newly public acquirers may suffer from those affiliations when conflicts of interests arise during the post‐IPO period. Equity underwriters may have incentive to promote non–value‐creating acquisitions (Type II error), and venture capitalists (VCs) may have incentive to forgo strategically important acquisitions (Type I error). Drawing on a sample of 4,029 acquisitions made by 717 newly public firms, we find that on average the announcement of an acquisition by a newly public acquirer elicits a positive response from investors. The market views more favorably the acquisitions announced by newly public acquirers associated with prestigious equity underwriters, but this reaction becomes negative when the lead underwriter is retained as the acquisition advisor. The market reacts more favorably to acquisitions announced by VC‐backed newly public acquirers, but only when those VCs are committed to a longer lockup period. The effects of pre‐IPO affiliations on expected returns are stronger for newly public acquirers with a high intangible resource base and persist throughout the three‐year post‐IPO period (across each subsequent acquisition announcement). Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

High‐Reputation Firms and Their Differential Acquisition Behaviors

Research summary: E merging reputation research suggests that high‐reputation firms will act to maintain their reputations in the face of high expectations. Yet, this research remains unclear on how high‐reputation firms do so. We advance this research by exploring three questions related to high‐reputation firms' differential acquisition behaviors: Do high‐reputation firms make more acquisitions than similar firms without this distinction? What kind of acquisitions do they make? How do investors react to high‐reputation firms' differential acquisition behaviors? We find that high‐reputation firms make more acquisitions and more unrelated acquisitions than other firms. Yet, we also find that investors bid down high‐reputation firms' stock more than other firms' in response to acquisition announcements, suggesting that investors are skeptical of how high‐reputation firms maintain their reputations . Managerial summary: W e know that high‐reputation firms wish to maintain their elite standing in the face of high‐market expectations, but we know little about how they do so. We explore this puzzle by investigating how reputation maintenance influences high‐reputation firms' acquisition behaviors. We classify high‐reputation firms are those firms that make Fortune's M ost A dmired annual list, and we find that high‐reputation firms make more acquisitions and more unrelated ones than other firms. Surprisingly, we also find that the market tends to react negatively to these acquisitions. Thus, managers may want to reconsider their strategy of making acquisitions as a means to maintain their firms' high reputations . Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Performance of acquirers of divested assets: Evidence from the U.S. software industry

We provide a comparative analysis of acquirer returns in acquisitions of public firms, private firms, and divested assets. On the basis of a sample of 5,079 acquisitions by U.S. software industry companies during 1988–2008, we find that acquisitions of divested assets outperform acquisitions of privately held firms, which in turn outperform acquisitions of publicly held firms. While the higher returns for acquisitions of divested assets relative to stand‐alone acquisition targets can be explained by market efficiency arguments, seller distress and improved asset fit further enhance the positive returns of acquirers of divested assets consistent with the relative bargaining power explanation. Finally, we find that the effects of these buyer bargaining advantages are mutually strengthening and that they also hold for longer‐term acquirer performance Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Do early birds get the returns? An empirical investigation of early‐mover advantages in acquisitions

We explore whether pioneering advantages exist for early‐mover acquirers in industry acquisition waves by examining both combined (target and acquirer) and acquirer stock returns. Combined abnormal returns are higher for acquisitions that occur at the beginning of acquisition waves. However, for acquirers' returns, only strategic pioneers—those acting in manners consistent with having superior information—capture significant advantages. Specifically, early‐mover acquirers who realize superior stock returns are those that conduct acquisitions in related industries, during industry expansionary phases, and finance their acquisitions as financial theory suggests they should when they possess an informational advantage—with cash. Our findings extend the first‐mover literature to corporate practices and link these practices to acquisition returns. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Technological acquisitions and the innovation performance of acquiring firms: a longitudinal study

This paper examines the impact of acquisitions on the subsequent innovation performance of acquiring firms in the chemicals industry. We distinguish between technological acquisitions, acquisitions in which technology is a component of the acquired firm's assets, and nontechnological acquisitions: acquisitions that do not involve a technological component. We develop a framework relating acquisitions to firm innovation performance and develop a set of measures for quantifying the technological inputs a firm obtains through acquisitions. We find that within technological acquisitions absolute size of the acquired knowledge base enhances innovation performance, while relative size of the acquired knowledge base reduces innovation output. The relatedness of acquired and acquiring knowledge bases has a nonlinear impact on innovation output. Nontechnological acquisitions do not have a significant effect on subsequent innovation output. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

How does firm experience and institutional distance impact ownership choice in high‐technology acquisitions?

One of the critical reasons for a firm to acquire other firms is to access new technology. This study seeks to understand what ownership position a firm should take in foreign markets if the target is in a high‐technology industry. Specifically, it looks at how firm‐level experience and institutional distance could impact this ownership. Using logistic regression models on a sample of 1,091 cross‐border acquisitions undertaken by firms from 36 countries over an 8‐year time period (2001–2008), we find that when firms acquire targets in a high‐technology industry, they resort to partial acquisitions. Our analysis further suggests that when firms seek targets in high‐technology industries but have experience with acquisitions or face higher institutional distance, the likelihood of full acquisitions over partial ones increases. Study findings contribute to our understanding of the interactive relationship among technology, experience, and institutional distance in determining appropriate ownership choices.     

Geographic distance and corporate acquisitions: signals from IPO firms

This paper examines acquisitions of firms after they have undergone initial public offerings (IPOs). Combining insights from information economics with recent research on geographic distance in various market settings, the analysis investigates whether the presence or absence of different signals on IPO firms has an impact on the geographic proximity of acquirers. The central proposition we develop and test is that specific characteristics of IPOs—venture capitalist backing, investment bank reputation, and underpricing of issued shares—convey signals on these firms, which can facilitate acquisitions by more remote acquirers who are more likely to face the risk of adverse selection. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The role of geographic distance in completing related acquisitions: Evidence from U.S. chemical manufacturers

Acquisitions often do not reach completion when buyers' initial evaluations change during post‐announcement due diligence investigations, but research offers only limited explanations for when such deal‐cancelling new information will be most common. Drawing from the spatial geography and acquisition strategy literatures, we argue that successful completion of acquisitions can be partially explained by their spatial characteristics. We start by predicting that geographic distance has a particularly strong impact in reducing the likelihood of completing related acquisitions; we then identify contingencies based on multiple forms of direct, contextual, and vicarious experience that can help acquirers overcome the constraints of distance. We test the arguments with a sample of 1,603 domestic acquisitions announced by 724 U.S. chemical manufacturing firms between 1980 and 2004. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Postacquisition turnover among U.S. top management teams: an analysis of the effects of foreign vs. domestic acquisitions of U.S. targets

An analysis of postacquisition top management turnover among 168 cross-border and 102 purely domestic acquisitions, and a control group of 120 nonacquired U.S. firms, revealed that turnover rates in firms acquired by non-U.S. acquirers were significantly higher than in firms acquired by other U.S. firms or the control group. Further, the timing of postacquisition turnover differed in the foreign vs. domestic acquisitions. Finally, the nationality of the foreign acquirer was found to be an important predictor of turnover in certain acquisition categories. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed. © 1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

What Role Do Acquisitions Play in Asian Firms' Global Strategies? Evidence from the Medical Sector, 1978–1995

This study compares the use of acquisitions by Asian, European, and North American firms operating in the U.S. medical sector between 1978 and 1995. We examine the incidence of acquisitions, the relative emphasis that acquirers place on resource deepening and resource extension, and the post-acquisition retention of acquired resources. We find substantial similarity in the asset-seeking role of acquisitions for medical sector firms from different continents, coupled with intriguing differences concerning what we refer to as asset keeping. The results suggest that there are many common causal factors that underlie the strategies of firms from different regions, but that some regional differences remain.     

Playing a double game? Pursuing innovation through ambidexterity in an international acquisition program from the Arabian Gulf Region

Acquisitions represent a strategy for enhancing competitive responsiveness in the global management of technology and innovation. Even more than single and domestic acquisitions, cross‐border acquisition programs present opportunities for firms seeking to sustain innovation. Yet, scant attention has been paid to the innovation dynamics of pursuing multiple, international acquisitions. We remedy this gap by investigating a multinational logistics firm enacting a multi‐decade program of cross‐border, technology intensive acquisitions and achieving dual competencies in (1) innovation and ambidexterity, (2) the exploration and exploitation capabilities of ambidexterity, and (3) tight and loose integration approaches. We determine that the firm relied on contextual, temporal, and structural manifestations of ambidexterity in acquisition integration. Findings illuminate the processual nature of an international acquisition program and suggest how ambidexterity benefits the acquisition of both innovation and innovative capabilities, when a firm applies a portfolio of tight‐to‐loose integration approaches.     

Choosing the right target: Relative preferences for resource similarity and complementarity in acquisition choice

Research summary : Corporate acquisition is a popular strategic option for firms seeking new resources. However, little research exists on the question of why one firm is chosen over another. We develop a model relating characteristics of similarity and complementarity between acquirers' and target firms' key resources, including their products and R&D pipelines, to the likelihood of the acquirers choosing a particular firm. We construct measures of similarity and complementarity between and across products and R&D pipelines, and test their effects using a novel application of the choice model. Findings reveal that acquirers view similarity and complementarity differently, based on the resource they are comparing. When making comparisons to their own R&D pipelines, acquirers prefer similarity over complementarity whereas when making comparisons to their product portfolios, they prefer complementarity over similarity. Managerial summary : Corporate acquisition is a popular way for firms to grow and obtain innovative resources. However, we know little about why acquirers choose one firm over another. We capture the influence of similarity and complementarity between acquirers' and target firms' products (current innovative value) and R&D pipelines (future innovative value) on whether a particular target firm is acquired. Insights from the pharmaceutical industry reveal that acquirers value similarity and complementarity in target firms differently, based on whether the comparison being made is with respect to their products or their R&D pipelines. Regarding their R&D pipelines, acquirers prefer that the target firm has similar, rather than complementary, resources. However, the opposite is true concerning their own products: acquirers prefer that the target firm has complementary, versus similar, resources. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.