When the target may know better: Effects of experience and information asymmetries on value from mergers and acquisitions

Research summary : Extending research on the effect of experience on acquisition outcomes, we examine how the differential in previous M&A experience between the target and the acquirer affects the value they, respectively, obtain when the acquirer takes over the target. Drawing on literature about organizational learning, negotiation, and information economics, we theorize that the party with greater experience will be able to obtain more value. Furthermore, we theorize that the effect of differential M&A experience on value obtained is contingent on the level of information asymmetry the acquirer faces with respect to the target, specifically as a function of the target's product‐market scope and whether the deal is friendly. We test and find support for these predictions in a sample of 1,241 M&As over a 30‐year period. Managerial summary : Corporate strategy is about a firm's scope and development decisions and outcomes, but corporate strategizing is incomplete unless managers anticipate the moves of other economic actors. We demonstrate the importance of these points when it comes to learning to make acquisitions. Using an innovative research design and theory that enables comparison between acquirer and target gains, we show that whatever their firm's acquisition history and capabilities, acquisitive managers should mind the negotiation and other pitfalls that arise when target firms possess ample acquisition experience of their own. We also demonstrate that the effect of experience advantage, whereby the more experienced party benefits, depends on the target firm's scope and whether the deal is friendly—two dimensions that acquirers can and should take into account. Copyright © 2016 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.     

Geographic overlap and acquisition pairing

Research Summary: This study examines the role of geographic factors in explaining acquisition pairing using a novel conditional logic methodology. Drawing from information asymmetry arguments regarding acquisition decisions, we theorize that geographic overlap between the acquirer and potential targets’ businesses and operations enables the acquirer to collect more information about the potential target through its multiple business operations that are geographically proximate. We also demonstrate moderating boundary conditions. In particular, we examine acquiring firm characteristics, acquiring firm size and geographic dispersion, which both weaken the relationship between geographic overlap and acquisition pairing. Likewise, we examine two dyadic distance moderators, geographic distance and product dissimilarity, both of which increase information asymmetry between the acquirer and potential targets, which increases the effect of geographic overlap in facilitating acquisition pairing. Managerial Summary: Firms pursuing acquisition activities face severe information asymmetry when evaluating potential targets. This study investigates how acquiring firms leverage geographic conditions to overcome information asymmetry and choose targets that they can better evaluate. We find that acquirers are more likely to choose targets that have subsidiaries or business operations overlapping in the same states as the acquirers themselves. This is particularly true for small acquirers, which lack resources and capabilities to seek external assistance, and acquirers that have business operations in more concentrated locations. We also find that acquiring targets with geographically overlapped business operations is especially salient when the target's headquarters is distantly located from the acquirer or when the target offers dissimilar products from the acquirer.     

Cross‐border acquisitions by state‐owned firms: How do legitimacy concerns affect the completion and duration of their acquisitions?

Research summary: Cross‐border acquisitions may raise legitimacy concerns by host‐country stakeholders, affecting the acquisition outcomes of foreign firms. We propose that theorization by local regulatory agencies is a key mechanism that links legitimacy concerns with acquisition outcomes. Given that theorization is time consuming and its outcome is uncertain, we argue that state‐owned foreign firms experience a lower likelihood of acquisition completion and a longer duration for completing a deal than other foreign firms. Moreover, we introduce a set of firm characteristics (target public status, target R&D alliances, and acquirer acquisition and alliance experiences) that may affect the threshold level of legitimacy, thereby altering the proposed relationships. Our framework and findings provide useful implications for institutional theory on its core concept of legitimacy. Managerial summary: Cross‐border acquisitions by state‐owned foreign firms may lead to national security concerns and thus debates and discussions among local regulatory agencies. We argue that such institutional processes may reduce the likelihood of acquisition completion and prolong the duration of acquisition completion. Using cross‐border acquisitions in the United States, we find that acquisitions by state‐owned foreign firms are not less likely to be completed than acquisitions by other foreign firms, but they take more time to be completed. Moreover, state‐owned foreign firms are less likely to complete an acquisition when the target firm has more R&D alliances. However, their acquisition experience and alliance experience in the host country increase the likelihood of acquisition completion, whereas their alliance experience alone shortens the acquisition duration. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Failed takeover attempts,corporate governance and refocusing

Hostile takeover attempts oftentimes signal that a target firm has an over‐diversified and ineffective corporate strategy. What does this signal mean when takeover attempts fail? Drawing from agency theory, we argue that target firms managed by independent directory boards are likely to ignore the takeover attempt and not refocus their firms' strategy. Conversely, target firms managed by nonindependent boards are more likely to view the failed takeover attempt as a ‘wake‐up call’ and will refocus their firms' strategy so as to preserve the firm's survival. These arguments are tested using a sample of 76 firms that were targets of failed hostile takeover attempts. Logistic regression analyses confirm the predictions. This study suggests that in the aftermath of a failed takeover attempt board of director characteristics can help predict changes in corporate strategies. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

National corporate governance institutions and post‐acquisition target reorganization

We examine the characteristics of national systems of corporate governance to theorize about the nature of the shareholders' and employees' interests when it comes to reorganization, under the assumption that the firm is coalitional in nature. We argue that corporate governance institutions prevalent in both the host and the target country of the merging firms enable or constrain the ability of the acquirer to reorganize the target. Using a cross‐national dataset of corporate acquisitions and post‐acquisition reorganization, we found support for our predictions that stronger legal protection of shareholder rights in the acquirer country compared to the target country increases the acquirer's ability to restructure the target's assets and leverage the target's resources, while the protection of employee rights in the target country restricts the acquirer's ability to restructure the target's assets and redeploy resources to and from the target. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Successful integration of R&D functions after acquisitions: An exploratory empirical study

Do the ‘grand’ strategic context characteristics of an acquisition (e.g., business relatedness of buyer and target) deter-mine the integration success of R&D functions after a takeover? Are acquisition management interventions (i.e., the way in which the integration process is man-aged) the key levers shaping integration success of R&D functions after a change in corporate ownership? Little non-anecdotal empirical data are available to answer these questions. Therefore, they were addressed with a sample of 92 acquisitions between German firms in 1988. Overall, use of management interventions which were designed to promote learning opportunities and reduce uncertainty for acquired employees (e.g., small group meetings to exchange information) but also degree of centralization of strategic R&D decisions in the hands of the acquirer were significantly positively related to integration level of R&D functions of both firms after an acquisition. With the exception of relative size of acquiree, strategic acquisition context characteristics were not directly related to R&D integration success. These characteristics may not be as important in shaping R&D integration success as management practitioners and scholars have thought.     

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.     

Resource complementarity and value capture in firm acquisitions: The role of intellectual property rights

Extant literature holds that firm acquisitions create value through innovation if the knowledge bases of the acquirer and the target complement each other. Little is known about the value that patents associated with a target's knowledge convey to the acquirer, i.e., their value in securing market exclusion and freedom to operate in R&D. We argue that such property rights hold preemptive power allowing firms to capture the value from combining complementary technologies and to realize gains from trade in strategic factor markets. Our results for a sample of 1,428 acquisitions indicate that—controlling for technological value—acquired preemptive power is an important determinant of the acquisition price, particularly when the acquirer is technology intensive and acquired patents are highly related to the acquirer's knowledge base. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Sources of value in takeovers: Synergy or restructuring–implications for target and bidder firms

Advocates of the market for corporate control argue that takeover bids should be accepted because unsuccessful targets tend to lose market value. Other researchers argue that takeover bids should be rejected because the combined firms often perform poorly. However, missing in this debate is the influence of the source of takeover gains on the decision to reject or accept takeover bids. This study posits that value from takeovers can be created by synergy or restructuring. The study suggests that only if the synergy component is dominant should the target firm agree to be taken over. The study then tests the dominance of the source of value in takeovers by examining takeovers that were unsuccessful. The study concludes that, first, restructuring, not synergy, motivated the sample studied and target firms can create the same value independently. Second the need for restructuring was industry-wide. However, even if restructuring is the motive behind a takeover, the target firm has to carry out the restructuring, failing which it does not create any value. The study also suggests reasons for the ambiguous findings in the strategic management merger literature.     

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.     

Mergers and acquisitions in the global food processing industry in 1986–2006

Food systems around the world experienced increased merger and acquisition (M&A) activity over the past decades. Based on a sample of 13,911M&A attempts worldwide during 1986–2006, this study provides an analysis of major determinants of M&A completion in the food processing industry. Friendly attitude, cash payment and experience with M&As emerge as strong deal facilitators. Bidding competition, pursuit of parallel transactions, target subsidiary status and acquirer public status are the most important deal breakers. Unlike the lenient antitrust approach of the Reagan administration, the 1998 UK Competition Act and various directives and regulations on food safety and quality associated with the completion of the internal European market in 1992 facilitated M&A completion. In contrast, the beginning of the Economic and Monetary Union, as marked by the introduction of the Euro in 1999, had a strong negative effect on completion likelihood. This study identifies substantial regional differences. Completion of M&As that involve Asian firms depends on distinct factors. Results for NAFTA are mostly in line with predictions derived from general economic theory, compared to other regions.     

Acquisition Motives and the Distribution of Acquisition Performance

Research summary: I examine how acquisition motives relate to the distribution of post‐acquisition performance. I argue that acquisitions motivated by operating synergies have the potential to experience greater gains than acquisitions driven by financial synergies but are harder to value and implement, making them more uncertain. Using SEC filings, conference calls and press releases to capture acquisition motives, I find that acquirers pursuing operating synergies are more likely to experience highly positive and highly negative long‐term returns than acquirers pursuing financial synergies. I also find that acquisition experience and geographic proximity to targets soften acquirers' extreme downside outcomes in operating synergy acquisitions. My theory and results suggest that approaches that emphasize average outcomes for acquirers and use industry classifications to capture acquisition motives may be incomplete. Managerial summary: Managers engage in acquisitions for various reasons. In this study, I find that reasons related to operating synergies (e.g., revenue growth through new product offerings or cost savings through economies of scale) are more likely to result in extreme high and low performance outcomes for the acquiring firm compared to reasons related to financial synergies (e.g., diversification of cash flow streams). In addition, I find that the acquirer's prior acquisition experience and the geographic proximity between the target and acquirer help soften the extreme low performance outcomes related to operating synergies. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

With greater power comes greater responsibility? takeover protection and corporate attention to stakeholders

Using takeover protection as an indicator of corporate governance, this study examines how an exogenous shift in power from shareholders to managers affects corporate attention to non‐shareholding stakeholders. Two competing hypotheses are entertained. The shareholder view predicts that stronger takeover protection will lead to a decrease in corporate attention to shareholders and non‐shareholding stakeholders alike, as managers divert resources from shareholders to the pursuit of their private interests. The stakeholder view, in contrast, predicts that stronger takeover protection will increase corporate attention to non‐shareholding stakeholders. Because catering to non‐shareholding stakeholders contributes to the long‐term value of the firm, managers will be more likely to attend to those stakeholders when relieved from short‐termism triggered by the threat of hostile takeovers. Using a sample of 878 U.S. firms from 1991 to 2002, the study finds that an exogenous increase in takeover protection leads to higher corporate attention to community and the natural environment, but has no impact on corporate attention to employees, minorities, and customers. Additional analyses show that firms that increase their attention to stakeholders experience an increase in long‐term shareholder value. These findings provide additional evidence that relief from short‐termism is a likely source of the increase in corporate attention to non‐shareholding stakeholders following the increase in takeover protection. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

A capabilities‐based perspective on target selection in acquisitions

We develop a capabilities‐based theory of acquirer target selection, arguing that acquirers will pursue both low capability targets in existing contexts to deploy existing capabilities, and high capability targets in new contexts to acquire new capabilities. These arguments are formalized in an analytical model that jointly considers the benefits and costs of acquisition as a function of target capability level and context. The predictions from this model are tested in the Chinese brewing industry (1998–2007), with results showing that acquirers strongly prefer inferior targets in existing geographic markets, but are relatively more likely to choose superior targets in new markets, especially if they have strong acquisition capabilities. Our study provides insight into the factors driving target selection, and contributes to a capabilities‐based understanding of acquisitions. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

On the role of acquisition premium in acquisition research

Several studies argue that paying high acquisition premia is value destroying for acquirer shareholders. There are studies that have even used the size of premium as a measure of low‐quality decision making. This paper departs from the earlier research and shows that acquisition premia may be justified when target firms' resources are difficult for the market to value. An analysis of a sample of 458 acquisitions demonstrates that although higher premia are paid for R&D‐related assets, the premia do not cause negative abnormal returns. Abnormal returns are more strongly affected by the overall target price levels independent of premia. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Takeover Risk and Dividend Strategy: A Study of UK Firms

We investigate the relationship between a company’s dividend strategy and its risk of takeover. Our results from a large panel of UK quoted companies suggest that higher dividend payments are associated with a significantly lower conditional probability (hazard) of takeover. Moreover, firms which wish to avoid takeover would be better to distribute the marginal £1 of earnings in dividends rather than investing it in the company. We consider two explanations for these findings. We suggest that the presence of an active market for corporate control could encourage firms to raise dividends to maintain shareholder loyalty.     

Takeover defenses,innovation, and value creation: Evidence from acquisition decisions

The desirability of antitakeover provisions (ATPs) is a contentious issue. ATPs might enable managerial empire building by insulating managers from disciplinary takeovers. However, some companies, such as “hard‐to‐value” (HTV) companies, might trade at a discount due to valuation difficulties, thereby exposing HTV companies to opportunistic takeovers and creating agency conflicts of managerial risk aversion. ATPs might ameliorate such managerial risk aversion by inhibiting opportunistic takeovers. This paper analyzes acquisitions made by HTV firms, focusing on whether the acquirer (not the target) is entrenched in order to examine the impact of entrenchment managerial decision making. The results show that HTV firms that are entrenched make acquisitions that generate more shareholder wealth and are more likely to increase corporate innovation, suggesting that ATPs can be beneficial in some firms. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

External corporate governance and financial fraud: cognitive evaluation theory insights on agency theory prescriptions

R esearch summary : Agency theory suggests that external governance mechanisms (e.g., activist owners, the market for corporate control, securities analysts) can deter managers from acting opportunistically. Using cognitive evaluation theory, we argue that powerful expectations imposed by external governance can impinge on top managers' feelings of autonomy and crowd out their intrinsic motivation, potentially leading to financial fraud. Our findings indicate that external pressure from activist owners, the market for corporate control, and securities analysts increases managers' likelihood of financial fraud. Our study considers external governance from a top manager's perspective and questions one of agency theory's foundational tenets: that external pressure imposed on managers reduces the potential for moral hazard. M anagerial summary : Many of us are familiar with stories about top managers “cooking the books” in one way or another. As a result, companies and regulatory bodies often implement strict controls to try to prevent financial fraud. However, cognitive evaluation theory describes how those external controls could actually have the opposite of their intended effect because they rob managers of their intrinsic motivation for behaving appropriately. We find this to be the case. When top managers face more stringent external control mechanisms, in the form of activist shareholders, the threat of a takeover, or zealous securities analysts, they are actually more likely to engage in financial misbehavior. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

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.