When Is One Plus One More Than Two? Theory and Evidence of Merger Motivations

We devise a neoclassical economic model that reveals the underlying motivations for mergers, without resorting to distorted firm decisions or stock market inefficiency. Using empirical analyses to verify the model's predictions, we discover that mergers are more likely in economic booms than in recessions. Furthermore, we assert that a firm with insufficient physical capital is likely a bidder in a merger, whereas a firm with large physical capital is likely a target. Our findings are largely consistent with the waves of mergers during economic booms and the theory on operational synergies.     

The British Cotton Industry and International Competitive Advantage: The State of the Debates

The new institutional approach to the theory of the firm represents a welcome advance over neoclassical theory in that, instead of treating the firm merely as a device to explain equilibrium under different market structures, it delves into the workings of the firm in an effort to understand why enterprises undertake the activities they do and how they grow over time. The theoretical framework for much of the new approach was developed by Oliver Williamson, who argued that firms evolved not because of technological non-separabilities but to economise on transaction costs. The object of this essay is to demonstrate that Williamson's comparative static methodology is ill-suited to explaining how firms actually evolve. It argues that far greater insights are provided by capability- or resource-based theories of the firm, which combine the concepts of transaction costs and firm-specific advantage in order to show that the boundaries of the firm are in fact determined by the non-separability and tacit nature of knowledge that lies at the heart of every enterprise.     

Business strategy and firm location decisions: testing traditional and modern methods

Business Economics - For nearly a century, economists have relied upon the neoclassical principle of a “profit-maximizing firm.” Two modern challenges to this principle have arisen: the...     

Toward a Common Good Theory of the Firm: The Tasubinsa Case

Tasubinsa is a “Special Employment and Occupational Center” constituted in accordance with Spanish Law where 90% of the workers have mental, sensorial or physical impairments of at least 30%. Its positive experience of more than 15 years provides entirely different responses from mainstream neoclassical theory (transaction cost theory, agency theory, and shareholder theory) to basic questions such as “What is a firm?”, “What is its purpose?”, “Who owns a firm?”, and “What do a firm’s owners seek?”. The article discusses how these different premises give rise to a distinctive corporate culture centered on the handicapped person.     

The role of ethics in executive compensation: Toward a contractarian interpretation of the neoclassical theory of managerial renumeration

The topic of Chief Executive Officer (CEO) compensation has been a focus of interest for many years. The purpose of this article is to explore the ethical dimensions of various generally accepted theories of CEO renumeration. We argue that a contractarian approach, based on the Kantian ethical framework, can be used to augment the existing contingent pay models.While the neoclassical economic model of the firm views the maximization of the shareholders' wealth as the sole responsibility of top management, a contractarian approach regards the balancing of various stakeholders' interests as the primary task of top management. Ethical problems emerge when there are divergent, yet equally justifiable interests which compete in order to channel organizational resources to meet their own needs. In this situation, given the inherent ambiguities and ever present possibilities of multiple perspectives, it may not always be feasible to provide a categorical answer to the question of whether the CEO's decisions are ethical. We suggest that a broad interpretation of the neoclassical theory of the firm, one that is grounded in Kantian and contractarian ethics, can serve as a basis for a reconciliation of different theories of executive compensation.Linda L. Carr, a certified public accountant, has held positions as an auditor in public accounting and as a controller in industry. Her thesis examines the determinants of executive compensation in large and small firms.Moosa Valinezhad is assistant professor of economics in Western Kentucky University, where he teaches international economics, microeconomics, and statistics. Dr. Valinezhad has a deep interest in the interdisciplinary aspects of economics. His recent article in theJournal of Economic Issues explores the importance of sociopolitical forces for the monetary approach to the balance of payment.     

Behavioral Economics,Federalism, and the Triumph of Stakeholder Theory

Stakeholder theorists distinguish between normative stakeholders, those who gain moral standing by making contributions to the firm, and derivative stakeholders, those who can constrain the corporate association even though they make no contribution. The board of directors has the legal authority to distinguish among these stakeholder groups and to distribute rights and obligations among these stakeholder groups. To be sure, this stakeholder formulation appropriately seizes on the firm’s voluntary, associative character. Yet, the firm’s constituents contribute assets and incur risks to participate in market, economic activities. And, as such, the firm’s “stakeholders” must share an imperfect language to assist in making two key economic decisions: (1) who are the legitimate and who are the derivative stakeholders; and (2) who should sit on the board? Still, stakeholder theorists have good reason to be skeptical of neoclassical economics. Its assumptions that all act opportunistically and that all can calculate rationally and fully hardly correspond to studies on the managerial experience of corporate coordination. However, advances in behavioral law and economics now provide a cogent economic logic that readily fits into a stakeholder mode. In brief, we argue that (1) the firm’s economic purpose designates legitimacy to core stakeholders, to those who add value, assume unique risk, and can incur harm; (2) the board serves as the principal who coordinates these core stakeholders to sustain competitive advantage and new wealth creation; and (3) state incorporation law, Delaware in particular, reinforces the board’s function. These, in turn, supply selection criteria for board membership. We aim to synchronize concepts from behavioral law and economics with stakeholder theory.     

Upstream or downstream in the value chain?

Companies in the natural resources industry (e.g., mining, timber, farming and fishery) face the dilemma of whether to focus upstream or downstream in the value chain. The literature provides arguments and empirical evidence for either position. This paper presents an analytical framework based on the neoclassical theory of the firm, for which the best competitive advantage is the one that maximizes production efficiency. It serves to formulate an optimization model for the sawmill industry, and draws the data from the largest sawmilling company in the southern hemisphere. Although one conclusion is that the company should concentrate on the upstream activities, such conclusion is not applicable to other firms, since the analysis of the upstream-downstream dilemma must focus on the individual capabilities of each firm.     

Endogenous Market Structures in the Presence of a Socially Responsible Firm

We consider the endogenous selection of strategic contracts in an asymmetric duopoly with substitutable goods. the duopoly comprises a typical managerial firm with a sales delegation and a socially responsible firm (CSR firm) with a linear combination of social welfare and quantity as its managerial delegation contract. In particular, we examine how the equilibrium market structure changes from the case wthere both firms adopt sales delegation contracts to the case wthere one of the firms becomes a CSR firm, after the owners of the firms select their strategic contracts. We show that two market structures that are asymmetric with respect to their strategic contracts can become equilibrium market structures under the pure strategic contract class. Furthermore, we consider a unique mixed strategy equilibrium to examine how the risk domination between the two asymmetric equilibrium market structures affects equilibrium selection. there, we find that the competition wthere the firm with the sales delegation and the CSR firm have a price contract and a quantity contract, respectively, risk-dominates the competition wthere the firms have a quantity contract and a price contract, respectively. Finally, by deriving the order of social welfare among the four subgames, we show that the social incentive does not coincide with the private incentive in the robust equilibrium with respect to risk domination in the endogenous selection game of the strategic contracts of the asymmetric duopoly with the firm with a sales delegation and the CSR firm.     

新古典微观经济学能否成为发展经济学的微观基础

为了在现代经济学理论体系中获得相对独立存在的合理性。发展经济学必须建立在严格的微观理论基础之上,但这并不意味着它必须以新古典微观经济学为其微观基础。本文试图阐明,新古典微观经济学的分析空间是一个均衡分析空间,它或许适合于研究处于均衡或近均衡状态的经济体,但不足以分析远离均衡的发展中国家经济。从某种意义上说,新古典微观经济学可以看作是一般的“经济生理学”．而发展经济学的微观基础应该是“欠发达经济病理学”。     

Reconciling Corporate Citizenship and Competitive Strategy: Insights from Economic Theory

Neoclassical and Austrian/evolutionary economic paradigms have different implications for integrating corporate social responsibility (corporate citizenship) and competitive strategy. Porter’s “Five Forces” model implicitly rests on neoclassical theory of the firm and is not easily reconciled with corporate social responsibility. Resource-based models of competitive strategy do not explicitly embrace a particular economic paradigm, but to the extent their conceptualization rests on neoclassical assumptions such as imperfect factor markets and profits as rents, these models also imply a trade-off between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Differences in Austrian/evolutionary economic model’s assumptions about equilibrium, profits, and other economic concepts allow this paradigm to embrace alternative views of strategy such as the activities or dynamic capabilities views. These alternative views of strategy focus on learning and adaptation; they align more easily with corporate social responsibility. In practice this alignment comes about because social engagement facilitates the learning and adaptation that are a source of competitive advantage. Among the many business arguments for CSR such as improved employee morale/productivity or brand differentiation, this view prioritizes innovation.     

Making the Shift: Moving from "Ethics Pays" to an Inter-Systems Model of Business

For several decades, business has operated according to the tenets of neoclassical economic theory, where the primary obligation of corporations is to maximize profit for shareholders. However, the larger social mandate for business has changed, represented by the rise of language such as "sustainable development", "corporate social responsibility" (CSR) and "stakeholder groups." Nevertheless, the theoretical shift implied by the use of such language has not occurred. Issues of sustainable development and CSR continue to be justified in the terms of neoclassical economic theory through the rationalization of "doing well by doing good".Within this economic paradigm, CSR cannot move beyond enlightened self-interest (acting in socially responsible ways in order to further one's own ends) because all behavior must be justified economically. This implies that corporate socially responsible behavior will simply cease when it becomes uneconomic, regardless of the impact on interrelated systems which in turn will re-impact the business realm.Faced with bitter realities arising from complex interactions among social, political, cultural, eco-nomic and natural environments, we may better comprehend and negotiate these problems by moving out of a neoclassical economic justification of the stakeholder model of the corporation to an inter-systems model, shifting from a narrow comprehension of a single economic independent system analyzed apart from its larger context to a fuller understanding of business as one of a number of interrelated systems.Operational differences between the old and new mandates are described, and two ways to practically shift towards the new mandate are identified as a modified version of scenario planning and the introduction of the voice of the critic.     

Impact of industry sector on corporate diversification and firm performance: Evidence from Indian business groups

Prior business group (BG) studies implicitly assume that corporate diversification‐firm performance relationships are uniform across industry sectors. This generalization may lead to research implications that are not equally true for BG‐affiliated manufacturing and service firms. Drawing on strategy and marketing literature, this research addresses this scholarly gap. Our empirical analysis of a large sample of BG‐affiliated Indian firms over a five‐year period (2004‐2008) indicates that the influence of corporate diversification on firm performance is greater for affiliated service firms than affiliated manufacturing firms. Results also indicate that the influence of BG size and diversity on diversification‐firm performance relationship varies significantly depending on whether the focal firm belongs to the manufacturing or service sector. Firm's share ownership does not generate similar influence. Copyright © 2015 ASAC. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

A synthesis of the Heckscher-Ohlin and the neoclassical models of international trade

In this paper we provide a synthesis between the neoclassical and the Heckscher-Ohlin models of international trade by developing the properties of a two-sector, three-factor model. The neoclassical model, where one or more factors are specific to one or both industries, and the Heckscher-Ohlin model, where two (or all factors) are nonspecific, then can be analyzed as special cases of our model. The theorems by Rybczynski, Stolper and Samuelson, Jones and Chipman, among others, are reexamined in terms of our generalized model.     

Just about money? CEO satisfaction and firm performance in small family firms

This paper examines how family ownership and family ties influence the relative importance of economic and non-economic goals on the CEO’s satisfaction with the firm. Using a sample of small high-tech family and non-family firms, we show that the influence of past firm economic performance on CEO satisfaction is weaker in the case of CEOs leading a family firm. Our results also suggest that this influence becomes weaker as the family firm transitions into subsequent generations. However, contrary to our expectations, we were not able to find a differential effect of firm performance on CEO satisfaction between CEOs who belong to the controlling family and those who do not.     

Carbon policy and the structure of global trade

Alternative perspectives on the structure of international trade have important implications for the evaluation of climate policy. In this paper, we assess climate policy in the context of three important alternative trade formulations. First is a Heckscher‐Ohlin model based on trade in homogeneous products, which establishes the traditional neoclassical view on comparative advantage. Second is an Armington model based on regionally differentiated goods, which is a popular specification for numerical simulations of trade policy. Third is a Melitz model based on monopolistic competition and firm heterogeneity. This heterogeneous‐firms framework is adopted in many contemporary theoretic and empirical investigations in international trade. As we show in this paper, the three alternative trade formulations have important implications for the assessment of climate policy with respect to competitive effects for energy‐intensive production (and hence carbon leakage) as well as the transmission of policy burdens across countries.     

Profiting from product innovation: The impact of legal, marketing, and technological capabilities in different environmental conditions

Although product innovation is a key tool for firms competing in the marketplace, innovating firms often fail to obtain economic returns from their product innovations. This study examines the moderating effects of legal, marketing, and technological capabilities on the relationship between product innovation and firm performance in different environmental conditions in order to identify how a firm can leverage these capabilities to profit from product innovation. Based on the data of 223 Chinese firms, this study finds that legal capability positively moderates the relationship between product innovation and firm performance, especially when competitive intensity is high; the moderating effect of marketing capability is positive, although it is weakened by market turbulence; and technological capability has a negative moderating effect, which becomes more significant as technological turbulence increases.     

A critical evaluation of Etzioni's socioeconomic theory: Implications for the field of business ethics

Given the pervasive influence of neoclassical economic theory on the field of business, the opposition of the standard economists to the inclusion of moral factors in economic decisions provides an intellectual resistance to the ideas of many business ethicists. Etzioni (1988) offers a theoretical alternative to the neoclassical model, an alternative that includes a moral dimension. This article: (1) highlights the differences between Etzioni's proposed model and the neoclassical economic paradigm; (2) describes and critically evaluates Etzioni's proposed theory in view of his objective of synthesizing the neoclassical paradigm with a duty-based morality; and (3) discusses the implications of Etzioni's proposed paradigm for the field of business ethics.Diane Swanson is an Assistant Professor of finance and economics at Robert Morris College in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. She is also a doctoral student in Business Environment and Public Policy at the Katz Graduate School of Business, University of Pittsburgh.     

Individual, Collective and Social Responsibility of the Firm

The main concern of this paper is the moral responsibility of the firm, as well as of the individuals in a firm, to uphold environmental protection. Much of the business ethics literature defines corporate social responsibility in terms of stakeholder relationships, and the emphasis is frequently on collective as opposed to individual responsibility. This paper has three objectives. The first is to clarify the nature of moral responsibility, and the distinction between legal and moral responsibility. The second objective is to steer academicians and others towards a new vision of the firm. We argue that a firm is not just a singular legal entity but also a collectivity of morally responsible individuals who are liable for immoral acts of the firm. By expanding the boundary of responsibility of action from an intangible collectivity – the firm, to all the individuals within it, this vision moves beyond the typical emphasis on the firm as being the only moral agent responsible for corporate actions. The paper emphasizes not simply the responsibility of top echelon managers, but of every employee across ranks. The third goal of this paper is to examine the circumstances where application of moral responsibility becomes crucial, for instance, in the context of protection of the natural environment by a firm and its employees.     

风险企业股票期权类型选择机制研究

在风险企业的创业过程中,风险企业家和员工的人力资本在很大程度上决定着创业的成败,然而人力资本具有非共生性,需要用一定的激励机制来共化人力资本于风险企业的价值之中。定量分析体现股票期权激励效果的因素,以边际激励效果因子大小为选择股票期权类型的标准,来比较标准的股票期权计划和基于业绩要求的股票期权计划所产生的激励效果,为风险企业采用高激励效果的基于业绩要求的股票期权计划提供依据。     

Reassessing Firm Size in International Marketing Research

This study investigates the relevance and importance of firm size as a current research variable in international marketing while being cognizant of the reasons behind previous researcher's focus on firm size. Utilizing two different databases and analyses, this study integrates existing research on the effects of firm size variables on decisions in international marketing and draws a general conclusion. The main research questions center on whether firm size matters in internationalization decisions and whether firm size is a meaningful proxy for specific firm resources. Our results suggest that the effect of size on internationalization becomes less significant over time and that the effect of firm size on choice of ownership is significantly less than that of other firm-specific variables such as R&D intensity and advertising intensity, suggesting that strategic international marketing decisions are more related to a firm's unique assets than to its size.