Search results

Whilst substantial evidence from low-corruption, developed market environments supports the view that more productive firms are more likely to export, there has been little research into analysing the link between productivity and exports in high corruption, developing market environments. The purpose of this paper is twofold. First, to test the premise of self-selection theory whether the association between productivity and export is maintained in high-corruption environments, and second to identify other variables explaining export activity in high-corruption contexts, including cluster networks and firms’ competences.

The authors draw on the World Bank Enterprise survey to undertake a cross-section analysis including 1,233 small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) located in nine African countries. The advantage of this database is that it contains information about the level of perceived corruption at firm level. Logistic regressions are performed for the full sample and for subsamples of firms in high- and low-corruption environments.

The findings demonstrate that the self-selection theory only applies to low-corruption environments, whereas in high-corruption environments, alternative factors such as cluster networks and outward-looking competences (OLC) exert a stronger influence on the exporting activity of African SMEs.

This research contributes to the theory as it provides evidence that contradicts the validity of self-selection theory in high-corruption environments. The findings would benefit from further longitudinal investigation.

African SMEs need to consider cluster networks and OLC as important strategic factors that might enhance their international competitiveness.

The criticism of the self-selection theory is distinctive in the literature and has important implications for future research. The authors show that the contextualisation of existing theories matters and this opens a research avenue for further more sensitive contextualisation of existing theories in developing economies.

Managing Executives occupy a pivotal role in the acquisition process. It is virtually inconceivable that major Merger and Acquisitions (M&As) could proceed without their personal sponsorship (Hayward & Hambrick, 1997). They are central to the negotiation and signing for such deals and it is these negotiations that raise questions over how the target company should be run post-acquisition, how it should be configured to fit within the newly expanded group and what sort of strategy may be appropriate for the future. Managing Executives embody their firm’s strategies and so are intimately connected with these issues of organisational fit and strategic rational. With negotiations focussed upon the future of their businesses and their personal places in corporate history, these contests can be very dramatic. The high stakes are evident in the substantial levels of acquired Managing Executive departure post-acquisition. Whilst we can observe that many acquired Managing Executives subsequently leave the enlarged firm, little evidence to date answers the question of why they have been retained or replaced?

Post-acquisition integration matters for overall M&A outcome. However within this phase researchers have struggled to identify clear links between integration activities and post-acquisition outcome. This may be due to using organisational levels of analysis, where sub-organisational issues serve to confound findings. In order to unpack the post-acquisition phase, and to delve more deeply into organisations, this paper adopts a more granular perspective on integration activities by focusing upon the building blocks of organisations. Specifically we investigate ordinary routine amalgamation and their impact upon meta-routine outcome during acquisition integration. Drawing upon two longitudinal integration cases and using ‘retroductive’ analysis, two types of amalgamation are identified, namely ‘combination’ and ‘superimposition’. We find that, while the basic nature of routines, such as multiplicity and nestedness, inhibit routine amalgamation, external interference in the form of context, structural change or introduction of additional routines is needed to stabilise amalgamated routines. From our findings we are able to suggest a number of testable propositions about the factors that influence the amalgamation of routines. This empirical study contributes to the M&A literature by opening up the ‘black box’ of post-acquisition integration by providing details at a granular level of what actually happens during integrations.

Why do managers continue to transact merger & acquisition (M&A) deals, in massive number and dollar terms, when so many are deemed to fail? This paradox is central to the study of M&A. Despite considerable research effort being devoted to refining and redefining assessments of M&A performance the consensus of opinion remains that most M&A fail. Certain of the high percentage of M&A failure, performance academics infer that the continued massive levels of transactions can only be explained as misguided actions by managers. This chapter believes that the performance paradox can begin to unravel if we move beyond simple inference of managerial intentions and observe what actually takes place in practice. For instance the underlying assumptions of performance academics, that; 1) each M&A must create greater value for acquiring shareholders; 2) no other reasons for an M&A are legitimate, are not adequate for capturing ‘legitimate’ managerial action in practice. This suggests that part of the reason for so many M&A appearing to be failures is a result of the ‘myopia’ of performance studies themselves, where assumed and simplified motives have resulted in crude categorisations and confounded data. These limitations in the M&A performance literature are addressed in this chapter by; 1) demonstrating a broader set of motivations for M&A; 2) establishing their legitimacy; 3) showing that motivations may not be singular in nature but intertwined and complex; 4) presenting a way in which this greater complexity may be conceived in order for more sensitive empirical tests to be performed.

This paper provides an overview of the merger and acquisition (M&A) activity of Middle‐Eastern (M.E.) countries from 1990 to 2000. The following information is presented: M&A transactions by the nationality and industries of the target firms; home countries and industries of the acquiring firms and the acquisition methods. The largest twenty mergers and acquisitions in the Middle East during the 1990–2000 period are identified. The paper also compares the M&A activity in four important countries (Egypt, Israel, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia). Learning the M&A activity in the Middle East is essential in identifying target or acquirers, and conducting future M&A transactions.

We are celebrating our sixth annual volume of the Advances in Mergers and Acquisitions. We have attempted over the years to include a range of disciplines and orientations from occupational psychology to economics, to corporate strategy, to corporate finance, to marketing. This volume is no exception with academics from a range of disciplines and a number of countries (e.g. Germany, Finland, UK, Canada, Italy, US, and Mexico). The unimpeded growth in mergers and acquisitions (M&A) activity globally means that research and practice in this field is likely to become even more significant as large developing countries such as China, India, and Brazil begin to go globally and influence markets in a different but dynamic way.