Abstract: Building on prior research on acquisition-sequences, we examine the implications of the complexity of an acquisition-sequence on acquirer performance. Although doing different types of acquisitions can be beneficial for an acquirer, it can likewise reduce a firm’s ability to integrate them effectively. We examine the effects of two types of acquisitions—resource-deepening and resource-widening—acquisitions. Building on absorptive capacity and organizational indigestion arguments, we find support for our arguments on the limited capacity of acquirers to effectively absorb acquisition-sequences that contain resource-deepening and resource-widening acquisitions. This negative effect, however, is reduced if the acquisitions are processed across different firm-entities; the acquirer has experience from coordination acquisitions across different entities; and the target-to-target similarity is high. Our findings complement the dominant learning perspective on acquisition-sequences.

Abstract: This research aims to show how a single business takes advantage of M&A as a strategy to become a business group. We explore market commonality and resource similarity between the acquirers and the acquisition ones, and examine how the acquirers integrate M&A targets to exploit the expected synergy. Based on five exploratory case studies in a listed business group in Taiwan, the article develops a theoretical model suggesting that the acquirers can distinguish M&A targets via the relative market and resource relationship between the acquirers and the acquisition ones. We find that according to different motives, the acquirer adopts different M&A approach to integrate M&A targets and implements knowledge transfer, coevolving, and patching in different ways, thereby exploiting the expected synergy.

Abstract: The rapid growth in research interest into whether firms can learn to master acquisitions has come at the expense of coherence. This paper provides a critical review of empirical research on acquisition experience. It informs acquisition research by condensing and summarizing empirical findings in relation to three common topical areas: how past acquisitions influence propensity to grow via further acquisitions, acquisition prowess, and the processes underpinning acquisition experience. It suggests balancing current biases in data, and identifies remaining gaps in acquisition experience research. In particular, there is need for more in-depth data on the processes of acquisition experience that allows, first, to unravel more complex pictures of experience networks, and second, to theoretically distinguish more clearly the organizational learning in acquisition experience.

Abstract: This paper empirically examines how much of the mergers are due to misevaluation reasons and how much due to opportunities of organizational growth and provide answers to the long standing question as to why acquiring firms continue to use mergers as a major strategic option despite the lack of gains. It decomposes market to book value ratio to four composites capturing firm specific, and industry specific misevaluation, and short and long run growth opportunities and empirically examine their effect on merger activity using UK data over the period 1989-2012. Findings show that an acquirer is not able to attribute the correct amount to each composite of a target’s market to book value and may overpay for a target as it overestimates its long run growth opportunities