IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jbrese/v63y2010i5p502-509.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Acquisition experience, board characteristics, and acquisition behavior

Author

Listed:
  • Peng, Yu-Shu
  • Fang, Chung-Ping

Abstract

Literature on acquisition places more concern on the consequence of an acquisition event and pays less attention to what factors influence the motive for initiating the acquisition strategy of a firm. Through the lenses of organizational learning and corporate governance theories, the study examine whether the prior acquisition experience and board characteristics affect firms' acquisition behavior. Hypotheses are tested on a sample of 92 acquisition events of Taiwanese electronics firms during the period from 1997 to 2007 by employing the survival function model. Empirical results indicate that business acquisition experience positively influence the inclination of the acquirer adopting a subsequent acquisition, while board characteristics do not relate to the likelihood of the acquirer making a subsequent acquisition. These findings provide theoretical and managerial implications for organizational learning and corporate governance theories in general and acquisition management in particular.

Suggested Citation

  • Peng, Yu-Shu & Fang, Chung-Ping, 2010. "Acquisition experience, board characteristics, and acquisition behavior," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 63(5), pages 502-509, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:63:y:2010:i:5:p:502-509
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0148-2963(09)00112-X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yakov Amihud & Baruch Lev, 1981. "Risk Reduction as a Managerial Motive for Conglomerate Mergers," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 12(2), pages 605-617, Autumn.
    2. Jensen, Michael C. & Meckling, William H., 1976. "Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 305-360, October.
    3. Markides, Constantinos & Oyon, Daniel, 1998. "International acquisitions:: Do they create value for shareholders?," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 125-135, April.
    4. Melinda Muth & Lex Donaldson, 1998. "Stewardship Theory and Board Structure: a contingency approach," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 6(1), pages 5-28, January.
    5. Lex Donaldson & James H. Davis, 1991. "Stewardship Theory or Agency Theory: CEO Governance and Shareholder Returns," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 16(1), pages 49-64, June.
    6. David G. McKendrick, 2001. "Global strategy and population‐level learning: the case of hard disk drives," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(4), pages 307-334, April.
    7. Mark A. Fox & Robert T. Hamilton, 1994. "Ownership And Diversification: Agency Theory Or Stewardship Theory," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(1), pages 69-81, January.
    8. Kevin Hendry & Geoffrey C. Kiel, 2004. "The Role of the Board in Firm Strategy: integrating agency and organisational control perspectives," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(4), pages 500-520, October.
    9. Brian K. Boyd, 1995. "CEO duality and firm performance: A contingency model," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(4), pages 301-312.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ruth, Derek & Iyer, Dinesh N. & Sharp, Barton M., 2013. "Motivation and ability in the decision to acquire," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(11), pages 2287-2293.
    2. Yexin Liu & Yecheng Wu & Weiwei Wu, 2023. "Which kind of board benefits more from the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and radical innovation? The asymmetric roles of board characteristics in China," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-14, December.
    3. Al-Shammari, Marwan & Rasheed, Abdul & Al-Shammari, Hussam A., 2019. "CEO narcissism and corporate social responsibility: Does CEO narcissism affect CSR focus?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 106-117.
    4. Ahmad Ismail & Abed A. Abdallah, 2013. "Acquirer's return and the choice of acquisition targets: does acquisition experience matter?," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(26), pages 3770-3777, September.
    5. Carl Åberg & Wei Shen, 2020. "Can board leadership contribute to board dynamic managerial capabilities? An empirical exploration among Norwegian firms," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 24(1), pages 169-197, March.
    6. Hunt, Richard A., 2021. "Entrepreneurial orientation and the fate of corporate acquisitions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 241-255.
    7. Schriber, Svante & Degischer, Daniel, 2020. "Disentangling acquisition experience: A multilevel analysis and future research agenda," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(2).
    8. Aapo Länsiluoto & Elina Varamäki & Erkki K. Laitinen & Anmari Viljamaa & Juha Tall, 2015. "Management Control Systems in Small Business Transfers — A Resource-Based View," Journal of Enterprising Culture (JEC), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 23(04), pages 449-471, December.
    9. Carl Åberg & Mariateresa Torchia, 2020. "Do boards of directors foster strategic change? A dynamic managerial capabilities perspective," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 24(3), pages 655-684, September.
    10. Wafa Tariq Waqar, 2020. "Board size and acquisition outcome: The moderating role of home country formal institutional development," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(4), pages 529-541, June.
    11. Angwin, Duncan N. & Paroutis, Sotirios & Connell, Richard, 2015. "Why good things Don’t happen: the micro-foundations of routines in the M&A process," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(6), pages 1367-1381.
    12. Jing Zhou & Yunwen Jiang & On Kit Tam & Wei Lan & Silin Ye, 2021. "Success in completing cross‐border acquisitions by emerging market firms: What matters?," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(7), pages 2128-2163, July.
    13. Twardawski, Torsten & Kind, Axel, 2023. "Board overconfidence in mergers and acquisitions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    14. Dhir, Sanjay & Ongsakul, Viput & Ahmed, Zafar U. & Rajan, Rishabh, 2020. "Integration of knowledge and enhancing competitiveness: A case of acquisition of Zain by Bharti Airtel," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 674-684.
    15. Cui, Lin & Li, Yi & Li, Zijie, 2013. "Experiential drivers of foreign direct investment by late-comer Asian firms: The Chinese evidence," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(12), pages 2451-2459.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nor Farizal Mohammed & Zuraidah Mohd Sanusi & Fahdah Sultan Alsudairi, 2017. "Corporate Governance and Malaysian Politics: Theoretical Framework for Accounting Quality," International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, Econjournals, vol. 7(2), pages 188-195.
    2. Jens Grigoleit, 2011. "Kapitalmarktreaktionen auf die Ankündigung des Wechsels von Vorstandsvorsitzenden in den Aufsichtsrat bei deutschen Unternehmen," Metrika: International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Statistics, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 131-157, January.
    3. Yu, Mei & Ashton, John K., 2015. "Board leadership structure for Chinese public listed companies," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 236-248.
    4. Singla, Chitra, 2016. "Impact of Board and CEO characteristics on Firms’ Performance," IIMA Working Papers WP2016-03-35, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Research and Publication Department.
    5. Bruton, Garry D. & Keels, J. Kay & Scifres, Elton L., 2002. "Corporate restructuring and performance: An agency perspective on the complete buyout cycle," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 55(9), pages 709-724, September.
    6. Khaled Elsayed, 2007. "Does CEO Duality Really Affect Corporate Performance?," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(6), pages 1203-1214, November.
    7. Patrick Velte & Stefan Weber, 2010. "Koalitionsbildungen im Rahmen der Corporate Governance als Anlass für weitere Reformen des unternehmerischen Überwachungssystems," Metrika: International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Statistics, Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 393-417, March.
    8. Chitra Singla, 2016. "Impact of Board and CEO characteristics on Firms’ Performance," Working Papers id:11035, eSocialSciences.
    9. Martin Kyere & Marcel Ausloos, 2021. "Corporate governance and firms financial performance in the United Kingdom," International Journal of Finance & Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(2), pages 1871-1885, April.
    10. Mushtaq Hussain Khan, & Ahmad Fraz & Arshad Hassan, 2016. "The Diversification Puzzle: The Role of Asymmetric Information and Insider Trading in Pakistan," Lahore Journal of Economics, Department of Economics, The Lahore School of Economics, vol. 21(2), pages 97-119, July-Dec.
    11. Al Dah, Bilal & Michael, Amir & Dixon, Rob, 2017. "Antitakeover provisions and CEO monetary benefits: Revisiting the E-index," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 992-1004.
    12. Jacqueline Christensen & Pamela Kent & Jenny Stewart, 2010. "Corporate Governance and Company Performance in Australia," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 20(4), pages 372-386, December.
    13. Etienne Redor, 2016. "Board attributes and shareholder wealth in mergers and acquisitions: a survey of the literature," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 20(4), pages 789-821, December.
    14. Marco Pini, 2019. "Family management and Industry 4.0: Different effects in different geographical areas? An analysis of the less developed regions in Italy," Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation, Fundacja Upowszechniająca Wiedzę i Naukę "Cognitione", vol. 15(3), pages 73-102.
    15. Jaskiewicz, Peter & Klein, Sabine, 2007. "The impact of goal alignment on board composition and board size in family businesses," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 60(10), pages 1080-1089, October.
    16. Michael Pirson & Shann Turnbull, 2011. "Toward a More Humanistic Governance Model: Network Governance Structures," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 99(1), pages 101-114, March.
    17. Esther Del Brio & Elida Maia-Ramires & Alberto De Miguel, 2011. "Ownership structure and diversification in a scenario of weak shareholder protection," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(29), pages 4537-4547.
    18. Maria L. Goranova & Richard L. Priem & Hermann A. Ndofor & Cheryl A. Trahms, 2017. "Is there a “Dark Side” to Monitoring? Board and Shareholder Monitoring Effects on M&A Performance Extremeness," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(11), pages 2285-2297, November.
    19. Amy J. Hillman & Gavin Nicholson & Christine Shropshire, 2008. "Directors' Multiple Identities, Identification, and Board Monitoring and Resource Provision," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(3), pages 441-456, June.
    20. Pugliese, A. & Bezemer, P.J. & Zattoni, A. & Huse, M. & van den Bosch, F.A.J. & Volberda, H.W., 2009. "Boards of Directors’ Contribution to Strategy: A Literature Review and Research Agenda," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2009-013-STR, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:63:y:2010:i:5:p:502-509. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jbusres .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.