IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/unm/umamer/2000010.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Effect of Mergers and Acquisitions on the Technological Performance of Companies in a High-tech Environment

Author

Listed:
  • Hagedoorn, John
  • Duysters, Geert

    (MERIT)

Abstract

A large part of the literature from industrial organisation and management expects that, compared with unrelated M&As, related M&As show superior economic performance because of synergetic effects that follow from economies of scale and scope. The current contribution takes the debate on the effect of different M&As somewhat further by studying the effect of M&As on the technological performance of companies. In this study the technological performance of M&As is related to a high-tech sector, i.e. the computer industry. The main result of this research is that the so called strategic and organisational fit between companies involved in M&As seem to play an important role in improving the technological performance of companies.

Suggested Citation

  • Hagedoorn, John & Duysters, Geert, 2000. "The Effect of Mergers and Acquisitions on the Technological Performance of Companies in a High-tech Environment," Research Memorandum 010, Maastricht University, Maastricht Economic Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    • Handle: RePEc:unm:umamer:2000010
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.merit.unu.edu/publications/rmpdf/2000/rm2000-010.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bronwyn H. Hall, 1990. "The Impact of Corporate Restructuring on Industrial Research and Development," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 21(1990 Micr), pages 85-135.
    2. repec:fth:harver:1473 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Cohen, Wesley M. & Levin, Richard C., 1989. "Empirical studies of innovation and market structure," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 18, pages 1059-1107, Elsevier.
    4. Scott,John T., 2005. "Purposive Diversification and Economic Performance," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521022583.
    5. MacDonald, James M, 1985. "R and D and the Directions of Diversification," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 67(4), pages 583-590, November.
    6. Sutton,C. J., 1980. "Economics and Corporate Strategy," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521296106.
    7. Ravenscraft, David J & Scherer, F M, 1987. "Life after Takeover," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(2), pages 147-156, December.
    8. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 287-343, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Edwin Mansfield, 1986. "Patents and Innovation: An Empirical Study," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(2), pages 173-181, February.
    10. Odagiri, Hiroyuki & Hase, Tatsuo, 1989. "Are mergers and acquisitions going to be popular in Japan too? : An empirical study," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 49-72, March.
    11. Devinney, Timothy M., 1993. "How well do patents measure new product activity?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 447-450.
    12. Zoltan J. Acs & David B. Audretsch, 1989. "Patents' Innovative Activity," Eastern Economic Journal, Eastern Economic Association, vol. 15(4), pages 373-376, Oct-Dec.
    13. Pari Patel & Keith Pavitt, 1991. "Large Firms in the Production of the World’s Technology: An Important Case of “Non-Globalisation”," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 22(1), pages 1-21, March.
    14. Hausman, Jerry & Hall, Bronwyn H & Griliches, Zvi, 1984. "Econometric Models for Count Data with an Application to the Patents-R&D Relationship," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(4), pages 909-938, July.
    15. Scherer, F M, 1988. "Corporate Takeovers: The Efficiency Arguments," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 2(1), pages 69-82, Winter.
    16. Ariel Pakes & Zvi Griliches, 1984. "Patents and R&D at the Firm Level: A First Look," NBER Chapters, in: R&D, Patents, and Productivity, pages 55-72, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Grupp, Hariolf, 1994. "The measurement of technical performance of innovations by technometrics and its impact on established technology indicators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 175-193, March.
    18. Cosh, A. D. & Hughes, A. & Lee, K. & Singh, A., 1989. "Institutional investment, mergers and the market for corporate control," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 73-100, March.
    19. Kamien,Morton I. & Schwartz,Nancy L., 1982. "Market Structure and Innovation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521293853, December.
    20. Rebecca Henderson & Iain Cockburn, 1994. "Measuring Competence? Exploring Firm Effects in Pharmaceutical Research," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(S1), pages 63-84, December.
    21. Henrik Bresman & Julian Birkinshaw & Robert Nobel, 1999. "Knowledge Transfer in International Acquisitions," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 30(3), pages 439-462, September.
    22. Zoltan J. Acs & David B. Audretsch, 1989. "Patents as a Measure of Innovative Activity," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(2), pages 171-180, August.
    23. Chris Freeman & Luc Soete, 1997. "The Economics of Industrial Innovation, 3rd Edition," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 3, volume 1, number 0262061953, December.
    24. Geert Duysters, 1996. "The Dynamics of Technical InnovatioN," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 924.
    25. Harbir Singh & Cynthia A. Montgomery, 1987. "Corporate acquisition strategies and economic performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 8(4), pages 377-386, July.
    26. Michael Lubatkin, 1987. "Merger strategies and stockholder value," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 8(1), pages 39-53, January.
    27. Acs, Zoltan J & Audretsch, David B, 1989. "Patents as a Measure of Innovative Activity," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(2), pages 171-180.
    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. Bertrand, Olivier & Zuniga, Pluvia, 2006. "R&D and M&A: Are cross-border M&A different? An investigation on OECD countries," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 401-423, March.
    2. Xinlei Zhao, 2009. "Technological Innovation and Acquisitions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(7), pages 1170-1183, July.
    3. Lingling Suo & Kezhi Yang & Hao Ji, 2023. "The Impact of Technological Mergers and Acquisitions on Enterprise Innovation: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(17), pages 1-17, August.
    4. John Cantwell & Grazia D. Santangelo, 2002. "M&As AND THE GLOBAL STRATEGIES OF TNCs," The Developing Economies, Institute of Developing Economies, vol. 40(4), pages 400-434, December.

    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. Hagedoorn, John & Cloodt, Myriam, 2003. "Measuring innovative performance: is there an advantage in using multiple indicators?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(8), pages 1365-1379, September.
    2. Hagedoorn, John & Duysters, Geert, 2000. "Learning in Dynamic Inter-firm Networks - The Efficacy of Multiple Contacts," Research Memorandum 009, Maastricht University, Maastricht Economic Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    3. Jaimin Goh & Jaehong Lee & Wonchang Hur & Yunchang Ju, 2019. "Do Analysts Fully Reflect Information in Patents about Future Earnings?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-17, May.
    4. Cloodt, Myriam & Hagedoorn, John & Van Kranenburg, Hans, 2006. "Mergers and acquisitions: Their effect on the innovative performance of companies in high-tech industries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 642-654, June.
    5. Duysters, Geert & Hagedoorn, John, 1996. "The effect of core competence building on companies performance," Research Memorandum 010, Maastricht University, Maastricht Economic Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    6. Hagedoorn, John & Wang, Ning, 2012. "Is there complementarity or substitutability between internal and external R&D strategies?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 1072-1083.
    7. Cohen, Wesley M., 2010. "Fifty Years of Empirical Studies of Innovative Activity and Performance," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 129-213, Elsevier.
    8. Landon Kleis & Paul Chwelos & Ronald V. Ramirez & Iain Cockburn, 2012. "Information Technology and Intangible Output: The Impact of IT Investment on Innovation Productivity," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 42-59, March.
    9. Janger, Jürgen & Schubert, Torben & Andries, Petra & Rammer, Christian & Hoskens, Machteld, 2017. "The EU 2020 innovation indicator: A step forward in measuring innovation outputs and outcomes?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 30-42.
    10. Shiferaw Gurmu & Fidel Pérez-Sebastián, 2008. "Patents, R&D and lag effects: evidence from flexible methods for count panel data on manufacturing firms," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 35(3), pages 507-526, November.
    11. Arroyabe, M. F. & Hussinger, Katrin & Hagedoorn, John, 2020. "Hiring new key inventors to improve firms' post-M&A inventive output," ZEW Discussion Papers 20-029, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    12. Fai, Felicia & von Tunzelmann, Nicholas, 2001. "Industry-specific competencies and converging technological systems: evidence from patents," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 141-170, July.
    13. Burhan, Muqbil & Singh, Anil K. & Jain, Sudhir K., 2017. "Patents as proxy for measuring innovations: A case of changing patent filing behavior in Indian public funded research organizations," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 181-190.
    14. Zoltan J. Acs & David B. Audretsch, 2005. "Entrepreneurship and Innovation," Papers on Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy 2005-21, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy Group.
    15. Bertrand, Olivier & Zuniga, Pluvia, 2006. "R&D and M&A: Are cross-border M&A different? An investigation on OECD countries," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 401-423, March.
    16. Chadha, Alka, 2009. "TRIPs and patenting activity: Evidence from the Indian pharmaceutical industry," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 499-505, March.
    17. Choi, Mincheol & Lee, Chang-Yang, 2021. "Technological diversification and R&D productivity: The moderating effects of knowledge spillovers and core-technology competence," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    18. Nikulainen, Tuomo & Pajarinen, Mika & Palmberg, Christopher, 2005. "Patents and Technological Change - A Review with Focus on the FEPOCI Database," Discussion Papers 984, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    19. Yuri Jo & Chang-Yang Lee, 2014. "Technological Capability, Agglomeration Economies and Firm Location Choice," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(8), pages 1337-1352, August.
    20. Zhang, Feng & Jiang, Guohua & Cantwell, John A., 2019. "Geographically Dispersed Technological Capability Building and MNC Innovative Performance: The Role of Intra-firm Flows of Newly Absorbed Knowledge," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 1-1.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    management and organization theory ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:unm:umamer:2000010. 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: Leonne Portz (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/meritnl.html .

    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.