IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/indcch/v30y2021i4p905-926..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating an organizational innovation: evidence from the conglomerate merger wave
[Fools rush in? The institutional context of industry creation]

Author

Listed:
  • Peter Klein
  • Robert Wuebker
  • Mo Chen
  • Kathrin Zoeller

Abstract

How do we assess new forms of economic organization? As with other innovations, the value of a new organizational form is initially unknown. When assets are traded in financial markets, the information embodied in prices represent one mechanism through which organizational innovations are evaluated. We apply an experimental-learning framework to explore the influence of the capital markets on economic organization, using the conglomerate merger wave of the 1960s and 1970s as an empirical context. In our setting, the initial market popularity of conglomerates, followed by their rapid decline, is indicative of investors attempting to determine the value of a new organizational form. We provide event-study evidence that investors systematically updated their beliefs about the value of the conglomerate form based on new information (positive or negative) about the largest and most newsworthy conglomerates. Our results suggest that financial market participants make judgments not only about specific companies, but about organizational structure itself.

Suggested Citation

  • Peter Klein & Robert Wuebker & Mo Chen & Kathrin Zoeller, 2021. "Evaluating an organizational innovation: evidence from the conglomerate merger wave [Fools rush in? The institutional context of industry creation]," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 30(4), pages 905-926.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:indcch:v:30:y:2021:i:4:p:905-926.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/icc/dtab023
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    More about this item

    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:oup:indcch:v:30:y:2021:i:4:p:905-926.. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/icc .

    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.