Resource Configuration and Value Creation Following Mergers and Acquisitions
Mergers and Acquisitions (M&A) continue to be a popular vehicle for corporate profitability and growth. Although a rich stream of theory and research exists on M&A, there is considerable diversity in the findings and no consistent evidence validating the role of M&A in improving firm performance (e.g., Datta, Narayanan, and Pinches 1992; Haspeslagh and Jemison 1991; King et al. 2004; Ravenscaft and Scherer 1987). This apparent disconnection leaves open the possibility that a broader set of factors, beyond the constructs typically studied, may influence the outcome of M&A. Consequently, there is a recognized need for research to identify a theoretical framework that can help explain M&A performance.
M&A, as a vehicle to access and integrate assets and capabilities that exist outside the firms boundaries, can be a promising field of study in marketing. Surprisingly, it has received relatively limited attention from marketing scholars. Likewise, research on M&A has been mute on related marketing issues. Against this backdrop, the central thesis of this dissertation is to adapt a marketing perspective and explore additional theories to provide insights into a new set of determinants to explain M&A performance. Within the purview of resource-based view of the firm (Barney 1991; Wernerfelt 1984), I elaborate and empirically assess the link between the resource configuration of the merging firms and M&A performance and also delineate the contingent factors that enhance or mitigate these effects. Specifically, I investigate how the strategic emphases of the merging firms facilitate merger performance. In this research, I define strategic emphasis as the relative emphasis a firm places on building either brand resources or R&D resources (Mizik and Jacobson 2003). In this process, I examine whether M&A performance is a function of similarity or complementarity in strategic emphasis between merging firms.
There are conceptual and analytical arguments supportive of both resource similarity (e.g., Ansoff 1965; Hitt et al. 2001; Montgomery and Hariharan 1991) and complementarity (e.g., Harrison et al. 1991, 2001; Hoskisson and Busenitz 2002) as a positive driver of performance. The lack of a definitive answer is critical. I advance a contingency perspective based on merger motive to systematically explain the competing arguments. Much previous research has focused only on the main effect view of merger motives. I use two broad classifications: Consolidation- based M&A and Diversification- based M&A, and examine how each interacts with similarity and complementarity in the strategic emphases of the merging firms. I suggest that when there is similarity in strategic emphasis alignment, value creation is enhanced under the consolidation motive. Alternatively, for complementarity in strategic emphasis alignment, value is enhanced when the merger motive is one of diversification.
I use forward-looking financial market-based measures to evaluate M&A performance. Using stock market reactions to merger announcements, I examine synergistic gains accruing to the merging firms and wealth creation for the acquiring firms. The analysis draws from M&A announcements in two different industries that took place over the 22 year period between 1980 and 2001. Empirical tests considerably support the models prediction; the findings point to the distinct role of resource configuration of merging firms, as well as to important interactions between resource configuration and motives. The findings provide practical insights into how firm-specific factors affect M&A performance. I discuss the implications of these results for research on marketings role within a firm and set a theoretical and empirical basis for future research on firm specific resources and M&A performance.
School:University of Pittsburgh
School Location:USA - Pennsylvania
Source Type:Master's Thesis
Date of Publication:09/06/2005