Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-qxdb6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-29T08:09:47.766Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Value Constraining or Value Enabling? The Impact of Business Group Affiliation on Post-Acquisition Performance by Emerging Market Firms

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 March 2020

Manish Popli Open the ORCID record for Manish Popli [Opens in a new window]  and
Radha Mukesh Ladkani
Manish Popli*
Affiliation:
Indian Institute of Management, India
Radha Mukesh Ladkani
Affiliation:
Indian Institute of Management, India
*
Corresponding author: Manish Popli (manishp@iimidr.ac.in)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Literature has advanced two contrasting theoretical perspectives related to the governance structure of business groups: the ‘value-constraining’ perspective, which focuses on principal–principal agency conflict and organizational inertia theory, and the ‘value-enabling’ perspective, which emphasizes the role of business groups in mitigation of institutional voids. Building on these two competing lenses, we develop hypotheses to examine post-acquisition performance of affiliate firms relative to stand-alone firms. As our empirical context, we study 440 majority-stake, domestic and cross-border merger and acquisition deals closed by Indian firms during the period 2002–2013. The results imply that in emerging markets, despite concerns of organizational inertia and principal–principal agency issues, the value-enabling impact of group affiliation persists. We also examine the contextual impact of intergroup heterogeneity owing to group diversification on post-acquisition performance and find that greater group diversification leads to better performance for affiliate acquirers.

摘要

摘要

已有文献针对商业群体的治理结构提出了两个相反的理论观点。“价值约束”观点聚焦委托代理冲突和组织惰性理论，“价值赋能”观点则强调商业群体在减少制度空白中的作用。基于两种对立的视角，我们建立了假设检验附属公司相对于独立公司完成并购后的业绩。我们研究了印度公司在2002-2013年间完成的440个国内和跨国的大股东并购案例，结果表明在新兴市场中，尽管存在组织惰性和委托代理方面的顾虑，群体隶属的价值赋能影响依然存在。我们还考察了因群体多样化而产生的群体间的异质性对于并购后业绩所产生的情境影响，发现更大的群体多样化导致附属的并购企业产生更好的业绩。

Аннотация

АННОТАЦИЯ

В научной литературе существуют две противоположные теоретические перспективы, которые связаны со структурой управления в деловых кругах: перспектива «ограничения ценности», которая основана на конфликте «принципал-принципал» и теории организационной инерции, и перспектива «создания ценности», которая подчеркивает роль деловых кругов в ослаблении влияния институционального вакуума. Опираясь на эти две противоположные точки зрения, мы разрабатываем гипотезы для изучения производительности дочерних компаний после приобретения по сравнению с самостоятельными компаниями. В качестве нашего эмпирического контекста, мы изучаем 440 внутренних и международных сделок по слиянию и поглощению с мажоритарным участием, которые заключили индийские компании в период 2002–2013 годов. Результаты показывают, что на развивающихся рынках, несмотря на организационную инерцию и проблему «принципал-принципал», принадлежность деловых кругов способствует созданию ценности. Мы также изучаем контекстуальное влияние межгрупповой неоднородности, основанной на групповой диверсификации, на производительность после приобретения и обнаруживаем, что большая групповая диверсификация ведет к повышению производительности для аффилированных приобретателей.

Resumen

RESUMEN

La literatura ha avanzado dos perspectivas teóricas contrastantes relacionadas con la estructura de gobierno de los grupos empresariales: la perspectiva de “limitador de valor” la cual se enfoca en la teoría de inercia organizacional y del conflicto de la agencia principal y la principal, y la perspectiva de “habilitador de valor”, la cual enfatiza el rol de los grupos empresariales en la mitigación de los vacíos institucionales. Sobre la base de estos dos lentes que compiten, desarrollamos hipótesis para examinar el desempeño posterior a la adquisición de las empresas afiliadas en relación con las empresas independientes. En nuestro contexto empírico, estudiamos 440 acuerdos de fusiones y adquisiciones mayoritarios cerrados por empresas indias durante el periodo 2002-2013. Los resultados implican que, en los mercados emergentes, a pesar de las preocupaciones de la inercia organizacional y los asuntos de agencia principal a principal, el impacto habilitador de valor de la afiliación del grupo persiste. También examinamos el impacto del contexto de la heterogeneidad intergrupal debido a la diversificación grupal en el desempeño posterior a la adquisición y encontramos que una mayor diversificación grupal lleva a un mejor desempeño para los adquirientes afiliados.

Keywords

business group affiliationpost-acquisition performancevalue-constraining perspectivevalue-enabling perspective商业群体隶属并购后业绩价值约束观点价赋能观点принадлежность деловых круговпроизводительность после приобретенияперспектива ограничения ценностиперспектива создания ценностиafiliación al grupo empresarialdesempeño posterior a la adquisiciónperspectiva de limitador de valorperspectiva de habilitador de valor
Type
Article
Information
Management and Organization Review , Volume 16 , Issue 2 , May 2020 , pp. 261 - 291
Open Practices
Open data
Copyright
Copyright © 2020 The International Association for Chinese Management Research

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Accepted by: Senior Editor Sai Yayavaram

The Open Data badge recognizes authors who deposit their data (and statistical code, if necessary) in an open-access repository. The data used in this study can be found at [https://osf.io/nd4af/]. Details about the badge are available on the journal's website.

References

REFERENCES

Akerlof, G. A. 1970. The market for ‘lemons’: Quality uncertainty and the market mechanism. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 84(3): 488–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arya, B., & Lin, Z. 2007. Understanding collaboration outcomes from an extended resource-based view perspective: The roles of organizational characteristics, partner attributes, and network structures. Journal of Management, 33(5): 697–723.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ayyagari, M., Dau, L. A., & Spencer, J. 2015. Strategic responses to FDI in emerging markets: Are core members more responsive than peripheral members of business groups? Academy of Management Journal, 58(6): 1869–1894.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bae, K. H., Kang, J. K., & Kim, J. M. 2002. Tunnelling or value added? Evidence from mergers by Korean business groups. The Journal of Finance, 57(6): 2695–2740.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barai, P., & Mohanty, P. 2014. Role of industry relatedness in performance of Indian acquirers–Long and short run effects. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 31(4): 1045–1073.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Basuil, D. A., & Datta, D. K. 2015. Effects of industry-and region-specific acquisition experience on value creation in cross-border acquisitions: The moderating role of cultural similarity. Journal of Management Studies, 52(6): 766–795.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Belenzon, S., & Berkovitz, T. 2010. Innovation in business groups. Management Science, 56(3): 519–535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bertrand, M., Mehta, P., & Mullainathan, S. 2002. Ferreting out tunneling: An application to Indian business groups. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 117(1): 121–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bhaumik, S. K., & Selarka, E. 2012. Does ownership concentration improve M&A outcomes in emerging markets? Evidence from India. Journal of Corporate Finance, 18(4): 717–726.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, S. J., & Warner, J. B. 1985. Using daily stock returns: The case of event studies. Journal of Financial Economics, 14(1): 3–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byun, H. Y., Choi, S., Hwang, L. S., & Kim, R. G. 2013. Business group affiliation, ownership structure, and the cost of debt. Journal of Corporate Finance, 23: 311–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, J. T., Sirmon, D. G., & Schijven, M. 2016. Fuzzy logic and the market: A configurational approach to investor perceptions of acquisition announcements. Academy of Management Journal, 59(1): 163–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Capron, L., & Shen, J. C. 2007. Acquisitions of private vs. public firms: Private information, target selection, and acquirer returns. Strategic Management Journal, 28(9): 891–911.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carney, M. 2008. The many futures of Asian business groups. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 25(4), 595–613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carney, M., & Gedajlovic, E. 2003. Strategic innovation and the administrative heritage of East Asian family business groups. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 20(1): 5–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carney, M., Gedajlovic, E. R., Heugens, P. P., Van Essen, M., & Van Oosterhout, J. H. 2011. Business group affiliation, performance, context, and strategy: A meta-analysis. Academy of Management Journal, 54(3): 437–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carney, M., Shapiro, D., & Tang, Y. 2009. Business group performance in China: Ownership and temporal considerations. Management and Organization Review, 5(2): 167–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carow, K., Heron, R., & Saxton, T. 2004. Do early birds get the returns? An empirical investigation of early-mover advantages in acquisitions. Strategic Management Journal, 25(6): 563–585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chakrabarti, R., Gupta-Mukherjee, S., & Jayaraman, N. 2009. Mars–Venus marriages: Culture and cross-border M&A. Journal of International Business Studies, 40(2): 216–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chari, M. D., & Dixit, J. 2015. Business groups and entrepreneurship in developing countries after reforms. Journal of Business Research, 68(6): 1359–1366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chi, J., Sun, Q., & Young, M. 2011. Performance and characteristics of acquiring firms in the Chinese stock markets. Emerging Markets Review, 12(2): 152–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chittoor, R., Kale, P., & Puranam, P. 2015. Business groups in developing capital markets: Towards a complementarity perspective. Strategic Management Journal, 36(9): 1277–1296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cho, N. 1999. Minority shareholders seek reforms to protect rights in emerging markets. The Wall Street Journal, September 13: A39.Google Scholar
Choi, S. B., Lee, S. H., & Williams, C. 2011. Ownership and firm innovation in a transition economy: Evidence from China. Research Policy, 40(3): 441–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Claessens, S., Djankov, S., & Lang, L. 2000. The separation of ownership and control in East Asian corporations. Journal of Financial Economics, 58: 81–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colli, A., & Colpan, A. M. 2015. Business groups and corporate governance: Review, synthesis, and extension. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 24(3): 374–402.Google Scholar
Cuervo-Cazurra, A. 2006. Business groups and their types. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 23(4): 419–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cullinan, G., Le Roux, J. M., & Weddigen, R. M. 2004. When to walk away from a deal. Harvard Business Review, 82(4): 96–105.Google ScholarPubMed
Cyert, R. M., & March, J. G. 1963. A behavioral theory of the firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Dalton, D. R., Hitt, M. A., Certo, S. T., & Dalton, C. M. 2007. The fundamental agency problem and its mitigation: Independence, equity, and the market for corporate control. The Academy of Management Annals, 1(1): 1–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denrell, J., Fang, C., & Winter, S. G. 2003. The economics of strategic opportunity. Strategic Management Journal, 24(10): 977–990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dewenter, K., Novaes, W., & Pettway, R. H. 2001. Visibility versus complexity in business groups: Evidence from Japanese Keiretsu. The Journal of Business, 74(1): 79–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dharwadkar, R., George, G., & Brandes, P. 2000. Privatization in emerging economies: An agency theory perspective. Academy of Management Review, 25(3): 650–669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dyer, J. H., & Singh, H. 1998. The relational view: Cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(4): 660–679.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elango, B., & Pattnaik, C. 2007. Building capabilities for international operations through networks: A study of Indian firms. Journal of International Business Studies, 38(4): 541–555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Encarnation, D. J. 1989. Dislodging multinationals: India's strategy in comparative perspective. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Estrin, S., & Prevezer, M. 2011. The role of informal institutions in corporate governance: Brazil, Russia, India, and China compared. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 28(1): 41–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faccio, M. 2006. Politically connected firms. The American Economic Review, 96(1): 369–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fama, E. F. 1970. Efficient capital markets: A review of theory and empirical work. The Journal of Finance, 25(2): 383–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fama, E. F., & French, K. R. 2007. Disagreement, tastes, and asset prices. Journal of Financial Economics, 83(3): 667–689.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fama, E. F., & Jensen, M. C. 1983. Separation of ownership and control. Journal of Law and Economics, 26: 301–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferris, S. P., Kim, K. A., & Kitsabunnarat, P. 2003. The costs (and benefits?) of diversified business groups: The case of Korean chaebols. Journal of Banking & Finance, 27(2): 251–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. 1991. Social cognition (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Frenz, M., & Letto-Gillies, G. 2009. The impact on innovation performance of different sources of knowledge: Evidence from the UK Community Innovation Survey. Research Policy, 38(7): 1125–1135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fuller, K., Netter, J., & Stegemoller, M. 2002. What do returns to acquiring firms tell us? Evidence from firms that make many acquisitions. The Journal of Finance, 57(4): 1763–1793.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gao, L., & Kling, G. 2008. Corporate governance and tunnelling: Empirical evidence from China. Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, 16(5): 591–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaur, A. S., Malhotra, S., & Zhu, P. 2013. Acquisition announcements and stock market valuations of acquiring firms’ rivals: A test of the growth probability hypothesis in China. Strategic Management Journal, 232(July): 215–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
George, R., & Kabir, R. 2008. Business groups and profit redistribution: A boon or bane for firms? Journal of Business Research, 61(9): 1004–1014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilson, R. J. 2006. Controlling shareholders and corporate governance: Complicating the comparative taxonomy. Harvard Law Review, 119(6): 1641–1679.Google Scholar
Gomes, A. 2000. Going public without governance: managerial reputation effects. Journal of Finance, 55(2): 615–646.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gubbi, S. R., Aulakh, P. S., Ray, S., Sarkar, M. B., & Chittoor, R. 2010. Do international acquisitions by emerging-economy firms create shareholder value? The case of Indian firms. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(3): 397–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gubbi, S. R., & Elango, B. 2016. Resource deepening vs. resource extension: Impact on asset-seeking acquisition performance. Management International Review, 56(3): 353–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guillén, M. F. 2000. Business groups in emerging economies: A resource-based view. Academy of Management Journal, 43(3): 362–380.Google Scholar
Guillén, M. F. 2002. Structural inertia, imitation, and foreign expansion: South Korean firms and business groups in China, 1987–1995. Academy of Management Journal, 45(3): 509–525.Google Scholar
Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. 1984. Structural inertia and organizational change. American Sociological Review, 49(2): 149–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hauser, R. 2018. Busy directors and firm performance: Evidence from mergers. Journal of Financial Economics, 128(1): 16–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hendricks, K. B., & Singhal, V. R. 2001. The long-run stock price performance of firms with effective TQM programs. Management Science, 47(3): 359–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang, Z., Zhu, H. S., & Brass, D. J. 2017. Cross-border acquisitions and the asymmetric effect of power distance value difference on long-term post-acquisition performance. Strategic Management Journal, 38(4): 972–991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, M. C. 1986. Agency costs of free cash flow, corporate finance, and takeovers. The American Economic Review, 76(2): 323–329.Google Scholar
Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. 1976. Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4): 305–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, S., La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., & Shleifer, A. 2000. Tunneling. American Economic Review, 90(2): 22–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Junni, P., Sarala, R. M., Tarba, S. Y., & Weber, Y. 2015. The role of strategic agility in acquisitions. British Journal of Management, 26(4): 596–616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kane, T., Holmes, K. R., & O'Grady, M. A. 2007. 2007 index of economic freedom: The link between economic opportunity and prosperity. Washington, DC: Heritage Foundation.Google Scholar
Kedia, B. L., Mukherjee, D., & Lahiri, S. 2006. Indian business groups: Evolution and transformation. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 23(4): 559–577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keister, L. 1998. Engineering growth: Business group structure and firm performance in China's transition economy. American Journal of Sociology, 104(2): 404–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khanna, T., & Palepu, K. 1997. Why focused strategies may be wrong for emerging markets. Harvard Business Review, 75(4): 41–51.Google Scholar
Khanna, T., & Palepu, K. 2000a. Is group affiliation profitable in emerging markets? An analysis of diversified Indian business groups. The Journal of Finance, 55(2): 867–891.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khanna, T., & Palepu, K. 2000b. The future of business groups in emerging markets: Long-run evidence from Chile. Academy of Management Journal, 43(3): 268–285.Google Scholar
Khanna, T., & Rivkin, J. W. 2001. Estimating the performance effects of business groups in emerging markets. Strategic Management Journal, 22(1): 45–74.3.0.CO;2-F>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, J. Y. J., Haleblian, J. J., & Finkelstein, S. 2011. When firms are desperate to grow via acquisition: The effect of growth patterns and acquisition experience on acquisition premiums. Administrative Science Quarterly, 56(1): 26–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, H., Kim, H., & Hoskisson, R. E. 2010. Does market oriented institutional change in an emerging economy make business-group-affiliated multinationals perform better? An institution-based view. Journal of International Business Studies 41(7): 1141–1160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, Y., & Lui, S. S. 2015. The impacts of external network and business group on innovation: Do the types of innovation matter? Journal of Business Research, 68(9): 1964–1973.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, W. S., Lyn, E., Park, T. J., & Zychowicz, E. 2005. The wealth effects of capital investment decisions: An empirical comparison of Korean Chaebol and non-Chaebol firms. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 32(5–6): 945–971.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, D. R., Dalton, D. R., Daily, C. M., & Covin, J. G. 2004. Meta-analyses of post-acquisition performance: Indications of unidentified moderators. Strategic Management Journal, 25(2): 187–200. doi:10.1002/smj.371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kothari, S. P., & Warner, J. B. 1997. Measuring long-horizon security price performance. Journal of Financial Economics, 43(3): 301–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kumar, V., Gaur, A. S., & Pattnaik, C. 2012. Product diversification and international expansion of business groups. Management International Review, 52(2): 175–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lamin, A. 2013. Business group as an information resource: An investigation of business group affiliation in the Indian software services industry. Academy of Management Journal, 56(5): 1487–1509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. 2000. Investor protection and corporate governance. Journal of Financial Economics, 58(1): 3–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lavie, D. 2006. The competitive advantage of interconnected firms: An extension of the resource-based view. Academy of Management Review, 31(3): 638–658.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Le, S. A., Park, J. C., & Kroll, M. 2014. Differential effects of pre-and post-acquisition R&D expenditures on post-acquisition performance. Journal of Business Research, 67(2): 92–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, C. Y., Lee, J. H., & Gaur, A. S. 2016. Are large business groups conducive to industry innovation? The moderating role of technological appropriability. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 34(2): 1–25.Google Scholar
Lee, K. B., Peng, M. W., & Lee, K. 2008. From diversification premium to diversification discount during institutional transitions. Journal of World Business, 43(1): 47–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leff, N. H. 1978. Industrial organization and entrepreneurship in the developing countries: The economic groups. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 26(4): 661–675.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levitt, B., & March, J. G. 1988. Organizational Learning. Annual Review of Sociology, 14: 319–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, J. T., & Qian, C. L. 2013. Principal-principal conflicts under weak institutions: A study of corporate takeovers in China. Strategic Management Journal, 34(4): 498–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lins, K. V. 2003. Equity ownership and firm value in emerging markets. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 38(1): 159–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luo, Y., & Tung, R. L. 2007. International expansion of emerging market enterprises: A springboard perspective. Journal of International Business Studies, 38(4): 481–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lyon, J. D., Barber, B. M., & Tsai, C. 1999. Improved methods for tests of long-run abnormal stock returns. Journal of Finance, 54(1): 165–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacKinlay, A. C. 1997. Event studies in economics and finance. Journal of Economic Literature, 35(1): 13–39.Google Scholar
Madhok, A., & Keyhani, M. 2012. Acquisitions as entrepreneurship: Asymmetries, opportunities, and the internationalization of multinationals from emerging economies. Global Strategy Journal, 2(1): 26–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Majumdar, S. K., & Bhattacharjee, A. 2014. Firms, markets, and the state: Institutional change and manufacturing sector profitability variances in India. Organization Science, 25(2): 509–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manikandan, K., & Ramachandran, J. 2015. Beyond institutional voids: Business groups, incomplete markets, and organizational form. Strategic Management Journal, 36(4): 598–617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
March, J., & Simon, H. A. 1958. Organizations. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Mayer, M. C., Stadler, C., & Hautz, J. 2015. The relationship between product and international diversification: The role of experience. Strategic Management Journal, 36(10): 1458–1468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, K. E. 2015. Context in management research in emerging economies. Management and Organization Review, 11(3): 369–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, M. L., & Stafford, E. 2000. Managerial decisions and long-term stock price performance. The Journal of Business, 73(3): 287–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moeller, S. B., & Schlingemann, F. P. 2005. Global diversification and bidder gains: A comparison between cross-border and domestic acquisitions. Journal of Banking & Finance, 29(3): 533–564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morck, R., Wolfenzon, D., & Yeung, B. 2005. Corporate governance, economic entrenchment, and growth. Journal of Economic Literature, 43(3): 655–720.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nadolska, A., & Barkema, H. G. 2007. Learning to internationalise: The pace and success of foreign acquisitions. Journal of International Business Studies, 38(7): 1170–1186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
OECD. 2011. Classification of manufacturing industries into categories based on R&D intensities. ISIC Rev. 3 technology intensity definition. Paris, France: OECDGoogle Scholar
Oler, D. K., Harrison, J. S., & Allen, M. R. 2008. The danger of misinterpreting short-window event study findings in strategic management research: An empirical illustration using horizontal acquisitions. Strategic Organization, 6(2): 151–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pattnaik, C., Chang, J. J., & Shin, H. H. 2013. Business groups and corporate transparency in emerging markets: Empirical evidence from India. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 30(4): 987–1004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Penrose, E. T. 1959. The theory of the growth of the firm. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Popli, M., & Sinha, A. K. 2014. Determinants of early movers in cross-border merger and acquisition wave in an emerging market: A study of Indian firms. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 31(4): 1075–1099.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Preda, A. 2007. The sociological approach to financial markets. Journal of Economic Surveys, 21(3): 506–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ramaswamy, K., Purkayastha, S., & Petitt, B. S. 2017. How do institutional transitions impact the efficacy of related and unrelated diversification strategies used by business groups? Journal of Business Research, 72: 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rappaport, A. L., & Sirower, M. L. 1999. Stock or cash? The trade-offs for buyers and sellers in mergers and acquisitions. Harvard Business Review, 77(6): 147–158.Google ScholarPubMed
Scherer, F. M., & Ross, D. 1990. Industrial market structure and economic performance. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Schijven, M., & Hitt, M. A. 2012. The vicarious wisdom of crowds: Toward a behavioral perspective on investor reactions to acquisition announcements. Strategic Management Journal, 33(11): 1247–1268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shapiro, D., & Li, J. 2016. Understanding the ‘enigma’ of Chinese firm performance: Confucius and beyond. Management and Organization Review, 12(2): 259–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. 2003. Stock market driven acquisitions. Journal of Financial Economics, 70(3): 295–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singh, D., & Delios, A. 2017. Corporate governance, board networks and growth in domestic and international markets: Evidence from India. Journal of World Business, 52(5): 615–627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Su, Y., Xu, D., & Phan, P. H. 2008. Principal–principal conflict in the governance of the Chinese public corporation. Management and Organization Review, 4(1): 17–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, R. E., Hoskisson, R. E., Yiu, D. W., & Bruton, G. D. 2008. Employment and market innovation in Chinese business group affiliated firms: The role of group control systems. Management and Organization Review, 4(2): 225–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, M., Filatotchev, I., Hoskisson, R. E., & Peng, M. W. 2005. Strategy research in emerging economies: Challenging the conventional wisdom – Introduction. Journal of Management Studies, 42(1): 1–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, H., Ru, J., & Ren, T. 2015. Ownership and M&A performance in a transitional economy: The case of the Chinese real estate industry. Management and Organization Review, 11(4): 715–737.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yiu, D. W. 2011. Multinational advantages of Chinese business groups: A theoretical exploration. Management and Organization Review, 7(2): 249–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yiu, D. W., Lu, Y., Bruton, G. D., & Hoskisson, R. E. 2007. Business groups: An integrated model to focus future research. Journal of Management Studies, 44(8): 1551–1579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, M. N. 2016. Commentary on the enigma of Chinese performance: Do Chinese investors’ reactions to merger announcements accurately reflect prospects for success? Management and Organization Review, 12(2): 249–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, M. N., Peng, M. W., Ahlstrom, D., Bruton, G. D., & Jiang, Y. 2008. Corporate governance in emerging economies: A review of the principal-principal perspective. Journal of Management Studies, 45(1): 196–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zaheer, S. 1995. Overcoming the liability of foreignness. Academy of Management Journal, 38(2): 341–363.Google Scholar
Zajac, E. J., & Westphal, J. D. 2004. The social construction of market value: Institutionalization and learning perspectives on stock market reactions. American Sociological Review, 69(3): 433–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zattoni, A., Pedersen, T., & Kumar, V. 2009. The performance of group-affiliated firms during institutional transition: A longitudinal study of Indian firms. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 17(4): 510–523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zheng, W., Singh, K., & Mitchell, W. 2015. Buffering and enabling: The impact of interlocking political ties on firm survival and sales growth. Strategic Management Journal, 36(11): 1615–1636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zollo, M., & Winter, S. G. 2002. Deliberate learning and the evolution of dynamic capabilities. Organization Science, 13(3): 339–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zuckerman, E. W. 2004. Structural incoherence and stock market activity. American Sociological Review, 69(3): 405–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar