Global Strategy Journal最新文献

The impact of ownership on global strategy: Owner diversity and non-financial objectives

IF 5.7 2区管理学 Q1 BUSINESS

Global Strategy Journal

Pub Date : 2025-03-06 DOI: 10.1002/gsj.1520

Alvaro Cuervo-Cazurra, Anna Grosman, Michael J. Mol, Geoffrey Wood

Research Summary

In this special issue introduction, we analyze how a firm's international ownership affects its global strategy. We reinterpret the literature by grouping dominant owners into four categories: (1) individuals (entrepreneurs and families), (2) labor (managers and employees), (3) state (national and subnational governments), and (4) institutions (pension funds, mutual funds, hedge funds, private equity, venture capital, and impact investors). We argue that although all seek financial returns from their investments, they differ markedly in their non-financial objectives, resulting in differences in strategies for expanding abroad. We also propose that the home country context modifies the impact of ownership on global strategy, directly by influencing the prevalence of owner types, and indirectly by affecting owners' incentives and constraints in their pursuit of non-financial objectives.

Managerial Summary

Although all firms' owners search for financial returns from their investments, differences across dominant owners in their non-financial objectives result in significant diversity in the global strategies of invested firms. We clarify these differences by grouping owners into four categories: (1) individuals (entrepreneurs and families), (2) labor (managers and employees), (3) state (national and subnational governments), and (4) institutions (pension funds, mutual funds, hedge funds, private equity, venture capital, and impact investors). We explain how their specific non-financial objectives influence the global strategies of invested firms. We also discuss how the characteristics of the home country affect both the prevalence of types of owners and owners' strategies. The special issue articles illustrate some of these ideas.

{"title":"The impact of ownership on global strategy: Owner diversity and non-financial objectives","authors":"Alvaro Cuervo-Cazurra, Anna Grosman, Michael J. Mol, Geoffrey Wood","doi":"10.1002/gsj.1520","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/gsj.1520","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Research Summary</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>In this special issue introduction, we analyze how a firm's international ownership affects its global strategy. We reinterpret the literature by grouping dominant owners into four categories: (1) individuals (entrepreneurs and families), (2) labor (managers and employees), (3) state (national and subnational governments), and (4) institutions (pension funds, mutual funds, hedge funds, private equity, venture capital, and impact investors). We argue that although all seek financial returns from their investments, they differ markedly in their non-financial objectives, resulting in differences in strategies for expanding abroad. We also propose that the home country context modifies the impact of ownership on global strategy, directly by influencing the prevalence of owner types, and indirectly by affecting owners' incentives and constraints in their pursuit of non-financial objectives.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Managerial Summary</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Although all firms' owners search for financial returns from their investments, differences across dominant owners in their non-financial objectives result in significant diversity in the global strategies of invested firms. We clarify these differences by grouping owners into four categories: (1) individuals (entrepreneurs and families), (2) labor (managers and employees), (3) state (national and subnational governments), and (4) institutions (pension funds, mutual funds, hedge funds, private equity, venture capital, and impact investors). We explain how their specific non-financial objectives influence the global strategies of invested firms. We also discuss how the characteristics of the home country affect both the prevalence of types of owners and owners' strategies. The special issue articles illustrate some of these ideas.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":47563,"journal":{"name":"Global Strategy Journal","volume":"15 1","pages":"3-33"},"PeriodicalIF":5.7,"publicationDate":"2025-03-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/gsj.1520","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143632759","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Common ownership and competitive dissimilarity: A global perspective on competition and institutional ownership

IF 5.7 2区管理学 Q1 BUSINESS

Global Strategy Journal

Pub Date : 2025-02-08 DOI: 10.1002/gsj.1519

Philip J. Steinberg, Jan C. Hennig, Jana Oehmichen, Judith Heigermoser

Research Summary

Research highlights that common institutional ownership (an investor owning publicly traded shares in two rival firms) can reduce rivals' incentives to compete. So far, this literature focused on domestic market competition. However, competition also arises in global markets, and common owners invest outside their home countries. We integrate the perspectives of global market competition and cross-national distance into a model of shared principals with rival agents and argue for a positive effect of common ownership on rivals' competitive dissimilarity in global markets. Moreover, we argue that the competitive intensity in joint regions amplifies, and the cross-national distance between common owners and their firms mitigates this effect. We find support for our theorizing using a multi-industry dataset with 1574 of the largest firms worldwide.

Managerial Summary

When investors hold shares in two competing companies, it can reduce how aggressively those rivals compete. To avoid direct competition, these companies often adopt divergent strategic actions. Our research shows that this dynamic extends to how competitors behave in international markets. We also identify key boundary conditions to this effect: The effect weakens when competition within shared markets decreases and when the distance between the owned rivals and their common investor increases. For managers of globally operating companies, this highlights the need to consider not just competitors' strategies but also their ownership structure. Overlapping ownership could significantly influence competitive dynamics in global markets by shaping competitors' strategic approaches.

{"title":"Common ownership and competitive dissimilarity: A global perspective on competition and institutional ownership","authors":"Philip J. Steinberg, Jan C. Hennig, Jana Oehmichen, Judith Heigermoser","doi":"10.1002/gsj.1519","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/gsj.1519","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Research Summary</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Research highlights that common institutional ownership (an investor owning publicly traded shares in two rival firms) can reduce rivals' incentives to compete. So far, this literature focused on domestic market competition. However, competition also arises in global markets, and common owners invest outside their home countries. We integrate the perspectives of global market competition and cross-national distance into a model of shared principals with rival agents and argue for a positive effect of common ownership on rivals' competitive dissimilarity in global markets. Moreover, we argue that the competitive intensity in joint regions amplifies, and the cross-national distance between common owners and their firms mitigates this effect. We find support for our theorizing using a multi-industry dataset with 1574 of the largest firms worldwide.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Managerial Summary</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>When investors hold shares in two competing companies, it can reduce how aggressively those rivals compete. To avoid direct competition, these companies often adopt divergent strategic actions. Our research shows that this dynamic extends to how competitors behave in international markets. We also identify key boundary conditions to this effect: The effect weakens when competition within shared markets decreases and when the distance between the owned rivals and their common investor increases. For managers of globally operating companies, this highlights the need to consider not just competitors' strategies but also their ownership structure. Overlapping ownership could significantly influence competitive dynamics in global markets by shaping competitors' strategic approaches.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":47563,"journal":{"name":"Global Strategy Journal","volume":"15 1","pages":"94-129"},"PeriodicalIF":5.7,"publicationDate":"2025-02-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/gsj.1519","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143633013","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Beacons not burdens: Business groups and corporate social performance around the world 灯塔而非负担：世界各地的企业集团和企业社会绩效

IF 5.7 2区管理学 Q1 BUSINESS

Global Strategy Journal

Pub Date : 2024-11-15 DOI: 10.1002/gsj.1515

Sorin M. S. Krammer, Vlad-Andrei Porumb, Yasemin Zengin-Karaibrahimoglu, Joel Bothello

Research Summary

Prior studies on business groups (BGs) have predominantly focused on the impact of group affiliation on financial performance. In contrast, we argue that BG affiliates will outperform standalone firms in terms of corporate social performance (CSP) and that this effect will be positively moderated by the strength of formal and informal institutions. Moreover, we examine also differences among BGs and hypothesize that diversification and hierarchy of the group will negatively affect the CSP of affiliates. Employing a panel of 4368 firms from 43 countries between 2003 and 2016 and a propensity score matching approach in our regressions, we find robust support for these predictions. Our findings advance two distinct strands of literature on BGs and, respectively, corporate social responsibility.

Managerial Summary

BG are a common organizational structure in many countries. Despite this, we still do not know much about them beyond their financial performance. In this study, we focus on examining the impact of BG affiliation on non-financial performance (i.e., CSP) in the light of growing societal grand challenges. Using an international dataset of several thousands of firms, we find out that BG affiliates exhibit superior CSP results compared to non-affiliated firms. These positive effects of affiliation are increased in environments with strong formal and informal institutions but reduced within groups that are more diversified and hierarchical. Our findings showcase the importance of BGs in tackling some of today's grand challenges and provide support for more nuanced approaches to study BGs across countries.

研究摘要以往关于企业集团（BGs）的研究主要集中于集团关联对财务业绩的影响。相比之下，我们认为企业集团关联公司在企业社会绩效（CSP）方面会优于独立公司，而且这种影响会受到正式和非正式机构实力的积极调节。此外，我们还研究了企业集团之间的差异，并假设集团的多元化和等级制度将对关联公司的 CSP 产生负面影响。通过对 2003 年至 2016 年间来自 43 个国家的 4368 家企业进行面板分析，并在回归中采用倾向得分匹配法，我们发现这些预测得到了有力的支持。我们的研究结果分别推进了有关企业集团和企业社会责任的两股不同的文献。经理人摘要 BG 是许多国家常见的组织结构。尽管如此，除了它们的财务表现之外，我们对它们的了解仍然不多。在本研究中，我们重点考察了企业集团隶属关系在日益严峻的社会挑战下对非财务绩效（即企业社会责任）的影响。通过使用一个包含数千家企业的国际数据集，我们发现，与非隶属企业相比，隶属于企业集团的企业表现出更优越的 CSP 结果。在拥有强大的正式和非正式机构的环境中，隶属关系的这些积极效应会增强，但在更加多元化和等级化的群体中，隶属关系的这些积极效应会减弱。我们的研究结果展示了企业集团在应对当今一些重大挑战方面的重要性，并为采用更细致的方法研究各国的企业集团提供了支持。

{"title":"Beacons not burdens: Business groups and corporate social performance around the world","authors":"Sorin M. S. Krammer, Vlad-Andrei Porumb, Yasemin Zengin-Karaibrahimoglu, Joel Bothello","doi":"10.1002/gsj.1515","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/gsj.1515","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Research Summary</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Prior studies on business groups (BGs) have predominantly focused on the impact of group affiliation on financial performance. In contrast, we argue that BG affiliates will outperform standalone firms in terms of corporate social performance (CSP) and that this effect will be positively moderated by the strength of formal and informal institutions. Moreover, we examine also differences among BGs and hypothesize that diversification and hierarchy of the group will negatively affect the CSP of affiliates. Employing a panel of 4368 firms from 43 countries between 2003 and 2016 and a propensity score matching approach in our regressions, we find robust support for these predictions. Our findings advance two distinct strands of literature on BGs and, respectively, corporate social responsibility.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Managerial Summary</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>BG are a common organizational structure in many countries. Despite this, we still do not know much about them beyond their financial performance. In this study, we focus on examining the impact of BG affiliation on non-financial performance (i.e., CSP) in the light of growing societal grand challenges. Using an international dataset of several thousands of firms, we find out that BG affiliates exhibit superior CSP results compared to non-affiliated firms. These positive effects of affiliation are increased in environments with strong formal and informal institutions but reduced within groups that are more diversified and hierarchical. Our findings showcase the importance of BGs in tackling some of today's grand challenges and provide support for more nuanced approaches to study BGs across countries.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":47563,"journal":{"name":"Global Strategy Journal","volume":"14 4","pages":"709-753"},"PeriodicalIF":5.7,"publicationDate":"2024-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/gsj.1515","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142737470","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Culture, international stakeholders, and crowdfunding

IF 5.7 2区管理学 Q1 BUSINESS

Global Strategy Journal

Pub Date : 2024-10-15 DOI: 10.1002/gsj.1514

Douglas J. Cumming, Ahmed Sewaid

Research Summary

International crowdfunding platforms present a unique opportunity for foreign entrepreneurs to attract stakeholders, typically from either the entrepreneur's home-country or the platform's host-country. We argue that success in mobilizing these stakeholders is culturally dependent. Specifically, cultural distance from the platform's host country can impede the mobilizing of home-country stakeholders. Conversely, while attracting host-country stakeholders may appear advantageous, these benefits are uncertain and limited for culturally-proximal entrepreneurs. This is because their offerings are seen as less distinct compared to host-country local offerings while introducing additional information asymmetries. Given these dynamics, we theorize that culturally-distant entrepreneurs have better fundraising prospects when attracting host-country backers, while culturally-proximal entrepreneurs are more successful when mobilizing home-country backers. Our analysis of 55,266 foreign projects on Kickstarter supports these arguments.

Managerial Summary

This study examines how cultural differences affect the success of entrepreneurs using non-local crowdfunding platforms. We find that entrepreneurs from countries that are culturally distant from the platform's host-country are more successful when they focus on attracting backers from the platform's host-country. In contrast, entrepreneurs from culturally similar countries do better when they mobilize supporters from their home country. For practitioners, this means that understanding cultural distance is key to successful crowdfunding. Entrepreneurs should tailor their outreach strategy based on their cultural distance from the platform's host country. Those from culturally-distant regions should prioritize backers from the platform's country, while those from culturally similar regions should focus on home-country supporters to maximize their fundraising success.

{"title":"Culture, international stakeholders, and crowdfunding","authors":"Douglas J. Cumming, Ahmed Sewaid","doi":"10.1002/gsj.1514","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/gsj.1514","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Research Summary</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>International crowdfunding platforms present a unique opportunity for foreign entrepreneurs to attract stakeholders, typically from either the entrepreneur's <i>home-country</i> or the platform's <i>host-country</i>. We argue that success in mobilizing these stakeholders is culturally dependent. Specifically, cultural distance from the platform's host country can impede the mobilizing of home-country stakeholders. Conversely, while attracting host-country stakeholders may appear advantageous, these benefits are uncertain and limited for culturally-proximal entrepreneurs. This is because their offerings are seen as less distinct compared to host-country local offerings while introducing additional information asymmetries. Given these dynamics, we theorize that culturally-distant entrepreneurs have better fundraising prospects when attracting host-country backers, while culturally-proximal entrepreneurs are more successful when mobilizing home-country backers. Our analysis of 55,266 foreign projects on Kickstarter supports these arguments.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Managerial Summary</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This study examines how cultural differences affect the success of entrepreneurs using non-local crowdfunding platforms. We find that entrepreneurs from countries that are culturally distant from the platform's host-country are more successful when they focus on attracting backers from the platform's host-country. In contrast, entrepreneurs from culturally similar countries do better when they mobilize supporters from their home country. For practitioners, this means that understanding cultural distance is key to successful crowdfunding. Entrepreneurs should tailor their outreach strategy based on their cultural distance from the platform's host country. Those from culturally-distant regions should prioritize backers from the platform's country, while those from culturally similar regions should focus on home-country supporters to maximize their fundraising success.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":47563,"journal":{"name":"Global Strategy Journal","volume":"15 1","pages":"184-216"},"PeriodicalIF":5.7,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143632661","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Theorizing about emerging multinationals' cross-border acquisitions 新兴跨国公司跨国收购的理论研究

IF 5.7 2区管理学 Q1 BUSINESS

Global Strategy Journal

Pub Date : 2024-10-07 DOI: 10.1002/gsj.1512

Mike W. Peng, Joyce C. Wang, En Xie, Sergey Lebedev

Research Summary

The emergence of multinational enterprises from emerging economies (emerging multinationals or EMNEs) has resulted in two puzzles: (1) Why do EMNEs often bid higher for targets in developed economies? (2) Why do EMNEs often allow such targets significant autonomy? From a theoretical standpoint, the two puzzles beg the question of whether an integrative answer exists. Extending property rights theory, we conceptualize an EMNE as a collection of assets over which an emerging-economy firm has residual control, gained predominantly through cross-border acquisitions. Leveraging a legitimacy-based view, we suggest that EMNEs suffer from legitimacy deficits. Overall, the key to theorizing about EMNEs' cross-border acquisitions and solving the two puzzles is to appreciate EMNEs' endeavors to simultaneously maximize joint value creation, minimize target incentive loss, and overcome legitimacy deficits.

Managerial Summary

Driven by property rights thinking and legitimacy deficits considerations, multinational enterprises from emerging economies (emerging multinationals or EMNEs) often pay higher premiums for and grant significant autonomy to acquisition targets in developed economies. During the pre-acquisition phase, EMNEs need to carefully evaluate targets' value-creation potential and asset complementarity. During the post-acquisition phase, offering autonomy to targets is advisable, if acquisition premiums are high, if pursued assets are knowledge-based, and if target managers and employees as well as other stakeholders (such as host-country governments) have raised major concerns. Although few EMNEs explicitly refer to research on property rights and legitimacy deficits, many of them have acted in a way that is consistent with such theoretical reasoning. Emerging-economy acquirers that follow such reasoning often perform well.

研究摘要新兴经济体跨国企业（新兴跨国企业或 EMNEs）的出现导致了两个困惑：（1）为什么 EMNEs 往往对发达经济体的目标出价更高？(2) 为什么新兴企业往往允许这些目标企业拥有很大的自主权？从理论的角度来看，这两个难题提出了一个问题：是否存在一个综合答案？从产权理论出发，我们将新兴市场企业概念化为新兴经济体企业主要通过跨国并购获得剩余控制权的资产集合。借助基于合法性的观点，我们认为新兴市场企业存在合法性缺陷。总之，要对新兴市场企业的跨国并购进行理论分析并解决这两个难题，关键在于理解新兴市场企业如何同时实现联合价值创造最大化、目标激励损失最小化以及克服合法性缺陷。管理总结在产权思想和合法性缺陷考虑的驱动下，新兴经济体的跨国企业（新兴跨国公司或 EMNEs）往往为发达经济体的收购目标支付更高的溢价，并赋予其很大的自主权。在收购前阶段，新兴企业需要仔细评估目标企业的价值创造潜力和资产互补性。在收购后阶段，如果收购溢价较高，如果所追求的资产以知识为基础，如果目标企业的管理人员和员工以及其他利益相关者（如东道国政府）提出了重大关切，那么向目标企业提供自主权是可取的。尽管很少有新兴市场企业明确提及产权和合法性缺陷方面的研究，但其中许多企业的行为都与这些理论推理相一致。遵循这种推理的新兴经济体收购方往往表现出色。

{"title":"Theorizing about emerging multinationals' cross-border acquisitions","authors":"Mike W. Peng, Joyce C. Wang, En Xie, Sergey Lebedev","doi":"10.1002/gsj.1512","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/gsj.1512","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Research Summary</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The emergence of multinational enterprises from emerging economies (emerging multinationals or EMNEs) has resulted in two puzzles: (1) Why do EMNEs often bid higher for targets in developed economies? (2) Why do EMNEs often allow such targets significant autonomy? From a theoretical standpoint, the two puzzles beg the question of whether an integrative answer exists. Extending property rights theory, we conceptualize an EMNE as a collection of assets over which an emerging-economy firm has residual control, gained predominantly through cross-border acquisitions. Leveraging a legitimacy-based view, we suggest that EMNEs suffer from legitimacy deficits. Overall, the key to theorizing about EMNEs' cross-border acquisitions and solving the two puzzles is to appreciate EMNEs' endeavors to simultaneously maximize joint value creation, minimize target incentive loss, and overcome legitimacy deficits.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Managerial Summary</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Driven by property rights thinking and legitimacy deficits considerations, multinational enterprises from emerging economies (emerging multinationals or EMNEs) often pay higher premiums for and grant significant autonomy to acquisition targets in developed economies. During the pre-acquisition phase, EMNEs need to carefully evaluate targets' value-creation potential and asset complementarity. During the post-acquisition phase, offering autonomy to targets is advisable, if acquisition premiums are high, if pursued assets are knowledge-based, and if target managers and employees as well as other stakeholders (such as host-country governments) have raised major concerns. Although few EMNEs explicitly refer to research on property rights and legitimacy deficits, many of them have acted in a way that is consistent with such theoretical reasoning. Emerging-economy acquirers that follow such reasoning often perform well.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":47563,"journal":{"name":"Global Strategy Journal","volume":"14 4","pages":"683-708"},"PeriodicalIF":5.7,"publicationDate":"2024-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/gsj.1512","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142737543","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Does prior success influence risk-taking in foreign location decisions? A prospect theory perspective 先前的成功是否会影响国外选址决策中的风险承担？前景理论视角

IF 5.7 2区管理学 Q1 BUSINESS

Global Strategy Journal

Pub Date : 2024-10-01 DOI: 10.1002/gsj.1513

Kathrin Schwaiger, Petra Hennrich, Jan Hendrik Fisch

Research Summary

Research suggests that foreign direct investment decisions can be biased and deviate from economic theory. This study deploys prospect theory to analyze the impact of the success of previous investments on risk-taking in subsequent investment decisions. Our theorizing suggests that prior success influences foreign investors' decisions to take host-country risk, and that this moderating influence on the risk-investment relation is specific to the type of risk. The results of an event-history study of 1259 location decisions support the notion that the success of previous investments encourages investors to enter host countries with high negative or positive risk, whereas it discourages them from entering locations with high mixed risk. The effects are stronger for investment locations that are similar than for those that are dissimilar.

Managerial Summary

Regarding the varying risks that investors face in foreign countries, investment decisions may sometimes appear rather confident and sometimes rather cautious. Our study relates these decisions to the success that investors had with similar investments in the past, since research suggests that experiencing gains or losses can influence decision behavior. The results suggest that prior success affects risk-taking in foreign direct investment decisions and comes in contrary forms, depending on the type of risk: prior success leads to overconfident investment decisions in the case of negative and positive risk, whereas it induces overcautious investment decisions in the case of mixed risk. Being aware of these behavioral tendencies can prevent managers from making biased investment decisions.

研究摘要研究表明，外国直接投资决策可能存在偏差，偏离经济理论。本研究运用前景理论分析了先前投资的成功对后续投资决策中风险承担的影响。我们的理论研究表明，先前的成功经验会影响外国投资者承担东道国风险的决策，而这种对风险投资关系的调节作用是针对风险类型的。对 1259 项投资地点决策进行的事件史研究结果表明，以往投资的成功经验会鼓励投资者进入负面或正面风险较高的东道国，而阻碍他们进入混合风险较高的投资地点。对相似投资地点的影响比对不同投资地点的影响更大。管理总结由于投资者在国外面临的风险各不相同，因此投资决策有时会显得相当自信，有时又会显得相当谨慎。我们的研究将这些决策与投资者过去在类似投资中取得的成功联系起来，因为研究表明，经历过的收益或损失会影响决策行为。研究结果表明，以往的成功经验会影响外商直接投资决策中的风险承担，并根据风险类型以相反的形式出现：以往的成功经验会导致在消极和积极风险情况下做出过于自信的投资决策，而在混合风险情况下则会诱发过于谨慎的投资决策。意识到这些行为倾向可以防止管理者做出有失公允的投资决策。

{"title":"Does prior success influence risk-taking in foreign location decisions? A prospect theory perspective","authors":"Kathrin Schwaiger, Petra Hennrich, Jan Hendrik Fisch","doi":"10.1002/gsj.1513","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/gsj.1513","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Research Summary</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Research suggests that foreign direct investment decisions can be biased and deviate from economic theory. This study deploys prospect theory to analyze the impact of the success of previous investments on risk-taking in subsequent investment decisions. Our theorizing suggests that prior success influences foreign investors' decisions to take host-country risk, and that this moderating influence on the risk-investment relation is specific to the type of risk. The results of an event-history study of 1259 location decisions support the notion that the success of previous investments encourages investors to enter host countries with high negative or positive risk, whereas it discourages them from entering locations with high mixed risk. The effects are stronger for investment locations that are similar than for those that are dissimilar.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Managerial Summary</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Regarding the varying risks that investors face in foreign countries, investment decisions may sometimes appear rather confident and sometimes rather cautious. Our study relates these decisions to the success that investors had with similar investments in the past, since research suggests that experiencing gains or losses can influence decision behavior. The results suggest that prior success affects risk-taking in foreign direct investment decisions and comes in contrary forms, depending on the type of risk: prior success leads to overconfident investment decisions in the case of negative and positive risk, whereas it induces overcautious investment decisions in the case of mixed risk. Being aware of these behavioral tendencies can prevent managers from making biased investment decisions.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":47563,"journal":{"name":"Global Strategy Journal","volume":"14 4","pages":"800-842"},"PeriodicalIF":5.7,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/gsj.1513","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142737366","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Rethinking institutional arbitrage: De jure exposure and de facto enforcement 重新思考机构套利：法律上的暴露和事实上的执行

IF 5.7 2区管理学 Q1 BUSINESS

Global Strategy Journal

Pub Date : 2024-06-19 DOI: 10.1002/gsj.1510

Jian Xu

Research Summary

This article disentangles the de jure and de facto dimensions of institutional distances to examine their impact on firms embedded across heterogeneous jurisdictions. I argue that significant transaction costs occur only when the de facto implementations of regulations from both home and foreign jurisdictions become irreconcilable. Using an original dataset of the enforcement actions of the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), I find that institutional arbitrage becomes infeasible for non-US-based firms with de jure exposure to the FCPA when the de facto judicial constraints over bureaucratic discretion are weak in these firms' home countries targeted by FCPA enforcement. De facto FCPA enforcement makes such US-listed firms more likely to divest from their home markets or voluntarily delist from US stock markets.

Managerial Summary

Mangers should consider the divergence or convergence between the de jure and de facto dimensions of institutional distance in evaluating their international business strategies. In analyzing the operational obstacles for engaging in cross-jurisdictional activities, notably institutional arbitrage schemes, managers should realize that such obstacles do not simply arise from contradictions in officially stipulated regulations, but also from whether and the extent to which such de jure contradictions are activated. Assessing the feasibility of corporate political activities and other legally ambiguous nonmarket strategies as risk-mitigation measures thus needs to take into account this distinction. MNEs' global strategies should also recognize the increasingly intertwined national and supranational legal systems and their interactions as sources of operational risks.

研究摘要本文将制度距离的法律层面和事实上的层面区分开来，以研究其对跨异质司法管辖区的企业的影响。我认为，只有当本国和外国司法管辖区的法规在事实上的执行变得不可调和时，才会产生巨大的交易成本。通过使用美国《反海外腐败法》（FCPA）执法行动的原始数据集，我发现当这些公司的母国对官僚自由裁量权的实际司法约束较弱时，制度套利对于在法律上受到 FCPA 影响的非美国公司来说就变得不可行了。事实上的 FCPA 执法使这些在美国上市的公司更有可能从本国市场撤资或自愿从美国股市退市。管理总结企业管理者在评估其国际业务战略时，应考虑制度距离的法律层面和事实层面之间的分歧或趋同。在分析从事跨司法管辖区活动（尤其是制度套利计划）的操作障碍时，管理者应认识到，这些障碍不仅仅来自于官方规定法规的矛盾，还来自于这些法律上的矛盾是否以及在多大程度上被激活。因此，在评估企业政治活动和其他法律上模棱两可的非市场战略作为风险缓解措施的可行性时，需要考虑到这一区别。跨国企业的全球战略还应认识到，国家和超国家法律体系日益相互交织，它们之间的互动是经营风险的来源。

{"title":"Rethinking institutional arbitrage: De jure exposure and de facto enforcement","authors":"Jian Xu","doi":"10.1002/gsj.1510","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/gsj.1510","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Research Summary</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This article disentangles the de jure and de facto dimensions of institutional distances to examine their impact on firms embedded across heterogeneous jurisdictions. I argue that significant transaction costs occur only when the de facto implementations of regulations from both home and foreign jurisdictions become irreconcilable. Using an original dataset of the enforcement actions of the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), I find that institutional arbitrage becomes infeasible for non-US-based firms with de jure exposure to the FCPA when the de facto judicial constraints over bureaucratic discretion are weak in these firms' home countries targeted by FCPA enforcement. De facto FCPA enforcement makes such US-listed firms more likely to divest from their home markets or voluntarily delist from US stock markets.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Managerial Summary</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Mangers should consider the divergence or convergence between the de jure and de facto dimensions of institutional distance in evaluating their international business strategies. In analyzing the operational obstacles for engaging in cross-jurisdictional activities, notably institutional arbitrage schemes, managers should realize that such obstacles do not simply arise from contradictions in officially stipulated regulations, but also from whether and the extent to which such de jure contradictions are activated. Assessing the feasibility of corporate political activities and other legally ambiguous nonmarket strategies as risk-mitigation measures thus needs to take into account this distinction. MNEs' global strategies should also recognize the increasingly intertwined national and supranational legal systems and their interactions as sources of operational risks.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":47563,"journal":{"name":"Global Strategy Journal","volume":"14 4","pages":"754-799"},"PeriodicalIF":5.7,"publicationDate":"2024-06-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/gsj.1510","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142737508","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

A perspective on three trade-offs of blockchain technology for the global strategy of the MNC 区块链技术对跨国公司全球战略的三种权衡视角

IF 5.7 2区管理学 Q1 BUSINESS

Global Strategy Journal

Pub Date : 2024-06-09 DOI: 10.1002/gsj.1509

Tuuli Hakkarainen, Anatoli Colicev, Torben Pedersen

Research Summary

New technology plays a key role in shaping the global strategy of the MNC. We propose a perspective on how and why a novel technological development—blockchain technology—and its relevant applications affect the global strategy of the MNC. We focus on the trade-offs associated with cryptocurrencies, smart contracts, and blockchain data, and provide several real-world examples. While cryptocurrencies could lower financial costs and broaden consumers' payment options, they require new investments in cybersecurity and payment infrastructure. Smart contracts could increase trust in collaboration due to their automated, transparent, and inflexible rules, but their rigidity can harm collaboration. Finally, while blockchain data can enhance the MNC's analytics capabilities, it can also jeopardize consumer privacy.

Managerial Summary

Is blockchain technology all hype or a useful advancement for global firms? We propose that this technology has merits and drawbacks for financial transactions, collaboration, and data analytics. Cryptocurrencies have stolen the headlines and several leading organizations have already added them as payment methods. Their merits include lower transaction fees, better security, and higher speed, but they require expensive infrastructure and carry a stigma. Smart contracts can streamline agreements between parties but lack the flexibility that global firms need when interacting with suppliers and partners. Novel blockchain data can be plugged into marketing dashboards but can also threaten consumer privacy. Overall, the jury is still out on the role of blockchain technology for global firms.

新技术在塑造跨国公司的全球战略方面发挥着关键作用。我们从一个视角来探讨新技术的发展--区块链技术及其相关应用如何以及为什么会影响跨国公司的全球战略。我们将重点放在与加密货币、智能合约和区块链数据相关的权衡上，并提供了几个现实世界中的例子。虽然加密货币可以降低金融成本，扩大消费者的支付选择，但需要对网络安全和支付基础设施进行新的投资。智能合约因其自动、透明、规则不灵活，可以提高合作中的信任度，但其僵化性可能会损害合作。最后，虽然区块链数据可以增强跨国公司的分析能力，但也可能危及消费者隐私。区块链技术究竟是炒作还是全球企业的有益进步？我们认为，区块链技术在金融交易、合作和数据分析方面各有利弊。加密货币抢占了头条新闻，一些主要组织已经将其作为支付方式。它们的优点包括交易费用更低、安全性更高、速度更快，但它们需要昂贵的基础设施，并带有污名。智能合约可以简化各方之间的协议，但缺乏灵活性，而这正是全球企业与供应商和合作伙伴互动时所需要的。新颖的区块链数据可以插入营销仪表板，但也可能威胁到消费者的隐私。总之，区块链技术对全球企业的作用尚无定论。

{"title":"A perspective on three trade-offs of blockchain technology for the global strategy of the MNC","authors":"Tuuli Hakkarainen, Anatoli Colicev, Torben Pedersen","doi":"10.1002/gsj.1509","DOIUrl":"10.1002/gsj.1509","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Research Summary</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>New technology plays a key role in shaping the global strategy of the MNC. We propose a perspective on how and why a novel technological development—blockchain technology—and its relevant applications affect the global strategy of the MNC. We focus on the trade-offs associated with cryptocurrencies, smart contracts, and blockchain data, and provide several real-world examples. While cryptocurrencies could lower financial costs and broaden consumers' payment options, they require new investments in cybersecurity and payment infrastructure. Smart contracts could increase trust in collaboration due to their automated, transparent, and inflexible rules, but their rigidity can harm collaboration. Finally, while blockchain data can enhance the MNC's analytics capabilities, it can also jeopardize consumer privacy.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Managerial Summary</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Is blockchain technology all hype or a useful advancement for global firms? We propose that this technology has merits and drawbacks for financial transactions, collaboration, and data analytics. Cryptocurrencies have stolen the headlines and several leading organizations have already added them as payment methods. Their merits include lower transaction fees, better security, and higher speed, but they require expensive infrastructure and carry a stigma. Smart contracts can streamline agreements between parties but lack the flexibility that global firms need when interacting with suppliers and partners. Novel blockchain data can be plugged into marketing dashboards but can also threaten consumer privacy. Overall, the jury is still out on the role of blockchain technology for global firms.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":47563,"journal":{"name":"Global Strategy Journal","volume":"14 3","pages":"635-654"},"PeriodicalIF":5.7,"publicationDate":"2024-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/gsj.1509","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141366457","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Foreign institutional investors and equity share decisions in cross-border mergers and acquisitions 外国机构投资者与跨国并购中的股权决策

IF 5.7 2区管理学 Q1 BUSINESS

Global Strategy Journal

Pub Date : 2024-06-07 DOI: 10.1002/gsj.1511

Dennis Wajda, Juan Bu, Wei Shi

Research Summary

This study examines the role of foreign institutional investors in shaping acquiring firms' equity share decisions in cross-border mergers and acquisitions (M&As). We argue that foreign institutional ownership (FIO) from a given country is positively associated with the share of equity sought in the target firm in this country because foreign institutional investors can help reduce information asymmetry between the acquiring and target firms. Moreover, this positive relationship is stronger if target firms are in countries with weaker institutional development because acquiring firms suffer from higher information asymmetry and thus are more inclined to rely on foreign institutional investors for information. Findings from a sample of 4166 cross-border M&As by US firms lend support to our arguments.

Managerial Summary

Can foreign institutional investors influence acquiring firms' equity share decisions in cross-border M&As? We posit that local knowledge and information foreign institutional investors provide to acquiring firms can reduce uncertainty in the M&A process. Using data on cross-border M&As by US firms, we find that high levels of FIO are positively associated with the equity sought in target firms by acquirers. This effect is stronger when target firms are located in countries with weak institutions. Our study highlights the beneficial role of FIO that firm executives should be aware of and has practical implications for how firms manage the M&A process.

本研究探讨了在跨国并购（M&A）中，外国机构投资者在影响收购公司股权份额决策方面的作用。我们认为，某一国家的外国机构所有权（FIO）与目标公司在该国寻求的股权份额呈正相关，因为外国机构投资者有助于减少并购公司与目标公司之间的信息不对称。此外，如果目标公司所在国的制度发展较弱，这种正相关关系会更强，因为收购公司的信息不对称程度较高，因此更倾向于依靠外国机构投资者来获取信息。外国机构投资者能否影响并购企业在跨国并购中的股权决策？我们认为，外国机构投资者为并购企业提供的本地知识和信息可以减少并购过程中的不确定性。利用美国公司跨国并购的数据，我们发现高水平的外国机构投资者与并购方寻求目标公司股权呈正相关。当目标公司位于制度薄弱的国家时，这种效应会更强。我们的研究凸显了 FIO 的有利作用，企业高管应该意识到这一点，并对企业如何管理并购过程产生了实际影响。

{"title":"Foreign institutional investors and equity share decisions in cross-border mergers and acquisitions","authors":"Dennis Wajda, Juan Bu, Wei Shi","doi":"10.1002/gsj.1511","DOIUrl":"10.1002/gsj.1511","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Research Summary</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This study examines the role of foreign institutional investors in shaping acquiring firms' equity share decisions in cross-border mergers and acquisitions (M&As). We argue that foreign institutional ownership (FIO) from a given country is positively associated with the share of equity sought in the target firm in this country because foreign institutional investors can help reduce information asymmetry between the acquiring and target firms. Moreover, this positive relationship is stronger if target firms are in countries with weaker institutional development because acquiring firms suffer from higher information asymmetry and thus are more inclined to rely on foreign institutional investors for information. Findings from a sample of 4166 cross-border M&As by US firms lend support to our arguments.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Managerial Summary</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Can foreign institutional investors influence acquiring firms' equity share decisions in cross-border M&As? We posit that local knowledge and information foreign institutional investors provide to acquiring firms can reduce uncertainty in the M&A process. Using data on cross-border M&As by US firms, we find that high levels of FIO are positively associated with the equity sought in target firms by acquirers. This effect is stronger when target firms are located in countries with weak institutions. Our study highlights the beneficial role of FIO that firm executives should be aware of and has practical implications for how firms manage the M&A process.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":47563,"journal":{"name":"Global Strategy Journal","volume":"15 1","pages":"66-93"},"PeriodicalIF":5.7,"publicationDate":"2024-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/gsj.1511","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141373309","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Do financial crises moderate the influence of stakeholder rights protection on M&A activity: The influence of institutional logics and power? 金融危机是否会减缓利益相关者权利保护对并购活动的影响？制度逻辑和权力的影响？

IF 5.7 2区管理学 Q1 BUSINESS

Global Strategy Journal

Pub Date : 2024-05-24 DOI: 10.1002/gsj.1504

May-Anne Very, Laurence Capron, Mauro Guillén

Research Summary

M&A represents a contested process of change in control influenced by two contending prevailing institutional logics: shareholder-centered and labor-oriented. These logics, whose respective power is influenced by national laws, shape mergers and acquisition (M&A) outcomes. Crises, like systemic financial crises, are periods during which these logics may be altered. This research examines how financial crises affect the positive (negative) relationship between the legal protection of shareholder (labor) rights and M&A activity in a country. Utilizing a dataset from financial services companies across 35 countries from 1990 to 2016, we find that financial crises significantly weaken the effects of both shareholder and labor rights on M&A transactions. Our findings emphasize the role of power dynamics amidst conflicting institutional logics in determining M&A outcomes during both crisis and non-crisis periods.

Managerial Summary

In the world of mergers and acquisitions, the battle for control is influenced by two major opposing forces: shareholders and employees, with their power rooted in the country's laws. Countries with high protection of shareholder rights witness higher M&A activity compared to those more protective of labor rights. However, drawing from data covering financial services firms in 35 countries from 1990 to 2016, we discovered that financial crises tend to weaken the influence of both shareholder and employee rights on M&A deals. This insight highlights the importance of understanding the differences in the functioning of the M&A market across countries and the shifting power dynamics between shareholders and employees, especially in times of financial uncertainty, for those involved in planning and executing M&A strategies.

并购是一个有争议的控制权变更过程，受到两种相互竞争的主流制度逻辑的影响：以股东为中心和以劳工为导向。这些逻辑各自的力量受到国家法律的影响，决定了并购的结果。危机，如系统性金融危机，是这些逻辑可能发生改变的时期。本研究探讨了金融危机如何影响一个国家对股东（劳工）权利的法律保护与并购活动之间的正（负）关系。利用 1990 年至 2016 年 35 个国家金融服务公司的数据集，我们发现金融危机会显著削弱股东权益和劳工权益对并购交易的影响。我们的研究结果强调了在相互冲突的制度逻辑中，权力动态在危机和非危机时期对并购结果的决定作用。股东权益受到高度保护的国家，其并购活动要比劳工权益受到更多保护的国家活跃。然而，根据 1990 年至 2016 年 35 个国家金融服务公司的数据，我们发现金融危机往往会削弱股东权益和员工权益对并购交易的影响。这一洞察力凸显了了解各国并购市场运作的差异以及股东和员工之间权力动态变化的重要性，尤其是在金融不确定时期，这对参与规划和执行并购战略的人员来说尤为重要。

{"title":"Do financial crises moderate the influence of stakeholder rights protection on M&A activity: The influence of institutional logics and power?","authors":"May-Anne Very, Laurence Capron, Mauro Guillén","doi":"10.1002/gsj.1504","DOIUrl":"10.1002/gsj.1504","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Research Summary</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>M&A represents a contested process of change in control influenced by two contending prevailing institutional logics: shareholder-centered and labor-oriented. These logics, whose respective power is influenced by national laws, shape mergers and acquisition (M&A) outcomes. Crises, like systemic financial crises, are periods during which these logics may be altered. This research examines how financial crises affect the positive (negative) relationship between the legal protection of shareholder (labor) rights and M&A activity in a country. Utilizing a dataset from financial services companies across 35 countries from 1990 to 2016, we find that financial crises significantly weaken the effects of both shareholder and labor rights on M&A transactions. Our findings emphasize the role of power dynamics amidst conflicting institutional logics in determining M&A outcomes during both crisis and non-crisis periods.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Managerial Summary</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>In the world of mergers and acquisitions, the battle for control is influenced by two major opposing forces: shareholders and employees, with their power rooted in the country's laws. Countries with high protection of shareholder rights witness higher M&A activity compared to those more protective of labor rights. However, drawing from data covering financial services firms in 35 countries from 1990 to 2016, we discovered that financial crises tend to weaken the influence of both shareholder and employee rights on M&A deals. This insight highlights the importance of understanding the differences in the functioning of the M&A market across countries and the shifting power dynamics between shareholders and employees, especially in times of financial uncertainty, for those involved in planning and executing M&A strategies.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":47563,"journal":{"name":"Global Strategy Journal","volume":"14 4","pages":"657-682"},"PeriodicalIF":5.7,"publicationDate":"2024-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/gsj.1504","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141102213","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0