ادغام توسط بازار شرکت های چند ملیتی نوظهور: مفاهیم برای عملکرد شرکت

This study develops and tests a framework about the resource- and context-specificity of prior experience in acquisitions. Although extant research has explained why multinational companies from emerging countries (EMNCs) acquire companies in developed countries, we have an incomplete and inconsistent understanding of the consequences of such acquisitions for the performance of target firms. First, we show that despite the concerns raised by politicians and the general public in developed countries, the acquisitions made by EMNCs often enhance the performance of target firms. Second, we examine whether the role of EMNCs' idiosyncratic resources (such as access to new markets and cheap production facilities) and investment experience in enhancing the performance of target firms differs across acquisition contexts. We demonstrate that not all types of resources and investment experience are equally beneficial and, in fact, some types of experience even have a negative effect on the performance of target firms. By contrast, other types of experience that EMNCs accumulate from prior investment enhance the performance of target firms by facilitating resource redeployment and the exploitation of complementarities.

Although globalization was for several decades driven by firms from developed nations, multinational companies from emerging countries (EMNCs) are increasingly investing in developed countries by acquiring firms. This entry mode is strategically important because it gives EMNCs quick access to new markets, resources and capabilities. The rise of outward foreign direct investment (OFDI) from emerging economies is a phenomenon that has important theoretical and empirical implications, and has therefore recently attracted considerable scholarly attention. However, extant research on the subject has largely focused on either the characteristics and determinants of OFDI (Buckley et al., 2007, Gammeltoft, 2008, Kalotay, 2008, Li, 2007, Mathews, 2006, Rugman, 2008 and Sauvant, 2005) or examined whether established theory can explain the recent internationalization of EMNCs. Hence, although prior studies have offered valuable insights into the determinants of OFDI from emerging economies, little research has analyzed its consequences for performance, leaving an interesting and important question less well understood: “How do the acquisitions of EMNCs influence the performance of target firms in developed countries?”. The incomplete understanding of the performance consequences of OFDI not only limits theorizing on international business, but also influences EMNCs' acquisition strategy and the behavior of host-country governments. Indeed, the effectiveness of EMNCs' internationalization depends on how well they understand the conditions shaping the success of their acquisitions in developed countries. Equally, given that the general public and politicians in developed countries only rarely welcome EMNCs' acquisitions (Goldstein, 2007), host-country governments need to identify and attract the type of investors that have the potential to enhance the performance of domestic firms. To address the above question, we examine how acquisitions from Brazil, Russia, India and China (BRIC) influence the performance of target firms in developed countries. Our analysis extends prior research in two important ways. First, established international business theory has largely been created with developed countries in mind. It thus relies on predictions and assumptions that are not always valid in situations where an EMNC acquires a firm in a developed country (Kuada, 2002). For example, whereas previous studies point to the importance of intangible resources in affecting the performance of target firms acquired by developed market firms (Delios & Beamish, 2001), prior research has shown that EMNCs only rarely possess strong intangible resources and may invest abroad precisely in order to access intangible assets (Ramamurti, 2009). To increase understanding of these differences, we develop and test a conceptual framework that explains the mechanisms influencing the post-acquisition performance of developed country firms. Our contribution lies in demonstrating how variations in the performance of target firms is explained by the idiosyncratic resources possessed by the acquiring EMNC. More specifically, our analysis contributes to theory on the role of external resources (Lavie, 2006 and Rui and Yip, 2008) by explaining how such acquisitions enable target firms to become part of a wider network, exploit complementarities and benefit from the resources owned by other parts of the organization (Capron et al., 1998, Capron, 1999 and Uhlenbruck, 2004). The findings of the study are surprising and differ significantly from studies that focused on acquisitions made by developed country MNCs (Conyon et al., 2002, Feys and Manigart, 2010, Kyoji et al., 2005 and Piscitello and Rabbiosi, 2005) or the performance of the acquiring EMNC (Contractor et al., 2007, Garg and Delios, 2007 and Gaur and Kumar, 2009). Our second contribution concerns the role of experience accumulated by EMNCs through previous acquisitions and greenfield investment in developed and emerging markets. Inherent contextual properties map onto distinct learning processes and experiences (Muehlfeld, Rao Sahib, & van Witteloostuijn, 2012). Building on the notion of context-specific applicability, we examine whether the experience that EMNCs gain from various investment contexts influences subsequent outcomes in either different-context or similar-context acquisitions. This involves the analysis of whether the usefulness of experiential learning patterns associated with prior investments differs across contexts depending on the type of market entry (greenfield or acquisition) and the investment location (emerging or developed countries). Although prior research has acknowledged that experience influences the success of acquisitions (Barkema and Vermeulen, 1998 and Muehlfeld et al., 2012), EMNCs originate from countries that differ significantly from developed countries in their political, economic, cultural and institutional environments (Goldstein, 2007). As such, their experience differs from that of developed country MNEs. We extend the literature on OFDI by demonstrating that not all types of experience are equally beneficial. Rather, we find that the performance-enhancing effects of investment experience depend on the context in which experience was gained. This differs from the general tenet that firms become more proficient at managing new investments with each additional investment experience. The implication for theory and practice is that the direct and moderating role of EMNCs' experience is not equally effective for enhancing the performance of target firms but depends on the EMNC's investment pattern. In fact, we find that some types of experience may even have negative consequences for the performance of target firms. Conversely, other types of EMNCs' experience (or a combination of different types of experience) positively moderate the relationship between their resources and the performance of target firms. Overall, the findings suggest that the idiosyncratic characteristics, experience and resources of EMNCs lead to significant differences in the potential synergies and complementarities that EMNCs may exploit when acquiring new firms. They also suggest that different types and locations of investment are associated with a given set of capabilities that is not transferable to other acquisition deals. These idiosyncrasies change the role that firm experience plays in managing resources and new acquisitions and in improving the performance of target firms.

The emergence of new global players from BRIC countries and their investments in developed countries are changing the global landscape. In this study, we examined a phenomenon that remains under-theorized: “how do such acquisitions influence the performance of target firms in developed countries?” More specifically, building on the notion of context-specific applicability, we developed and tested a framework about the resource- and context-specificity of prior experience in acquisitions. We demonstrate that variations in the performance of target firms in developed markets can be explained by differences in (1) the resources of the acquiring EMNC and (2) the experience accumulated by the EMNC from previous acquisitions and investments in developed and emerging countries. Our conceptualization highlights the need to consider not only the characteristics of current acquisitions and investments, but also patterns in the previous ones. This approach is useful because it enables us to explain why some acquisitions generate greater benefits than others, even though the resources of the firms might be similar in their characteristics. It is also useful in showing that different types of experience may lead to different types of learning and capabilities and, in turn, influence different aspects of performance. Our findings have a number of theoretical implications. First, an interesting pattern emerges concerning the role of experience. The results indicate that prior investment experience is not always beneficial for the performance of target firms, and that it might even have negative consequences. In fact, only specific types of investment experience enhance the performance of target firms. For instance, acquisition experience assists the acquiring firm in managing the resources of the organization as a whole and in identifying synergies and complementarities that improve the performance of the target firm through two key mechanisms – resource redeployment and asset divestiture (Capron et al., 1998, Lavie, 2006 and Newbert, 2007). Interestingly, EMNCs that are most effective in enhancing the performance of target firms are those that have investment experience in both acquisitions and developed countries. Overall, our analysis suggests that because inherent contextual properties map onto distinct learning processes (Muehlfeld et al., 2012), the experience that EMNCs gain from a given context is unlikely to influence subsequent acquisition outcomes in different contexts. Different investments are associated with a given set of capabilities and organizational routines that are not always transferable to other situations. This may also explain why multinationals often choose to follow a similar investment pattern over time. The theoretical implication for the OFDI literature is that that not all types of experience are equally beneficial. The usefulness of experiential learning differs across contexts depending on the type of market entry (greenfield or acquisition) and the investment location (emerging or developed countries). These findings differ from the general tenet that each additional investment experience makes firms better at managing future investments. It seems that investment experience is so type- and location-specific that when EMNCs that only have greenfield investment experience engage in acquisitions, there is a negative effect on the performance of the target companies because greenfield experience is less useful in providing acquisition-specific knowledge. Greenfield investment involves a different logic and dynamic to acquisitions because it often focuses on asset-exploitation, rather than asset-exploration. Hence, the target firm might run the risk of not being well embedded in the strategy of the parent company, thus decreasing the performance of both firms (Datta, 1991, Ramaswamy, 1997 and Shelton, 1988). We also provide evidence that the performance of target firms, especially in the manufacturing sector, is largely driven by EMNCs' tangible assets. This finding stands in contrast with the established resource-based notion that intangible resources are usually more important. By contrast, while studies on developed market MNCs suggest that their intangible resources enhance the performance of target firms, we find that this does not hold in the case of EMNCs as the performance consequences of their intangible resources turn out to be insignificant. This finding is consistent with the view that EMNCs invest in developed countries to source rather than to transfer knowledge-intensive and intangible assets. Furthermore, we show that both the direct and the moderating effects of experience differ in the case of EMNCs. Emerging country environments have different characteristics compared to developed countries. They are grounded in informal ties and democracies that are not always completely accomplished (Goldstein, 2007). These differences limit EMNCs' ability to undertake investments in developed economies, increasing the probability of making pre- and post-acquisition mistakes. This might explain our finding showing that previous investments in developed countries have a positive and significant direct effect on the performance of target firms. This type of experience provides EMNCs with the necessary knowledge to manage new deals in similar (i.e. developed) countries. An analysis of acquiring firms from developed countries might yield different results since such MNCs have a better understanding of the environments that can be found in other developed countries.