No abstract

No abstract

This paper focuses on the impact that reputation has on the decision to proceed with a strategic alliance. Employing reputation constructs adapted from the Fortune Corporate Reputation Survey, we manipulated a target firm’s reputation in an experimental design. The subjects were placed in the role of CEO of the partner firm and asked whether they would engage in the alliance. Findings indicate that (1) reputation is a multidimensional construct, (2) the personal information‐processing characteristics of the decision‐maker mediate the reputation effect and may suppress the reputation information, (3) subjects may compensate weaker elements of reputation for stronger ones when making decisions, (4) product and management reputation are the most important factors, and (5) reputation is a factor affecting the decision regardless of whether the proposed target is a supplier or a competitor. © 1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

We explore whether pioneering advantages exist for early-mover acquirers in industry acquisition waves by examining both combined (target and acquirer) and acquirer stock returns. Combined abnormal returns are higher for acquisitions that occur at the beginning of acquisition waves. However, for acquirers' returns, only strategic pioneers-those acting in manners consistent with having superior information-capture significant advantages. Specifically, early-mover acquirers who realize superior stock returns are those that conduct acquisitions in related industries, during industry expansionary phases, and finance their acquisitions as financial theory suggests they should when they possess an informational advantage-with cash. Our findings extend the first-mover literature to corporate practices and link these practices to acquisition returns.First-mover advantages represent an important concept in the strategic management literature and in business practice. A first-mover advantage implies that, by acting early relative to peers, a pioneer may establish a competitive advantage that enables it to garner positive economic profits (Lieberman and Montgomery, 1988: 41). In the context of the resource-based view of the firm, an early mover can develop a resource that is rare, valuable, difficult to imitate and nonsubstitutable (Barney, 1986;Conner, 1991;Makadok, 1998;Wernerfelt, 1984). Despite the relatively wide acceptance of first-mover advantages, few empirical studies examine whether being an early mover in certain organizational practices materially affects performance. In the retrospective on and update of their original paper on first-mover advantages, Lieberman and Montgomery (1998) encourage more empirical research to identify the linkages between the resource-based view of the firm, first-mover advantages, and firm performance.First-mover advantages may be significant in industry acquisition waves. Acquisitions provide firms with a means to obtain valuable resources more quickly than is possible via internal capital expenditures (Finkelstein, 1997;Pfeffer, 1972). In light of the serious concerns that have been raised regarding the success of acquisitions in both practitioner and academic outlets (Business determination of factors that influence acquisition success remains an important research question.This study investigates whether being an early mover in the acquisition process affects shareholder returns. Specifically, we compare the stock market reactions to early-mover acquisitions (i.e.,

To strengthen the theoretical foundations of incentive system design for corporate entrepreneurship, we develop a moderated model of new venture participation, integrating financial, risk, and effort factors to more comprehensively understand the limits of economic utility maximization theory. We make explicit the trade-offs and opportunity costs for corporate employee-entrepreneurs. We use a conjoint field experiment to collect data on 1952 decisions made by 61 corporate employees to test how risk and effort moderate an employee's decision to participate in a new corporate venture. We find that these factors do interact to affect the choice to engage in corporate entrepreneurship projects.