Learning Through Acquisitions.

Vermeulen, Freek; Barkema, Harry G.

doi:10.2307/3069364

Cited by 862 publications

(468 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

443

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…1985;Vermeulen and Barkema 2001); and (3) the dummy variable LOSS takes a value of 1 for a focal serial acquisition in case there has been a small loss in CAR in its previous serial acquisition. Small is defined as negative cumulated abnormal returns between 0 and 3 percent (Hayward 2002).…”

Section: Additional Control Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Prior empirical studies analyzing the performance effects of serial acquisitions generally pursue two variant key topics: the effect of time or more specifically acquisition patterns (Klarner and Raisch 2013;Laamanen and Keil 2008;Prescott 2011, 2012;see Shi et al 2012 for an overview) and the role of experience on learning effects (Ellis et al 2011;Finkelstein and Haleblian 2002;Haleblian and Finkelstein 1999;Hayward 2002;Meschi and Métais 2013;Vermeulen and Barkema 2001; see Barkema and Schijven 2008b for an overview). We interconnect these two perspectives by introducing the concept of strategic consistency, which we define in this paper as the coherence of strategic directions of acquisitions within a series.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Lost in transaction? The transfer effect of strategic consistency

Fehre

Kronenwett

Lindstädt

et al. 2015

Bus Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prior empirical studies provide evidence that the learning-curve perspective from manufacturing settings is not directly applicable to strategic management settings. In the latter case learning relates to the quality rather than to the quantity of experience. Regarding the antecedents of organizational learning especially, there are still unanswered questions remaining; for example, the questions what kind of experience has a positive effect on performance and what kind of experience is more of a hindrance than a help. This becomes obvious when looking at acquisitions as examples of strategic management decisions. Results of prior empirical studies analyzing the relationship of acquisition experience and acquisition performance have been mixed. By introducing the concept of strategic consistency, we intend to facilitate a better understanding of the kind of experience necessary for organizational learning. Therefore, we measure the concordance and frequency of change in strategic actions. Employing a sample of 379 acquisition series, we find evidence for a positive transfer effect of strategic consistency within series and, therefore, a positive relationship between strategic consistency and acquisition performance.

show abstract

Section: Additional Control Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lost in transaction? The transfer effect of strategic consistency

Fehre

Kronenwett

Lindstädt

et al. 2015

Bus Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…the ongoing use of the firm's knowledge base (Vermeulen and Barkema, 2001) helps the organisation to refine its routines and allows it to recoup initial investments and to become profitable. Thus during the exploitation phase, firms focus on the knowledge that contributes most to its success, and filters out knowledge and routines that are less successful.…”

Section: From Exploration To Exploitationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Industry Life Cycle, Knowledge Generation and Technological Networks

Nesta

Mangematin

2002

Economics of Science, Technology and Innovation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…External knowledge sources include acquisitions (Chaudhuri & Tabrizi, 1999) and other forms of international relationships (Vermeulen & Barkema, 2001), such as alliances (Lane & Lubatkin, 1998). However, exposure to external sources of knowledge is necessary but not sufficient for transfer (Matusik, 2000); transfer also requires an understanding of the breadth and depth of this exposure, the new information's relatedness to prior knowledge, and the extent to which the new knowledge is different from current internal knowledge (Cockburn & Henderson, 1998;Lane & Lubatkin, 1998;Lofstrom, 2000;Matusik & Heeley, 2001;Van Wijk, Van den Bosch, & Volberda, 2001).…”

Section: Acap and The Entrepreneurial Processmentioning

confidence: 99%