The surge of cross-border mergers and acquisitions (CBM&As) from China, the largest of the emerging economies, has attracted considerable scholarly attention recently. The unique institutional context in China, i.e., heavy government involvement in business activities and imbalanced development of subnational institutions among Chinese regions, raises two interesting questions: whether, or not, CBM&As of Chinese firms create value for acquirers in the short and the long term; and what special sources of value creation exist in Chinese firms’ CBM&A? The main focus of this thesis is to investigate the impact of multi-level institutional variables on short- and long-term value creation in Chinese firms’ CBM&A in the unique Chinese context. Using a sample of 279/192 CBM&A events collected from the CSMAR database over the period 1999-2013, we find that the market reacts positively to CBM&A announcements, but the accounting performance of acquirers fails to improve after CBM&A in the long term. Based on the selected sample, we employ Ordinary Least Squares to analyse the data and find the following results. First, the study reveals government is an important source of value creation, but its effects on the short- and long-term value creation in Chinese firms’ CBM&A are reflected by government ownership and political connections. We find Chinese market investors reward acquirers with political connections at the time of CBM&A announcements, but explicit government ownership contributes more to long-term performance improvement of acquirers after CBM&A. Second, in the long term, we find there is U-shaped relationship between R&D intensity and the long-term post-CBM&A performance of acquirers, which suggests acquirers with moderate-level R&D intensity suffer from more integration problems resulting from the dilemma of compatibility. Third, at the macro level, we find that higher-quality institutions among the Chinese regions and higher-quality host country institutions provoke more positive market reactions, while less cultural distance and greater formal institutional distance contribute to performance improvement of acquirers after CBM&A in the long term. Furthermore, the effects of micro-level institutional factors, i.e., government ownership and political connections, on the value creation in Chinese firms’ CBM&A are dependent on the macro-level institutional environments. In the short term, the market responds more positively to acquirers with higher government ownership, but less positively to acquirers with political connections with an increase in subnational institutional quality. With the increase in host country institutional quality, the market responds less positively to both the larger government ownership and the presence of political connections. In the long term, we find that the influence of government ownership on value creation is enhanced with the increase of cultural distance, but declines with the increase of formal institutional distance.

Organizational transformations, such as mergers and acquisitions, disrupt the steady state of organizational daily life. Under some conditions, these kinds of disruptions may actually alter the organizational and occupational structure of everyday work. However, current theories of organizational learning and knowledge governance, such as the so-called ‘knowledge- or capability-based view of the firm’, are inadequate when it comes to the potential number of structural variations inherent in an organizational transformation taking place in non-commercial organizational settings such as higher education institutions. In an exploratory case study of a university merger, this dissertation inductively examines how governance structures in universities impact the creation and exploitation of knowledge, both in core academic activities (research and teaching) and in related and supporting administrative tasks. This setting provides an institutional configuration that differs considerably from that which has informed most previous research on the creation, sharing and exploitation of knowledge, but in which there are prominent institutional locales for the governance of knowledge processes. Taking a practice lens, this study proposes a finer-grained picture of those structural variations by depicting the recursive relationship between changes in knowledge content (ostensive aspects) and knowledge-use practices (performative aspects) in the academic merger. Similarities and differences in relation to knowledge governance in firms are also identified. The findings suggest a classification of the micro-processes by which organizational and competence-based capabilities are recreated, improving our understanding of knowledge-based capabilities (re)creation at different levels of organization and through different stages of merger implementation.

This study analyses the impact of M&As on acquiring company shareholder wealth and market risk through empirical evidence based on event study methods and cross-sectional regressions. The hypotheses investigated relate to the relevance of target status, method of payment, acquirers‘ bidding experience, and diversification motives. The evidence is based on a comprehensive sample of M&A transactions comprising 46,758 initial bids announced in 180 countries over the period 1977-2012, covering 88 industries. The study also investigates the relevance of deal and firm-specific factors affecting the likelihood of the success or failure of a deal once announced. The results of the event study indicate that acquirers‘ abnormal returns are not influenced by uncertainty about whether the announced deals will succeed or fail, which is consistent with the efficient market hypothesis. The event study evidence also confirms that acquirers‘ gains are most significant in cross-border M&As with acquirers located in developed countries and targets in developing countries. Further evidence from cross-sectional regressions confirms that cross-border and cross-industry diversification yields significant announcement gains for acquirers, although in comparison with domestic and focussed deals, such deals carry a greater risk of failure. Diversification has no significant impact on acquirers‘ market or systematic risk. In addition, the evidence with regard to the impact of target status and method of payment suggests that acquirers‘ gains are most significant in stock payment deals involving private or subsidiary targets, while stock payment deals involving publicly-listed targets yield lower returns. In general, cash payment for acquisitions serves to reduce the negative impact of acquiring public targets, while stock payment enhances the positive impact of acquiring private or subsidiary targets. Correspondingly, acquirers‘ market increases with the acquisition of non-public targets, while using cash payment reduces this risk. The overall findings in this regard are robust across various samples and are generally associated with the existence of information asymmetry between acquirers and targets. Finally, the findings reveal that acquirers‘ prior experience of bidding in M&A deals is associated with significantly lower shareholder returns for acquirers, and this also increases their risk. This finding, however, is specific to serial acquirers and generally supports the hubris motive.

This thesis investigates four interrelated research issues in the context of takeover likelihood modelling. These include: (1) the determinants of target firms’ takeover likelihood, (2) the extent to which targets can be predicted using publicly available information, (3) whether target prediction can form the basis of a profitable investment strategy, and – if not – (4) why investing in predicted targets is a suboptimal investment strategy. The research employs a UK sample of 32,363 firm-year observations (consisting of 1,635 target and 31,737 non-target firm-year observations) between 1988 and 2010. Prior literature relies on eight (old) hypotheses for modelling takeover likelihood – determinants of takeover likelihood. Consistent with prior studies, I find that takeover likelihood increases with the availability of free cash flow (Powell (1997, 2001, 2004)), the level of tangible assets (Ambrose and Megginson (1992)) and management inefficiency (Palepu (1986)), but decreases with firm age (Brar et al. (2009)). The empirical evidence lends no support to the firm undervaluation, industry disturbance, growth-resource mismatch or firm size hypotheses (Palepu (1986)). I extend prior research by developing eleven (new) hypotheses for target prediction. Consistent with the new hypotheses, I find evidence that takeover likelihood is an inverse U-shaped function of firm size, leverage and payroll burden. Takeover likelihood also increases with share repurchase activity, market liquidity and stock market performance and decreases with industry concentration. As anticipated, the new hypotheses improve the within-sample classification and out-of-sample predictive abilities of prior takeover prediction models. This study also contributes to the literature by exploring the effects of different methodological choices on the performance of takeover prediction models. The analyses reveal that the performance of prediction models is moderated by different modelling choices. For example, I find evidence that the use of longer estimation windows (e.g., a recursive model), as well as, portfolio selection techniques which yield larger holdout samples (deciles and quintiles) generally result in more optimal model performance. Importantly, I show that some of the methodological choices of prior researchers (e.g., a one-year holdout period and a matched-sampling methodology) either directly biases research findings or results in suboptimal model performance. Additionally, there is no evidence that model parameters go stale, at least not over a ten-year out-of-sample test period. Hence, the parameters developed in this study can be employed by researchers and practitioners to ascribe takeover probabilities to UK firms. Despite the new model’s success in predicting targets, I find that, consistent with the market efficiency hypothesis, predicted target portfolios do not consistently earn significant positive abnormal returns in the long run. That is, despite the high target concentrations achieved, the portfolios generate long run abnormal returns which are not statistically different from zero. I extend prior literature by showing that these portfolios are likely to achieve lower than expected returns for five reasons. First, a substantial proportion of each predicted target portfolio constitutes type II errors (i.e., non-targets) which, on average, do not earn significant positive abnormal returns. Second, the portfolios tend to hold a high number of firms that go bankrupt leading to a substantial decline in portfolio returns. Third, the presence of poorly-performing small firms within the portfolios further dilutes its returns. Fourth, targets perform poorly prior to takeover bids and this period of poor performance coincides with the portfolio holding period. Fifth, targets that can be successfully predicted tend to earn lower-than-expected holding period returns, perhaps, due to market-wide anticipation. Overall, this study contributes to the literature by developing new hypotheses for takeover prediction, by advancing a more robust methodological framework for developing and testing prediction models and by empirically explaining why takeover prediction as an investment strategy is, perhaps, a suboptimal strategy.

Les petites sociétés génèreraient de meilleures performances en périodes économiquement favorables et leurs performances seraient plutôt médiocres en périodes économiquement défavorables. Nous avançons l‟hypothèse selon laquelle l‟effet taille n‟est manifeste que durant les périodes d'expansion économique. Notre étude empirique confirme cette hypothèse pour la période 2000-2009. Nous utilisons un modèle avec variables binaires pour estimer les alphas ainsi que trois indicateurs du cycle économique : l'indicateur composite avancé de l‟OCDE, l‟indice CAC 40 et l‟Euribor 1 mois. / It would seem that small companies perform better in economically favourable times and give more mediocre performances in economically unfavourable times. We put forward the hypothesis that size effect only occurs during periods of economic expansion. Our empirical study confirms this hypothesis for the 2000-2009 period. We use a model with binary variables to estimate alphas as well as three economic cycle indicators: the OCDE composite leading indicator, the CAC 40 index and the 1 month Euribor rate.

In this thesis I outline a political problem of positioning organisation theory. I maintain that there are projects of positioning, depositioning and repositioning, which articulate organisation in different political ways. To dialectically critique the politics of these projects I discuss the way philosophers of destruction, deconstruction and impossibility conceptualise the political event. I argue that these speculative philosophies share a political belief in the need to question and show the limits of the ways social reality is positioned in the realms of modernity, capitalism and `Empire', and explore possibilities of how the world might look different. I maintain that the politics of the positioning project is to turn organisation into the hegemony of management, which I show by engaging with the particular discourse of knowledge management. The politics of the depositioning project is to resist the hegemony of management in multiple ways; I discuss particularly how organisation theorists emphasise the precariousness, plurality and locality of processes of organising. Although the political resistances by the depositioning project are of great importance, I argue that there is a tendency to not link their politics to questions of hegemony, which I show to have certain depoliticising effects. In response to these failures, the politics of the repositioning project aims to repoliticise organisation theory by speculating about a new hegemony of social organisation. My engagement with the so-called 'anticapitalist movement' and questions of its organisation and politics shows, however, that such an attempt of repositioning is itself an impossible or undecidable event. Nevertheless, I argue that it is precisely this political event of impossibility that calls for a speculative decision to be made; a decision, however, which will always fail to fully represent social organisation.

Intra-family succession is the transfer of management, leadership and/or control of the business from one family member to another, and has been a core topic in family business research (Debicki, Matherne, Kellermanns, and Chrisman, 2009). Family firm researchers have suggested that family firms have a strong desire toward economic and non-economic goals (Kotlar and De Massis, 2013). However, how these goals fit into the strategic management decision of intra-family succession has not been explored by researchers (Chrisman, Kellermanns, Chan, and Liano, 2010). The purpose of this study is to identify and explain the importance of the goals that small private family firms expect to achieve through intra-family succession that cannot be achieved through non-family succession as “success in strategic management, including the management of intra-family succession, must be measured in terms of goal achievement” (De Massis, Sharma, Chua, and Chrisman, 2012, p. 30). To examine why intra-family succession goals (IFSGs) are important, this study relies on the psychological personality constructs of generativity (concern for guiding and establishing the next generation) and narcissism (an individual’s self-assurance, self-esteem and satisfaction with oneself). The respondents of this study are those family members who make up the dominant coalition (founders, incumbents, and potential successors) of the family firm. Only those firms where the family has the ability to influence firm behavior, and the intention (willingness) for intra-family succession, are included in this study. Qualitative data was collected to identify IFSGs, and these IFSGs are used in the development of the structured questionnaire. Fourteen IFSGs were identified from the qualitative phase of the study. The data collected from the structured questionnaire was subject to various statistical methods. The results suggest that the dominant coalition of small private family firms considered each IFSG as important, and that generativity and narcissism partially explain why these goals are important. The findings suggest that gender and the individual’s role within the dominant coalition influence the hypothesized relationship between IFSGs and generativity, and the IFSG of legacy and narcissism. This research provides several analytical, methodological and theoretical contributions and paves the way for further theoretical and empirical enquiry into intra-family succession of small private family firms.

L’objectif de la thèse est de comprendre les mécanismes de collaboration dans les projets innovants inter-organisationnels, pour ensuite co-construire des outils de gestion adaptés à cette situation. Les projets innovants collaboratifs (PIC) sont notre objet d’étude. Ils sont « multi-vocaux », donnent à voir des « contradictions » qui se manifestent parce que l’orientation du projet n’est pas partagée (Engeström, 1987, 2001 ; Engeström et Sannino, 2011) et des changements de trajectoire de l’activité en fonction du poids relatif des parties prenantes (Mitchell et al. 1997). Il y existe un enjeu de médiation. Nous nous appuyons sur le levier de la responsabilité sociétale pour réaliser cette médiation. Notre problématique de recherche est la suivante : dans quelle mesure des artefacts médiateurs, dans l’esprit de la responsabilité sociétale, constituent-ils un levier de collaboration inter-organisationnelle dans le contexte des PIC ?Dans le cadre d’une recherche-intervention en sciences de gestion (David, 2012), en CIFRE, nous nous intéressons aux PIC du pôle de compétitivité HYDREOS, notre terrain. Le PIC SYALIS met en évidence le besoin d'un artefact capable, à un moment donné, de cristalliser des tensions entre plusieurs parties prenantes. Le PIC SIRUS permet d’expérimenter la co-construction de cet artefact. Les résultats sont une prise en compte des différentes représentations, ce qui est de nature à améliorer la collaboration inter-organisationnelle, le développement d’un apprentissage expansif dans l’équipe d’animation du pôle et dans le consortium du PIC et le diagnostic de la zone proximale de développement qui renforce la dynamique d’apprentissage. / The aim of this doctoral thesis is to understand the mechanisms for collaboration in inter-organizational innovation projects and then build together management tools adapted to this situation. Collaborative innovation projects (CIP) are our object of study. They are “multi-voice” make visible “contradictions” that occur because the project focus is not shared (Engeström, 1987, 2001; Engeström and Sannino, 2011) and path changes of activity based on the relative weight of stakeholders (Mitchell et al. 1997). There is a mediation issue. We rely on the lever of societal responsibility to carry out this mediation. Our research question is: to what extent mediator artifacts, in the spirit of societal responsibility, are an inter-organizational collaboration lever in the CIP?In a context of an intervention-research in management sciences (David, 2012), in Industrial Convention of Formation by Research, we are interested in CIP of a competitiveness cluster, HYDREOS. The CIP SYALIS highlights the need of an artifact, which is able to crystallize tensions between several stakeholders. The CIP SIRUS allows experiencing the co-construction of this artifact. The results are consideration of different points of view, which is likely to improve inter-organizational collaboration; the development of an expansive learning in the operational team and the consortium of CIP; and the diagnosis of proximal zone of development that reinforces the dynamics of learning.

The current research is motivated by the controversy between the proponents and opponents of privatizing SOEs in LDCs concerning its impact on the MCSs designed and implemented in these companies. On the one hand, proponents expect privatization to foster the design and implementation of market-based, consensual and transparent MCSs. On the other hand, opponents are more critical about the ‘actual’ changes that privatization might entail to SOEs’ MCSs as they expect it to entail the design and implementation of non-transparent, coercive MCSs. When examined closely, this conflict was found to be rooted in the different theoretical perspectives adopted by each side. While proponents base their arguments, mostly, on ‘traditional’ agency and property-rights theories that underplay the role of structure in shaping the MCSs designed and implemented in privatized companies, many of the opponents base their arguments on neo-Marxist theories that underplay the role of agency in that process (namely labour process theory- LPT). The current research contributes to this debate through developing a power-informed theoretical model that acknowledges the role of both agency and structure in shaping the nature of the pre- and post-privatization MCSs designed and implemented in companies operating in LDCs. The model provides an attempt to develop the Hopper et al (2009) model through integrating into it a theory of power informed by the works of Lukes (1974 and 2005) and Gaventa (1980 and 2007) while adopting the integrative agency-structure approach suggested by Mahoney and Snyder (1999).Once developed, the model is used to guide the analysis of the relevant literature pertaining to Egypt’s supra-national and national power relations and structural factors throughout its state and market capitalism eras as a first step towards comparatively analysing the pre- and post-privatization power relations and MCSs manifesting in two Egyptian companies. The empirical data was mainly collected through conducting semi-structured interviews in the two companies and with some of the government officials involved in their privatization. Other sources of data include the companies’ internal records and financial reports, government publications, and newspapers. The comparative analysis shows how the power-informed model can help shed more light onto the nature of, and the dynamics of change in, MCSs transformations in LDCs; without having to abandon LPT as one of the main theoretical perspectives informing the analysis. While doing so, the nature of a company’s MCSs (be it coercive, consensual, or irrelevant) is found to reflect the power relations manifesting in that company (namely, powerful management, comparatively powerful management and labour, or powerful labour, respectively). Furthermore, as the comparative analysis shows, it is found that privatization is more likely to result in changing the nature of a SOE’s MCSs when it entails altering the power relations shaping these MCSs.

Cross-border mergers and acquisitions (M&As) are strategic business expansions across national boundaries, which provide bundle of resources and opportunity for growth strategies, however can prove rather problematic and complex. One of the most complex stages in cross-border M&As is when two firms are in the integration process. The most challenging part in a cross-border M&A, is the integration of two different firms that feature different management styles and organizational cultures. Once the integration seeps deeper into functional levels, the strategic level M&A commitment is faced with operational implementation issues. The marketing department is usually heavily involved in this integration process. These are the people who create and generate the sales which thereby increase the income of the combined firm. However, research on marketing integration related to M&As has paid little attention to the amalgamation of similar resources from two similar departments, particularly in the cross-border M&A context. Furthermore, the existing research does not clearly demonstrate the success factors that contribute to the marketing integration process in cross-border M&As. Hence, this thesis explores the role of the antecedents that influence the marketing integration process in cross-border M&As. Results indicate a significant impact on integration from marketing synergy and the redeployment of marketing resources. Meanwhile there is a striking result pertaining to the relationship between interaction and the speed of integration which is significant but negatively to influence the marketing integration process. In addition, cost savings and relationship effectiveness among the marketers of both the acquirer and the acquired firms are found to be highly significant and to positively support the M&A performance. This means that the commitment of the marketers from both firms relies on a close relationship in order to uphold the integration synergy while at the same time reducing cost and improving M&A performance.