Purpose The purpose of this paper is to analyze corporate scope decisions in acquisitions with a focus on the relationship between target country unfamiliarity and acquirer-to-target relatedness and on the moderating effects played by product diversification and international experience. Design/methodology/approach Using a dataset of 689 acquisitions completed in the period 2007-2013 by acquirers located in 60 countries, this paper utilizes an ordered logistic regression analysis. Findings With greater target country unfamiliarity, acquirers are encouraged to pursue greater acquirer-to-target relatedness. This finding suggests that acquirers tend to seek a balance between product and international diversification to reduce the sources of uncertainty in their acquisition moves. While past international experience strengthens this relationship, diversification experience has a negative moderating effect and hence encourages acquirers to reduce relatedness at increasing market unfamiliarity. Originality/value The originality of this paper is twofold. First, the authors extend the traditional internationalization-diversification framework to an unfamiliarity-relatedness relationship in the context of acquisitions. Second, the authors propose a construct of target country unfamiliarity in acquisitions that goes beyond the traditional domestic vs cross-border dichotomy by including previous experience in the target country.

Building on organizational learning theory, and notably on the notion of strategic momentum, we examine the antecedents of cross‐border acquisitions, with a specific focus on the effect of experience. In particular, we unbundle firm experience into domestic and cross‐border acquisition experience. Using data on 763 acquisitions in the period 2007–2013, our results show the existence of a U‐shaped relationship between domestic acquisition experience and the likelihood of cross‐border acquisitions: acquisition experience in the domestic market is negatively related to subsequent international M&A activity up to a certain level, after which accumulation of experience in the domestic market generates process‐related capabilities that encourage subsequent cross‐border acquisitions. Empirical support is provided for an inverted U‐shaped relationship between prior cross‐border acquisition experience and the likelihood of subsequent cross‐border acquisitions: such experience encourages further acquisitions up to the point at which the coordination costs discourage further international expansion.

The effects of cross-border acquisitions on the survival of target firms is attracting increasing academic interest. Specifically, whether cross-border acquisitions may hamper target firms’ performance or enhance their sustainable competitiveness represents a highly debated research question. Building on the knowledge-based perspective of mergers and acquisitions, this paper directs attention to absorptive capacity and investigates the likelihood of survival of target firms acquired by foreign investors. In particular, it examines the role played by three potential antecedent conditions of an acquiring firm’s absorptive capacity on the probability of the target firm’s survival: (a) The business relatedness between acquirer and target, (b) previous experience of the acquirer in the host country, and (c) the cultural distance between the countries of the acquiring and acquired firms. Based on a sample of 396 Italian firms acquired by foreign multinationals, results suggest that target firms are more likely to survive in case the acquirer benefits from previous country-level experience and in case of business relatedness, while the cultural distance between the home country of the acquiring firm and Italy does not prove to be a significant determinant of survival versus mortality of acquired subsidiaries. Overall, our analysis confirms that context familiarity, in terms of both country and business contexts, plays a fundamental role in determining the sustainable competitiveness of acquired firms.

PurposeThis paper aims to develop a conceptual framework on how the representativeness heuristic operates in the decision-making process. Specifically, the authors unbundle representativeness into its building blocks: search rule, stopping rule and decision rule. Furthermore, the focus is placed on how individual-level cognitive and behavioral factors, namely experience, intuition and overconfidence, affect the functioning of this heuristic.Design/methodology/approachFrom a theoretical standpoint, the authors build on dual-process theories and on the adaptive toolbox view from the “fast and frugal heuristics” perspective to develop an integrative conceptual framework that uncovers the mechanisms underlying the representativeness heuristic.FindingsThe authors’ conceptualization suggests that the search rule used in representativeness is based on analogical mapping from previous experience, the stopping rule is the representational stability of the analogs and the decision rule is the choice of the alternative upon which there is a convergence of representations and that exceeds the decision maker's aspiration level. In this framework, intuition may help the decision maker to cross-map potentially competing analogies, while overconfidence affects the search time and costs and alters both the stopping and the decision rule.Originality/valueThe authors develop a conceptual framework on representativeness, as one of the most common, though still poorly investigated, heuristics. The model offers a nuanced perspective that explores the cognitive and behavioral mechanisms that shape the use of representativeness in decision-making. The authors also discuss the theoretical implications of their model and outline future research avenues that may further contribute to enriching their understanding of decision-making processes.

No abstract