This article explores post-acquisition attitudes and behaviors and the impact of merger satisfaction on attitudinal and behavioral outcome variables. The sample for the study comprises 2,845 employees in one division of a large manufacturing company. Results show significant differences in merger satisfaction both within and between acquiring firm and acquired firm employees. Level of individual satisfaction with a merger was also found to be strongly associated with several key attitudinal and demographic variables, including satisfaction with supervision, satisfaction with career future and company identification, communication with top management, agreement with the acquiring company's mission statement, turnover intent, and union status.

This study investigates the differences in salary between male and female purchasing managers and the effect on their respective perceptions of job‐related factors. A sample of 395 purchasing managers who were members of the National Association of Purchasing Management and who were from firms of all sizes participated in the study. The study found that female purchasing managers, as a group, had more negative perceptions of the job‐related factors than did male purchasing managers. Specific differences are identified, and implications for management are developed.

IntroductionMergers and acquisitions often create significant trauma for both the acquiring and acquired firm [1]. The significance of such trauma is underscored by research indicating that, despite seemingly favourable strategic, financial and operational assessments made during pre-merger feasibility studies, mergers have less than a 50:50 chance of being successful [2]. Even in the best of circumstances, mergers can so change the nature, orientation and character of one or both of the merger partners that five to seven years are typically needed for employees to feel truly assimilated in the merged entity [3].While there are many potential reasons why mergers fail to meet expectations, the lack of post-merger success is increasingly being attributed to human factors [4,5]. Mergers increase employee uncertainty, and with that increase there seems to be a rise in stress and a decrease in satisfaction, commitment, intentions to remain with the organization, and perceptions of the organization's trustworthiness, honesty, and caring [6]. These attitudes can spread and become endemic among employees -even those who were not disaffected by the merger [7]. Clearly, managers will play a pivotal role in influencing employee attitudes towards a merger. In studies by Napier et al. [8] and Bastien[9], it was the individual manager and how he/she handled the situation that was the major focal point for most employees during a merger.Much information is available concerning the role of managers in major organizational change. Kanter[10], for example, suggests that, in order to build commitment to change, managers should: allow employees to participate; provide a clear picture or vision of the future; share information; demonstrate commitment to the change; tell people exactly what is expected of them; and offer positive reinforcement.These suggestions are typical of those provided by other researchers and practitioners offering guidelines for the management of large-scale change.A key question left largely unanswered, however, is whether or not the managerial behaviour effective in other types of organizational change are effective in mergers. As Marks[11] notes, mergers differ from any other process of major organizational change in three important aspects: rate of change, scale of change, and the critical mass of the unknown they represent.An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 1994 Academy of Management Annual Meetings.

No abstract

<span>As the size of the elderly market increases, so does the need to understand the decision making process for selecting long-term health care (LTHC) facilities. This study describes the membership and relative degree of influence of specific participants in the decision making unit (DMU) as well as the situational effects of time, prompt and stage of decision making on the size, composition and influence of CMU participants.</span>