Very]Do cultural differences have an impact on the performance of M&A? Despite the widely accepted myth that they do, and in a negative way, a review of extant research provides contradictory findings. In this article, we explore reasons for this contradiction and propose solutions in the form of propositions and a theoretical framework. We begin with a brief overview of extant research on the culture-performance relationship in M&A. In light of the contradictions emerging from this review, we move on to identifying three areas of complexity explaining this confusion, and for each one, we suggest propositions to guide future research. We then summarize our argument using a theoretical framework. Because of the long-term and dynamic nature of the M&A process, we argue that instead of studying the simple performance impact of cultural differences in M&A, we should move on to thinking how cultural differences impact on the M&A process and its outcome.

Based on a qualitative, large-scale, interview-based inductive study of eight acquisitions conducted by Finnish multinationals, this article develops a grounded model of the dynamics of acquired firm employee reactions preceding related, industrial cross-border acquisitions. In contrast to most merger and acquisition (M&A) research portraying employee reactions in times of M&A in a negative, stressful light, the present findings shed a contradictory light on this discourse. In six of the studied acquisitions, pre-acquisition employee reactions tended toward motivation rather than uncertainty. The underlying reason was that these acquisitions were perceived as opportunities instead of threats in the target firms. As a result, target firm management became proactively involved in promoting the acquisition’s success. The author terms this target behavioral responsiveness and found it to result from (a) “static” factors (partner organizational attractiveness and target cognitive responsiveness) as well as (b) “dynamic” factors (partner behavioral attractiveness and target strategic responsiveness). Intriguingly, the dynamic factors were found to have a stronger predictive impact on target behavioral responsiveness. Indeed, in two of the acquisitions, their low ranking on static factors was countered by a high ranking on dynamic factors, namely, attractive partner behaviors and a strategically responsive target. Employee reactions to a forthcoming acquisition are thus not the deterministic result of the change itself, but can be influenced through buying firm behaviors and positive future intentions as well as the target experiencing a need to be acquired. Implications for M&A research are discussed, and a model and propositions to guide future research are suggested.

Although the signifi cance of managing the acquisition process is acknowledged, little evidence exists as to the ways in which managerial action throughout this process impacts acquisition performance. In this article, the researchers draw attention to the central, yet largely neglected fi gure responsible for implementing mergers and acquisitions (M&A), namely "the integration manager. " Drawing from an extensive study of nine related, friendly acquisitions involving 166 interviews, the authors fi nd that integration managers affect acquisition performance by capturing value derived from (a) the preacquisition phase, (b) the acquiring fi rm, and (c) the acquired fi rm. Through their in/action, integration managers affect two sources of economic performance: the extent of additional value created and the extent of value leaked. The fi ndings contribute to enriching our knowledge of managing the acquisition process and are a call for more actor-based, microlevel studies on the ways in which managing the acquisition process and the actors therein affect acquisition performance.