No abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to focus on the pre-acquisition process and, specifically, how the complexity involved in the transaction may drive the temporal gap between the formal announcement and the completion of the deal. The authors emphasize the time (in days) between announcement and completion. Design/methodology/approach The empirical setting consists of the cross-border acquisitions (CBAs) of Brazilian firms by multinational corporations announced between 2008 and 2012. Using a sample of 741 acquisitions, the authors examine how institutional (cultural and regulatory) and technological complexity and the predictable mitigating effect of prior acquisition experience in Brazil all impact on the time needed for evaluating the target and negotiating. Findings The results show that these complexity factors do matter for hastening the process and that recent experience with acquisitions in Brazil shortens the time needed to completion. Originality/value This study contributes to the literature on the acquisition process and the uncertainty and complexity factors in CBA in an emerging economy.

Study objective: This study aims to identify the emergence of new studies in the field of strategy, considering 12 years of publications in the Strategic Management Journal.Methodology / approach: In the Web of Science database, we searched the journal “Strategic Management Journal”, in two periods, 2007 to 2012 and 2013 to 2018. We exclusively selected articles related to “Business” and “Management”. This search generated 1,100 articles for our database, with 376 articles from the first period and 724 articles from the second period. We use matching techniques in the analyses performed using Bibexcel and SPSS. At the same time, in Ucinet, we created the network diagram which supports the relationships between the identified factors and confirmatory analysis of the findings.Originality / Relevance: Bibliometric studies are constantly seeking to analyze how the theoretical structure of theories is progressing, and in strategy, it has not been different. To verify how studies in strategy have evolved in theoretical terms, given their multi-disciplinarity, a comparative study of two distinct but subsequent periods offers a global view of where the studies are heading. We discovered new theoretical fronts in essence to behavioral studies that emerged in previous studies and are strengthened in new research.Main results: The search identified 57 articles and six factors from 2007 to 2012 and 2013 to 2018 produced 22 articles and five factors. The results confirmed the evolution of studies in behavioral theories, especially regarding managers and their strategies as well as other findings, such as research related to environmental dynamics and competitive dynamics. We still have strong participation of studies with resource-based theory, transaction costs, and the emergence of new theories such as tournaments and behavioral strategy.Theoretical / methodological contributions: Bibliometric searches can be examples of how to analyze references. In this sense, this study helps researchers have a parameter in similar studies, with pairing analysis and the combination of analysis of two subsequent periods. On the theoretical side, the findings give strength to previous research, validating established theories and showing emerging theories.Social / management contributions: This research obtained results that confirm the multi-disciplinarity in strategy studies. Behavioral theories have emerged and strengthened in recent years. For management, we found that the surveys substantially analyze the strategic behavior of senior members in strategic decisions, such as in company acquisitions, in the formation of alliances, and how managers will perform when they are under contracts, differentiated remuneration, or in competition. For this reason, some theories emerged in the second period, such as tournament theory, not highlighted in previous bibliometric studies. Finally, a comparative summary of the factors found in the two periods helps managers in managerial perspectives on organizational strategies.

Objective of the study: In this study we aim to analyze the evolution of the discipline Strategy published on the scholarly periodical Strategic Management Journal in the period from 2007 to 2018, covering a period of 12 years of publications in the field.Methodology / approach: Through a bibliometric co-citation study, we analyzed two periods, from 2007 to 2012 and from 2013 to 2018. As a proxy, we used “Strategic Management Journal” in the Web of Science database. This research generated a sample of 1100 articles. The sample was analyzed with the software Bibexcel and submitted to factor analysis in SPSS software to identify the factors. To present the networks, we used the software Ucinet.Originality / Relevance: Strategy studies are the focus of researchers who aim to identify how the theoretical field behaves. Identify the intellectual structure of research in strategy is relevant to new publications, and with greater concern afterwards the work by Ramos-Rodrigues and Ruiz-Navarro (2004). The multidisciplinary of Strategy was cited in previous studies, with evidence of the discipline in new fields of studies, such as in behavioral theories in strategy (Fernandes Pinto, Guerrazzi, Serra Kniess, 2016 and Ferreira; Fernandes Ratten, 2016). Thus, we sought to carry out a new research, in different and successive periods, which allow a validation of new reflections and perspectives regarding strategy in new fields of studies. In fact, we confirmed, with the results, the emergence of behavioral theories.Main results: We identified four factors in the publishing from 2007 to 2012 period, with 36 articles, and two factors in the period from 2013to 2018, with 30 articles. The results allowed us to observe that Resource-based Theory (RBT) is still one of the most explored theories, in the first period, which is confirmed by previous studies. Regarding the second period, we verified the most evident movement in behavioral theories, with works in the fields of learning, knowledge and innovation (Fernandes Pinto, Guerrazzi, Serra Kniess, 2016; Ferreira, Fernandes Ratten, 2016).Theoretical / methodological contributions: This study allows researchers to methodologically analyze the steps of a bibliometric co-citation study, including in this process the ways to analyze factors and make comparisons in two different publication periods. Supporting the theory, the results show the development of the theoretical field of Strategy and its evolution since the work by Ramos-Rodrigues and Ruiz-Navarro (2004). This is a contribution that expands the multidisciplinarity of the discipline and new existing relationships. We confirm the evidence from previous bibliometric studies that reported the growth of behavioral theories in strategy, such as learning, knowledge and innovation (Serra, Ferreira Almeida, 2015; Fernandes Pinto, Guerrazzi, Serra Kniess, 2016).Social / management contributions: The emergence of new studies in behavioral strategy is the most relevant contribution. Managers can make better business decisions by looking more closely at the behavioral line theory. Decision-making may consider broader and organizational issues, or strategic points that involve behavioral analysis, on specific strategic resources.

Este estudo aponta as novas vertentes teóricas e sociais que envolvem os Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) nas estratégias das empresas, por meio de um estudo bibliométrico com técnicas de pareamento, com dados do período entre 1992 e 2019. Os estudos sobre CEOs estão intrinsecamente ligados às tomadas de decisões estratégicas. Os resultados indicam a preocupação dos pesquisadores com governança corporativa, experiência e aprendizagem, análise das compensações e remunerações vinculadas aos contratos, além da relevância do perfil do CEO. Este estudo contribui para teoria, indicando a multidisciplinaridade que envolve a tomada de decisão e modelo de pesquisa para estudos semelhantes em áreas do pesquisador.