2003
DOI: 10.1002/mde.1116
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Business portfolio restructuring, prior diversification posture and investor reactions

Abstract: This study examined firm performance in market reaction to two types of business portfolio restructuring announcements: refocusing and repositioning. We predicted that market performance effects for these two types of strategic restructurers would be moderated by prior diversification posture. The theory behind these expectations was built on a general premise that restructuring strategy would be more favorably viewed by the market as performance enhancing when it offered greater potential for organizational t… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0
4

Year Published

2006
2006
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 62 publications
0
11
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…In this paper we made the disintegrating firm the unit of our analysis and we investigated whether vertical disintegration improves operating performance. Because disintegration-like most types of organizational restructuring-is not a homogeneous phenomenon (Byerly et al, 2003), we also developed and tested predictions concerning the conditions under which disintegration is most likely to improve performance.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this paper we made the disintegrating firm the unit of our analysis and we investigated whether vertical disintegration improves operating performance. Because disintegration-like most types of organizational restructuring-is not a homogeneous phenomenon (Byerly et al, 2003), we also developed and tested predictions concerning the conditions under which disintegration is most likely to improve performance.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Third, the literature identifies three possible directions a firm may take by implementing a BPR strategy: a) refocusing, which is when the firm owns a core business with unique capabilities, so it decides to divest peripheral businesses and renew and concentrate its efforts on its existing core business (Chatterjee et al, 2003;Geroski and Gregg, 1994;Haynes et al, 2003); b) repositioning, when the firm identifies a new core business and decides to regroup its resources around the new business (Byerly et al, 2003;Chang, 1996), and c) firm liquidation, as the last option and occurs when it is impossible to identify a core business that generates more economic value than by selling all the company's lines of business (Byerly et al, 2003;Sengupta and Faccio, 2011).…”
Section: Literature Review On Corporate and Business Portfolio Restrumentioning
confidence: 99%
“…At least Montgomery and Thomas (1988) differentiate between types of divesting firms because companies react to a performance decline in different ways: while 'tactical' divestors use business exits to raise funds in order to improve short-term performance, 'strategic' divestors are likely to reevaluate and eventually change their strategy with a business exit. The latter is more offensive and risky than a divestiture without the simultaneous pursuit of strategic change, especially in terms of repositioning (Byerly, Lamont and Keasler, 2003). Risktaking is less likely in the face of performance problems, because managers tend to adopt defensive strategic choices when survival is perceived to be at risk (Laughhunn, Payne and Crum, 1980;Shimizu, 2007).…”
Section: The Antecedents Of Business Exit As Signals Of the Need For mentioning
confidence: 99%