Learning to internationalise: the pace and success of foreign acquisitions

Abstract

We argue that firms engaged in international acquisitions can benefit from foreign acquisition, domestic acquisition, and international joint venture experiences, but that their learning process is prone to biases. Only once companies learn what part of their knowledge about national cultures and entry modes can successfully be applied to new settings will they become truly successful abroad, in terms of both the rate and the frequency of their foreign acquisitions. The hypotheses were tested using negative binomial regression and hazard rate models on data on 1038 foreign acquisitions of 25 firms over a period of more than three decades. Journal of International Business Studies (2007) 38, 1170–1186. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400318

Lost in transaction? The transfer effect of strategic consistency

“…For example, in the strategic alliance context, Zollo et al (2002) examine the effect of accumulated expertise from previous alliances in same technological areas on the performance of the focal alliance. Nadolska and Barkema (2007) study three different sources of learning for internationalizing companies, namely experience with international acquisitions, with domestic acquisitions, and with international joint ventures. Piaskowska et al (2014) focus on differences between diverse forms of joint ventures in order to analyze transfer effects of prior joint venture experience on ex-ante and ex-post performance of subsequent joint ventures.…”

Explaining the surge in M&A as an entry mode: home country and cultural influences

“…However, the tacit nature of some types of proprietary and intangible resources and capabilities makes them difficult to purchase through market transactions (Coff, 1999;Gupta and Govindarajan, 2000). Nadolska and Barkema (2007) ;Capron, Dussauge, and Mitchell (1998) argue that the market for firms may be more efficient than the market for some resources, thus making acquisitions the popular entry mode for gaining and reconfiguring new resources and capabilities.…”

The State of Case Study Research in Mergers & Acquisitions: A Review of the Literature in Different Management Streams

“…For instance, in-depth case analysis (Blaško et al, 2000;Cambra-Fierro et al, 2012;Conklin, 2005;Duncan and Mtar, 2006;Geppert et al, 2013;Halsall, 2008;Knoerich, 2010;Quah and Young, 2005;Singer and Yankey, 1991;Sim, 2006;Ullrich et al, 2005;Yip et al, 2006), testing the existing theories/models and propositions/hypotheses (Fang et al, 2004;Kshetri and Dholakia, 2009;Liu and Zhang, 2014;Altenborg, 2007, 2008;Nicholson and Kiel, 2007;Sinkovics et al, 2011), building theories/models and offering propositions/ hypotheses (Boehe, 2011;Deng, 2009;Dieleman and Sachs, 2008;Huang et al, 2008;Lynes and Andrachuk, 2008;Maguire and Phillips, 2008;Reddy et al, 2014;Tsamenyi et al, 2013;Wei and Clegg, 2014), and other ideas (Jonsson and Foss, 2011; longitudinal case study: Nadolska and Barkema, 2007; case survey method: Larsson and Lubatkin, 2001; surveybased studies : Bjursell, 2011;Ito et al, 2012;Krug and Nigh, 2001;London and Hart, 2004;Meyer et al, 2009;Very and Schweiger, 2001; teaching cases: Nangia et al, 2011;Reddy et al, 2012). These studies are summariz...…”