Global Strategy Journal最新文献

{"title":"The impact of ownership on global strategy: Owner diversity and non-financial objectives","authors":"Alvaro Cuervo-Cazurra,&nbsp;Anna Grosman,&nbsp;Michael J. Mol,&nbsp;Geoffrey Wood","doi":"10.1002/gsj.1520","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/gsj.1520","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Research Summary</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>In this special issue introduction, we analyze how a firm's international ownership affects its global strategy. We reinterpret the literature by grouping dominant owners into four categories: (1) individuals (entrepreneurs and families), (2) labor (managers and employees), (3) state (national and subnational governments), and (4) institutions (pension funds, mutual funds, hedge funds, private equity, venture capital, and impact investors). We argue that although all seek financial returns from their investments, they differ markedly in their non-financial objectives, resulting in differences in strategies for expanding abroad. We also propose that the home country context modifies the impact of ownership on global strategy, directly by influencing the prevalence of owner types, and indirectly by affecting owners' incentives and constraints in their pursuit of non-financial objectives.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Managerial Summary</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Although all firms' owners search for financial returns from their investments, differences across dominant owners in their non-financial objectives result in significant diversity in the global strategies of invested firms. We clarify these differences by grouping owners into four categories: (1) individuals (entrepreneurs and families), (2) labor (managers and employees), (3) state (national and subnational governments), and (4) institutions (pension funds, mutual funds, hedge funds, private equity, venture capital, and impact investors). We explain how their specific non-financial objectives influence the global strategies of invested firms. We also discuss how the characteristics of the home country affect both the prevalence of types of owners and owners' strategies. The special issue articles illustrate some of these ideas.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":47563,"journal":{"name":"Global Strategy Journal","volume":"15 1","pages":"3-33"},"PeriodicalIF":5.7,"publicationDate":"2025-03-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/gsj.1520","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143632759","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Common ownership and competitive dissimilarity: A global perspective on competition and institutional ownership","authors":"Philip J. Steinberg,&nbsp;Jan C. Hennig,&nbsp;Jana Oehmichen,&nbsp;Judith Heigermoser","doi":"10.1002/gsj.1519","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/gsj.1519","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Research Summary</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Research highlights that common institutional ownership (an investor owning publicly traded shares in two rival firms) can reduce rivals' incentives to compete. So far, this literature focused on domestic market competition. However, competition also arises in global markets, and common owners invest outside their home countries. We integrate the perspectives of global market competition and cross-national distance into a model of shared principals with rival agents and argue for a positive effect of common ownership on rivals' competitive dissimilarity in global markets. Moreover, we argue that the competitive intensity in joint regions amplifies, and the cross-national distance between common owners and their firms mitigates this effect. We find support for our theorizing using a multi-industry dataset with 1574 of the largest firms worldwide.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Managerial Summary</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>When investors hold shares in two competing companies, it can reduce how aggressively those rivals compete. To avoid direct competition, these companies often adopt divergent strategic actions. Our research shows that this dynamic extends to how competitors behave in international markets. We also identify key boundary conditions to this effect: The effect weakens when competition within shared markets decreases and when the distance between the owned rivals and their common investor increases. For managers of globally operating companies, this highlights the need to consider not just competitors' strategies but also their ownership structure. Overlapping ownership could significantly influence competitive dynamics in global markets by shaping competitors' strategic approaches.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":47563,"journal":{"name":"Global Strategy Journal","volume":"15 1","pages":"94-129"},"PeriodicalIF":5.7,"publicationDate":"2025-02-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/gsj.1519","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143633013","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Beacons not burdens: Business groups and corporate social performance around the world","authors":"Sorin M. S. Krammer,&nbsp;Vlad-Andrei Porumb,&nbsp;Yasemin Zengin-Karaibrahimoglu,&nbsp;Joel Bothello","doi":"10.1002/gsj.1515","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/gsj.1515","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Research Summary</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Prior studies on business groups (BGs) have predominantly focused on the impact of group affiliation on financial performance. In contrast, we argue that BG affiliates will outperform standalone firms in terms of corporate social performance (CSP) and that this effect will be positively moderated by the strength of formal and informal institutions. Moreover, we examine also differences among BGs and hypothesize that diversification and hierarchy of the group will negatively affect the CSP of affiliates. Employing a panel of 4368 firms from 43 countries between 2003 and 2016 and a propensity score matching approach in our regressions, we find robust support for these predictions. Our findings advance two distinct strands of literature on BGs and, respectively, corporate social responsibility.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Managerial Summary</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>BG are a common organizational structure in many countries. Despite this, we still do not know much about them beyond their financial performance. In this study, we focus on examining the impact of BG affiliation on non-financial performance (i.e., CSP) in the light of growing societal grand challenges. Using an international dataset of several thousands of firms, we find out that BG affiliates exhibit superior CSP results compared to non-affiliated firms. These positive effects of affiliation are increased in environments with strong formal and informal institutions but reduced within groups that are more diversified and hierarchical. Our findings showcase the importance of BGs in tackling some of today's grand challenges and provide support for more nuanced approaches to study BGs across countries.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":47563,"journal":{"name":"Global Strategy Journal","volume":"14 4","pages":"709-753"},"PeriodicalIF":5.7,"publicationDate":"2024-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/gsj.1515","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142737470","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Culture, international stakeholders, and crowdfunding","authors":"Douglas J. Cumming,&nbsp;Ahmed Sewaid","doi":"10.1002/gsj.1514","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/gsj.1514","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Research Summary</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>International crowdfunding platforms present a unique opportunity for foreign entrepreneurs to attract stakeholders, typically from either the entrepreneur's <i>home-country</i> or the platform's <i>host-country</i>. We argue that success in mobilizing these stakeholders is culturally dependent. Specifically, cultural distance from the platform's host country can impede the mobilizing of home-country stakeholders. Conversely, while attracting host-country stakeholders may appear advantageous, these benefits are uncertain and limited for culturally-proximal entrepreneurs. This is because their offerings are seen as less distinct compared to host-country local offerings while introducing additional information asymmetries. Given these dynamics, we theorize that culturally-distant entrepreneurs have better fundraising prospects when attracting host-country backers, while culturally-proximal entrepreneurs are more successful when mobilizing home-country backers. Our analysis of 55,266 foreign projects on Kickstarter supports these arguments.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Managerial Summary</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This study examines how cultural differences affect the success of entrepreneurs using non-local crowdfunding platforms. We find that entrepreneurs from countries that are culturally distant from the platform's host-country are more successful when they focus on attracting backers from the platform's host-country. In contrast, entrepreneurs from culturally similar countries do better when they mobilize supporters from their home country. For practitioners, this means that understanding cultural distance is key to successful crowdfunding. Entrepreneurs should tailor their outreach strategy based on their cultural distance from the platform's host country. Those from culturally-distant regions should prioritize backers from the platform's country, while those from culturally similar regions should focus on home-country supporters to maximize their fundraising success.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":47563,"journal":{"name":"Global Strategy Journal","volume":"15 1","pages":"184-216"},"PeriodicalIF":5.7,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143632661","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Theorizing about emerging multinationals' cross-border acquisitions","authors":"Mike W. Peng,&nbsp;Joyce C. Wang,&nbsp;En Xie,&nbsp;Sergey Lebedev","doi":"10.1002/gsj.1512","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/gsj.1512","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Research Summary</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The emergence of multinational enterprises from emerging economies (emerging multinationals or EMNEs) has resulted in two puzzles: (1) Why do EMNEs often bid higher for targets in developed economies? (2) Why do EMNEs often allow such targets significant autonomy? From a theoretical standpoint, the two puzzles beg the question of whether an integrative answer exists. Extending property rights theory, we conceptualize an EMNE as a collection of assets over which an emerging-economy firm has residual control, gained predominantly through cross-border acquisitions. Leveraging a legitimacy-based view, we suggest that EMNEs suffer from legitimacy deficits. Overall, the key to theorizing about EMNEs' cross-border acquisitions and solving the two puzzles is to appreciate EMNEs' endeavors to simultaneously maximize joint value creation, minimize target incentive loss, and overcome legitimacy deficits.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Managerial Summary</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Driven by property rights thinking and legitimacy deficits considerations, multinational enterprises from emerging economies (emerging multinationals or EMNEs) often pay higher premiums for and grant significant autonomy to acquisition targets in developed economies. During the pre-acquisition phase, EMNEs need to carefully evaluate targets' value-creation potential and asset complementarity. During the post-acquisition phase, offering autonomy to targets is advisable, if acquisition premiums are high, if pursued assets are knowledge-based, and if target managers and employees as well as other stakeholders (such as host-country governments) have raised major concerns. Although few EMNEs explicitly refer to research on property rights and legitimacy deficits, many of them have acted in a way that is consistent with such theoretical reasoning. Emerging-economy acquirers that follow such reasoning often perform well.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":47563,"journal":{"name":"Global Strategy Journal","volume":"14 4","pages":"683-708"},"PeriodicalIF":5.7,"publicationDate":"2024-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/gsj.1512","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142737543","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Does prior success influence risk-taking in foreign location decisions? A prospect theory perspective","authors":"Kathrin Schwaiger,&nbsp;Petra Hennrich,&nbsp;Jan Hendrik Fisch","doi":"10.1002/gsj.1513","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/gsj.1513","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Research Summary</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Research suggests that foreign direct investment decisions can be biased and deviate from economic theory. This study deploys prospect theory to analyze the impact of the success of previous investments on risk-taking in subsequent investment decisions. Our theorizing suggests that prior success influences foreign investors' decisions to take host-country risk, and that this moderating influence on the risk-investment relation is specific to the type of risk. The results of an event-history study of 1259 location decisions support the notion that the success of previous investments encourages investors to enter host countries with high negative or positive risk, whereas it discourages them from entering locations with high mixed risk. The effects are stronger for investment locations that are similar than for those that are dissimilar.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Managerial Summary</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Regarding the varying risks that investors face in foreign countries, investment decisions may sometimes appear rather confident and sometimes rather cautious. Our study relates these decisions to the success that investors had with similar investments in the past, since research suggests that experiencing gains or losses can influence decision behavior. The results suggest that prior success affects risk-taking in foreign direct investment decisions and comes in contrary forms, depending on the type of risk: prior success leads to overconfident investment decisions in the case of negative and positive risk, whereas it induces overcautious investment decisions in the case of mixed risk. Being aware of these behavioral tendencies can prevent managers from making biased investment decisions.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":47563,"journal":{"name":"Global Strategy Journal","volume":"14 4","pages":"800-842"},"PeriodicalIF":5.7,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/gsj.1513","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142737366","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Rethinking institutional arbitrage: De jure exposure and de facto enforcement","authors":"Jian Xu","doi":"10.1002/gsj.1510","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/gsj.1510","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Research Summary</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This article disentangles the de jure and de facto dimensions of institutional distances to examine their impact on firms embedded across heterogeneous jurisdictions. I argue that significant transaction costs occur only when the de facto implementations of regulations from both home and foreign jurisdictions become irreconcilable. Using an original dataset of the enforcement actions of the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), I find that institutional arbitrage becomes infeasible for non-US-based firms with de jure exposure to the FCPA when the de facto judicial constraints over bureaucratic discretion are weak in these firms' home countries targeted by FCPA enforcement. De facto FCPA enforcement makes such US-listed firms more likely to divest from their home markets or voluntarily delist from US stock markets.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Managerial Summary</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Mangers should consider the divergence or convergence between the de jure and de facto dimensions of institutional distance in evaluating their international business strategies. In analyzing the operational obstacles for engaging in cross-jurisdictional activities, notably institutional arbitrage schemes, managers should realize that such obstacles do not simply arise from contradictions in officially stipulated regulations, but also from whether and the extent to which such de jure contradictions are activated. Assessing the feasibility of corporate political activities and other legally ambiguous nonmarket strategies as risk-mitigation measures thus needs to take into account this distinction. MNEs' global strategies should also recognize the increasingly intertwined national and supranational legal systems and their interactions as sources of operational risks.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":47563,"journal":{"name":"Global Strategy Journal","volume":"14 4","pages":"754-799"},"PeriodicalIF":5.7,"publicationDate":"2024-06-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/gsj.1510","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142737508","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"A perspective on three trade-offs of blockchain technology for the global strategy of the MNC","authors":"Tuuli Hakkarainen,&nbsp;Anatoli Colicev,&nbsp;Torben Pedersen","doi":"10.1002/gsj.1509","DOIUrl":"10.1002/gsj.1509","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Research Summary</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>New technology plays a key role in shaping the global strategy of the MNC. We propose a perspective on how and why a novel technological development—blockchain technology—and its relevant applications affect the global strategy of the MNC. We focus on the trade-offs associated with cryptocurrencies, smart contracts, and blockchain data, and provide several real-world examples. While cryptocurrencies could lower financial costs and broaden consumers' payment options, they require new investments in cybersecurity and payment infrastructure. Smart contracts could increase trust in collaboration due to their automated, transparent, and inflexible rules, but their rigidity can harm collaboration. Finally, while blockchain data can enhance the MNC's analytics capabilities, it can also jeopardize consumer privacy.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Managerial Summary</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Is blockchain technology all hype or a useful advancement for global firms? We propose that this technology has merits and drawbacks for financial transactions, collaboration, and data analytics. Cryptocurrencies have stolen the headlines and several leading organizations have already added them as payment methods. Their merits include lower transaction fees, better security, and higher speed, but they require expensive infrastructure and carry a stigma. Smart contracts can streamline agreements between parties but lack the flexibility that global firms need when interacting with suppliers and partners. Novel blockchain data can be plugged into marketing dashboards but can also threaten consumer privacy. Overall, the jury is still out on the role of blockchain technology for global firms.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":47563,"journal":{"name":"Global Strategy Journal","volume":"14 3","pages":"635-654"},"PeriodicalIF":5.7,"publicationDate":"2024-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/gsj.1509","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141366457","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Foreign institutional investors and equity share decisions in cross-border mergers and acquisitions","authors":"Dennis Wajda,&nbsp;Juan Bu,&nbsp;Wei Shi","doi":"10.1002/gsj.1511","DOIUrl":"10.1002/gsj.1511","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Research Summary</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This study examines the role of foreign institutional investors in shaping acquiring firms' equity share decisions in cross-border mergers and acquisitions (M&amp;As). We argue that foreign institutional ownership (FIO) from a given country is positively associated with the share of equity sought in the target firm in this country because foreign institutional investors can help reduce information asymmetry between the acquiring and target firms. Moreover, this positive relationship is stronger if target firms are in countries with weaker institutional development because acquiring firms suffer from higher information asymmetry and thus are more inclined to rely on foreign institutional investors for information. Findings from a sample of 4166 cross-border M&amp;As by US firms lend support to our arguments.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Managerial Summary</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Can foreign institutional investors influence acquiring firms' equity share decisions in cross-border M&amp;As? We posit that local knowledge and information foreign institutional investors provide to acquiring firms can reduce uncertainty in the M&amp;A process. Using data on cross-border M&amp;As by US firms, we find that high levels of FIO are positively associated with the equity sought in target firms by acquirers. This effect is stronger when target firms are located in countries with weak institutions. Our study highlights the beneficial role of FIO that firm executives should be aware of and has practical implications for how firms manage the M&amp;A process.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":47563,"journal":{"name":"Global Strategy Journal","volume":"15 1","pages":"66-93"},"PeriodicalIF":5.7,"publicationDate":"2024-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/gsj.1511","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141373309","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Do financial crises moderate the influence of stakeholder rights protection on M&A activity: The influence of institutional logics and power?","authors":"May-Anne Very,&nbsp;Laurence Capron,&nbsp;Mauro Guillén","doi":"10.1002/gsj.1504","DOIUrl":"10.1002/gsj.1504","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Research Summary</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>M&amp;A represents a contested process of change in control influenced by two contending prevailing institutional logics: shareholder-centered and labor-oriented. These logics, whose respective power is influenced by national laws, shape mergers and acquisition (M&amp;A) outcomes. Crises, like systemic financial crises, are periods during which these logics may be altered. This research examines how financial crises affect the positive (negative) relationship between the legal protection of shareholder (labor) rights and M&amp;A activity in a country. Utilizing a dataset from financial services companies across 35 countries from 1990 to 2016, we find that financial crises significantly weaken the effects of both shareholder and labor rights on M&amp;A transactions. Our findings emphasize the role of power dynamics amidst conflicting institutional logics in determining M&amp;A outcomes during both crisis and non-crisis periods.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Managerial Summary</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>In the world of mergers and acquisitions, the battle for control is influenced by two major opposing forces: shareholders and employees, with their power rooted in the country's laws. Countries with high protection of shareholder rights witness higher M&amp;A activity compared to those more protective of labor rights. However, drawing from data covering financial services firms in 35 countries from 1990 to 2016, we discovered that financial crises tend to weaken the influence of both shareholder and employee rights on M&amp;A deals. This insight highlights the importance of understanding the differences in the functioning of the M&amp;A market across countries and the shifting power dynamics between shareholders and employees, especially in times of financial uncertainty, for those involved in planning and executing M&amp;A strategies.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":47563,"journal":{"name":"Global Strategy Journal","volume":"14 4","pages":"657-682"},"PeriodicalIF":5.7,"publicationDate":"2024-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/gsj.1504","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141102213","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}