朋友、敌人或“朋友”:跨国关系和跨境收购

IF 5.7 2区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS
Tsvetomira V. Bilgili, Hansin Bilgili, David G. Allen, Holly Loncarich, Ben L. Kedia, Jonathan L. Johnson
{"title":"朋友、敌人或“朋友”:跨国关系和跨境收购","authors":"Tsvetomira V. Bilgili,&nbsp;Hansin Bilgili,&nbsp;David G. Allen,&nbsp;Holly Loncarich,&nbsp;Ben L. Kedia,&nbsp;Jonathan L. Johnson","doi":"10.1002/gsj.1460","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Research Summary</h3>\n \n <p>We draw on the political institutions approach and relational embeddedness perspective to advance a relational theory of policy risk. We argue that policy risk negatively affects acquisition completion, but the strength of the effect is dependent on home-host country relations. Home-host country relations underpin host governments' motivation to commit to policies and influence foreign acquirers' perceptions of the credibility of such commitments. Using longitudinal event data on intercountry interactions, we measure the valence and strength of home-host country relations and examine the relationship between policy risk and cross-border acquisition (CBA) completion under cooperative, conflictive, and ambivalent relations. In a sample of 26,124 CBAs, we find that the relationship is negative and strong under conflictive relations, weaker under cooperative relations, and weakest under ambivalent relations.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Managerial Summary</h3>\n \n <p>We examine whether acquirers can use intercountry relations to infer and predict host governments' credibility of commitment to policies and evaluate the risk of arbitrary or opportunistic policy changes. Results show that policy risk decreases the likelihood of CBA completion, but the effect depends on home-host country relations. The negative effect of policy risk is strongest under conflictive intercountry relations, weaker under cooperative relations, and weakest under ambivalent relations. Executives' evaluations of home-host country relations in high policy risk environments can help assess the risk associated with completing CBAs and develop appropriate strategies to address potential issues.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":47563,"journal":{"name":"Global Strategy Journal","volume":"13 2","pages":"349-390"},"PeriodicalIF":5.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Friends, foes, or “frenemies”: Intercountry relations and cross-border acquisitions\",\"authors\":\"Tsvetomira V. Bilgili,&nbsp;Hansin Bilgili,&nbsp;David G. Allen,&nbsp;Holly Loncarich,&nbsp;Ben L. Kedia,&nbsp;Jonathan L. Johnson\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/gsj.1460\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Research Summary</h3>\\n \\n <p>We draw on the political institutions approach and relational embeddedness perspective to advance a relational theory of policy risk. We argue that policy risk negatively affects acquisition completion, but the strength of the effect is dependent on home-host country relations. Home-host country relations underpin host governments' motivation to commit to policies and influence foreign acquirers' perceptions of the credibility of such commitments. Using longitudinal event data on intercountry interactions, we measure the valence and strength of home-host country relations and examine the relationship between policy risk and cross-border acquisition (CBA) completion under cooperative, conflictive, and ambivalent relations. In a sample of 26,124 CBAs, we find that the relationship is negative and strong under conflictive relations, weaker under cooperative relations, and weakest under ambivalent relations.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Managerial Summary</h3>\\n \\n <p>We examine whether acquirers can use intercountry relations to infer and predict host governments' credibility of commitment to policies and evaluate the risk of arbitrary or opportunistic policy changes. Results show that policy risk decreases the likelihood of CBA completion, but the effect depends on home-host country relations. The negative effect of policy risk is strongest under conflictive intercountry relations, weaker under cooperative relations, and weakest under ambivalent relations. Executives' evaluations of home-host country relations in high policy risk environments can help assess the risk associated with completing CBAs and develop appropriate strategies to address potential issues.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47563,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Global Strategy Journal\",\"volume\":\"13 2\",\"pages\":\"349-390\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Global Strategy Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/gsj.1460\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Strategy Journal","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/gsj.1460","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

本文借鉴政治制度理论和关系嵌入理论,提出了政策风险的关系理论。我们认为,政策风险对并购完成产生负向影响,但这种影响的强弱取决于东道国与东道国之间的关系。东道国与东道国的关系巩固了东道国政府承诺政策的动机,并影响了外国收购者对这些承诺可信度的看法。利用国家间相互作用的纵向事件数据,我们测量了家-东道国关系的效价和强度,并研究了在合作、冲突和矛盾关系下政策风险与跨境收购(CBA)完成之间的关系。在26124个cba的样本中,我们发现在冲突关系下,cba与cba的关系是负向的,且在冲突关系下,cba与cba的关系是强的,在合作关系下,cba与cba的关系较弱,在矛盾关系下,cba与cba的关系最弱。我们研究了收购方是否可以利用国家间关系来推断和预测东道国政府对政策承诺的可信度,并评估武断或机会主义政策变化的风险。结果表明,政策风险降低了CBA完成的可能性,但效果取决于东道国与东道国之间的关系。政策风险的负向效应在冲突关系下最强,在合作关系下较弱,在矛盾关系下最弱。行政人员对高政策风险环境中东道国与东道国关系的评价有助于评估与完成国别信任评估有关的风险,并制定适当的战略来解决潜在问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Friends, foes, or “frenemies”: Intercountry relations and cross-border acquisitions

Research Summary

We draw on the political institutions approach and relational embeddedness perspective to advance a relational theory of policy risk. We argue that policy risk negatively affects acquisition completion, but the strength of the effect is dependent on home-host country relations. Home-host country relations underpin host governments' motivation to commit to policies and influence foreign acquirers' perceptions of the credibility of such commitments. Using longitudinal event data on intercountry interactions, we measure the valence and strength of home-host country relations and examine the relationship between policy risk and cross-border acquisition (CBA) completion under cooperative, conflictive, and ambivalent relations. In a sample of 26,124 CBAs, we find that the relationship is negative and strong under conflictive relations, weaker under cooperative relations, and weakest under ambivalent relations.

Managerial Summary

We examine whether acquirers can use intercountry relations to infer and predict host governments' credibility of commitment to policies and evaluate the risk of arbitrary or opportunistic policy changes. Results show that policy risk decreases the likelihood of CBA completion, but the effect depends on home-host country relations. The negative effect of policy risk is strongest under conflictive intercountry relations, weaker under cooperative relations, and weakest under ambivalent relations. Executives' evaluations of home-host country relations in high policy risk environments can help assess the risk associated with completing CBAs and develop appropriate strategies to address potential issues.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
14.20
自引率
11.80%
发文量
46
期刊介绍: The Global Strategy Journal is a premier platform dedicated to publishing highly influential managerially-oriented global strategy research worldwide. Covering themes such as international and global strategy, assembling the global enterprise, and strategic management, GSJ plays a vital role in advancing our understanding of global business dynamics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信