The Synergy Trap: How Companies Lose the Acquisition Game

By M. Sirower. 2000

485 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/9d51cd90e04fa59c715bae9adb553bec8bfcedbd

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

Critical success factors through the Mergers and Acquisitions process:revealing pre- and post- M&A connections for improved performance (2013, background): “…Price (Pre2) A substantial amount of research from a finance perspective has indicated that “paying too much” is a major cause of failure (Anslinger, Copeland, & Thomas, 1996; Bower, 2001; Datta & Puia, 1995; Hayward, 2002; Inkpen, Sundaram, & Rockwood, 2000; Schweiger et al., 1993; Sirower, 1997).”
Target Reputation and Appropriability: Picking and Deploying Resources in Acquisitions (2004, background): “Second, a company may make a successful acquisition by taking advantage of unique synergies it is able to exploit after the deal is consummated (Barney, 1988; Brush, 1996; Ranft & Lord, 2002; Sirower, 1997).”
Mergers and Acquisitions: Overcoming Pitfalls, Building Synergy, and Creating Value (2009, background): “While the acquisition premium has been identified as a significant variable (Krishnan, Hitt, & Park, 2007; Sirower, 1997), it has been examined in only a minority of M&A studies.”
Acquisition Integration and Productivity Losses in the Technical Core: Disruption of Inventors in Acquired Companies (2006, background): “1999), strategic synergies (Sirower 1997), and financial factors (Haunschild 1994, Hayward and Hambrick 1997), but will also look inside the organization at those employee groups whose day-to-day tasks comprise the firm’s value-creation activities, and who, in many cases, are the very resources that”
Performance Implications of Firm Resource Interactions in the Acquisition of R&D-Intensive Firms (2008, methodology): “In fact, we explain approximately twice the variance in firm performance from existing M&A research that typically only examines direct effects (Sirower 1997, p. 158).”
Consequences of measurement problems in strategic management research: the case of Amihud and Lev (2005, background): “…and Means, 1932; Jensen and Meckling, 1976), help to explain many organizational phenomena including executive perquisites (e.g., Boyd, 1994), governance innovations (e.g., Hoskisson and Hitt, 1994), and strategic initiatives (e.g., Baysinger, Kosnik, and Turk, 1991; Sirower, 1997), among others.”
Can They Take It With Them? The Portability of Star Knowledge Workers' Performance (2004, background): “One explanation for the consistent finding of zero or negative return in research on mergers and acquisitions (see Sirower 1997 for a review of literature) is that firms tend to overpay for their targets (Bradley et al. 1988).”
Pay Disparities Within Top Management Groups: Evidence of Harmful Effects on Performance of High-Technology Firms (2005, background): “Researchers have consistently found such delayed market adjustments to an array of corporate events or conditions, including acquisitions (Sirower 1997, Agrawal et al. 1992), spin-offs (Cusatis et al. 1993), and stock splits (Ikenberry et al. 1996, Desai and Jain 1997).”
Effects of Firm R&D Investment and Environment on Acquisition Likelihood* (2006, unknown): “…has been framed around understanding the motivations and performance of acquiring firms (e.g. King et al., 2004; Ravenscraft and Scherer, 1987; Sirower, 1997), with the resource profiles of these firms often examined as plausible predictors of acquisitions (Capron and Pistre, 2002; Chatterjee…”
The Influence of Acquisition Experience and Performance on Acquisition Behavior: Evidence From the U.S. Commercial Banking Industry (2006, unknown): “In the strategy literature, Sirower (1997) found that”