IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jbrese/v68y2015i6p1367-1381.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Why good things Don’t happen: the micro-foundations of routines in the M&A process

Author

Listed:
  • Angwin, Duncan N.
  • Paroutis, Sotirios
  • Connell, Richard

Abstract

Why do organizations reject favorable opportunities - why don't good things happen? To address this question, we examine companies that fail to proceed with major opportunities for strategic renewal. By focusing upon routines in 28 cases of reverse mergers and acquisitions decisions across three continents, the research uncovers the centrality of a hitherto overlooked process, the authorization routine. The characteristics of this routine, and its nested nature, are shown to be critical to whether favorable opportunities are progressed. These findings contribute to the mergers and acquisition literature by extending prior process models and to the routines literature by showing how links and interactions between different layers of routines, and the nature of the routine enactment itself, are important in affecting strategic outcomes.

Suggested Citation

  • Angwin, Duncan N. & Paroutis, Sotirios & Connell, Richard, 2015. "Why good things Don’t happen: the micro-foundations of routines in the M&A process," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(6), pages 1367-1381.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:68:y:2015:i:6:p:1367-1381
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.12.007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0148296314004226
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.12.007?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Felin, Teppo & Foss, Nicolai J., 2009. "Organizational routines and capabilities: Historical drift and a course-correction toward microfoundations," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 157-167, June.
    2. Katrin Muehlfeld & Padma Rao Sahib & Arjen Van Witteloostuijn, 2012. "A contextual theory of organizational learning from failures and successes: A study of acquisition completion in the global newspaper industry, 1981–2008," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(8), pages 938-964, August.
    3. Cohen, Michael D, et al, 1996. "Routines and Other Recurring Action Patterns of Organizations: Contemporary Research Issues," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 5(3), pages 653-698.
    4. Peter Abell & Teppo Felin & Nicolai Foss, 2008. "Building micro-foundations for the routines, capabilities, and performance links," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(6), pages 489-502.
    5. Martha S. Feldman, 2000. "Organizational Routines as a Source of Continuous Change," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 11(6), pages 611-629, December.
    6. Brian T. Pentland & Martha S. Feldman, 2005. "Organizational routines as a unit of analysis," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 14(5), pages 793-815, October.
    7. Peng, Yu-Shu & Fang, Chung-Ping, 2010. "Acquisition experience, board characteristics, and acquisition behavior," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 63(5), pages 502-509, May.
    8. Huyghebaert, Nancy & Luypaert, Mathieu, 2010. "Antecedents of growth through mergers and acquisitions: Empirical results from Belgium," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 63(4), pages 392-403, April.
    9. Argote, Linda & Ingram, Paul, 2000. "Knowledge Transfer: A Basis for Competitive Advantage in Firms," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 82(1), pages 150-169, May.
    10. Martha S. Feldman & Anat Rafaeli, 2002. "Organizational Routines as Sources of Connections and Understandings," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(3), pages 309-331, May.
    11. Michael A. Hitt & Beverly B. Tyler, 1991. "Strategic decision models: Integrating different perspectives," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(5), pages 327-351, July.
    12. Brian T. Pentland & Martha S. Feldman, 2007. "Narrative Networks: Patterns of Technology and Organization," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(5), pages 781-795, October.
    13. Angwin, Duncan, 2001. "Mergers and acquisitions across European borders: National perspectives on preacquisition due diligence and the use of professional advisers," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 32-57, April.
    14. Maurizio Zollo & Sidney G. Winter, 2002. "Deliberate Learning and the Evolution of Dynamic Capabilities," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(3), pages 339-351, June.
    15. Wanda J. Orlikowski, 2000. "Using Technology and Constituting Structures: A Practice Lens for Studying Technology in Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 11(4), pages 404-428, August.
    16. E. Eugene Carter, 1971. "Project Evaluations And Firm Decisions," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 8(3), pages 253-279, October.
    17. Worthington, Andrew C., 2004. "Determinants of merger and acquisition activity in Australian cooperative deposit-taking institutions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 47-57, January.
    18. Angwin, Duncan, 2004. "Speed in M&A Integration:: The First 100 Days," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 22(4), pages 418-430, August.
    19. repec:bla:jecsur:v:15:y:2001:i:2:p:145-86 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Zhang Mingli & Zhang Yijie & Qin Simeng & Gong Juhong, 2022. "Empirical study on the impact of major asset restructuring on the price of sub‐new stocks in Chinese A‐shares," International Journal of Finance & Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(1), pages 1461-1472, January.
    2. Piotr Trąpczyński & Ofer Zaks & Jan Polowczyk, 2018. "The Effect of Trust on Acquisition Success: The Case of Israeli Start-Up M&A," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-16, July.
    3. Ermolaeva, L., 2016. "Negative or positive: Which experience matters for international M&A initiation stage?," Working Papers 6443, Graduate School of Management, St. Petersburg State University.
    4. Pereira, Vijay & Patnaik, Swetketu & Temouri, Yama & Tarba, Shlomo & Malik, Ashish & Bustinza, Oscar, 2021. "A longitudinal micro-foundational investigation into ambidextrous practices in an international alliance context–A case of a biopharma EMNE," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 30(1).
    5. Patnaik, Swetketu & Pereira, Vijay & Temouri, Yama & Malik, Ashish & Roohanifar, Mohammad, 2020. "The dance of power and trust-exploring micro-foundational dimensions in the development of global health partnership," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    6. Scuotto, Veronica & Beatrice, Orlando & Valentina, Cillo & Nicotra, Melita & Di Gioia, Leonardo & Farina Briamonte, Massimiliano, 2020. "Uncovering the micro-foundations of knowledge sharing in open innovation partnerships: An intention-based perspective of technology transfer," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    7. Hamilton, Eleanor & Discua Cruz, Allan & Jack, Sarah, 2017. "Re-framing the status of narrative in family business research: Towards an understanding of families in business," Journal of Family Business Strategy, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 3-12.
    8. Rodgers, Waymond & Degbey, William Y. & Housel, Thomas J. & Arslan, Ahmad, 2020. "Microfoundations of collaborative networks: The impact of social capital formation and learning on investment risk assessment," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Giada Baldessarelli & Nathalie Lazaric & Michele Pezzoni, 2022. "Organizational routines: Evolution in the research landscape of two core communities," Post-Print halshs-03718851, HAL.
    2. D'Adderio, Luciana, 2008. "The performativity of routines: Theorising the influence of artefacts and distributed agencies on routines dynamics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 769-789, June.
    3. Luciana D’Adderio, 2014. "The Replication Dilemma Unravelled: How Organizations Enact Multiple Goals in Routine Transfer," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(5), pages 1325-1350, October.
    4. Dehua Gao & Flaminio Squazzoni & Xiuquan Deng, 2018. "The role of cognitive artifacts in organizational routine dynamics: an agent-based model," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 473-499, December.
    5. Robert Charles Sheldon & Eric Michael Laviolette & Fabien Geuser, 2020. "Explaining the process and effects of new routine introduction with a notion of micro-level entrepreneurship," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 609-642, July.
    6. Annosi, Maria Carmela & Martini, Antonella & Brunetta, Federica & Marchegiani, Lucia, 2020. "Learning in an agile setting: A multilevel research study on the evolution of organizational routines," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 554-566.
    7. Giada Baldessarelli & Nathalie Lazaric & Michele Pezzoni, 2022. "Organizational routines: Evolution in the research landscape of two core communities," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 32(4), pages 1119-1154, September.
    8. Lukas Radwan & Sebastian Kinder, 2013. "Practising the Diffusion of Organizational Routines," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 45(10), pages 2442-2458, October.
    9. Mickaël David & Frantz Rowe, 2015. "Enterprise Systems Contribution to Organizational Routines Evolution Potential [Le rôle des systèmes d’information d’entreprise dans l’évolutivité des routines organisationnelles]," Post-Print hal-01559512, HAL.
    10. Schriber, Svante & Löwstedt, Jan, 2015. "Tangible resources and the development of organizational capabilities," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 54-68.
    11. Scott F. Turner & Violina Rindova, 2012. "A Balancing Act: How Organizations Pursue Consistency in Routine Functioning in the Face of Ongoing Change," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 24-46, February.
    12. Carlo Salvato, 2009. "Capabilities Unveiled: The Role of Ordinary Activities in the Evolution of Product Development Processes," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(2), pages 384-409, April.
    13. Arie Y. Lewin & Silvia Massini & Carine Peeters, 2011. "Microfoundations of Internal and External Absorptive Capacity Routines," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 81-98, February.
    14. Anja Danner-Schröder & Daniel Geiger, 2016. "Unravelling the Motor of Patterning Work: Toward an Understanding of the Microlevel Dynamics of Standardization and Flexibility," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(3), pages 633-658, June.
    15. Mark J. Zbaracki & Mark Bergen, 2010. "When Truces Collapse: A Longitudinal Study of Price-Adjustment Routines," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(5), pages 955-972, October.
    16. Jeremy Aroles & Christine McLean, 2016. "Rethinking Stability and Change in the Study of Organizational Routines: Difference and Repetition in a Newspaper-Printing Factory," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(3), pages 535-550, June.
    17. Burr, Wolfgang & Frohwein, Torsten, 2012. "Regelbrüche in Organisationen," Research Papers on Innovation, Services and Technology 1/2012, University of Stuttgart, Institute of Business Administration, Department I - Institute of Research & Development and Innovation Management.
    18. Howard Aldrich & Tiantian Yang, 2014. "How do entrepreneurs know what to do? learning and organizing in new ventures," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 59-82, January.
    19. Rouslan Koumakhov & Adel Daoud, 2017. "Routine and reflexivity: Simonian cognitivism vs practice approach," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 26(4), pages 727-743.
    20. David Obstfeld, 2012. "Creative Projects: A Less Routine Approach Toward Getting New Things Done," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(6), pages 1571-1592, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:68:y:2015:i:6:p:1367-1381. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jbusres .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.