IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/qualqt/v49y2015i6p2459-2480.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Organizational decision-maker bias supports merger wave formation: demonstration with logical formalization

Author

Listed:
  • Gábor Péli
  • Hans Schenk

Abstract

Imitation of firms that opt for strategic reorganizations by opting for mergers and acquisitions facilitates market wave formation. Empirical evidence on mergers and acquisitions suggests that, under uncertainty, firms regret more not following their rivals’ merger moves of yet unknown outcome than possibly failing jointly by copying them. Looking for the rationale for this bandwagon behavior, we explore the underlying decision-making framework by using formal logic and search for behavioral premises consistent with the observed outcomes. We point out three biased expectations, modeled by using a belief modal operator, that filter out relevant scenarios from the consideration set of otherwise rationally behaving decision-makers. The theorems derived from the logic model highlight the drive to imitate competitors’ merger choices for all but one of the eight possible outcomes of the decision-making framework. For the latter case, a boundary condition is given that makes imitation the predicted strategy. Our approach goes against the view that human behavior defies logic-based rendering also if such behavior can be adequately described as non-rational in an economic sense. Logic is a flexible representation tool to model even faulty behavior patterns in a transparent way; it can also help exploring the consequences of the cognitive mistakes made. Our findings suggest that threats to wealth creation may not necessarily find their origins in morally questionable organizational behavior, but rather in modalities of decision-making under uncertainty. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Suggested Citation

  • Gábor Péli & Hans Schenk, 2015. "Organizational decision-maker bias supports merger wave formation: demonstration with logical formalization," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 49(6), pages 2459-2480, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:qualqt:v:49:y:2015:i:6:p:2459-2480
    DOI: 10.1007/s11135-014-0122-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11135-014-0122-8
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11135-014-0122-8?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. Hans Schenk, 1996. "Bandwagon mergers, international competitiveness, and government policy," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 23(3), pages 255-278, October.
    2. William P. Barnett & Olav Sorenson, 2002. "The Red Queen in organizational creation and development," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 11(2), pages 289-325.
    3. Herbert A. Simon, 1955. "A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 69(1), pages 99-118.
    4. Hans Schenk, 2006. "Mergers and Concentration Policy," Chapters, in: Patrizio Bianchi & Sandrine Labory (ed.), International Handbook on Industrial Policy, chapter 8, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. Schlag, Karl & Zapechelnyuk, Andriy, 2012. "On the impossibility of achieving no regrets in repeated games," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 81(1), pages 153-158.
    6. Frederic L. Pryor, 2001. "Dimensions of the Worldwide Merger Boom," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(4), pages 825-840, December.
    7. F. Scherer, 2006. "A New Retrospective on Mergers," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 28(4), pages 327-341, June.
    8. Gábor Péli & Michael Masuch, 1997. "The Logic of Propagation Strategies: Axiomatizing a Fragment of Organizational Ecology in First-Order Logic," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 8(3), pages 310-331, June.
    9. Christophe Boone & Walter Hendriks, 2009. "Top Management Team Diversity and Firm Performance: Moderators of Functional-Background and Locus-of-Control Diversity," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(2), pages 165-180, February.
    10. William P. Barnett & Elizabeth G. Pontikes, 2008. "The Red Queen, Success Bias, and Organizational Inertia," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(7), pages 1237-1251, July.
    11. Town, R J, 1992. "Merger Waves and the Structure of Merger and Acquisition Time-Series," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 7(S), pages 83-100, Suppl. De.
    12. Bikker, Jacob A. & Haaf, Katharina, 2002. "Competition, concentration and their relationship: An empirical analysis of the banking industry," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 26(11), pages 2191-2214, November.
    13. Patrizio Bianchi & Sandrine Labory (ed.), 2006. "International Handbook on Industrial Policy," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 3451.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. PELI, Gábor & SCHENK, Hans, 2011. "Organizational decision-maker bias supports market wave formation: Evidence with logical formalization," Working Papers 2011006, University of Antwerp, Faculty of Business and Economics.
    2. Trushin, Eshref & Ugur, Mehmet, 2018. "Ecosystem complexity, firm learning and survival: UK evidence on intra-industry age and size diversity as exit hazards," Greenwich Papers in Political Economy 19095, University of Greenwich, Greenwich Political Economy Research Centre.
    3. Chirag Kasbekar, 2020. "Adaptation of New Organizations to Legitimacy Shocks: Postbellum Firearms Firms in the U.S. South, 1866–1914," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(2), pages 355-377, March.
    4. Gaël Le Mens & Michael T. Hannan & László Pólos, 2015. "Organizational Obsolescence, Drifting Tastes, and Age Dependence in Organizational Life Chances," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(2), pages 550-570, April.
    5. K. Skylar Powell, 2017. "Understanding ‘Misfits’: Aspirations and Systematic Deviations from Firm-Specific Optimal Multinationality," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 57(4), pages 529-544, August.
    6. Ljubownikow, Grigorij & Ang, Siah Hwee, 2020. "Competition, diversification and performance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 81-94.
    7. Cockrell, Seth & Friske, Wesley & Voorhees, Clay M. & Calantone, Roger J., 2024. "The effects of innovation on product recall likelihood," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    8. Kamerbeek, S.P., 2009. "Merger Performance and Efficiencies in Horizontal Merger Policy in the US and the EU," MPRA Paper 18064, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Cefis, Elena & Marsili, Orietta, 2015. "Crossing the innovation threshold through mergers and acquisitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 698-710.
    10. E. Cefis & A. Sabidussi & E.J.J Schenk, 2007. "Do mergers of potentially dominant firms foster innovation? An empirical analysis for the manufacturing sector," Working Papers 07-20, Utrecht School of Economics.
    11. Jarig Sinderen & Ron Kemp, 2008. "The Economic Effect Of Competition Law Enforcement: The Case Of The Netherlands," De Economist, Springer, vol. 156(4), pages 365-385, December.
    12. Torgler, Benno & Schneider, Friedrich & Schaltegger, Christoph A., 2007. "With or Against the People? The Impact of a Bottom-Up Approach on Tax Morale and the Shadow Economy," Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics, Working Paper Series qt6331x6vz, Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics.
    13. Daniel Fonseca Costa & Francisval Carvalho & Bruno César Moreira & José Willer Prado, 2017. "Bibliometric analysis on the association between behavioral finance and decision making with cognitive biases such as overconfidence, anchoring effect and confirmation bias," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(3), pages 1775-1799, June.
    14. Christina Leuker & Thorsten Pachur & Ralph Hertwig & Timothy J. Pleskac, 2019. "Do people exploit risk–reward structures to simplify information processing in risky choice?," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 5(1), pages 76-94, August.
    15. Jae Wook Yoo & Richard Reed & Shung Jae Shin & David J. Lemak, 2009. "Strategic Choice and Performance in Late Movers: Influence of the Top Management Team's External Ties," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(2), pages 308-335, March.
    16. Giovanni Calice & Levent Kutlu & Ming Zeng, 2021. "Understanding US firm efficiency and its asset pricing implications," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 60(2), pages 803-827, February.
    17. Brissimis, Sophocles N. & Delis, Manthos D., 2011. "Bank-level estimates of market power," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 212(3), pages 508-517, August.
    18. Westerhoff, Frank H. & Dieci, Roberto, 2006. "The effectiveness of Keynes-Tobin transaction taxes when heterogeneous agents can trade in different markets: A behavioral finance approach," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 293-322, February.
    19. José Castro Caldas & Helder Coelho, 1999. "The Origin of Institutions: Socio-Economic Processes, Choice, Norms and Conventions," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 2(2), pages 1-1.
    20. Nagler Matthew G., 2007. "Understanding the Internet's Relevance to Media Ownership Policy: A Model of Too Many Choices," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 7(1), pages 1-28, June.

    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:spr:qualqt:v:49:y:2015:i:6:p:2459-2480. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.