Acquisitions, Node Collapse, and Network Revolution

Published Online:https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2016.2691

References

  • Ahuja G (2000) Collaboration networks, structural holes, and innovation: A longitudinal study. Admin. Sci. Quart. 45(3):425–455.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Ahuja G, Soda G, Zaheer A (2012) The genesis and dynamics of organizational networks. Organ. Sci. 23(2):434–448.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Anjos F, Fracassi C (2015) Shopping for information? Diversification and the network of industries. Management Sci. 61(1):161–183.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Barabási A-L, Albert R (1999) Emergence of scaling in random networks. Science 286(5439):509–512.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Baum JAC, Calabrese T, Silverman BS (2000) Don’t go it alone: Alliance network composition and startups’ performance in Canadian biotechnology. Strategic Management J. 21(3):267–294.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Blondel VD, Guillaume J-L, Lambiotte R, Lefebvre E (2008) Fast unfolding of communities in large networks. J. Statist. Mech. Theory Experiment. 2008(10):P10008.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Borgatti SP, Cross R (2003) A relational view of information seeking and learning in social networks. Management Sci. 49(4):432–445.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Bradley M, Desai A, Kim EH (1988) Synergistic gains from corporate acquisitions and their division between the stockholders of target and acquiring firms. J. Financial Econom. 21(1):3–40.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Burt RS (1992) Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Buskens V, Van de Rijt A (2008) Dynamics of networks if everyone strives for structural holes. Amer. J. Sociol. 114(2):371–407.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Capron L, Pistre N (2002) When do acquirers earn abnormal returns? Strategic Management J. 23(9):781–794.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Coase R (1937) The nature of the firm. Economica 4(16):386–405.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Damouni N, Finkle J, Leske J (2012) Cisco, EMC partnership turning into rivalry. Reuters (August 23), http://in.reuters.com/article/2012/08/23/idINL2E8JF83G20120823.Google Scholar
  • Davis JP, Eisenhardt KM, Bingham CB (2007) Developing theory through simulation methods. Acad. Management Rev. 32(2):480–499.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Devos E, Kadapakkam P-R, Krishnamurthy S (2009) How do mergers create value? A comparison of taxes, market power, and efficiency improvements as explanations for synergies. Rev. Financial Stud. 22(3):1179–1211.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Duffy J (2012) Cisco relationship was stressed with Nicira buy: EMC. Network World (November 13), http://www.networkworld.com/article/2223497/cisco-subnet/cisco-relationship-was-stressed-with-nicira-buy–emc.html.Google Scholar
  • Erdős P, Rényi A (1959) On random graphs. Publ. Math. 6:290–297.Google Scholar
  • Fortunato S (2010) Community detection in graphs. Phys. Rep. 486(3–5):75–174.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Fudenberg D, Tirole J (1991) Game Theory (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
  • Ghoshal S, Bartlett CA (1990) The multinational corporation as an interorganizational network. Acad. Management Rev. 15(4):603–625.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Giliberto SM, Varaiya NP (1989) The winner’s curse and bidder competition in acquisitions: Evidence from failed bank auctions. J. Finance 44(1):59–75.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Girvan M, Newman ME (2002) Community structure in social and biological networks. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 99(12):7821–7826.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Gulati R (1999) Network location and learning: The influence of network resources and firm capabilities on alliance formation. Strategic Management J. 20(5):397–420.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Hallen BL, Eisenhardt KM (2012) Catalyzing strategies and efficient tie formation: How entrepreneurial firms obtain investment ties. Acad. Management J. 55(1):35–70.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Haspeslagh PC, Jemison DB (1991) Managing Acquisitions: Creating Value Through Corporate Renewal (Free Press, New York).Google Scholar
  • Hernandez E, Menon A (2016) On network change. Working paper, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Hernandez E, Sanders WG, Tuschke A (2015) Network defense: Pruning, grafting, and closing to prevent leakage of strategic knowledge to rivals. Acad. Management J. 58(4):1233–1260.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Higgins MJ, Rodriguez D (2006) The outsourcing of R&D through acquisitions in the pharmaceutical industry. J. Financial Econom. 80(2):351–383.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • James CM, Wier P (1987) Returns to acquirers and competition in the acquisition market: The case of banking. J. Political Econom. 95(2):355–370.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Kleinbaum AM (2017) Reorganization and tie decay choices. Management Sci. ePub ahead of print April 18, https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2016.2705.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Lavie D (2006) The competitive advantage of interconnected firms: An extension of the resource-based view. Acad. Management Rev. 31(3):638–658.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Lee J, Park SH, Ryu Y, Baik Y-S (2010) A hidden cost of strategic alliances under Schumpeterian dynamics. Res. Policy 39(2):229–238.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Lin N (2001) Social Capital: A Theory of Social Structure and Action (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK).CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Madhavan R, Koka BR, Prescott JE (1998) Networks in transition: How industry events (re)shape interfirm relationships. Strategic Management J. 19(5):439459.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Megabios Corp. (1998) GeneMedicine and Megabios agree to merge to create industry leader in plasmid-based gene therapy. Press release, (October 26), http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/genemedicine-and-megabios-agree-to-merge-to-create-industry-leader-in-plasmid-based-gene-therapy-77131237.html.Google Scholar
  • NPS Pharmaceuticals (1999) NPS pharmaceuticals and Allelix to merge. Press release (September 28), NPS Pharmaceuticals, Salt Lake City. http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/nps-pharmaceuticals-and-allelix-to-merge-74541877.html.Google Scholar
  • Padgett JF, Ansell CK (1993) Robust action and the rise of the Medici, 1400–1434. Amer. J. Sociol. 98(6):1259–1319.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Phelps C, Heidl R, Wadhwa A (2012) Knowledge, networks, and knowledge networks a review and research agenda. J. Management 38(4):1115–1166.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Podolny JM (2001) Networks as the pipes and prisms of the market. Amer. J. Sociol. 107(1):33–60.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Porrini P (2004) Can a previous alliance between an acquirer and a target affect acquisition performance? J. Management 30(4):545–562.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Powell WW, White DR, Koput KW, Owen-Smith J (2005) Network dynamics and field evolution: The growth of interorganizational collaboration in the life sciences. Amer. J. Sociol. 110(4):1132–1205.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Reagans RE, Zuckerman EW (2008) Why knowledge does not equal power: The network redundancy trade-off. Indust. Corporate Change 17(5):903–944.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Rogan M (2013) Too close for comfort? The effect of embeddedness and competitive overlap on client relationship retention following an acquisition. Organ. Sci. 25(1):185–203.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Rogan M, Greve HR (2014) Resource dependence dynamics: Partner reactions to mergers. Organ. Sci. 26(1):239–255.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Rogan M, Sorenson O (2014) Picking a (poor) partner a relational perspective on acquisitions. Admin. Sci. Quart. 59(2):301–329.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Rosenkopf L, Almeida P (2003) Overcoming local search through alliances and mobility. Management Sci. 49(6):751–766.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Rundle RL (1999) Inamed to buy collagen company for $142 million, a 60% premium. Wall Street Journal (August 2), http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB933556974598229426.Google Scholar
  • Ryall MD, Sorenson O (2007) Brokers and competitive advantage. Management Sci. 53(4):566–583.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Salancik GR (1995) Wanted: A good network theory of organization. Admin. Sci. Quart. 40(2):345–349.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Seth A (1990) Sources of value creation in acquisitions: An empirical investigation. Strategic Management J. 11(6):431–446.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Shaver JM (2006) A paradox of synergy: Contagion and capacity effects in mergers and acquisitions. Acad. Management Rev. 31(4):962–976.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Shaver JM, Mezias JM (2008) Diseconomies of managing in acquisitions: Evidence from civil lawsuits. Organ. Sci. 20(1):206–222.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Sytch M, Tatarynowicz A (2014) Friends and foes: The dynamics of dual social structures. Acad. Management J. 57(2):585–613.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Szulanski G (1996) Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm. Strategic Management J. 17(S2):27–43.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Tatarynowicz A, Sytch M, Gulati R (2016) Environmental demands and the emergence of social structure technological dynamism and interorganizational network forms. Admin. Sci. Quart. 61(1):52–86.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • The Pharma Letter (1999) NPS Pharmaceuticals and Allelix of Canada agree to merge in bid to cut costs. (September 30), http://www.thepharmaletter.com/article/nps-pharmaceuticals-and-allelix-of-canada-agree-to-merge-in-bid-to-cut-costs.Google Scholar
  • Vasudeva G, Zaheer A, Hernandez E (2013) The embeddedness of networks: Institutions, structural holes, and innovativeness in the fuel cell industry. Organ. Sci. 24(3):645–663.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Wasserman S, Faust K (1994) Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK).CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Zaheer A, Bell GG (2005) Benefiting from network position: Firm capabilities, structural holes, and performance. Strategic Management J. 26(9):809–825.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Zaheer A, Hernandez E, Banerjee S (2010) Prior alliances with targets and acquisition performance in knowledge-intensive industries. Organ. Sci. 21(5):1072–1091.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Zaheer A, McEvily B, Perrone V (1998) Does trust matter? Exploring the effects of interorganizational and interpersonal trust on performance. Organ. Sci. 9(2):141–159.LinkGoogle Scholar
INFORMS site uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some are essential to make our site work; Others help us improve the user experience. By using this site, you consent to the placement of these cookies. Please read our Privacy Statement to learn more.