INSTiTUTIONAL DICHOTOMY AND CROSS-BORDER INBOUND ACQUISITIONS: A STUDY OF THREE CASES

Abstract

ftc extant literature on cross-border mergers and acquisitions suggested that firm-specific, deal-specilic and country-specific determinants affect both negotiation process and post-merger integration. In particular, a great extent of strategy, international business and finance scholars argued that legal and regulatory infrastructure, level of investor protection, financial markets development, international taxation provisions, and macroeconomic indicators are important factors significantly affecting the cross-border acquisitions completion. We found significant knowledge gaps addressing why cross-border acquisitions often litigate, delay and unsuccessful, especially when target firm is associated with developing country. With this in mind, we develop and analyze three litigated cross-border acquisitions connected to the host country-India: (I) Vodafone acquisition of Hutchison in 2007, (ii) unsuccessful cross-border merger between Bharti Airtel and MTN Group in 2008-09. and (iii) Vedanta Resources acquisition of Cairn India in 2010-11. To do so, we adopt qualitative case study research both to test existing theory and to build new theory. Hence, we accomplish research goals based on our new multi-case research design that assist qualitative researchers to overcome institutional barriers accountable for data collection as well as to study the emerging markets ilienomenon. Regarding theory testing, we test seventeen theories propounded in management-related literature. Based on limitations of the existing theories and multi-case proofs, we propose new theory and offer lawful propositions for future research that would advance the current knowledge on institutional role in cross-border acquisitions. In addition, we also recommend an alternative foreign 10 market entry model for making successful business entry in developing countries. We conclude that a given country weak institutional and regulatory environment benefits acquirer, target, or both; simultaneously, the behavior would adversely affect the economic benefit of that host country