Board reforms and M&A performance: international evidence

Ahmad, Muhammad Fa ooq; Ak as, Niha ; Cumming, Douglas; Xu, Guosong
A icle — Published Ve sion
Boa d e o ms and M&A pe o mance: in e na ional
e idence
Jou nal o In e na ional Business S udies
P o ided in Coope a ion wi h:
Sp inge Na u e
Sugges ed Ci a ion: Ahmad, Muhammad Fa ooq; Ak as, Niha ; Cumming, Douglas; Xu, Guosong
(2024) : Boa d e o ms and M&A pe o mance: in e na ional e idence, Jou nal o In e na ional
Business S udies, ISSN 1478-6990, Palg a e Macmillan, London, Vol. 55, Iss. 5, pp. 616-637,
h ps://doi.o g/10.1057/s41267-023-00674-3
This Ve sion is a ailable a :
h ps://hdl.handle.ne /10419/316653
S anda d-Nu zungsbedingungen:
Die Dokumen e au EconS o dü en zu eigenen wissenscha lichen
Zwecken und zum P i a geb auch gespeiche und kopie we den.
Sie dü en die Dokumen e nich ü ö en liche ode komme zielle
Zwecke e iel äl igen, ö en lich auss ellen, ö en lich zugänglich
machen, e eiben ode ande wei ig nu zen.
So e n die Ve asse die Dokumen e un e Open-Con en -Lizenzen
(insbesonde e CC-Lizenzen) zu Ve ügung ges ell haben soll en,
gel en abweichend on diesen Nu zungsbedingungen die in de do
genann en Lizenz gewäh en Nu zungs ech e.
Te ms o use:
Documen s in EconS o may be sa ed and copied o you pe sonal
and schola ly pu poses.
You a e no o copy documen s o public o comme cial pu poses, o
exhibi he documen s publicly, o make hem publicly a ailable on he
in e ne , o o dis ibu e o o he wise use he documen s in public.
I he documen s ha e been made a ailable unde an Open Con en
Licence (especially C ea i e Commons Licences), you may exe cise
u he usage igh s as speci ied in he indica ed licence.
h p://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0/
Vol:.(1234567890)
Jou nal o In e na ional Business S udies (2024) 55:616–637
h ps://doi.o g/10.1057/s41267-023-00674-3
Boa d e o ms andM&A pe o mance: in e na ional e idence
MuhammadFa ooqAhmad1· Niha Ak as2· DouglasCumming3,4· GuosongXu5
Recei ed: 2 Augus 2022 / Re ised: 1 No embe 2023 / Accep ed: 9 No embe 2023 / Published online: 16 Janua y 2024
© The Au ho (s) 2024
Abs ac
This esea ch employs a di e ence-in-di e ences amewo k o s udy he impac o majo boa d e o ms on he pe o mance
o me ge s and acquisi ions (M&As). Using an in e na ional sample o boa d e o ms implemen ed in 61 coun ies om
1985 o 2021, we documen a d as ic edis ibu ion o weal h om a ge sha eholde s o acqui e sha eholde s a e he
boa d e o ms in a ge coun ies. This e ec is mos p onounced in M&A ansac ions ha in ol e he sale o con olling
sha es, he eby suppo ing he hypo hesis ha co po a e boa d e o ms mi iga e he p i a e bene i s o con ol in he a ge
i m. Fu he mo e, hese e o ms inc ease expec ed deal syne gies, in ha deal-le el announcemen e u ns a e highe a e
he implemen a ion o he e o ms. When coun y-le el ins i u ional quali y and legal p o ec ion o sha eholde s a e g ea e ,
i ein o ces he e o m e ec s. O e all M&A ac i i y emains unchanged ollowing he e o ms, ye inancial bidde s com-
ple e ewe ansac ions, implying a e o m-induced squeeze-ou o inancial bidde s om he M&A ma ke in he a ge
coun y. Collec i ely, hese in e na ional esul s a e consis en wi h he p edic ions o he p i a e bene i s o con ol heo y
and unde sco e he ole o ins i u ional quali y and in es o p o ec ion in ein o cing he e ec s o boa d e o ms wo ldwide.
Keywo ds Boa d e o ms· M&A ac i i y· Ta ge gains· Co po a e go e nance
In oduc ion
Boa d o e sigh is a undamen al mechanism o co po a e
go e nance, and a key esponsibili y o co po a e di ec o s
in ol es supe ising me ge and acquisi ion (M&A) deals.
Ex an li e a u e shows ha M&A nego ia ions a e o en sus-
cep ible o agency issues.1 Thus, a key ques ion a ises: How
do e o ms ela ed o boa d p ac ices a ec he ma ke o
co po a e con ol in gene al and he dis ibu ion o weal h
be ween acqui e and a ge sha eholde s in pa icula ?
Despi e i s impo ance, he impac o boa d e o ms on
M&A ansac ions emains unexplo ed. In an e o o ill
his esea ch gap, we ocus on how boa d e o ms a ec
akeo e a ge s. Since 1990, mo e han 60 coun ies ha e
implemen ed boa d e o ms, designed o imp o e boa ds’
supe iso y unc ion. Many o hese e o ms equi e g ea e
boa d independence and manda e he sepa a ion o he chai
and CEO posi ions. To he ex en ha he e o ms in he a -
ge coun y alle ia e some agency p oblems and imp o e he
g ow h po en ial o he a ge i m (Fau e e al., 2017), pos -
e o m M&As should be d i en mo e by economic syne -
gies, which a guably should lead o g ea e o e all e iciency
gains. Ye hese e o ms could also al e he dis ibu ion o
Accep ed by Lemma Senbe , A ea Edi o , 9 No embe 2023. This
a icle has been wi h he au ho s o h ee e isions.
* Douglas Cumming
cummingd@ au.edu; [email p o ec ed];
[email p o ec ed]
Muhammad Fa ooq Ahmad
[email p o ec ed]
Niha Ak as
[email p o ec ed]
Guosong Xu
[email p o ec ed]
1 SKEMA Business School, Uni e si é Cô e d’Azu , Lille,
F ance
2 WHU O o Beisheim School o Managemen , Vallenda ,
Ge many
3 DeSan is Dis inguished P o esso College o Business,
Flo ida A lan ic Uni e si y, BocaRa on, USA
4 Bi mingham Business School, Uni e si y o Bi mingham,
Bi mingham, UK
5 Ro e dam School o Managemen , E asmus Uni e si y,
Ro e dam, TheNe he lands
1 See, e.g., Jensen (1986), Lang e  al. (1991), John and Senbe
(1998), Masulis e al. (2007), and Tosun and Senbe (2020).
617Jou nal o In e na ional Business S udies (2024) 55:616–637
syne ge ic gains be ween a ge and acqui e sha eholde s. I
hus is heo e ically ambiguous, ex an e, which ansac ing
pa y (acqui e o a ge sha eholde s) ob ain a g ea e sha e
o acquisi ion gains a e e o ms.
On he one hand, boa d e o ms may bols e he ba gain-
ing powe o he a ge i m, pa icula ly when i is man-
aged e icien ly. The esul ing inc ease in a ge alue and
ba gaining powe implies ha a ge sha eholde s bene i
om a g ea e sha e o he akeo e gain. On he o he hand,
acco ding o he heo y o p i a e bene i s o con ol (Dyck
& Zingales, 2004; G ossman & Ha , 1988), i he con ol-
ling sha eholde s in he a ge i m lose hei p i a e ben-
e i o con ol o e co po a e esou ces, he alue o hei
po en ial en ex ac ion dec eases, which could lowe he
ese a ion p ice o a ge con olling sha eholde s du ing
a co po a e sale.2 In ha scena io, acqui e i ms could gain
a g ea e sha e o he deal syne gies, in ha hey pay a lowe
p emium in he ansac ion (i.e., less he amoun o he ben-
e i loss o a ge con olling sha eholde s). These compe ing
hypo heses imply ha he ne e ec o weal h edis ibu ion
in pos - e o m M&As depends on whe he he dec ease in
a ge con olling sha eholde s’ p i a e bene i s ou weighs
he inc ease in he a ge alue.
To es hese hypo heses empi ically, we in es iga e a
comp ehensi e se o boa d- ela ed co po a e go e nance
e o ms ac oss 61 coun ies du ing 1985–2021. Wi h a sam-
ple including bo h domes ic and c oss-bo de M&A deals,
we documen se e al key indings. Fi s , a ge sha ehold-
e s expe ience a signi ican dec ease in me ge gains a e
he e o m. The economic magni ude is subs an ial: O e
a 7-day window, a ge sha eholde s’ announcemen e u n
(Ta ge CAR ) is 5% lowe in he pos - e o m pe iod. In con-
as , acqui e s’ abno mal e u ns (Acqui e CAR ) ollowing
me ge announcemen s a e 0.6% highe a e he e o ms
come in o e ec in he a ge coun y. These esul s, ob ained
wi h quasi di e ence-in-di e ences (DiD) eg essions ha
con ol o an ex ensi e se o i m, deal, and coun y cha -
ac e is ics and ixed e ec s, sugges ha boa d e o ms ig-
ge a d as ic edis ibu ion o weal h om a ge sha ehold-
e s o acqui e sha eholde s. Consis en wi h he heo y o
p i a e bene i s o con ol, we de e mine ha he e ec on
weal h edis ibu ion is d i en mainly by ansac ions ha
in ol e sales o block sha es. Second, deal-le el abno mal
e u ns (Combined CAR ) a e 1.9% highe in he pos - e o m
pe iod. Wi h Combined CAR , we cap u e expec ed akeo e
syne gies, and he esul con i ms he hypo hesis ha boa d
e o ms imp o e o e all economic gains in M&As.
Subs an ial li e a u e in in e na ional business and inance
es ablishes ha coun y-le el ins i u ional quali y and legal
p o ec ion o in es o s a ec he alue o each na ion’s capi-
al ma ke s (La Po a e al., 1997, 1998, 2000, 2002). In
ou esea ch con ex , he e ogenei y in coun y-le el legal
cha ac e is ics migh in luence he e ec i eness o he boa d
e o ms in M&A deals. Using a ious measu es o ins i u-
ional quali y and sha eholde p o ec ion, we es ablish ha
be e quali y ins i u ions and high in es o p o ec ion ein-
o ce he e ec s o boa d e o ms on a ge e u ns. This
esul sugges s ha i m-le el go e nance e o ms a e mo e
e ec i e in coun ies whe e legal p o ec ions a e s onge .
Ou esea ch con ibu es o in es iga ions o he ole o
co po a e boa ds in akeo e s. Mos s udies examine he
e ec on acqui e s and ind ha co po a e go e nance is
a undamen al mechanism ha d i es M&A p o i abili y
(e.g., Dahya e al., 2019; Masulis e al., 2007). Es ablishing
causali y emains challenging hough. Using boa d e o ms
as an exogenous shock o co po a e go e nance p ac ices,
his s udy sheds new ligh on he esea ch domain by docu-
men ing a causal link be ween boa d o e sigh and me ge
pe o mance.
We also expand esea ch in o he di ec impac o coun y
cha ac e is ics on inancial ma ke s. As ini ia ed by La Po a
e al. (1997), an ongoing li e a u e s eam has es ablished
ha legal p o ec ions o ex e nal in es o s a ec i m alue
and co po a e ac ions, such as s ock liquidi y (Huang e al.,
2020), ini ial public o e ings (Boul on e al., 2010), inno a-
ion (Hillie e al., 2011), and c oss-lis ings (Diniz-Maganini
e al., 2023). We build on such insigh s o link coun y-le el
legal cha ac e is ics o i m-le el akeo e ou comes ac oss
a la ge sample o M&As om 61 coun ies; as such, we
also add o g owing in e na ional business and M&A li e a-
u e (e.g., Ahe n e al., 2015; Alimo , 2015; Bhagwa e al.,
2021; B ockman e al., 2013; Cannon e al., 2020; Dessain
e al., 2017; Glendening e al., 2016; Zhou e al., 2016).
Theo y andhypo heses
Boa d e o ms andco po a e ou comes
Since 1990, a ious e o ms designed o s eng hen co -
po a e boa d unc ions ha e been implemen ed ac oss he
wo ld. Al hough he de ails di e , he key goal o hese
e o ms is o inc ease he o e sigh o boa d di ec o s by
p omo ing boa d independence and he sepa a ion o he
chai om he CEO. Resea ch in u n has es ablished ha
co po a e boa d e o ms inc ease i m alue (Fau e e al.,
2017) and i m p o i abili y du ing ini ial public o e ings
(Chen e al., 2022). Bae e al. (2021) e eal ha i ms pay
highe di idends once e o ms ha e empowe ed boa d di ec-
o s and sha eholde s, and simila ly, Chen e al. (2020) show
2 In hei s udy ac oss 39 coun ies, Dyck and Zingales (2004) es i-
ma e he a e age alue o p i a e con ol o be 14% o he i m equi y
alue.
618 Jou nal o In e na ional Business S udies (2024) 55:616–637
ha manage s educe co po a e cash holdings and inc ease
R&D a e e o ms. Acco ding o Hu e al. (2020), boa d
e o ms a e associa ed wi h educ ions in s ock p ice c ash
isks. Finally, D iss (2022) documen s imp o emen s in
in es men –s ock p ice sensi i i y. In summa y, ex an s ud-
ies o e consis en , con incing e idence ha boa d e o ms
imp o e co po a e go e nance p ac ices ha e en ually
enhance sha eholde alue.
Unlike hese p io s udies hough, we explo e a dis inc
alue c ea ion channel, namely, ha due o co po a e akeo-
e s. Ou indings– ha e o m-induced M&A syne gies
mainly acc ue o acqui e sha eholde s a he han a ge
sha eholde s–also di e om p e ious M&A li e a u e ha
sugges s he bene i s o alue c ea ion mainly bene i a ge
sha eholde s and ha mos acqui e s o lis ed a ge s ba ely
b eak e en o expe ience nega i e e u ns (e.g., Fulle e al.,
2002; Moelle e al., 2004). We explo e he easons o hese
di e ences he ea e .
Co po a e go e nance, bid compe i ion, andM&A
pe o mance
Co po a e go e nance is a key de e minan o M&A pe -
o mance o acqui e and a ge sha eholde s (Dahya e al.,
2019; Masulis e al., 2007). To he ex en ha co po a e
go e nance imp o es due o be e boa d o e sigh in he
a ge i m, boa d e o ms in he a ge coun y should
enhance o e all akeo e alue, including g ea e economic
syne gies a he deal le el. This inc ease in akeo e alue
s ems om wo sou ces. Fi s , be e go e ned a ge s o e
g ea e g ow h po en ial (Gompe s e al., 2003) and a mo e
anspa en in o ma ional en i onmen (Du ne e al., 2009;
Suga han & Geo ge, 2015), so he acqui e can mo e eadily
iden i y sou ces o syne ge ic gains.3 Second, s eng hened
boa d o e sigh may dec ease he p i a e bene i s o con-
ol in some a ge i ms. Following hese a gumen s, we
p opose:
Hypo hesis 1 O e all M&A alue and deal syne gies
inc ease a e a boa d e o m is implemen ed in he a ge
coun y.
Mo eo e , boa d e o ms could a ec he dis ibu ion o
ansac ion gains be ween he acqui e and a ge sha ehold-
e s. Howe e , i is unclea ex an e which ansac ion pa y
bene i s mo e om he alue edis ibu ion induced by hese
e o ms. I boa d e o ms simul aneously enhance he a ge
i m’s alue and s eng hen he a ge ’s ba gaining powe ,
a ge s likely ba gain o g ea e alue om he acquisi ion.
Meanwhile, acqui e s in he pos - e o m e a may expe ience
lowe (o compa able) e u ns, ela i e o he p e- e o m
pe iod. In o he wo ds, boa d e o ms may il he balance
o ba gaining powe in a o o a ge s, allowing hem o
cap u e a la ge sha e o he “acquisi ion pie.” This hypo h-
esis gi es ise o he ollowing p edic ions:
Hypo hesis 2 M&A a ge s ecei e highe alue (s ock
e u ns), while acqui e s ecei e lowe o compa able alue,
a e a boa d e o m is implemen ed in he a ge coun y,
compa ed wi h be o e he e o m.
Ye exis ing li e a u e also shows ha agency issues (i.e.,
con lic s o in e es be ween manage s and sha eholde s and
be ween con olling and mino i y sha eholde s) a e p e alen
in some me ge nego ia ions (e.g., Fich e al., 2011; Ha zell
e al., 2004). The p i a e alue o con ol is so subs an ial
o some sha eholde s ha hey demand signi ican ansac-
ion p emia when hey nego ia e a sale o hei con olling
block o sha es (Dyck & Zingales, 2004). Acco ding o he
heo y o p i a e bene i s o con ol, when con olling a ge
sha eholde s lose hei p i a e bene i s due o boa d e o ms,
hei ese a ion p ice dec eases, so he M&A p emium
should dec ease ollowing boa d e o ms.4 This al e na i e
hypo hesis, which we e m he p i a e bene i s hypo hesis,
p edic s a signi ican weal h ans e om a ge sha ehold-
e s o acqui e sha eholde s in he pos - e o m pe iod:
Hypo hesis 3 M&A a ge s ecei e lowe alue (s ock
e u ns), while acqui e s ecei e highe alue, a e a boa d
e o m is implemen ed in he a ge coun y, compa ed wi h
be o e he e o m.
Thus, whe he pos - e o m M&A alue acc ues mo e
o he acqui e o a ge sha eholde s is an empi ical ques-
ion. The ne e ec o such weal h edis ibu ion depends on
whe he he d op in a ge con olling sha eholde s’ p i a e
bene i s ou weighs he imp o emen in he a ge alue a e
he boa d e o m. We explo e his ques ion. In addi ion, wi h
ega d o he alue e ec , subs an ial in e na ional business
and inance esea ch posi s ha he e ec i eness o e o ms
3 A mo e anspa en in o ma ional en i onmen would allow bidde s
o iden i y access o new p oduc s, se ices, echnologies, and e i-
cien managemen eams mo e eadily, which a e impo an sou ces
o syne gies (Ak as e al., 2021).
4 Theo e ically, he dec ease in a ge sha eholde s’ ese a ion p ice
and he deal p emium could be g ea e in a hos ile bid scena io, in
which he bidde speaks di ec ly o sha eholde s. Howe e , we would
expec he same e ec in a iendly me ge nego ia ion because he
a ge boa d – ep esen ing he con olling sha eholde s – has less
ba gaining powe a e he e o m dep i es sha eholde s o hei p i-
a e bene i s. Because hos ile akeo e s a e almos comple ely absen
om ou sample (Schwe , 2000), we do no dis inguish be ween hos-
ile and iendly akeo e s o ou empi ical es s.
619Jou nal o In e na ional Business S udies (2024) 55:616–637
elies on he ins i u ional quali y and coun y-le el legal p o-
ec ions a ailable o ex e nal in es o s (e.g., La Po a e al.,
1997, 1998, 2000, 2002). Acco ding o his iew, enhanced
ins i u ional quali y o sha eholde p o ec ion inc eases he
e ec s o i m-le el co po a e go e nance. The e o e, we
also s udy he he e ogenei y o e o m e ec s in ou empi i-
cal analyses.
Da a andsumma y s a is ics
Boa d e o ms a ound hewo ld
We s a wi h all coun ies ha implemen ed majo boa d
e o ms du ing 1985–2021. This ini ial sample o coun-
ies comes om Fau e e al. (2017), who use a ious
da a sou ces o iden i y hese boa d e o ms, including he
Wo ld Bank, he Eu opean Co po a e Go e nance Ins i-
u e, and p io esea ch (e.g., Kim & Lu, 2013).5 Because
he las boa d e o m in hei sample ook place in 2007,
we expanded i by manually iden i ying addi ional majo
e o ms using he c i e ia applied by Fau e e al. (2017).
The upda ed lis o boa d e o ms expands o 61 coun ies;
he la es e o m was implemen ed in 2016. Mos e o ms
in ol e boa d independence, audi commi ee and audi o
independence, and CEO/chai sepa a ion.6 We epo he
e o m yea , e o m componen s, and e o m ype o each
coun y in Panel A o Table1.
Coun ies implemen boa d e o ms o a ious easons,
bu he ul ima e mo i a ion is o enhance co po a e go e n-
ance mechanisms ha cons i u e an “impo an elemen
in s eng hening he ounda ion o indi idual coun ies’
long- e m economic pe o mance and in con ibu ing o a
s eng hened in e na ional inancial sys em.”7 Anecdo al
e idence sugges s ha boa d oom e o ms end o occu
a e majo co po a e auds and scandals. Fo example,
he En on and Wo ldCom scandals in he Uni ed S a es
accele a ed adop ion o he 2002 Sa banes–Oxley Ac .
The Pa mala scandals in I aly led o he ins i u ion o he
Co po a e Go e nance Code by he Bo sa I ialiana.8 Ou
iden i ica ion s a egy le e ages he assump ion ha such
e o ms a e exogenous o indi idual i ms, which seems
likely, in ha indi idual i ms canno de e mine he exac
iming o ou comes o a na ionwide e o m implemen a-
ion (e.g., Bae e al., 2021; Chen e al., 2020, 2022; D iss,
2022; Fau e e al., 2017). Howe e , boa d e o ms could
co ela e wi h a coun y’s economic p ospec s o ins i u-
ional quali y, such ha hey would be endogenous o hese
coun y-le el a iables. To add ess his conce n, in Panel
B o Table1, we include economic and ins i u ional de e -
minan s, such as GDP g ow h, GDP pe capi a, economic
size, s ock ma ke de elopmen , and quali y o ins i u ions,
and we check whe he hey p edic boa d e o ms in ou
sample. The eg ession esul s indica e ha none o hese
ac o s signi ican ly co ela es wi h he iming o he boa d
e o ms, con i ming ou sense ha he e o ms a e plausibly
exogenous.9
Sample o M&As
We ga he M&A ansac ions om he Re ini i SDC da a-
base. Fo each o he 61 sample coun ies, we ex ac all
domes ic ansac ions and c oss-bo de M&A deals in ol -
ing acqui e and a ge i ms om ou sample coun ies. The
M&A sample s a s in 1985 and ends in 2021, 5yea s a e
he las boa d e o m. We d op M&A ansac ions o which
he s a us o he bidde s o a ge i ms is a go e nmen
agency, join en u es, o mu ual unds, as well as hose o
which he acquisi ion o m is buyback, exchange o e s, o
ecapi aliza ion. We also emo e inancial a ge s (s anda d
indus ial classi ica ion [SIC] codes 6000–6999). These da a
il e s yield a sample o 607,293 deals ac oss he 37-yea
sample pe iod, wi h a o al deal alue o app oxima ely $50
illion.
In columns 6 and 7 o Table1, Panel A, we ind ha , in
e ms o agg ega e M&A numbe and deal alue, he mos
ac i e a ge coun ies a e he Uni ed S a es and Uni ed
Kingdom. In Fig.1, we p esen he olume o M&A ans-
ac ions by yea ; in e ms o M&A deal numbe , a i s peak
occu s a ound 1999 and 2000, coinciding wi h he do com
bubble. The second wa e o M&A ac i i ies appea s a ound
2006 and 2007, jus be o e he global inancial c isis, ol-
lowed by ano he su ge in deals du ing he las 2yea s o ou
sample pe iod. We ind a simila pa e n o M&A ac i i y
measu ed by deal alue. These pa e ns signal ha M&As
occu in wa es a he agg ega e le el, in bo h domes ic and
c oss-bo de con ex s (e.g., Ahmad e al., 2021; Ha o d,
2005; Maksimo ic e al., 2013).
5 Fau e e al. (2017) p o ide a de ailed desc ip ion o he e o ms
implemen ed in each coun y in hei “Appendix1”.
6 Re o ms in i e coun ies ocus on o he aspec s o boa d p ac-
ices, such as de ini ions o boa d esponsibili ies, elec ions o boa d
membe s, and boa d disclosu es: B azil, Colombia, Czech Republic,
Hunga y, and Swi ze land. We keep hese coun ies in ou sample o
comple eness, like in Fau e e al. (2017). We do no ind any coun-
ies ha in oduce e o ms ha weaken co po a e go e nance mecha-
nisms.
7 See he s a emen s om he 2009 La in Ame ican Co po a e Go -
e nance Round able.
8 Fo a discussion o he a ionales o some boa d e o ms, see
Rockness and Rockness (2005).
9 In ou obus ness es s, we ack he dynamic e ec s o boa d
e o ms o con i m hei exogenei y.

620 Jou nal o In e na ional Business S udies (2024) 55:616–637
Table 1 Sample desc ip ion
Coun y Re o m yea Re o m componen Re o m ype Numbe o deals Deal alue
A B C
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Panel A. Re o m coun y and
sample dis ibu ion
A gen ina 2001 0 1 0 Rule-based 1811 75.60
Aus alia 2004 1 1 1 Comply-o -explain 21,443 1236.24
Aus ia 2004 1 1 0 Comply-o -explain 2563 88.08
Belgium 2005 1 1 1 Comply-o -explain 4591 258.53
B azil 2002 0 0 0 Rule-based 7136 549.53
Bulga ia 2007 1 1 1 Comply-o -explain 600 19.79
Canada 2004 1 1 1 Rule-based 28,841 1821.98
Chile 2001 0 1 0 Rule-based 1355 81.49
China 2001 1 1 0 Rule-based 18,619 1860.32
Colombia 2001 0 0 0 Rule-based 936 53.79
C oa ia 2007 1 0 1 Comply-o -explain 438 10.78
Cyp us 2002 1 1 1 Comply-o -explain 418 21.98
Czech Rep. 2001 0 0 0 Rule-based 2334 58.94
Denma k 2001 1 0 0 Comply-o -explain 5243 223.09
Egyp 2002 1 1 0 Rule-based 449 49.29
Finland 2004 1 1 1 Comply-o -explain 6001 188.42
F ance 2003 0 1 0 Rule-based 26,822 1390.59
Ge many 2002 1 1 0 Comply-o -explain 27,717 1530.76
G eece 2002 1 1 0 Rule-based 969 87.85
Hong Kong 2005 1 1 1 Comply-o -explain 5239 509.21
Hunga y 2003 0 0 0 Comply-o -explain 1340 26.19
Iceland 2004 1 1 1 Comply-o -explain 174 16.22
India 2002 1 1 0 Rule-based 6070 257.56
Indonesia 2007 1 1 0 Rule-based 1622 78.43
I eland 1995 1 1 1 Comply-o -explain 3094 295.10
Is ael 2000 1 1 1 Rule-based 1372 157.63
I aly 2006 1 1 0 Rule-based 11,960 963.51
Japan 2002 0 1 0 Rule-based 22,300 1222.43
Kazakhs an 2005 1 0 0 Comply-o -explain 236 19.64
Kenya 1999 1 1 1 Comply-o -explain 177 5.17
Kuwai 2010 1 1 1 Comply-o -explain 145 17.71
Luxembou g 2007 1 1 1 Comply-o -explain 653 149.74
Malaysia 2001 1 1 0 Comply-o -explain 7393 155.99
Mexico 2001 1 1 0 Rule-based 2409 259.94
Ne he lands 2004 1 1 1 Comply-o -explain 10,799 944.98
New Zealand 2004 1 1 1 Comply-o -explain 3559 99.44
Nige ia 2003 1 1 1 Comply-o -explain 259 26.00
No way 2005 1 1 1 Comply-o -explain 5312 286.96
Pakis an 2002 0 1 0 Comply-o -explain 150 7.93
Pe u 2005 1 1 0 Comply-o -explain 867 32.30
Philippines 2002 1 1 0 Comply-o -explain 1017 45.25
Poland 2002 1 0 0 Comply-o -explain 3623 118.90
Romania 2001 1 0 0 Comply-o -explain 1038 17.81
Russia 2002 1 0 1 Comply-o -explain 9797 268.76
Saudi A abia 2006 1 1 1 Comply-o -explain 293 107.72
621Jou nal o In e na ional Business S udies (2024) 55:616–637
Panel A p esen s he dis ibu ion o he M&A sample by a ge coun y. The M&A sample, co e ing he 1985–2021 pe iod, is om Thomson
Reu e s SDC da abase and includes domes ic and c oss-bo de deals comple ed by acqui e s and a ge s om he 61 coun ies o which majo
boa d e o m da a is a ailable. Fo each coun y, we epo he e o m yea in column 1, he e o m componen in columns 2–4, he e o m
ype in column 5, he numbe o deals in column 6 and he agg ega e deal alue (in US$ billions) in column 7. Re o m componen A, B, and C
a e bina y a iables iden i ying boa d e o ms ela ed o boa d independence, audi commi ee independence, and chai man and CEO sepa a-
ion, espec i ely. Panel B epo s he eg ession analysis o e o m de e minan s. The dependen a iable is a bina y a iable ha equals one
i a majo boa d e o m is e ec i e in a gi en a ge coun y in a gi en yea , and ze o o he wise. All he mac oeconomic ac o s a e de ined in
“Appendix1”. P alues a e epo ed wi hin pa en heses below he coe icien es ima es. Robus s anda d e o s a e clus e ed a he coun y le el
Table 1 (con inued)
Coun y Re o m yea Re o m componen Re o m ype Numbe o deals Deal alue
A B C
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Singapo e 2003 1 1 0 Comply-o -explain 3983 319.18
Slo akia 2002 1 1 1 Comply-o -explain 409 3.67
Sou h A ica 2002 1 1 1 Comply-o -explain 3584 207.71
Sou h Ko ea 1999 1 1 0 Rule-based 5683 566.38
Spain 2006 1 1 0 Comply-o -explain 13,350 635.27
Sweden 2006 1 1 1 Comply-o -explain 11,437 593.87
Swi ze land 2002 0 0 0 Comply-o -explain 6488 730.75
Taiwan 2002 1 1 0 Rule-based 1153 123.88
Thailand 2002 1 1 0 Comply-o -explain 1293 77.66
Tunisia 2008 1 1 1 Comply-o -explain 115 1.81
Tu key 2002 1 0 1 Comply-o -explain 1710 100.17
UAE 2016 1 1 0 Rule-based 765 58.68
Uk aine 2003 1 0 1 Comply-o -explain 1029 21.53
UK 1998 1 1 1 Comply-o -explain 65,899 4274.40
US 2003 1 1 0 Rule-based 229,347 26395.73
To al 607,293 49,892.63
Boa d e o m
Wi hin coun y C oss coun y
1 2
Panel B. De e minan s o boa d e o ms
GDP g ow h − 0.002 − 0.004
(0.465) (0.370)
Pe -capi a GDP 0.011 − 0.003
(0.927) (0.919)
GDP 0.002 0.012
(0.984) (0.167)
S ock ma ke de elopmen 0.002 0.011
(0.926) (0.340)
In es men p o ile 0.002 0.006
(0.753) (0.433)
Quali y o ins i u ions − 0.011 − 0.005
(0.409) (0.597)
Yea FE Yes Yes
Coun y FE Yes No
Adjus ed R20.840 0.793
Obse a ions 1494 1494
622 Jou nal o In e na ional Business S udies (2024) 55:616–637
We ely on a ious da a sou ces o cons uc he deal-,
i m-, and coun y-le el a iables o ou empi ical analy-
ses. Unless explici ly men ioned o he wise, SDC is he da a
sou ce o deal- ela ed a iables; CRSP, Wo ldscope, and
Compus a Global in o m he i m-le el a iables; and he
Wo ld Bank and In e na ional Coun y Risk Guide (ICRG)
p o ide he coun y-le el a iables. All alues a e con e ed
in o U.S. dolla s, i applicable.
The dependen a iables in ou empi ical analyses a e
akeo e gains measu ed by cumula i e abno mal e u ns
(CAR) a he a ge , acqui e , and deal le els. In he main
analysis, we compu e announcemen CAR o e a 7-day e en
window a ound he announcemen day, as in Dessain e al.
(2017). In obus ness checks, we also epo esul s wi h
3-day and 11-day al e na i e e en windows. To compu e
he abno mal e u n, we use a ma ke model wi h pa ame e s
es ima ed o e he es ima ion pe iod (− 236, − 36) ela i e
o he announcemen day; he local ma ke index is a p oxy
o he ma ke po olio.10
Table2 p esen s he summa y s a is ics o all he a i-
ables in ou main analyses;11 “Appendix1” p o ides hei
de ailed de ini ions. Acco ding o Table2, he a e age Ta ge
CAR is 22.2%, and he a e age acqui e CAR is 1.2% o he
ull sample, including bo h p i a e and lis ed a ge s. Fo
he sample o only lis ed a ge s, he a e age acqui e CAR
is nega i e and equal o − 1.0%. In his subsample, he posi-
i e Combined CAR (2.1%) indica es ha he sample deals
a e syne gy-d i en on a e age.12 These s a is ics a e consis -
en wi h p io in e na ional M&A li e a u e (e.g., Dessain
e al., 2017). The a e age O e P emium is 42.2%, consis -
en wi h he o e p emium o 42% epo ed by Rossi and
Volpin (2004) o an in e na ional sample and wi h he p e-
mium o 46% obse ed in a U.S. sample by Eckbo (2009).
We also abula e coun y-indus y-yea -le el M&A ac i i ies
(see Table2), which compa e a o ably o he deal ac i i ies
epo ed by Ba ge on e al. (2008) o a sample o domes ic
U.S. ansac ions in ol ing lis ed a ge s.
Wi h ega d o deal cha ac e is ics, such as he p opo ion
o c oss-bo de deals, ho izon al deals, hos ile deals, and
cash-only paymen s, ou sample also is compa able o p io
esea ch ha elies on in e na ional M&A da a (e.g., Ali-
mo , 2015; Dessain e al., 2017; Rossi & Volpin, 2004). The
p opo ion o e ical deals in ou sample is 13.6%.13 Fo a
sample o U.S. deals among lis ed companies, Kedia e al.
(2011) epo ha he p opo ion o e ical deals anges
be ween 9.88 and 21.28%, depending on he indus y clas-
si ica ion applied.
Fig. 1 Sample dis ibu ion
by yea . This igu e plo s he
sample dis ibu ion by yea .
The M&A sample, co e ing
he 1985–2021 pe iod, is om
Thomson Reu e s SDC da abase
and includes domes ic and
c oss-bo de deals comple ed by
acqui e s and a ge s om he
61 coun ies o which majo
boa d e o m da a is a ailable.
The sample includes 607,293
deals ac oss he 37-yea sample
pe iod, o aling a deal alue o
$49,892.64 billion. The le axis
e e s o he numbe o deals,
and he igh axis o he agg e-
ga e deal alue in US$ billion
-
500
1,00
0
1,50
0
2,00
0
2,50
0
3,00
0
3,500
-
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005200720092011 2013 2015 201720192021
Numbe o Deals Deal Value (in US$ billions)
10 We use he local ma ke index, because Ak as e al. (2004) docu-
men ha CARs a e no a ec ed by he choice o he ma ke index
(local e sus global equi y ma ke index), on a e age. Ou choice is
also consis en wi h p io in e na ional M&A li e a u e ha elies
on he local equi y ma ke index o compu e M&A announcemen
e u ns (Ahe n e  al., 2015; Bhagwa e  al., 2021; Dessain e  al.,
2017). See also El Ghoul e al. (2023) o a discussion o how o con-
duc e en s udies in in e na ional inance esea ch.
11 To mi iga e he in luence o ou lie s, all i m-le el a iables a e
winso ized a he op and bo om 2.5% o he dis ibu ion. We ob ain
simila esul s i we use 1% as an al e na i e winso iza ion h eshold
(un epo ed).
12 Combined CAR is he ma ke alue-weigh ed CAR (o he acqui e
and a ge ), using he me ging pa ies’ ma ke capi aliza ion 4weeks
be o e he announcemen as he weigh .
13 We ollow he app oach in Kedia e al. (2011) o iden i y e ical
deals (see a iable de ini ions in “Appendix1”).
623Jou nal o In e na ional Business S udies (2024) 55:616–637
Empi ical esul s
Boa d e o ms andM&A pe o mance
To in es iga e he impac o boa d e o ms on M&A pe o -
mance, we adop a quasi-DiD me hod. Speci ically, we com-
pa e he deal announcemen e u ns o he ea ed i ms (in a
e o m coun y) wi h hose o he con ol i ms. We es ima e
he ollowing o dina y leas squa es (OLS) eg ession:
whe e he dependen a iable is he (acqui e o a ge )
i m i’s CAR; Pos Ta ge is a dummy a iable ha equals
1 o M&As ha occu in he pos - e o m pe iod in a ge
(1)
CARi,
[−
3,
+
3
]
=𝛼+𝛽
⋅
Pos Ta ge i, +𝐙i, +𝜂y,j+𝜓c,j+𝜀i, ,
coun ies a ec ed by he e o ms. In all eg essions, we
include g anula indus y-yea ixed e ec s (ηy,j) and
coun y-indus y ixed e ec s (ψc,j). We de ine he indus-
y a he wo-digi SIC le el. The ixed e ec s con ol o
coun y–indus y-speci ic and ime- a ying ac o s, such
as indus y-le el M&A compe i ion, ha could a ec deal
e u ns. Nex , Zi, con ains i m-, deal-, and coun y-le el
cha ac e is ics, such as acqui e size, ela i e deal size,
e u n on asse s, ma ke - o-book alue, hos ile bid, cash-only
deal, c oss-bo de deal, numbe o bidde s, acqui e coun y
GDP, GDP pe capi a, GDP g ow h a e, ma ke capi aliza-
ion (as a pe cen age o GDP), eal in e es a e, in es men
p o ile, and he quali y o ins i u ion index. We also con ol
o ho izon al and e ical deal ypes because hey exe
Table 2 Summa y s a is ics
This able p o ides he desc ip i e s a is ics o he a iables used in ou mul i a ia e analyses. All he a i-
ables a e de ined in “Appendix1”
Va iable name Mean S . De . Q1 Median Q3N
Dependen a iables
Ta ge CAR 0.222 0.236 0.053 0.180 0.340 11,695
O e p emium 0.422 0.491 0.152 0.335 0.577 6186
Acqui e CAR 0.012 0.090 − 0.034 0.004 0.048 48,755
Ta ge CAR, public acqui e s 0.217 0.233 0.052 0.184 0.338 4310
Acqui e CAR, public a ge s − 0.010 0.093 − 0.064 − 0.011 0.036 4310
Combined CAR 0.021 0.090 − 0.031 0.016 0.067 4310
Numbe -based M&A ac i i y
Ln(1 + M&A Volume) 2.587 1.402 1.386 2.398 3.466 12,237
M&A in ensi y Fin. Acq. 0.120 0.166 0.000 0.066 0.188 12,237
Value-based M&A ac i i y
Ln(1 + M&A olume) 4.892 3.060 2.638 5.252 7.135 12,237
M&A in ensi y in. acq. 0.123 0.255 0.000 0.000 0.093 12,237
Fi m and deal cha ac e is ics
Fi m size 6.484 2.331 4.984 6.502 7.976 48,755
ROA 0.018 0.179 0.003 0.051 0.093 48,755
Ma ke - o-book 0.027 0.024 0.014 0.022 0.030 48,755
Rela i e deal size 0.316 0.547 0.035 0.162 0.352 48,755
Cash only 0.284 0.451 0.000 0.000 1.000 48,755
Hos ile 0.004 0.063 0.000 0.000 0.000 48,755
C oss-bo de 0.227 0.419 0.000 0.000 0.000 48,755
Numbe o bidde s 1.016 0.146 1.000 1.000 1.000 48,755
Ho izon al 0.566 0.496 0.000 1.000 1.000 48,755
Ve ical 0.136 0.343 0.000 0.000 0.000 48,755
Coun y cha ac e is ics
GDP 29.452 1.137 28.657 29.896 30.257 48,755
GDP pe capi a 10.498 0.571 10.400 10.618 10.791 48,755
GDP g ow h 2.882 2.047 2.011 2.783 4.077 48,755
In es men p o ile 4.747 0.333 4.638 4.841 4.967 48,755
Quali y o ins i u ions 3.668 3.152 1.590 3.069 6.324 48,755
Real in e es a e 10.775 1.649 9.667 11.542 12.000 48,755
S ock ma ke de elopmen 13.371 1.595 13.000 13.833 14.000 48,755
630 Jou nal o In e na ional Business S udies (2024) 55:616–637
o e paymen ex pos . As an al e na i e app oach o es o
inc easing e iciency in deal making, we examine o e pay-
men and epo he esul s in column 2 o Table4, Panel D,
using he acqui e ’s cash holdings o p oxy o he likelihood
o o e paymen . Ha o d e al. (2012) show empi ically ha
acqui e s wi h mo e cash holdings a e mo e p one o o e -
paymen in M&As. In a spi i simila o ha es ablished o
column 1, we ocus on he in e ac ion e m Pos Ta ge ×
Acqui e Cash Ra io. As column 2 in Panel D shows, abno -
mal e u ns o he a ge s acqui ed by a high cash bidde
a e signi ican ly lowe in he pos - e o m yea s han in he
p e- e o m pe iod. This esul u he unde sco es e o m-
induced e iciency o deal making.
Addi ional e idence: M&A olume
in hepos ‑ e o m pe iod
In his sec ion, we in es iga e he economic impac o boa d
e o ms on agg ega e M&A ac i i ies in he a ge coun y.
The inc ease in deal syne gies and acqui e gains ollowing
he e o m migh lead o a mo e ac i e akeo e ma ke , bu
because a ge sha eholde s ha e less o gain om akeo e s
a e he e o m, hey also may be less likely o sell. The e-
o e, he ne impac o boa d e o ms on agg ega e M&A
ac i i ies emains unclea ex an e. By s udying his ques-
ion, we gain insigh s in o he mac o-le el e ec s o boa d
e o ms on he coun y-le el M&A landscape.
To in o m his discussion, we un eg essions based on
Eq.(1) bu eplace he dependen a iable wi h a ge coun-
y M&A Volume, measu ed by deal numbe o ansac ion
alue comple ed o an indus y-coun y-yea .21 We con ol
o coun y cha ac e is ics, as well as indus y-yea and
coun y-indus y ixed e ec s. Table5 p esen s he esul s.
We s a wi h o e all M&A ac i i ies. Columns 1 and 2 in
Table5 show ha he agg ega e M&A deal numbe o alue
Table 5 Boa d Re o ms and
M&A ac i i y
This able p esen s OLS eg ession esul s examining he e ec o boa d e o ms on M&A ac i i y in num-
be -based (columns 1 and 3) and alue-based (columns 2 and 4). In columns 1–2, he dependen a iable
is M&A Volume (i.e., agg ega e M&A ac i i y in indus y- a ge coun y, whe e he indus y is de ined as
Fama-F ench 12-indus y). In columns 3–4, he dependen a iable measu es he M&A in ensi y by inan-
cial acqui e s. Pos Ta ge is a bina y a iable equal o one s a ing he yea in which he boa d e o m
becomes e ec i e in he a ge coun y. The inclusion o ixed e ec s (FEs) is indica ed a he bo om o he
able. Va iable de ini ions a e in “Appendix1”. P alues a e epo ed wi hin pa en heses below he coe -
icien es ima es. Robus s anda d e o s a e clus e ed a he coun y le el
M&A olume M&A in ensi y inancial acqui e s
Numbe -based Value-based Numbe -based Value-based
1 2 3 4
Pos a ge 0.039 − 0.096 − 0.023 − 0.040
(0.367) (0.314) (0.008) (0.006)
GDP − 0.286 − 0.155 − 0.124 − 0.118
(0.527) (0.850) (0.011) (0.019)
GDP pe capi a 0.732 1.281 0.105 0.120
(0.139) (0.188) (0.034) (0.024)
GDP g ow h 0.010 0.032 0.000 0.000
(0.058) (0.003) (0.681) (0.959)
S ock ma ke de . 0.025 0.090 − 0.004 0.000
(0.265) (0.004) (0.123) (0.946)
Real in e es a e 0.002 0.011 0.000 0.000
(0.418) (0.006) (0.926) (0.199)
In es men p o ile − 0.011 0.033 0.002 0.005
(0.637) (0.322) (0.391) (0.020)
Quali y o ins i u ions 0.029 0.000 0.002 − 0.001
(0.288) (0.993) (0.548) (0.807)
Yea × Indus y FE Yes Yes Yes Yes
Coun y × Indus y FE Yes Yes Yes Yes
Adjus ed R20.887 0.611 0.223 0.101
Obse a ions 12,237 12,237 12,237 12,237
21 Following Dessain e al. (2017), we measu e M&A deal olume
a he coun y-indus y le el, whe e indus y is classi ied acco ding o
he Fama-F ench 12 indus ies.

631Jou nal o In e na ional Business S udies (2024) 55:616–637
Table 6 Addi ional esul s and obus ness checks
[− 5, + 5] yea Window Excluding US acqui e s Excluding UK acqui e s Excluding
Canadian
Acq.
1 2 3 4
Panel A. Subsample analyses
Pos a ge − 0.033 − 0.058 − 0.036 − 0.063
(0.086) (0.041) (0.005) (0.000)
Con ols Yes Yes Yes Yes
Yea × Indus y FE Yes Yes Yes Yes
Coun y × Indus y FE Yes Yes Yes Yes
Adjus ed R20.104 0.082 0.123 0.117
Obse a ions 4877 4866 10,260 10,412
Acquisi ion o 100% s ake Including
wi hd awn
deals
1 2
Panel B. Di e en M&A da a sc eens
Pos a ge − 0.061 − 0.032
(0.000) (0.011)
Con ols Yes Yes
Yea × Indus y FE Yes Yes
Coun y × Indus y FE Yes Yes
Adjus ed R20.125 0.132
Numbe o obse a ions 7269 12,642
3-day CARs 11-day CARs
1 2
Panel C. Al e na i e e en window CARs
Pos a ge − 0.055 − 0.048
(0.000) (0.000)
Con ols Yes Yes
Yea × Indus y FE Yes Yes
Coun y × Indus y FE Yes Yes
Adjus ed R20.104 0.111
Obse a ions 11,695 11,695
P opensi y sco e
ma ching
Placebo e o m
yea s
Dynamic model S acked
DiD eg es-
sion
1 2 3 4
Panel D. P opensi y sco e ma ching, placebo es ,
dynamic model, and s acked DD eg ession
Pos Ta ge − 0.039 0.000 − 0.041
(0.047) (0.972) (0.082)
Yea 1 be o e e o m 0.006
(0.807)
Yea 2 be o e e o m 0.034
(0.105)
Yea o e o m − 0.028
(0.146)
Yea 1 a e e o m − 0.053
(0.009)
632 Jou nal o In e na ional Business S udies (2024) 55:616–637
emains unchanged ollowing a boa d e o m. The e o e, i
appea s ha he wo opposing o ces (i.e., mo e acqui e
gains and less willingness o sell due o be e managed com-
panies ollowing e o ms) cancel each o he ou , leading o a
negligible ne e ec on M&A olume a he agg ega e le el.
Howe e , as we ha e a gued p e iously, inancial bidde s
likely ge (pa ially) “squeezed ou ” o he akeo e ma ke ,
because he boa d e o m dep i es hem o an impo ance
sou ce o M&A gains, namely, he imp o emen in he a -
ge i m’s co po a e go e nance. We con i m his conjec-
u e wi h he esul s in columns 3 and 4 o Table5, which
show ha bo h he numbe and alue o deals comple ed by
inancial acqui e s d op signi ican ly a e he e o ms a e
in place.
Robus ness checks
In his sec ion and Table6, we epo on a ba e y o obus -
ness checks. Fi s , o mi iga e conce ns abou con ounding
e en s, we es ic ou sample pe iod o 5yea s be o e and
a e he e o m. As column 1 o Panel A shows, he coe -
icien es ima e o Pos Ta ge is nega i e and s a is ically
signi ican a he 10% le el. The economic e ec is compa-
able o ou main indings, as epo ed in Table3.
Second, legal o igins a guably migh explain he e ec s
o co po a e go e nance e o ms. In pa icula , ou esul s
migh be d i en by common law coun ies wi h a mo e
de eloped capi al ma ke (La Po a e al., 1997). We exam-
ine his possibili y by emo ing h ee la ges common law
coun ies in ou sample, namely, Uni ed S a es, Uni ed King-
dom, and Canada. These coun ies also ep esen he mos
ac i e M&A ma ke s du ing ou sample pe iod. In Panel A
o Table6, we a i m ha he indings o lowe a ge CAR
in he pos - e o m pe iod a e no d i en by hese coun ies
hough; he e ec s emain s a is ically signi ican when we
exclude M&As in hese egions (columns 2–4). The eco-
nomic magni ude o he e o m e ec is also simila in hese
subsample analyses.
Thi d, we check i ou esul s migh be sensi i e o he
sc eening c i e ia. Fo example, ou esul s migh be d i en
by pa ial acquisi ions o a sample selec ion bias due o ou
inclusion o only comple ed deals. Panel B o Table6 ea-
u es only 100%-s ake deals; i s column 1 shows ha he
e ec s o boa d e o ms a e simila o he baseline esul s. In
column 2, we include wi hd awn ansac ions in he analysis.
The esul s again emain obus .
Fou h, we examine some al e na i e announcemen
e u n windows. Speci ically, we use [− 1, + 1] and [− 5,
+ 5] e en windows, cen e ed a ound he deal announce-
men . We con inue o ind a nega i e associa ion be ween
boa d e o ms and a ge e u ns (Panel D, Table6).
Fi h, an impo an assump ion o he DiD analysis is
ha he ea ed and con ol g oups would ollow pa allel
ends in he absence o he e o m. The e o e, p io o he
This able p esen s he coe icien es ima es o OLS eg essions examining he e ec o boa d e o ms on Ta ge CAR . In all models, Ta ge CAR
is compu ed o e a 7-day e en window a ound he announcemen da e (excep in Panel C). Panel A epo s a ious subsample analyses. Column
1 limi s he sample o deals announced o e he [− 5, + 5] yea window ela i e o he boa d e o m yea . The emaining h ee columns p esen
he esul s a e excluding he h ee mos ac i e M&A ma ke s espec i ely. Panel B epo s he esul s wi h al e na i e M&A da a il e s. Col-
umn 1 conside s comple ed deals in ol ing he acquisi ion o 100% s ake in he a ge , and column 2 augmen s he sample wi h wi hd awn deals.
Panel C eplica es he main esul s wi h Ta ge CAR calcula ed o e a 5-day (column 1) and 11-day (column 2) e en windows. Panel D epo s
he es ima ion esul s o he p opensi y-sco e ma ching app oach (column 1), he model wi h placebo e o m yea s (column 2), he dynamic
model (column 3), and he s acked DiD eg ession (column 4). Pos Ta ge is a bina y a iable equal o one s a ing he yea in which he boa d
e o m becomes e ec i e in he a ge coun y. Each model includes he same se o con ols and ixed e ec s (FEs) as in Table3, whose coe -
icien s a e un abula ed o b e i y. Va iable de ini ions a e in “Appendix1”. P alues a e epo ed wi hin pa en heses below he coe icien es i-
ma es. Robus s anda d e o s a e clus e ed a he coun y le el.
Table 6 (con inued)
P opensi y sco e
ma ching
Placebo e o m
yea s
Dynamic model S acked
DiD eg es-
sion
1 2 3 4
Yea 2 a e e o m − 0.039
(0.014)
Yea s 3 and plus a e e o m − 0.061
(0.000)
Con ols Yes Yes Yes Yes
Yea × Indus y FE Yes Yes Yes Yes
Coun y × Indus y FE Yes Yes Yes Yes
Adjus ed R20.139 0.114 0.110 0.087
Obse a ions 6679 11,695 11,695 4605
633Jou nal o In e na ional Business S udies (2024) 55:616–637
e o m, we should no ind di e ences in e u ns be ween
ea ed and con ol i ms. We adop h ee s a egies o es
whe he his pa allel ends assump ion holds. Wi h p open-
si y sco e ma ching (PSM), we c ea e a ma ched sample in a
P obi model22 and he eby compa e he ea ed and con ol
i ms wi h simila obse able cha ac e is ics. “Appendix2”
epo s he di e ences in means ac oss samples be o e and
a e ma ching. In column 1 o Panel D, we use he PSM
sample o un ou baseline eg ession; he e ec o boa d
e o ms emains highly signi ican . Then we check o pa al-
lel ends by unning a placebo es , in which we andomly
assign he e o m yea o coun ies and e-es ima e he base-
line model. As expec ed, he placebo es ima e o Pos Ta ge
is no s a is ically signi ican (column 2, Panel D). Finally,
we check he dynamic e ec o he e o ms by expanding
he s a is ical speci ica ion in Eq.(1), using a se o indica-
o a iables ha ack e o m e ec s om 2yea s be o e
un il ou o mo e yea s a e he e o m (simila o Fau e
e al., 2017). In column 3, we see ha p io o he e o m,
a ge e u ns a e simila in he ea ed and con ol coun ies,
con i ming he pa allel ends. The e ec s o he e o ms
a e signi ican only 1yea a e he e o ms a e i s imple-
men ed. This e idence bols e s ou con idence abou using
e o ms as alid exogenous shocks o co po a e go e nance
ha enable us o examine M&A pe o mance.
Six h, we add ess ano he conce n ela ed o he s ag-
ge ed DiD analysis. S agge ed DiD eg essions may p oduce
biased es ima es o he a e age ea men e ec (ATE) wi h
ypical wo-way ixed e ec s (e.g., Callaway & San ’Anna,
2021; Sun & Ab aham, 2021), because o hese a iance-
weigh ed a e ages, some weigh s migh be nega i e. The
la e - ea ed obse a ions could ac as con ol uni s be o e
he ea men ; he ea lie - ea ed g oups can se e as con ols
a e he ea men . To deal wi h his conce n, we ollow
a emedy sugges ed by Bake , La cke and Wang (2022)
and Cengiz, Dube, Lindne and Zippe e (2019) and c e-
a e coho -speci ic da a se s ha include a ge i ms om
a e o m coun y ( ea ed a ge s) and all M&A a ge s ha
do no expe ience a e o m wi hin [− 5, + 5] yea s a ound
he e o m yea (i.e., “clean” con ols).23 A e s acking all
he e en -speci ic da a se s in ela i e ime, we pe o m he
DiD es ima ion on hese s acked da a (column 4, Panel D,
Table6). The s acked DiD es ima e emains s a is ically
signi ican , wi h an economic magni ude close o ha o he
baseline ea men e ec (Table3). The e o e, ou baseline
indings appea unlikely o be biased by he he e ogenous
ea men e ec s iden i ied in p io wo k.
Conclusions
Do imp o emen s o co po a e boa d unc ions a ec M&A
e u ns? We in es iga e his ques ion using boa d e o ms
ac oss 61 coun ies du ing 1985–2021. Ou quasi-DiD
eg essions indica e ha , ollowing he e o ms in a a ge
coun y, acqui e s’ announcemen e u ns inc ease, while
a ge e u ns dec ease. Tha is, boa d e o ms igge a sig-
ni ican weal h edis ibu ion be ween acqui e and a ge
sha eholde s. Mo eo e , deal-le el announcemen e u ns
inc ease ollowing he e o m, sugges ing ha boa d e o ms
imp o e o e all ansac ion syne gies. As we show, e o m-
induced educ ions in he p i a e bene i s o con ol o e
he a ge i m esou ces can explain hese esul s, in ha
he main indings a e d i en by a ge i ms owned by la ge
block holde s.
Explo ing coun y-le el he e ogenei y in ins i u ional
quali y and sha eholde p o ec ion, we also ind ha he
alue e ec s o he boa d e o ms a e mo e p onounced
in coun ies whe e legal p o ec ion o ex e nal in es o s is
s onge . The e o e, coun y-le el sha eholde p o ec ion
ein o ces he e ec i eness o i m-le el boa d e o ms.
Mo eo e , a e he boa d e o ms, inancial bidde s pa ici-
pa e ela i ely less in he akeo e ma ke , sugges ing ha
hese e o ms change he composi ion o he acqui e pool.
Among all he e o ms, hose implemen ed unde a comply-
o -explain app oach deli e he mos no iceable e ec s.
These esul s a e in o ma i e o esea che s, p ac i ion-
e s, and policymake s ha seek o unde s and he ole o
boa d p ac ices in M&A dynamics and ou comes. Co po a e
boa d e o ms ha e been p ominen in he policy agendas o
se e al eme ging ma ke s (A a a e al., 2021). Ou indings
sugges ha such e o ms may in luence c oss-bo de deal
lows, akeo e nego ia ions, and, ul ima ely, sha eholde
weal h in hese coun ies. In addi ion o i s ele ance o
policymaking, ou s udy o e s c ucial insigh s o busi-
nesses, such as mul ina ional en e p ises seeking expansion
h ough o e seas akeo e s. The success o hei M&A s a -
egy c i ically depends on he iming o he a ge coun y’s
boa d e o ms and exis ing legal p o ec ions in ha des ina-
ion coun y. Mo eo e , he impac o boa d e o ms on i m
beha io s likely expand o con ex s beyond M&A, such as
o eign-ma ke en y modes and o eign di ec in es men .
We lea e he explo a ion o hese opics o u he esea ch.
22 The dependen a iable equals 1 i he a ge i m is acqui ed a e
he in oduc ion o boa d e o m ( ea ed) and 0 i be o e he e o m
(con ol). The con ol a iables a e all i m and deal cha ac e is ics
om column 1 in Table3. We ma ch each ea ed i m wi h he con-
ol wi h he closes sco e o he ea ed i m. We also equi e ha he
maximum di e ence be ween he p opensi y sco e o each ea ed
i m and he con ol i m does no exceed 0.1% in absolu e alue.
23 We epea his exe cise wi h he [− 3; + 3] yea window a ound he
e o m yea , and he esul s emain unchanged (un epo ed).
634 Jou nal o In e na ional Business S udies (2024) 55:616–637
Appendix1: Va iable de ini ions
Dependen a iables
Ta ge CAR : Cumula i e abno mal e u n o he a ge i m
o e he 7-day e en window (− 3, + 3) a ound he announce-
men da e. In obus ness checks, 3-day and 11-day windows
a e also used as al e na i e e en windows. The abno mal
e u n is compu ed using a ma ke model wi h pa ame e s es i-
ma ed o e he es ima ion pe iod (− 236, − 36) wi h espec o
he announcemen day. The alue weigh ed index o US i ms
is ob ained om CRSP, while o o he coun ies local indices
a e e ie ed om Wo ldscope.
O e p emium: Final o e p ice ela i e o a ge ma ke
p ice 4weeks p io o M&A announcemen .
Acqui e CAR : Cumula i e abno mal e u n o he acqui -
ing i m o e he 7-day e en window (− 3, + 3) a ound he
announcemen da e. In obus ness checks, 3-day and 7-day
windows a e also used as al e na i e e en windows.
Combined CAR : The alue weigh ed 7-day CAR o acqui e
and a ge i ms whe eas he weigh s a e based on ma ke alue
o each i m 4weeks p io o he announcemen da e. I is cal-
cula ed o e a 7-day window a ound he announcemen da e.
In obus ness checks, 3-day and 7-day windows a e also used
as al e na i e e en windows.
M&A olume: Va iable measu ing he yea ly agg ega e
M&A ac i i y in a gi en indus y- a ge coun y, ei he
in numbe o deals o in alue (million US$). The adop ed
indus y de ini ion is he Fama-F ench (FF) 12-indus y clas-
si ica ion. The eg essions use he loga i hm o one plus he
co esponding a iable.
M&A in ensi y inancial acqui e s: Va iable measu ing he
in ensi y o inancial acqui e s’ M&A ac i i y. I co esponds
o he agg ega e M&A ac i i y by inancial acqui e s di ided
by he agg ega e M&A ac i i y in he same indus y- a ge
coun y in ha yea . The agg ega e M&A ac i i y is ei he
measu ed in numbe o in alue (million US$).
Independen a iables o in e es
Pos Ta ge (Acqui e ): Bina y a iable ha equals he alue
o one beginning in a iscal yea when majo boa d e o ms
became e ec i e in a gi en a ge (acqui e ) coun y, and
ze o o he wise.
Fi m cha ac e is ics
Blockholde : I iden i ies a ge i ms wi h s a egic block
owne s, elying on owne ship da a om O bis. Two a i-
ables a e cons uc ed: Numbe , which coun s he numbe o
block holde s wi h owne ship g ea e han 5% (o 20%), and
a dummy a iable, which iden i ies a ge i ms wi h a leas
one block holde in a gi en yea .
Cash a io: I is calcula ed as cash and sho - e m in es -
men s di ided by he book alue o o al asse s.
Financial acqui e : Bina y a iable ha equals he alue
o one i he acqui e is a inancial i m as de ined in SDC,
and ze o o he wise.
Fi m size: The na u al loga i hm o he i m’s ma ke
alue o equi y 4weeks p io o he announcemen da e (in
$ million).
Ma ke - o-Book: I is calcula ed as he ma ke alue o
common equi y di ided by he book alue o common equi y
and di ided by 100.
ROA: I is calcula ed as EBITDA di ided by he book
alue o o al asse s.
Deal cha ac e is ics
Cash only: Bina y a iable ha akes he alue o one i he
me hod o paymen is ully cash, and ze o o he wise.
C oss-bo de : Bina y a iable ha akes he alue o one
i he a ge and he acqui e a e om di e en coun ies,
and ze o o he wise.
Ho izon al: Bina y a iable ha akes he alue o one i
he a ge and he acqui e a e om he same wo-digi SIC
indus ies, and ze o o he wise.
Hos ile: Bina y a iable ha akes he alue o one i
he deal a i ude is classi ied as hos ile in SDC, and ze o
o he wise.
Numbe o bidde s: Va iable ha measu es he deg ee o
public compe i ion, co esponding o he numbe o bidde s
epo ed in SDC. The eg essions use he loga i hm o he
co esponding a iable.
Rela i e deal size: The a io o deal alue o he ma -
ke capi aliza ion o he a ge i m 4 weeks p io o he
announcemen da e.
Ve ical: Bina y a iable ha iden i ies e ical deals ol-
lowing he app oach in Kedia e al. (2011). To ha end, we
es ima e he e ical coe icien a iable using he indus y
commodi y low in o ma ion in he use able o benchma k
inpu –ou pu (IO) Accoun s o he US Economy collec ed
by he Bu eau o Economic Analysis. Fo a gi en deal,
we use he IO able co esponding o he yea o he deal
announcemen . The a iable akes he alue o one i he
e ical coe icien is highe han he 1% cu o poin .
Coun y cha ac e is ics
Accoun ing s anda ds: Disclosu e Quali y index c ea ed by
he Cen e o In e na ional Financial Analysis and Resea ch
o a e he quali y o 1990 annual epo s on hei disclosu e
o accoun ing in o ma ion. We use a dummy a iable equal
o one i he Disclosu e Quali y index o he a ge coun y
635Jou nal o In e na ional Business S udies (2024) 55:616–637
is abo e median, and ze o o he wise (Sou ce: La Po a e al.,
2000).
In es men p o ile: Time- a ying index measu ing he
go e nmen ’s a i ude owa ds in es men in he bidde
( a ge ) coun y. The in es men p o ile is de e mined by
summing he h ee ollowing componen s: (1) isk o exp o-
p ia ion o con ac iabili y; (2) paymen delays; and (3)
epa ia ion o p o i s. Each componen is sco ed on a scale
om 0, e y high isk, o 4, e y low isk. The index is
coded in such a way ha a highe sco e iden i ies coun ies
wi h be e in es men p o ile, and ice e sa (Sou ce: In e -
na ional Coun y Risk Guide).
GDP: The na u al loga i hm o he coun y’s g oss
domes ic p oduc .
GDP pe capi a: Pe -capi a g oss domes ic p oduc in
US$. We use he log ans o m o he a iable.
GDP g ow h: The annual g ow h a e o g oss domes ic
p oduc .
Quali y o ins i u ions: Time- a ying index measu ing
ins i u ional quali y o a coun y, which is calcula ed by
summing he ollowing h ee componen s: (1) co up ion;
(2) law and o de ; and (3) bu eauc a ic quali y. The index is
coded in such a way ha high sco e iden i ies coun ies wi h
be e ins i u ional quali y (Sou ce: In e na ional Coun y
Risk Guide).
Real in e es a e: The co esponding coun y’s eal in e -
es a e in pe cen age.
Sha eholde p o ec ion: An i-Di ec o Righ s (ADR)
index, which cap u es how s ongly he legal sys em a o s
mino i y sha eholde s agains manage s and/o dominan
sha eholde s. We use a dummy a iable equal o one i he
ADR index o he a ge coun y is abo e median, and ze o
o he wise (Sou ce: Djanko e al., 2008).
S ock ma ke de elopmen : Ma ke capi aliza ion o lis ed
domes ic companies as a pe cen age o he co esponding
coun y GDP.
Appendix2: Fi s s age o p opensi y sco e
ma ching
The able epo s he di e ences in means ac oss samples
be o e and a e ma ching.
Be o e ma ching A e ma ching
T ea ed Con ol -s a o
di e -
ences
T ea ed Con ol -s a o
di e -
ences
Psco e 0.613 0.532 32.01 0.595 0.595 0.00
Fi m
size
5.148 4.657 13.67 4.892 4.937 − 0.86
ROA − 0.028 − 0.018 − 3.30 − 0.021 − 0.018 − 0.61
MTB 0.023 0.023 − 0.02 0.022 0.024 − 1.62
Rela i e
deal
size
0.403 0.430 − 3.12 0.412 0.418 − 0.47
Cash
only
0.595 0.457 14.94 0.557 0.542 1.00
Hos ile 0.021 0.083 − 15.58 0.010 0.010 0.00
C oss-
bo de
0.263 0.165 12.71 0.198 0.209 − 0.99
Numbe
o bid-
de s
0.748 0.765 − 5.69 0.749 0.742 1.49
Ho i-
zon al
0.498 0.482 1.73 0.494 0.502 − 0.53
Ve ical 0.088 0.145 − 9.63 0.093 0.100 − 0.77
Acknowledgemen s We hank Lemma Senbe ( he Edi o ) and wo
anonymous e e ees o hei cons uc i e commen s. We a e also g a e-
ul o E ic de Bod , Jean-Gab iel Cousin, E o e C oci, Zo an Filipo ic,
Edi h Ginglinge , Ali Özdakak, and Lau en Weill, as well as semina
pa icipan s a Pa is Dauphine Uni e si y and EM S asbou g Busi-
ness School o help ul commen s and sugges ions. This esea ch did
no ecei e any speci ic g an om unding agencies in he public,
comme cial, o no - o -p o i sec o s. Da a used in he s udy a e om
publicly a ailable sou ces.
Open Access This a icle is licensed unde a C ea i e Commons A i-
bu ion 4.0 In e na ional License, which pe mi s use, sha ing, adap a-
ion, dis ibu ion and ep oduc ion in any medium o o ma , as long
as you gi e app op ia e c edi o he o iginal au ho (s) and he sou ce,
p o ide a link o he C ea i e Commons licence, and indica e i changes
we e made. The images o o he hi d pa y ma e ial in his a icle a e
included in he a icle’s C ea i e Commons licence, unless indica ed
o he wise in a c edi line o he ma e ial. I ma e ial is no included in
he a icle’s C ea i e Commons licence and you in ended use is no
pe mi ed by s a u o y egula ion o exceeds he pe mi ed use, you will
need o ob ain pe mission di ec ly om he copy igh holde . To iew a
copy o his licence, isi h p://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0/.

636 Jou nal o In e na ional Business S udies (2024) 55:616–637
Re e ences
Ahe n, K., Daminelli, D., & F acassi, C. (2015). Los in ansla ion?
The e ec o cul u al alues on me ge s a ound he wo ld. Jou nal
o Financial Economics, 117(1), 165–189.
Ahmad, M. F., de Bod , E., & Ha o d, J. (2021). In e na ional ade
and he p opaga ion o me ge wa es. Re iew o Financial S udies,
34(10), 4876–4925.
Ak as, N., de Bod , E., & Roll, R. (2004). Ma ke esponse o Eu opean
egula ion o business combina ions. Jou nal o Financial and
Quan i a i e Analysis, 39(4), 731–757.
Ak as, N., Boone, A., Wi kowski, A., Xu, G., & Yu oglu, B. (2021).
The ole o in e nal M&A eams in akeo e s. Re iew o Finance,
25(4), 1047–1088.
Alexand idis, G., Pe mezas, D., & T a los, N. G. (2010). Gains om
me ge s and acquisi ions a ound he wo ld: New e idence. Finan-
cial Managemen , 39(4), 1671–1695.
Alimo , A. (2015). Labo ma ke egula ions and c oss-bo de me g-
e s and acquisi ions. Jou nal o In e na ional Business S udies,
46(8), 984–1009.
Ande son, R. C., & Reeb, D. M. (2003). Founding- amily owne ship
and i m pe o mance: E idence om he S&P 500. Jou nal o
Finance, 58(3), 1301–1328.
A a a , M., Claessens, S., & Yu oglu, B. (2021). Co po a e go e nance
in eme ging ma ke s: A selec i e e iew and an agenda o u u e
esea ch. Eme ging Ma ke s Re iew, 48, 100767.
Bae, K., El Ghoul, S., Guedhami, O., & Zheng, X. (2021). Boa d
e o ms and di idend policy: In e na ional e idence. Jou nal o
Financial and Quan i a i e Analysis, 56(4), 1296–1320.
Bake , A. C., La cke , D. F., & Wang, C. Y. (2022). How much
should we us s agge ed di e ence-in-di e ences es ima es?
Jou nal o Financial Economics, 144(2), 370–395.
Ba ge on, L., Schlingemann, F., S ulz, R., & Zu e , C. (2008). Why
do p i a e acqui e s pay so li le compa ed o public acqui e s?
Jou nal o Financial Economics, 89(3), 375–390.
Bhagwa , V., B ogaa d, J., & Julio, B. (2021). A BIT goes a long
way: Bila e al in es men ea ies and c oss-bo de me ge s.
Jou nal o Financial Economics, 140(2), 514–538.
Boul on, T., Sma , S., & Zu e , C. (2010). IPO unde p icing and
in e na ional co po a e go e nance. Jou nal o In e na ional
Business S udies, 41(2), 206–222.
B adley, M., Desai, A., & Kim, E. H. (1988). Syne gis ic gains om
co po a e acquisi ions and hei di ision be ween he s ockhold-
e s o a ge and acqui ing i ms. Jou nal o Financial Econom-
ics, 21(1), 3–40.
B ockman, P., Rui, O., & Zou, H. (2013). Ins i u ions and he pe o -
mance o poli ically connec ed M&As. Jou nal o In e na ional
Business S udies, 44(8), 833–852.
Cai, Y., & Se ili , M. (2012). Boa d connec ions and M&A ansac-
ions. Jou nal o Financial Economics, 103(2), 327–349.
Callaway, B., & San ’Anna, P. H. (2021). Di e ence-in-di e ences
wi h mul iple ime pe iods. Jou nal o Econome ics, 225(2),
200–230.
Cannon, J. N., Hu, B., Lee, J. J., & Yang, D. (2020). The e ec o in e -
na ional akeo e laws on co po a e esou ce adjus men s: Ma ke
discipline and/o manage ial myopia? Jou nal o In e na ional
Business S udies, 51(9), 1443–1477.
Cengiz, D., Dube, A., Lindne , A., & Zippe e , B. (2019). The e ec o
minimum wages on low-wage jobs. Qua e ly Jou nal o Econom-
ics, 134(3), 1405–1454.
Chen, R., Guedhami, O., Yang, Y., & Zaynu dino a, G. (2020). Co -
po a e go e nance and cash holdings: E idence om wo ldwide
boa d e o ms. Jou nal o Co po a e Finance, 65, 101771.
Chen, Y., Goyal, A., & Zolo oy, L. (2022). Global boa d e o ms and
he p icing o IPOs. Jou nal o Financial and Quan i a i e Analy-
sis, 57(6), 2412–2443.
Claessens, S., Djanko , S., & Lang, L. H. P. (2000). The sepa a ion
o owne ship and con ol in Eas Asian co po a ions. Jou nal o
Financial Economics, 58(1–2), 81–112.
Dahya, J., Golubo , A., Pe mezas, D., & T a los, N. (2019). Go e n-
ance manda es, ou side di ec o s, and acqui e pe o mance. Jou -
nal o Co po a e Finance, 59, 218–238.
de Bod , E., Cousin, J., & O ice , M. S. (2022). Financial cons ain s,
owne ship dilu ion, and he me hod o paymen in M&A ansac-
ions. Jou nal o Co po a e Finance, 75, 102250.
Dessain , O., Golubo , A., & Volpin, P. (2017). Employmen p o ec ion
and akeo e s. Jou nal o Financial Economics, 125(2), 369–388.
Diniz-Maganini, N., Rasheed, A. A., Yaşa , M., & Sheng, H. H. (2023).
C oss-lis ing and p ice e iciency: An ins i u ional explana ion.
Jou nal o In e na ional Business S udies, 54(2), 233–257.
Djanko , S., La Po a, R., Lopez-de Silanes, F., & Shlei e , A. (2008).
The law and economics o sel -dealing. Jou nal o Financial Eco-
nomics, 88(3), 430–465.
D i ield, D., Jones, C., & C o y, J. (2013). In e na ional business
esea ch and isky in es men , an analysis o FDI in con lic
zones. In e na ional Business Re iew, 22(1), 140–155.
D iss, H. (2022). Boa d go e nance and in es men sensi i i y o s ock
p ice: In e na ional e idence. Jou nal o Financial and Quan i a-
i e Analysis, 58, 3027–3057.
Du ne , A., E unza, V., & Molchano , A. (2009). P ope y igh s p o-
ec ion, co po a e anspa ency, and g ow h. Jou nal o In e na-
ional Business S udies, 40(9), 1533–1562.
Dyck, A., & Zingales, L. (2004). P i a e bene i s o con ol: An in e -
na ional compa ison. Jou nal o Finance, 59(2), 537–600.
Eckbo, B. E. (2009). Bidding s a egies and akeo e p emiums: A
e iew. Jou nal o Co po a e Finance, 15(1), 149–178.
El Ghoul, S., Guedhami, O., Mansi, S. A., & Sy, O. (2023). E en
s udies in in e na ional inance esea ch. Jou nal o In e na ional
Business S udies, 54(2), 344–364.
Faccio, M., & Lang, L. H. P. (2002). The ul ima e owne ship o Wes -
e n Eu opean coun ies. Jou nal o Financial Economics, 65(3),
365–395.
Fau e , L., Hung, M., Li, X., & Taboada, A. G. (2017). Boa d e o ms
and i m alue: Wo ldwide e idence. Jou nal o Financial Eco-
nomics, 125(1), 120–142.
Fich, E. M., Cai, J., & T an, A. L. (2011). S ock op ion g an s o a ge
CEOs du ing p i a e me ge nego ia ions. Jou nal o Financial
Economics, 101(2), 413–430.
Fulle , K., Ne e , J., & S egemolle , M. (2002). Wha do e u ns o
acqui ing i ms ell us? E idence om i ms ha make many
acquisi ions. Jou nal o Finance, 57(4), 1763–1793.
Glendening, M., Khu ana, I. K., & Wang, W. (2016). The ma ke o
co po a e con ol and di idend policies: C oss-coun y e idence
om M&A laws. Jou nal o In e na ional Business S udies, 47(9),
1106–1134.
Gompe s, P., Ishii, J., & Me ick, A. (2003). Co po a e go e nance and
equi y p ices. Qua e ly Jou nal o Economics, 118(1), 107–156.
Go benko, A. S., & Malenko, A. (2014). S a egic and inancial bid-
de s in akeo e auc ions. Jou nal o Finance, 69(6), 2513–2555.
G ossman, S. J., & Ha , O. (1988). One sha e-one o e and he ma -
ke o co po a e con ol. Jou nal o Financial Economics, 20,
175–202.
Ha o d, J. (2005). Wha d i es me ge wa es? Jou nal o Financial
Economics, 77(3), 529–560.
Ha o d, J., Humphe y-Jenne , M., & Powell, R. (2012). The sou ces o
alue des uc ion in acquisi ions by en enched manage s. Jou nal
o Financial Economics, 106(2), 247–261.
637Jou nal o In e na ional Business S udies (2024) 55:616–637
Ha zell, J. C., O ek, E., & Ye mack, D. (2004). Wha ’s in i o me?
CEOs whose i ms a e acqui ed. Re iew o Financial S udies,
17(1), 37–61.
Hillie , D., Pindado, J., de Quei oz, V., & de la To e, C. (2011). The
impac o coun y-le el co po a e go e nance on esea ch and
de elopmen . Jou nal o In e na ional Business S udies, 42(1),
76–98.
Hsu, P. H., Tian, X., & Xu, Y. (2014). Financial de elopmen and inno-
a ion: C oss-coun y e idence. Jou nal o Financial Economics,
112(1), 116–135.
Hu, J., Li, S., Taboada, A., & Zhang, F. (2020). Co po a e boa d
e o ms a ound he wo ld and s ock p ice c ash isk. Jou nal o
Co po a e Finance, 62, 101557.
Huang, T., Wu, F., Yu, J., & Zhang, B. (2020). In es o p o ec ion and
he alue impac o s ock liquidi y. Jou nal o In e na ional Busi-
ness S udies, 51(1), 72–94.
Jensen, M. C. (1986). Agency cos s o ee cash low, co po a e inance,
and akeo e s. Ame ican Economic Re iew, 76(2), 323–329.
John, K., & Senbe , L. W. (1998). Co po a e go e nance and boa d
e ec i eness. Jou nal o Banking and Finance, 22(4), 371–403.
Kedia, S., Ra id, A., & Pons, V. (2011). When do e ical me ge s
c ea e alue? Financial Managemen , 40(4), 845–877.
Kim, E. H., & Lu, Y. (2013). Co po a e go e nance e o ms a ound
he wo ld and c oss-bo de acquisi ions. Jou nal o Co po a e
Finance, 22, 236–253.
La Po a, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., Shlei e , A., & Vishny, R. (1997).
Legal de e minan s o ex e nal inance. Jou nal o Finance, 52(3),
1131–1150.
La Po a, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., Shlei e , A., & Vishny, R.
(1998). Law and inance. Jou nal o Poli ical Economy, 106(6),
1131–1155.
La Po a, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., Shlei e , A., & Vishny, R. (2000).
In es o p o ec ion and co po a e go e nance. Jou nal o Finan-
cial Economics, 58(1–2), 3–27.
La Po a, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., Shlei e , A., & Vishny, R. (2002).
In es o p o ec ion and co po a e alua ion. Jou nal o Finance,
57(3), 1147–1170.
Lang, L. H. P., S ulz, R. M., & Walkling, R. A. (1991). A es o he
ee cash low hypo hesis: The case o bidde e u ns. Jou nal o
Financial Economics, 29(2), 315–336.
Maksimo ic, V., Phillips, G., & Yang, L. (2013). P i a e and public
me ge wa es. Jou nal o Finance, 68(5), 2177–2217.
Malmendie , U., & Ta e, G. (2008). Who makes acquisi ions? CEO
o e con idence and he ma ke ’s eac ion. Jou nal o Financial
Economics, 89(1), 20–43.
Masulis, R., Wang, C., & Xie, F. (2007). Co po a e go e nance and
acqui e e u ns. Jou nal o Finance, 62(4), 1851–1889.
Moelle , S. B., Schlingemann, F. P., & S ulz, M. (2004). Fi m size
and he gains om acquisi ions. Jou nal o Financial Economics,
73(2), 201–228.
Robinson, J., Acemoglu, D., & Johnson, S. (2005). Ins i u ions as a
undamen al cause o long- un g ow h. Handbook o Economic
G ow h, 1A, 386–472.
Rockness, H., & Rockness, J. (2005). Legisla ed e hics: F om En on
o Sa banes–Oxley, he impac on co po a e Ame ica. Jou nal o
Business E hics, 57(1), 31–54.
Rossi, S., & Volpin, P. F. (2004). C oss-coun y de e minan s o me g-
e s and acquisi ions. Jou nal o Financial Economics, 74(2),
277–304.
Schwa z-Zi , M., & Volko a, E. 2023. Is blockholde di e si y de i-
men al? Managemen Science, o hcoming.
Schwe , G. W. (2000). Hos ili y in akeo e s: In he eyes o he
beholde ? Jou nal o Finance, 55(6), 2599–2640.
Suga han, A., & Geo ge, R. (2015). The in luence o go e nance in a-
s uc u e and co po a e go e nance on p o i shi ing. Jou nal o
In e na ional Business S udies, 46(8), 886–916.
Sun, L., & Ab aham, S. (2021). Es ima ing dynamic ea men e ec s
in e en s udies wi h he e ogeneous ea men e ec s. Jou nal o
Econome ics, 225(2), 175–199.
Tosun, O. K., & Senbe , L. W. (2020). Does in e nal boa d moni o -
ing a ec deb ma u i y? Re iew o Quan i a i e Finance and
Accoun ing, 54(1), 205–245.
Villalonga, B., & Ami , R. (2006). How do amily owne ship, con ol,
and managemen a ec i m alue? Jou nal o Financial Econom-
ics, 80(2), 385–417.
Zhou, C., Xie, J., & Wang, Q. (2016). Failu e o comple e c oss-bo de
M&As: “ o” s. “ om” eme ging ma ke s. Jou nal o In e na-
ional Business S udies, 47(9), 1077–1105.
Publishe 's No e Sp inge Na u e emains neu al wi h ega d o
ju isdic ional claims in published maps and ins i u ional a ilia ions.
Muhammad Fa ooq Ahmad is Associa e P o esso o Finance a
SKEMA Business School. His esea ch in e es s include in e na ional
co po a e go e nance, sus ainable inance, me ge s and acquisi ions,
and inno a ion. His wo k has been published in he Jou nal o Banking
and Finance, Re iew o Financial S udies, and o he academic ou le s.
Niha Ak as is P o esso o Finance holding he Chai o Me ge s
and Acquisi ions a WHU O o Beisheim School o Managemen . His
esea ch a icles, mos ly ocusing on me ge s and acquisi ions, ha e
appea ed in such jou nals as Business and Socie y, Economic Jou nal,
Jou nal o Co po a e Finance, Jou nal o Financial and Quan i a i e
Analysis, Jou nal o Financial Economics, Re iew o Finance, among
o he s.
Douglas Cumming is he DeSan is Dis inguished P o esso o Finance
and En ep eneu ship a he College o Business, Flo ida A lan ic Uni-
e si y, and a Visi ing P o esso o Finance a Bi mingham Business
School, Uni e si y o Bi mingham. Douglas has published 21 books
and 230 a icles in leading e e eed academic jou nals (including 43 in
Financial Times Top-50 jou nals), which ha e been ci ed o e 27,000
imes.
Guosong Xu is Assis an P o esso o Finance a Ro e dam School o
Managemen , E asmus Uni e si y. His esea ch in e es s include co -
po a e inance, beha io al inance, and he in e sec ions wi h en i on-
men al, social, and co po a e go e nance issues. His esea ch has been
published in he Jou nal o Co po a e Finance, Jou nal o Financial
and Quan i a i e Analysis, and Re iew o Finance.