国内外企业并购动因理论文献综述
中外企业并购重组的理论综述
中外企业并购重组的理论综述中外企业并购重组是指中外两国企业为了实现各自发展目标，通过并购或重组来实现资源整合和优势互补的行为。
自2000年以来，随着全球化和经济一体化的加速发展，中外企业并购重组的频率和规模也不断增加。
本文将从理论的角度综述中外企业并购重组的发展趋势、动因和影响。
首先，中外企业并购重组的发展趋势。
随着全球化的深入推进，中外企业之间的交流与合作日益紧密。
中外企业通过并购重组可以迅速获取对方企业的技术、市场、品牌等资源，从而提升自身的竞争力。
此外，随着产业结构升级和市场需求变化，中外企业之间的并购重组呈现出多元化、高度专业化的特点。
例如，今年以来，全球电动车市场竞争激烈，许多中外汽车企业通过并购重组来获取电动车技术和市场份额。
其次，中外企业并购重组的动因。
中外企业并购重组的动因有多种，包括资源整合、市场拓展、品牌扩大等。
首先，中外企业通过并购重组可以实现资源整合。
通过合并，企业可以整合双方的生产、技术、销售等资源，实现资源共享和协同效应，提高企业的生产效率和市场竞争力。
其次，中外企业通过并购重组可以扩大市场份额。
通过收购对方企业，企业可以快速进入对方企业所在的市场，从而实现市场的快速扩大。
最后，中外企业通过并购重组可以实现品牌扩大。
通过收购对方企业的品牌，企业可以迅速扩大自身的品牌影响力，提高其在市场上的竞争地位。
再次，中外企业并购重组的影响。
中外企业并购重组的影响主要体现在企业经济效益、市场竞争力和社会影响三个方面。
首先，中外企业并购重组可以提高企业的经济效益。
通过并购重组，企业可以实现规模效应和经济效益的最大化，提高企业的盈利能力和发展潜力。
其次，中外企业并购重组可以提升企业的市场竞争力。
通过并购重组，企业可以整合资源，优化企业结构，提高企业的市场竞争能力，适应市场变化和竞争压力。
最后，中外企业并购重组对社会的影响也是显著的。
通过并购重组，企业可以实现产业结构升级，推动技术进步和经济发展，促进就业和社会稳定。
国内外企业并购动因理论文献综述
国内外企业并购动因理论文献综述国内外企业并购是指企业为了实现经济效益和战略目标，通过购买或兼并其他企业的资产、股权或业务来实现的行为。
企业并购是一个复杂的决策过程，涉及到多个因素和变量。
本文将对国内外企业并购动因理论进行综述。
1.经济效益理论经济效益理论是企业并购决策中最为重要的理论之一。
这一理论认为，企业并购的主要目标是通过合并和整合资源，实现规模经济、范围经济和壁垒经济，从而提高企业的效益、降低成本并增强竞争力。
企业通过并购可以实现资源的互补性，提高生产效率和市场份额，进而获得更高的利润和回报。
2.战略目标理论战略目标理论认为，企业并购的动因主要源于企业战略目标的实现需要。
企业在制定并购策略时，通常会考虑到自身现有资源能力与目标市场的差距，通过并购可以快速获取所需的资源和能力，并加快实现战略目标的进程。
企业并购的战略目标包括国际化、多元化、垂直一体化等。
3.经验学习理论经验学习理论认为，企业并购行为受到企业经验积累的影响。
企业通过一系列并购行为，积累了丰富的经验和知识，从而能够更好地应对并购决策所面临的不确定性和风险。
企业在并购决策中会参考过去的并购经验，评估风险和机会，并选择最合适的并购战略和实施方式。
4.交易成本理论交易成本理论认为，企业进行并购的动因主要是为了降低交易成本。
交易成本包括信息获取成本、谈判成本、合同监管成本、交易执行成本等。
通过并购可以消除市场不完全性和信息不对称性，降低交易成本，提高资源配置效率和经济效益。
5.市场势力理论市场势力理论认为，企业进行并购行为主要受到市场势力的影响。
市场势力包括市场竞争、市场需求、市场结构等因素。
企业通过并购可以扩大市场份额，增强市场地位，改变市场结构，从而增强企业在市场中的竞争力和议价能力。
6.机会成本理论机会成本理论认为，企业进行并购的动因主要是为了避免错失市场机会。
企业在制定并购决策时会考虑自身发展的机会成本，即如果不进行并购，可能会错失的机会。
并购理论国外研究报告
并购理论国外研究报告一、引言随着全球经济的发展，企业并购活动日益频繁，成为企业扩张和转型的重要手段。
然而，并购成功率并不高，许多企业在并购过程中遇到了种种问题。
为了提高并购成功率，国内外学者对并购理论进行了深入研究。
本报告以国外并购理论为研究对象，旨在分析国外并购理论的最新进展，探讨其在我国企业并购实践中的应用价值。
本研究的重要性体现在以下几个方面：首先，国外并购理论的发展对我国企业并购实践具有指导意义，有助于提高我国企业并购的成功率；其次，通过对国外并购理论的梳理，有助于我国学者在这一领域取得更多创新性成果；最后，本研究有助于推动我国并购理论的发展，为政策制定者和企业提供理论支持。
在此基础上，本研究提出以下研究问题：国外并购理论的主要观点有哪些？这些理论在我国企业并购实践中的应用效果如何？为解决这一问题，本研究假设国外并购理论在我国企业并购实践中具有一定的适用性，但需结合我国实际情况进行调整。
研究范围与限制方面，本报告主要关注国外并购理论的发展及其在我国企业中的应用，不涉及国内并购理论的探讨。
报告将从并购动机、并购估值、并购整合等方面对国外并购理论进行系统梳理，并结合实际案例分析其在我国企业并购中的应用。
本报告的简要概述如下：首先，介绍国外并购理论的发展历程及主要观点；其次，分析国外并购理论在我国企业并购实践中的应用现状；最后，提出针对我国企业并购实践的建议，以期为我国企业并购活动提供理论支持。
二、文献综述国外并购理论研究始于20世纪60年代，至今已形成多个理论框架。
M&A （Mergers and Acquisitions）理论主要包括效率理论、市场势力理论、管理主义理论和战略匹配理论等。
效率理论认为并购可提高企业效率，实现协同效应；市场势力理论强调并购是企业扩大市场份额、增强竞争力的手段；管理主义理论关注管理层利益在并购中的作用；战略匹配理论则强调并购双方在战略上的互补性。
前人研究成果显示，并购动机、估值方法、整合策略等方面取得了显著进展。
【《企业连续并购绩效研究的理论基础及国内外文献综述》12000字】
企业连续并购绩效研究的理论基础及国内外文献综述目录企业并购绩效研究的理论基础及国内外文献综述 (1)1.1概念界定 (1)1.1.1并购 (1)1.1.2连续并购 (2)1.1.3并购绩效 (2)1.2理论基础 (2)1.1.1协同效应理论 (2)1.1.2市场势力理论 (3)1.1.3经济增加值理论 (3)1.1.4托宾Q值理论 (3)1.3文献综述 (4)1.3.1连续并购 (4)1.3.2连续并购动因 (5)1.3.3连续并购绩效 (7)1.3.4连续并购绩效的评价方法 (8)1.3.5文献述评 (9)参考文献 (10)1.1概念界定1.1.1并购并购是兼并（Merger）与收购（Acquisition）的总称。
其中兼并（Merger）含有吸收合并、吞并之意，是指具有优势地位的企业吸收吞并另外一家或多家企业，获取目标公司的控制权并使其丧失法人资格的行为。
《国际财务报告准则第3号-企业合并》指出1，收购（Acquisition）则是指一家企业，即购买方支付对价购买另一方企业的股票或资产，以获得对该企业资产的所有权，或对该企业的控制权的行为。
总的来说，并购是指一家企业通过单次或分阶段运作，以获得其他企业控制权的经济活动。
根据并购双方在业务种类与市场地位方面的联系，并购可以分类为横向并购、纵向并购与混合并购。
其中，横向并购目的在于追求规模效应、扩大市场份额、提升企业行业地位等，并购双方往往有着相似的主营业务产品或服务；纵向并购的并购双方多位于同一产业链的上下游，彼此之间关系与联系密切，纵向并购的目的往往在于完善产业链、形成行业壁垒；混合并购则是指很少有业务或服务联系的企业之间的并购活动，可以帮助企业进入新行业，实现企业产品与服务的多样化。
1《国际财务报告准则》（International Financial Reporting Standards，IFRS），是由国际会计准则理事会（International Accounting Standards Board，IASB）制定的《财务报表编制与列报框架》及其它准则、解释公告。
企业并购文献综述及外文文献资料
本文档包括改专题的：外文文献、文献综述一、外文文献Financial synergy in mergers and acquisitions. Evidence from Saudi ArabiaAbstractBusinesses today consider mergers and acquisitions to be a new strategy for their company's growth. Companies aim to grow through increasing sales, purchasing assets, accumulating profits and gaining market share. Thus; the best way to achieve any of the above-mentioned targets is by getting into either a merger or an acquisition. As a matter of fact, growth through mergers and acquisitions has been a critical part of the success of many companies operating in the new economy. Mergers and acquisitions are an important factor in building up market capitalization. Based on three structured interviews with major Saudi Arabian banks it has been found that mergers motivated by economies of scale should be approached cautiously. Similarly, companies should also approach vertical mergers cautiously as it is often difficult to gain synergy through a vertical merger. Firms should seek out mergers that allow them to acquire specialized knowledge. It has also been found that firms should look for mergers that increase market power whilst avoiding unrelated mergers or conglomerate mergers.Keywords: Synergy, Mergers and Acquisitions, Saudi Arabia 1. IntroductionThere is a major difference between mergers and acquisitions. Mergers occur between similarly sized companies and the collaboration is "friendly" between both companies. However, Acquisitions often occur between differently sized companies and the partnership is usually forced and hostile.Wheelen and Hunger (2009) define a merger as a transaction involving two or more corporations in which stock is exchanged but in which only one corporation survives. In other words, the two companies become one and the name for the corporation becomes composite and is derived from the two original names. Furthermore, an acquisition is the purchase of a company that is completely absorbed as an operating subsidiary or divisionof the acquiring corporation (Wheelen and Hunger, 2009). The authors also state thathostile acquisitions are called takeovers.The main reason for firms entering into mergers and acquisitions (M&A) is to grow, andcompanies grow to survive (Akinbuli, 201 2). Growth strategies expand the company's activities and add to its value since larger firm have more bargaining power than smaller ones. A firm sustaining growth will always have more opportunities for advancement, promotions and more jobs to offer people (Wheelen and Hunger, 2009). In general, mergers and different types of acquisitions are performed in the hope of realizing an economic gain. For such a business deal to take place, the two firms involved must be worth more together than each was apart.A few of the prospective advantages of M&A include achieving economies of scale, combining complementary resources, garnering tax advantages, and eliminating inefficiencies. Other reasons for considering growth through acquisitions contain obtaining proprietary rights to products or services, increasing market power by purchasing competitors, shoring up weaknesses in key business areas, penetrating new geographic regions, or providing managers with new opportunities for career growth and advancement (Brown, 2005).Many firms choose M&A as a tool to expand into a new market or new area of expertise since it is quicker and cheaper than taking the risk alone. Furthermore, M&A happen when senior executives feel enthusiastic and excited about a potential deal ; the idea of successfully pursuing and taking over another company before the company s competitors are able to do so. Competition in a growing industry drives firms to acquire others. In fact, a successful merger between companies increases benefits for the entire corporation.However, failures also occur in M&A as indicated by Haberbserg and Rieple (2001) and Akinbuli (2012). They showed that 50% of acquisitions are unsuccessful; they increase market power but do not necessarily increase profits. Brown (2005) explains the reasons for the high failure rate of M&A as follows:(a)Over-optimistic assessment of economies of scale. Economies of scale are usually achieved at certain business size. However, expansion beyond the optimum level results in disproportionate cost disadvantages that lead to various diseconomies of scale.(b)Inadequate preliminary investigation combined with an inability to implement the amalgamation efficiently. Resistance to change and the inability for the acquired company to manage change well is a main reason for failure due to the resistance of the employees and management of both companies involved.(c)Insufficient appreciation of the personnel problems, which will arise, is due mainly to the differing organizational cultures in each company.(d)Dominance of subjective factors such as the status of the respective boards of directors.Therefore, drafting careful plans before and after the merger is a necessity that should not be overlooked. Some companies find the solution in hiring a change manager who will add value and better manage the transition of the "marriage between both companies" (Brown, 2005).2.Synergy in M&A and financial synergyThis section discusses the literature review in order to identify the importance of acquiring financial synergy in the M&A.2.1Synergy in M&ASynergy, as defined in the business dictionary, is the state in which two or more agents, entities, factors, processes, substances, or systems work together in a particularly fruitful way that produces an effect greater than the sum of their individual effects. Synergy is the magic force that allows for enhanced cost efficiencies of the new business. Synergy takes the form of revenue enhancement and cost savings (Mergers and acquisitions: Definition, n.d.).Synergy is also expressed as an increase in the value of assets as a result of their combination. Expected synergy is the justification behind most business mergers. For example, the 2002 combination of Hewlett-Packard and Compaq was designed to reduce expenses and capitalize on combining Hewlett-Packard's reputation for quality with Compaq's impressive distribution system (Synergy Business Definition, n.d.).Through research it has been noted that synergy is the concept that two businesses will generate greater profits together than they could separately (Wheelen and Hunger, 2009). Synergy is said to exist for a divisional corporation if the return on investment of each division is greater than what the return would be if each division were an independent business (Wheelen and Hunger, 2009). In order to succeed cooperation between the partners is the basic ingredient for achieving growth through synergy (Rahatullah, 201 0). This requires partners to build trust, commitment, and secure consensus, to achieve their targets (Gronroos, 1997; Ring and Van-de-Ven, 1994).Synergy can take several forms. According to Goold and Campbell (1 998) synergy is demonstrated in six ways: benefiting from knowledge or skills, coordinated strategies,shared tangible resources, economies of scale, gaining bargaining power over suppliers and creating new products or services.M8<A result in the creation of synergies, the sharing of manufacturing facilities, software systems and distribution processes. This type of synergy is referred to as operational synergy and is seen mostly in manufacturing industries. Another motive for forming an acquisition is gaining greater financial strength by purchasing a competitor, which increases market share. The aim of mergers and acquisitions is to achieve improvement for both companies and produce efficiency in most of the company's operations. (Haberberg and Rieple, 2001).However, Brown (2005) summarizes the sources of synergy that result from M8<A underthe following headlines:1.Operating economies which include:(a)Economies of scale: Horizontal mergers (acquisition of a company in a similarline of business) are often claimed to reduce costs and therefore increase profits due to economies of scale. These can occur in the production, marketing or finance divisions.Note that these gains are not expected automatically and diseconomies of scale may also be experienced. These benefits are sometimes also claimed for conglomerate mergers(acquisition of companies in unrelated areas of business) in financial and marketingcosts.(b)Economies of vertical integration: Some acquisitions involve buying out other companies in the same production chain. For example, a manufacturer buys out a rawmaterial supplier or a retailer. This can increase profits through eliminating the middleman in the supply chain.(c)Complementary resources: It is sometimes argued that by combining the strengths of two companies a synergistic result can be obtained. For example, combining a company specializing in research and development with a company strong in the marketing area could lead to gains. Combining the expertise of both firms would benefit each company through the gained knowledge and skills that individually they lack.(d)Elimination of inefficiency: If either of the two companies had been badly managed; its performance and hence its value can be improved by the elimination of inefficiencies through M&A, Improvements could be obtained in the areas of production, marketing and finance.2.Market power; Horizontal mergers may enable the firm to obtain a degree of monopoly power which could increase its profitability. Coordinated strategies between both companies will lead the entire organization in gaining competitive advantage. Gaining bargaining power over suppliers is realized since the company is larger in size after the merger.3.Financial gains; Companies with large amounts of surplus cash may see the acquisition of other companies as the best application for these funds. Shared tangible resources such as sharing a bigger building, more office supplies, equipment, manufacturing facilities and research and design labs will also lead to a reduction in costs translated into better financial performance. McNeil (2012) identifies that the shareholders of a business under M&A process may benefit from the sale of their stocks, this is especially true if the M&A is with a better, bigger and more reputable prospective partner.4.Others; such as surplus management talent, meaning that companies with highly skilled managers can make use of their qualified personnel only if they have problems to solve. The acquisition of inefficient companies allows for maximum utilization of skilled managers. Incorporating the efforts of both management teams will drive the creation of innovative products or services.The synergy factor prevails in the M&A when the firms produce a greater return than the two individual firms owing to reasons such as improvements in efficiency and an increase in market power for the merged or acquired firms (Berkovitch and Narayana, 1993).2.2Financial synergyAs defined by Knoll (2008), financial synergies are performance advantages gained by controlling financial resources across businesses of firms. There exist four types of financial synergies, which are:1.Reduction of corporate risk: Reduction of corporate risk is increasing the risk capacity of the overall firm, which means the ability of the firm to bear more risk. Meaning that by increasing the risk capacity the shareholders will invest more in the company and the firm will gain benefits such as coinsurance effects.2.Establishment of internal capital market: Establishing internal capital gains means that the firm will decrease its financing costs and will increase financialflexibility which results in the company having higher liquidity and the ability to payits creditors easily.3.Tax advantages: Tax advantages by reducing the tax liabilities of the firm using the losses in one business to offset profits in the other business referred to as "profit accounting".4.Financial economies of scale: Financial economies of scale reducing transaction cost in issuing debt and equity securities (Knoll, 2008).3.Methodology and resultsFor this project, the method of interviews was used due to it being the most appropriate way to gather information about the interpretation of events, as to why some mergers produce synergy while others do not; and to understand the reasons why companies enter into mergers. In Saudi Arabia it is difficult to secure responses from senior executives. Approaching such a person is not only difficult protocol wise but there are bureaucratic hurdles. The quantitative analysis is more suitable for large scale data collection (Denzin and Lincoln, 1997). Whereas, qualitative research provides the researcher with the perspective of target audience members through captivation and direct interaction with the people under study (Glesne and Peshkin, 1992). These methods help to comprehend what others perceive of a certain phenomenon, postulates Creswell (1994).The planned interview method was to use a structured interview. In a structured interview, the researcher knows in advance what information is needed and asks a predetermined set of questions (Sekaran and Bougie, 2009). The same questions are asked of all interviewees, which allows for better comparison of the responses than unstructured interviews, where the interviewees are asked different questions. The structured interview process does allow the researcher to ask different follow up or probing questions based on the interviewee's response. This allows the interviewer to identify new factors and gain a deeper understanding of the topic (Sekaran and Bougie, 2009).Since the interviewees were located in different parts of Saudi Arabia the interviews were scheduled in advance and conducted face to face. The data was gathered by taking notes during the interviews, which were not recorded as that may have seemed too intrusive.When conducting interviews it is important to conduct them in a manner that is free of bias or inaccuracies. According to Sekaran and Bougie (2009), bias can be introduced by theinterviewer, interviewee or the situation. Interviewers can introduce bias by distorting the information that they hear so it aligns with their expected responses to the question or through simple misunderstandings. To prevent this, the respondents' answers were summarized back to them before moving on to the next question. Interviewees can introduce bias if they do not like the interviewer or if they phrase the answers to be biased towards what they think the interviewer wants to hear. Since the interviewees were obtained through referrals, it is highly unlikely that they gave false responses. Also, the basic area of research was discussed with the interviewees, but no hypothesis was advance to them, such that they would skew their answers to what they though the interviewer wanted to hear.Three companies were interviewed and asked a specific set of questions (see Appendix). There are numerous reasons to interview three companies in Saudi Arabia. These are the following:*The M&A in Saudi Arabia are normally carried out by large size companies.*It is difficult to reach out to the senior managers to discuss such issues.*The officers are also tied by company confidentiality rules to not divulge information.*The number of M&A is also significantly less in comparison with other countries.*The researchers, using diverse resources including personal contacts and formal requests, were able to reach out to three of the major companies of the Kingdom.An interview was conducted with National Commercial Bank (NCB) NCB is an international bank headquartered in Saudi Arabia and engaged in personal, business and private banking, and wealth management (NCB, 2011 ). Another interview was done with Samba Financial Group. Samba is also an international bank headquartered in Saudi Arabia that is engaged in personal and business banking (Samba, 2011). The third company that was interviewed was Savola Holding Company, which is headquartered in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia and is engaged in the food industry. Through subsidiary companies, Savola is engaged in the manufacturing of vegetable oils, dairy products and food retailing operations both in Saudi Arabia and other international markets. Due to strict confidentiality of the companies interviewed, the names of the people will not be mentioned or their titles. This was the most important condition in order to conduct these interviews.Each of the three companies has been involved in significant mergers. NCB's most significant merger was when it acquired a Turkish bank, Turkiye Finans Katilm Bank in 2008.Samba's most significant merger was its acquisition of Cairo Bank in 1 999. Savola's most significant acquisition was its acquisition of Al-Marai in 1 991.NCB has engaged in four mergers overall and three international mergers. In addition to its acquisition of the Turkish bank, it acquired Estate Capital Holdings, The Capital Partnership Group Limited and NCB Capital. The acquisition oftheTurkish bank was considered its most successful acquisition because it allowed NCB to expand into a new international market with strong growth.While NCB does not consider any of its acquisitions to be a failure, it has recognized losses through goodwill impairment, even in the Turkish bank acquisition. Samba's most prominent M8<A has been with Cairo bank of Egypt.Savola has engaged in about 10 mergers including a few international mergers. It considers its acquisition of Panda (a supermarket chain) in 1998 to be its most successful because it allowed Savola to gain a major presence in the food retailing market and increases revenues significantly. Savola has had a couple of mergers that it considered to be failures. One such example was when it acquired a real estate company in Jordan. This company was outside Savola's core business and outside its home country. Savola's learning from this failure was not to invest outside its core business in a foreign country as there was no ability to create any value through this merger and it was investing in a country that it did not know as well as its home country. Another failed merger occurred when it acquired an edible oil company in Kazakhstan. This merger failed because even though the acquired company had good fundamentals, the value creation mechanisms were quite different between the two companies.Strategic motivations for mergers were discussed with the companies and Samba provided details. One motivation is to increase lines of business. Another motivation is to move into a new geographic area. In many cases when expanding into a new country, it is easier to acquire an existing business than try to start a new one. Another motivation is to increase market share.Particularly in a mature industry, a company can gain market share quickly through an acquisition, while it is usually a slow process to gain market share organically in an incremental manner.All the companies tried to achieve company growth and synergy in their mergers.The criteria and selection process for mergers were also discussed with the companies. Savola worked with financial institutions to identify acquisition target companies. Savola looked for companies that were among the leaders in their respective markets. Savola believed that companies that were leaders generally had good processes and were well managed, so their operations would be good to acquire. After the failed merger with the real estate company, Savola looked to acquire companies related to its core food manufacturing and sales business. All companies obviously reviewed financial statements closely to assess the financial condition of the acquired firm. Samba noted that sometimes in the banking and financial industry, strong banks will acquire banks that are in a weak financial condition in a rescue operation, often due to political reasons. In reviewing candidates for a merger, Savola engages its operations and technical team to assess the target company's operation, processes and potential fit into the business group.The three interviewed companies use various metrics to evaluate the success of the merger. Savola evaluates the revenue growth of the sector where the acquisition occurred along with the market share and operating cost. The goals are to increase revenue,increase market share or reduce operating cost. Samba evaluated similar metrics of market share and operating cost.Samba noted that it usually takes until the second year after a merger to evaluateits success. In the first year, there are onetime costs associated with integration costs of the merger. It usually takes until the second year to see reduced operating costs from activities such as closing and consolidating branches.The different ways to obtain synergy in a merger were discussed with the companies. Savola looked to obtain synergy through economies of scale, as acquisitions would add to the company's shipment volume, which would allow the company to reduce freight and distribution costs. Samba also looked to obtain synergy through economies of scale and eliminating the duplication of activities. When it acquired Cairo bank, which had previously acquired United Saudi Commercial Bank, Samba was able to cut costs in Saudi Arabia by reducing the number of bank branches and ATMs. NCB was able to gain financial synergies in its mergers by developing a more diversified and lower risk portfolio ofinvestments.From the responses to the questions included in the structured interview, thefollowing findings can be highlighted:A.Mergers to Expand to International Markets:One finding is that firms undertake some mergers to expand into new international markets. In doing so they are gaining the synergy of the acquired firm's knowledge of the market. In these cases, the acquiring firm saves the costs of starting up a business in the new country, gaining the necessary approvals, learning how to do business successfully in the market and building a brand in the country. This is especially true in the bank and finance industry, where the industry is closely regulated. It can be easier to acquire a company that already has all of the necessary regulatory approvals as opposed to trying to gain all of the necessary approvals to conduct business legally in the selected market. Also, building a brand is important in the banking industry, as consumers and commercial customers prefer to do business with a trusted firm. In these mergers, synergy can be gained through the acquired firm's knowledge of the market and the acquiring firm's capital. The new infusion of capital can often allow the acquired firm to grow in the market. The NCB acquisition of the Turkish bank is a good example of this type of synergy.Even when a firm acquires a company within their own market there is the chance to create synergies through knowledge gained and transferred. In many cases, the acquired firm has certain processes in some areas that are better than the acquiring firm, so selecting the best process allows the merged firm to improve its overall processes. Also, the acquiring company usually has some processes that are better than the acquired firm's processes in some areas, which allows the company to improve the newly acquired operations. As noted by Samba in its interview, the goal is to utilize the optimum processes from both companies to produce synergy from the merger.B.Mergers to Gain Economies of Scale:Firms also seek and gain synergies through economies of scale. Larger businesses can often gain economies in certain business activities including manufacturing, distribution and sales. One of the goals of Samba's mergers was to gain synergies through economies of scale. In their mergers, Savola hoped to gain economies of scale in shipping and distribution activities. Economies of scale can also be achieved in the banking industry since the cost of processing checks or issuing credit cards is likely to decline on a per unit basis with increasing volume; therefore the fixed cost associated with these activities can be spread over a larger volume. The result is reduced costs, which makes the merged firm more profitable and more competitive in the market.C.Eliminating Inefficiencies:Another way to achieve synergy is through elimination of inefficiencies. Removing the duplication of resources can eliminate inefficiencies. In horizontal mergers, it is common for the merged company to consolidate operations, close offices and reduce staff. Samba mentioned that reducing the number of bank branches, ATMs and staff was one of the ways that they drove cost efficiencies after acquiring Cairo Bank. Samba also provided the insight that there is a delay for these cost efficiencies to show up in financial performance, since it takes time to remove the duplication of resources involved and there are one-time costs associated with removing the duplication of resources. The official also pointed out that the success or failure of a merger should not be evaluated until at least two years after the merger.D.Gain More Market Power:Firms also try to achieve synergies through an increase in market power, by controlling a larger share of the market. Discussions with all respondents implied increasing market share to be one of the motivations to enter into a merger. Savola and Samba both mentioned increasing market share as a way to judge the success of a merger. Greater market power can improve profitability through a couple of mechanisms. One such mechanism is greater monopoly pricing power in the market, which allows firms to increase prices due to reduced competition. This is one reason that major mergers have to be approved by government regulators who s objective is to maintain a competitive market. A second mechanism is increased buyer power over suppliers. Since the merged firm represents a greater portion of an industry's business, suppliers to the industry want the merged firm's business more, which gives the merged firm better negotiating power over suppliers. This allows the merged firm to reduce its costs and increase it profits. However, a strategic perspective could be on the supplier side as Porter (1 998) identifies that the stronger the company becomes the weaker the supplier becomes thus reducing their bargaining power.E.Gain Growth:Growth is one of the main reasons that firms undertake mergers, as this was mentioned by all of the companies interviewed. Companies seek growth through mergers because it can allow them to gain market power, which generally leads to increased profits. Mergers are also a way to satisfy investors'/shareholders' expectations for growth. In many cases, itis difficult to grow a business in a mature market organically, so mergers are often the best way to achieve growth.Samba provided a perspective on the use of acquisitions as a growth strategy. Samba believed that within the same industry organic growth was less expensive than growth through acquisition because a premium had to be paid for another company's operations in the same industry. Samba believed that when trying to expand into a different industry, growth through acquisition was less expensive than organic growth because the firm had no knowledge or expertise in the new industry. Samba used this philosophy when formulating their strategic growth plans. If the company simply wanted to expand within their current industry, the focus would be on organic growth initiatives, whereas if the company wanted to grow by expanding into new industries, the focus would be on acquisitions.F.Reducing RisksFirms can gain synergies by reducing their overall risk through diversification and reducing their cost of capital. Generally, this is a weak form of synergy and prone to failures because it often entails firms moving into businesses outside of their core competencies. The businesses are then run without the knowledge of how to run a business successfully in that market. This leads to operational losses or subpar performance in the industry, which negates any synergistic gains from reducing the company's overall risk.This was experienced by Savola, who acquired a real estate company, which was outside its core business of the food market. Consequently, the acquired real estate business produced subpar performance and losses, which negated any gains from reducing risk. Thus, the merger was considered to be a failure because it reduced the overall value of the firm. Due to the difficulties of creating financial synergies through diversification, there are few conglomerate mergers and few conglomerate companies.The companies interviewed look for synergies when considering mergers and try to estimate the potential synergistic gains that could be attained in a proposed merger. The potential synergies gained depend on the industry and the characteristics of the company acquired. In the failed mergers, the firm overestimated the amount of synergy that could be gained through the merger. Savola overestimated the synergy that could be gained through the acquisition of a real estate company because the only synergy that could be gained was。
文献综述
企业并购动因文献综述1.国外相关研究文献。
兼并与收购是资本市场永恒的主题，从19 世纪末至今，西方国家已经历了六次并购浪潮。
企业并购动因是促成并购行为的发端，可以解释为诱发企业并购行为的因素。
国外学者对于企业并购动因作了广泛而深入的研究，提出了多种并购动因理论。
一是协同效应理论。
Ansoff ( 1965 )最早提出协同效应理论，即指并购双方资产、能力等方面的互补或协同从而提高公司业绩和创造价值，使合并后公司的整体业绩大于合并前各自原有业绩的总和。
Berkovitch和Narayana(1993)也将企业并购动因归结为协同效应或效率，并分析该动因对合并后企业收益的影响。
Sirower ( 1997) 认为如果并购后的业绩改进已经被市场预期，那么该预期将以并购溢价的形式体现出来，并归集到目标公司股东手中。
Hagcdoom、Duysters(2000)在对计算机行业的并购研究中证明，在经营战略和组织结构上相近的两个公司合并有利于发挥双方技术协同效应，促进技术资源的重新配置。
协同效应理论包括经营协同效应、财务协同效应以及管理协同效应。
经营协同效应假定存在着规模经济，合并后可以对企业规模进行扩充和调整，达到最佳规模经济，使相关业务单元的成本降低。
Stigler(1950)认为公司间的并购可以减少竞争者，扩大优势企业的规模，增加对市场的控制能力，从而导致市场垄断。
即使不能形成垄断，也可以由于并购扩大的规模效应构成潜在进入者的市场进入壁垒。
Meeks(1997)将并购的动因归结为扩大规模、提高市场份额和对市场的控制能力。
财务协同效应是指企业控股权的更迭会给企业带来财务方面的效益，这种效益的取得是由于税法、会计处理和证券交易而产生的。
此外，合并后企业将外部融资转化为内部融资，融资风险与成本下降。
Hannah和Kay(1977)认为税收制度有时会鼓励企业参与并购，其一是营业亏损和税收抵免的延续，通过将利润向亏损企业转移，实现合法避税。
企业并购动因文献综述
企业并购动因文献综述【摘要】本文对企业并购动因进行了文献综述。
在概述了企业并购的重要性和研究现状。
在介绍了企业并购的定义与特点、主要动因、经典理论以及不同学者研究动因的观点。
最后分析了企业并购的影响因素。
结论部分总结了文献综述的主要发现，探讨了未来研究方向和实践意义。
通过本文的研究，可以更好地理解企业并购的动因，为相关研究提供参考和借鉴。
【关键词】企业并购、动因、文献综述、定义、特点、动因、理论、影响因素、研究、总结、未来研究方向、实践意义1. 引言1.1 企业并购动因文献综述引言在过去的几十年里，关于企业并购动因的研究呈现出多样化和复杂化的趋势。
学者们通过从不同角度和方法论出发，对企业并购动因进行深入研究和讨论，取得了丰硕成果。
企业并购动因既包括内部因素，如经营绩效和资源配置，也涉及外部因素，如市场竞争和产业环境。
通过对企业并购动因的全面梳理和综合分析，可以更好地理解企业并购的逻辑和实质，为企业管理者和决策者提供决策支持和战略指导。
未来的研究方向将更加关注企业并购动因的多样性和复杂性，探讨不同类型企业并购的动因差异和影响机制。
结合实证分析和案例研究，深入挖掘企业并购动因的内在逻辑和外部影响，为企业并购实践和战略制定提供更加有效的建议和指导。
企业并购动因文献综述的意义和价值在于为企业并购研究和实践提供前沿信息和思路，促进学术和商业界的互动与交流，推动企业并购领域的进一步发展和深化。
2. 正文2.1 企业并购的定义与特点企业并购是指一家企业通过收购或合并其他企业来实现快速扩张或实现战略目标的行为。
在当今全球化和竞争激烈的市场环境下，企业并购已成为企业发展的重要战略选择之一。
企业并购具有以下几个特点：1.战略性：企业并购通常是为了实现企业的长期发展战略目标而进行的，可以帮助企业快速进入新的市场、获得核心技术、打造全球化布局等。
2.风险与回报共存：企业并购的过程中存在一定的风险，包括整合风险、文化冲突风险等，但成功的并购也可以为企业带来丰厚的回报。
连续并购动因和绩效的文献综述
连续并购动因和绩效的文献综述1. 引言1.1 研究背景连续并购作为企业并购领域的一个重要研究方向，在近年来备受学术界和实践界的关注。
随着全球化和市场化进程的加速推进，企业在追求资源整合、市场扩张和战略转型的通过连续并购来实现业务增长和价值创造的目标。
尤其是在经济不断变化和竞争加剧的环境下，连续并购更显得具有重要意义。
当前的企业并购活动不再是单个交易的简单操作，而是呈现出连续并购的趋势。
连续并购指的是一个企业通过多次并购活动来达到战略目标，形成一种连续不断的增长模式。
这种模式在企业发展战略中具有独特的优势，并对企业的绩效和竞争力产生重要影响。
探讨连续并购的动因和绩效关系，对于了解企业并购活动的动态变化、促进企业发展和提高经营绩效具有重要意义。
本文旨在就连续并购的动因和绩效进行深入分析和探讨，为相关研究提供理论支持和实践指导。
1.2 研究目的研究目的包括以下几个方面：通过探讨连续并购的动因和对绩效的影响，揭示连续并购行为的内在逻辑和机制，为理解企业连续并购行为提供理论支持；通过分析连续并购动因与绩效的关系，探讨企业在进行连续并购时应该如何选择合适的目标公司和实施合理的整合策略以提高绩效；总结连续并购的成功因素，为企业成功开展连续并购提供实践指导；通过对连续并购的重要性和未来研究方向的探讨，提出未来研究的重点和方向，为学术界和实践者提供参考，推动连续并购研究的深入发展和实践的持续改进。
通过以上研究目的的探讨，本文旨在全面深入地分析连续并购的动因和绩效，为企业连续并购提供理论支持和实践参考。
1.3 研究意义连续并购作为企业发展战略的重要组成部分，对企业的长期发展具有深远影响。
对连续并购的动因和绩效进行深入研究具有重要的理论和实践意义。
通过研究连续并购的动因，可以深入了解企业进行并购的原因和动机，有助于拓展并完善相关理论体系，为企业管理决策提供理论依据。
通过研究连续并购对绩效的影响，可以为企业领导者提供更为科学的并购决策参考，帮助他们更好地评估并购活动对企业绩效的影响。
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。
国内外企业并购动因理论文献综述国内外企业并购动因理论文献综述摘要：本文总结了国内和国外学者关于企业并购动因理论的研究，并对两者的动因理论进行了比较。
相对于国外发达国家的理论，我国的并购动因具有浓厚的中国特色，但另一方面，表明国外关于并购动因所提出的理论已逐渐适合中国的企业。
关键词：企业并购动因理论并购（mergers and acquisition）包括兼并和收购，两者有一定的区别和联系。
但是，随着全球化经济大发展，实业界的创新活动层出不穷，企业兼并和企业收购的界限越来越模糊。
正如温斯顿说讲:“传统的主题已经扩展到包括接管以及相关的公司重组、公司控制、企业所有权结构变更等问题上,为简便起见，我们把它们统称为并购(M&A)”。
并购在当今世界扮演者越来越重要的角色。
施蒂格勒(G. J. Stigler)经过研究认为：没有一个美国大公司不是通过某种适度、某种方式的兼并而成长起来的，几乎没有一家大公司主要是靠内部扩张成长起来。
从19世纪末英、美等西方国家发生的第一次企业并购高潮算起，历经五次企业并购高潮，至今已有近百年的历史。
企业并购理论也成为目前西方经济学最活跃的研究领域之一，在该领域的研究主要集中在并购动因研究和并购绩效研究两方面，两者共同成为理解企业并购经济合理性和制定公共政策的基础。
在该文中，主要总结并购动因方面的文献。
一、国外企业并购动因的研究企业并购动因的复杂性和多变性难以用一种经济理论解释清楚，不同地区、不同历史时期企业并购的产生和发展都有深刻的社会、政治、经济等原因；对于不同企业来说，他进行并购活动的原因不同，甚至同一企业在不同时期的并购也有不同的原因。
对于并购动因问题，西方学者进行了广泛而深入的研究，提出了多种并购动因理论。
Berkovitch 和narayanan(1993)将并购的动因归结于协同效应（synergy）,代理问题(agency)，管理者自负(hubris),并通过实证分析表明，以协同效应为目标的并购将带来正的效应，以代理问题为目标的并购，将带来负的效应。
Kode ,Ford, Sutherland(2003)认为并购的动因在于协调效应，并提出了评价并购协同效应的模型。
K. D. Brouthers等(1998)认为，并购动机可以分为经济动机、个人动机和战略动机三类。
其中，经济动机包括扩大营销规模、增加利润、降低风险、防御竞争对手等子项目9项，个人动机包括增加管理特权等子项目4项，战略动机包括提高竞争力、追求市场力量等4项。
这些研究都为并购的动因的理论发展作出了巨大的贡献。
威斯通等（1998）可以看成是国外对企业并购理论研究的集大成者。
按照威斯通的理论和其它文献的研究成果，我们可以将企业并购的动因归为两大类：第一类是并购赞成论，包括效率理论（管理协同效应理论、经营协同效应理论、财务协同效应理论、多样化经营理论、价值低估理论）、信息与信号理论、代理成本理论。
第二类是并购怀疑论，包括管理主义、自负假说、闲置现金流量理论、市场势力理论。
（一）、并购赞成论1.效率理论（Efficiency Theory）效率理论认为并购活动能够给社会收益带来一个潜在的增量，而且对交易的参与者来说无疑能提高各自的效率。
这一理论包含两个基本的要点：（1）公司并购活动的发生有利于改进管理层的经营业绩；（2）公司并购将导致某种形式的协同（Synergy）效应。
该理论主要包括管理协同效应理论、经营协同效应理论、财务协同效应理论、纯粹多样化经营理论、价值低估理论5个理论。
（1）管理协同（management synergy）效应理论管理协同效应即企业并购后，因管理效率的提高而带来的收益。
该理论认为优势企业并购劣势企业，管理者作为一个团队被转移时，能够将被收购企业的非效率性的组织资本和收购公司过剩的管理资本结合，从而产生较的协同效应。
Lewellen, Loderer,and Rosenfeld(1985)证明了并购方从并购中获取的收益与并购公司的管理能力成正相关。
（2）经营协同（operating synergy）效应理论该理论主要指并购企业生产经营活动在效率方面带来的变化及效率的提高所产生的效益，并购对企业效率最明显的作用，表现为它可以为企业规模经济效益。
同时也应注意，该理论的一个重要前提：该行业确实存在规模经济，并且在并购之前没有在规模经济水平上运营，包括横向降低成本费用的生产规模经济、纵向降低交易费用的规模经济和特定管理职能方面的规模经济。
（3）财务协同（financial synergy）效应理论财务协同效应是指并购企业在财务方面带来的种种效益，它是由于税法、会计处理惯例以及证券交易等内在规律的作用而产生的一种纯金钱效益。
该理论认为并购是将目标企业所在行业中的投资机会内部化，将企业外部融资转化为内部融资，由于内部融资比外部融资成本更低(Myers and Majluf,1984)，从而增加了财务协同，降低了融资风险。
(4) 纯粹多样化(Pure Diversification)经营理论公司管理层及其员工由于他们不能像公司股东一样可在资本市场上分散其风险，只有靠多角化经营才能分散其投资回报的来源和降低来自单一经营的风险。
格兰特（1991）认为在一定限度内，公司的业绩与经营业务的多少呈正方向关系，但超过一定的限度后，随着经营业务的增加，公司业绩呈下降趋势。
Rumelt(1974)认为由于核心能力的延伸作用或资源共享作用，向相关行业的有限多元化经营会使企业的业绩提高，过度多元化会使协同作用降低，会对公司的业绩产生负影响。
多样化经营可以通过内部发展和并购活动来完成，然而在特定情况下，并购方法优于内部发展的途径。
因为公司可能仅仅是由于缺少必要的资源或其潜力已超过了行业容量而缺少内部发展的机会。
时机的选择是非常重要的，通过并购可以迅速地实现多样化经营，在任何时候都可能存在许多寻求多样化经营的企业（Jesen 1986）（5）价值低估理论(Under Valuation)该理论认为，并购的动因在于股票市场价格低于目标公司的真实价值。
造成市场低估的原因重要有：第一，公司现有管理层并没有使公司达到其潜在的效率水平；第二，并购者有内幕消息，依据这种消息，公司股票应高于当前的市场价：第三，公司资产价格与其重置成本之间的差异。
衡量这种差距的一个重要指标叫做Q值，这个比值被定义为公司股票的市场价格与其实物资产的重置价格之间的比值。
如果目标公司的Q值为0.6，而并购该公司的溢价为市场价格的50%，那么收购价与重置价的比值为0.9，这就意味着收购目标公司的价格还是比该公司的重置价格低10%。
2. 信息与信号理论Dodd, Ruback(1977)、Bradley(1980)经过实证研究表明，即使公司收购活动最终并未取得成功，目标公司的股票在收购活动中也会被重新提高估价。
针对这种效应Desia，Kim(1983)提出了信息与信号假说。
这一假说包含两种解释：“坐在金矿上”的解释认为，收购活动会散布关于目标公司股票被低估的信息并促使市场对这些股票重新估价；“背后鞭策”解释则认为收购要约会激励目标公司的管理层自身贯彻更有效的战略，而无须任何外部动力。
信号理论是信息假说的一个重要变形，它说明新的信息作为要约收购的结果而向市场传达出特殊的信号。
Ross(1977)将信号概念与资本结构的选择联系在一起，分析了企业并购过程中的信号发布的三种形式，较为具体地阐述了作为信号的收购事件对企业并购效应的影响。
3.代理成本理论Fama, Jensen(1983)指出，在企业的所有权与控制权分离的情况下，将企业的决策管理与决策控制分开，能限制决策代理人侵蚀股东利益的可能性。
企业可以通过组织机制方面和市场机智方面的制度安排来解决代理问题，降低代理成本。
Michael Firth(1997)指出，为了使管理者的利益与股东的利益更好的结合在一起，可以使用股票期权、股票增值的权利和其他红利激励等方式。
由于经营不善的企业很容易受到外部收购的威胁，经营不善的管理层就有被替换的危险(Jensen,1988)，当目标公司出现代理问题时，通过并购获得控制权，可减少和弱化代理问题(Fama and Jensen,1983)。
这是企业并购动机对解决代理问题提供的一个答案，即当报酬安排、监督、经理人市场、资本市场等内外机制都不能解决代理问题时，并购就成为解决目标企业代理问题的途径，它可以减缓所有权与控制权相分离所带来的代理问题。
（二）、并购怀疑论1. 管理主义(Managerialism)该假说表明管理者知道自己在并购过程中支付了过高的价格，并购是在牺牲股东利益的情况使得自身所控制公司的规模最大化。
因为管理者的补偿与其自身所控制的资产的数量相关，所以管理者喜欢追求资产增长的速度而非利润（Marris,1964）。
同时，管理者为了减少人力资本方面的风险，乐于从事相关多元化的业务（Amihud,Lev,1981），但是结果证实以管理主义为目的的并购，给企业带来的效益是负的（Berkoitch&Narayanan，1993，Seth&Song&Pettit,2000)。
并购是企业获得管理价值最大化的行为。
管理者希望通过并购扩张企业，不断促使企业迅速发展，以实现其在事业上的雄心壮志。
在企业并购中，特别是在脱离商业活动的情况下，最普遍的并购动机来自管理者的事业心、成就感。
而企业内部的积累难以达到迅速扩张的目的，因此，并购成为管理者乐于接受的一种扩张方式。
2. 自负假说(Hubris Hypothesis)Roll(1986)从管理者的并购决策行为来解释企业并购现象的，他认为管理层的并购决策往往出于自身的狂妄和盲目的乐观，充分相信自己对目标公司的“错误”估价和对协同效应的“错误”估计。
该假说仅仅为我们提供了理解企业并购现象的一个说法而已。
3. 闲置现金流量理论(Free Cash Flow Theory)Jensen将闲置现金流量定义为超过所有投资项目资金要求量的现金流量，且这些项目在以适用的资本成本折现后要有正的净现值。
Jensen （1986）认为，由于股东和经理人员在闲置现金流量配置问题上的冲突而产生的代理成本，是造成接管活动的主要原因。
这个代理问题可以分成两个方面来理解，一方面，股东和管理者在企业战略选择上是有严重的利益冲突的，代理成本是不能妥善解决这些利益冲突而产生的。
当代理成本很大时，接管活动有助于降低这些费用。
但另一方面，代理成本又可能是并购造成的，因为管理者可以运用闲置现金流量来并购其他企业。
闲置现金流量的派发，将会减少管理者控制之下的资源规模，并相应缩小管理者的权力，这样可以降低代理成本。