The first five merger waves were US-led events. In this article we show that the largely over-looked sixth wave (2003–2008) emerged in all regions simultaneously. Because of this, and building upon interconnected literatures – which: (1) suggests that agency is a big predictor of merger performance; (2) distinguishes between three distinct governance traditions; and (3) argues that theAnglo-Saxonsystem puts the most effort into protecting investors and aligning interests, and theConfuciansystem the least – we predicted thatAnglo-Saxonacquirers would create value in the sixth wave, andConfucianacquirers would destroy it. We find the opposite to be true and show that Chinese acquirers, in particular, created the most value in the sixth wave. In attempting to explain why, we find that China outperformed its Asian neighbors while doing the same thing, and outperformed its Western peers while doing what the literature suggests that they shouldn't do. This not only points to the limits of the generalizability of the existing literature, but supports the suggestion that Chinese acquirers are ‘different’. We call, therefore, for additional research into understanding Chinese and Confucian acquirers using the standard comparative merger data.

Strategic alliances, in particular strategic alliances with universities, are widely thought to be beneficial to the drug discovery process. However, the discussion of alliances and their effect has tended to focus on single alliances and has ignored the fact that firms tend to participate in multiple alliances simultaneously. Here, we show the importance of adopting a portfolio perspective of strategic alliances. We build a model of the U.S. pharmaceutical industry, and show how 2298 alliances, announced over a 15-year period, impact the alliance portfolios of 324 pharmaceutical firms, and how that, in turn, impacts the breakthrough innovations that these firms produce. In doing so, we show the stengths and benifits of strategic alliances, but we also show the dangers of adopting a more the merrier approach to strategic alliance making.

McCarthy K. J. and Dolfsma W. The euro and its impact on the number, size, performance and regional spread of European mergers and acquisitions, Regional Studies. The macroeconomic effects of the euro have been extensively studied. The literature has, however, paid significantly less attention to the microeconomic consequences and few authors have considered if and how the euro has impacted firm-level decision-making. This paper explores if, how and in what way the euro has impacted one firm-level decision: whether to merge with or acquire another firm. This paper builds a sample of 19 362 acquisitions, announced in the period 1990–2014. It shows that the euro has dramatically increased the number, size and performance of European mergers and acquisitions. Importantly, it also notes that the euro has altered the geographic spread of European acquisitions. The paper reports that since the introduction of the euro, acquirers have made increasingly distant acquisitions and have preferred targets in peripheral regions to those in the core. The results also hint at the suggestion that the euro may have led acquirers to prefer Eurozone to non-Eurozone targets. From a policy perspective, it is concluded, therefore, that the euro has significantly impacted firm behaviour and has contributed, in a positive sense, to regional integration.

Ukraine had had its ups and downs in recent years. It has, for example, dramatically improved its ease of doing business (EOBB), and it has made some progress reducing the relative size and influence of its shadow economy (Shadow). But, the Russian invasion of 2014 (Conflict) forced it to take a few developmental steps backwards. In this paper, we consider the effect of these factors, positive and negative, on the number of mergers and acquisitions, involving Ukrainian firms. We construct a sample of 4030 acquisitions in the period 1 January 2000–31 December 2020. Our results suggest that while the number of acquisitions by domestic firms increases in efficiency (+EOBB), transparency (−Shadow) and peace (−Conflict), the number of foreign acquisitions increases in bureaucracy (−EOBB), in informality (+Shadow), and unrest (+Conflict). From an academic perspective, our findings fit with some recent work, while providing new insights too. From a policy perspective, our findings that the number of foreign acquisitions is negatively affected by Ukraine’s attempts to modernize and improve its economy and is positively affected by the ongoing conflict with Russia, makes us wonders what type of ‘false friends’ make such investments.