Why Companies Do Not Pursue Attractive Mergers and Acquisitions By Richard B. Connell

Why Companies Do Not Pursue Attractive Mergers and Acquisitions ...

Chapter :

Terms and Definitions

Read

ABOUT
- Data
- Description
- Reviews
- About Author
- Cover
RESEARCH
- Bookmarks
- Notes
FONT
- Font Size
  - x-small
  - small
  - medium
  - large
  - x-large
- Line Height
  - 1.00
  - 1.25
  - 1.50
  - 1.75
  - 2.00
- Letter Spacing
  - Default
  - 1 pixel
  - 2 pixels
  - 3 pixels
  - 4 pixels
DOWNLOAD
- Complete Edition
PAGE
- TOC
- Copyright
- References
- Index

This is a limited free preview of this book. Please buy full access.

Strategic versus value-capturing acquisitions: These terms or expressions are used to distinguish acquisitions made mainly for longer term strategic or value-adding opportunity (typically synergy related) reasons (Pablo, Sitkin, & Jemison, 1996, p. 726) from those made for short-term financial gain. This distinction, commonly made in the strategic management literature, is elaborated in chapters 1, 3, and 5. The expressions financial acquisitions and value-capturing acquisitions are used interchangeably.

Candidate versus deal: The term candidate refers to either the company under consideration or being acquired. The deal incorporates the terms and conditions under which the candidate may or will be acquired (or the offer made). Thus, a candidate may be “attractive”, but the deal may be unattractive. The term deal is also used in connection with the flow or volume of potential candidates or opportunities to which the potential acquirer is exposed. The term target is often used in financial literature in lieu of candidate. The two terms are used interchangeably in this book.

Definitions of Methodology Terms

According to Denzin and Lincoln (1994, p. 3), “multiple uses and meanings of the methods of qualitative research make it difficult for researchers to agree on any essential definition of the field”. This is reflected in the inconsistencies in the use of terminology describing methodologies and methods in the literature.

As an example, these authors trace five stages (“moments”) in epistemological evolution and state that “ ‘qualitative research’ means different things in each of these” (Denizen & Lincoln, 1994, p. 1). And Gummesson (2001) asserts that whether the research is called quantitative or qualitative is not important. It is the process of knowing that is.