A good repute can be bad for business, according to new investigate from a University of Georgia.
For rarely regarded companies, open venerate comes with advantages such as employing improved talent and charging aloft prices. But it also brings expectations that are scarcely unfit to meet, says Mike Pfarrer, associate highbrow of government during UGA’s Terry College of Business.
“As most as people like to contend that a batch marketplace is blind to unjust behavior, since it’s run by humans there are a lot of tellurian biases baked into it-and we unprotected one,” Pfarrer said. “Reputation is inherently a psychological construct. So, if we do a lot of good over a duration of time, people start to design some-more from you. If we keep delivering a same aged thing, even if it’s a good product, a marketplace might not prerogative we for it.”
Pfarrer and colleagues looked into how expectations impact firms with good reputations. Specifically, they complicated how companies on Fortune’s “Most Admired Companies” list differed from others in their partnership and merger behaviors.
The research, published in Strategic Management Journal, found that, in contrariety to other businesses, high-reputation companies make about twice as many acquisitions-and those purchases tend to be reduction associated to a company’s expertise. And, notwithstanding their prestige, a marketplace penalizes them for it by lowered batch value.
“We looked during about 1,400 firms over scarcely 20 years and found that high-reputation firms take bigger risks in sequence to accommodate or surpass a expectations that investors put on them,” Pfarrer said. “Think of a association like Google. We’ve seen it grow adult in a lifetimes and start appropriation other firms like YouTube. At first, organic expansion is good adequate for investors. But, eventually, to prove a ever-upward expansion that a marketplace demands, they have to start shopping other companies since they can’t accommodate expectations organically anymore.”
Acquisitions are unsure endeavors, generally when a business is outward a company’s expertise, Pfarrer said. So, even yet businesses feel forced to make acquisitions in sequence to keep their reputations, investors conflict to these moves with trepidation.
“When Microsoft bought Skype, a marketplace reacted by asking, ‘What are we doing?’ But a existence is that Microsoft substantially had a lot of good reasons for doing it,” Pfarrer said. “It’s easy to collect on these companies, though we have to assume that firms that have been around a prolonged time with billion-dollar marketplace caps are not inherently dumb.”
Even when investors take this believe into account, their function is doubtful to change, Pfarrer said.
“We all have these behaviors and emotions hard-wired into us. It’s only how we are,” Pfarrer said. “We used to consider that they done us irrational, though now we know that it’s not unequivocally irrational. It’s tellurian nature. The doctrine for managers might be to consider twice about creation unsure acquisitions to accommodate expectations since a marketplace is going to reprove we for it anyway.”
The paper, “High-Reputation Firms and their Differential Acquisition Behaviors,” was co-authored by Jerayr J. Haleblian of a University of California-Riverside and Jason T. Kiley of Oklahoma State University.
Source: University of Georgia
Comment this news or article