Roberto Ragozzino

Alliance Dynamics for Entrepreneurial Firms

Small firms are thought to encounter various difficulties implementing strategic alliances. Due to these problems, they may be less able to reap the benefits of alliance adaptation, and the changes that do occur in alliances may not coincide with a small firms interests. The evidence we present on contractual renegotiations in alliances suggests that small firms are no more or less likely to adjust their alliances contracts in general. However, small firms tend to bear inefficiencies of two kinds in their collaborations. First, they are less likely to adapt alliances in the presence of governance misalignments. Second, our sampled small firms were more prone to make transaction-specific investments, which can stimulate ex post hold-up in the form of contractual renegotiations.

Initial public offerings and the acquisition of entrepreneurial firms

Information asymmetries between buyers and sellers can create inefficiencies in mergers & acquisition (M&A) markets and prevent acquirers from gaining access to valuable resources and capabilities via acquisitions. Entrepreneurial firms face similar problems in raising external capital, due to the asymmetric information that separates them from prospective investors. In this article, we bring together the strategy, financial economics and entrepreneurship literatures and exploit the initial public offering (IPO) context to examine the informational characteristics of newly public entrepreneurial firms. We construct hazard models that offer strong evidence that certain IPO characteristics signal the value of entrepreneurial firms and thereby attract M&A suitors.

Venture-Backed Firms: How Does Venture Capital Involvement Affect Their Likelihood of Going Public or Being Acquired?

This paper investigates how venture capitalists’ involvement in new ventures affects the likelihood of entrepreneurial exit, either via an acquisition or via an initial public offering. We examine the prominence of venture capitals (VCs), the number of VCs invested in a company, as well as the timing, duration, and magnitude of their investments in new ventures. We find that each of these dimensions directly explains entrepreneurial exit, although their effects tend to differ depending on whether the exit occurs via an acquisition or an initial public offering (IPO). These results withstand several robustness checks and offer a more precise account of how the relationship between new ventures and VC firms unfolds in the early years of the entrepreneurial cycle.

Insights of Signaling Theory for Acquisitions Research

Abstract This paper examines the use of signaling theory in the M&A context. We review some of the most important developments in applications and extensions of this theory to the realm of M&A, indicating how this theory has been used to explain many M&A decisions and outcomes and has offered fresh perspectives in the mature literature on acquisitions. For example, we show how signaling theory provides a new view of the determinants of acquisition premiums, and it can contribute to an improved understanding of firms’ search for acquisition opportunities as well as target selection. We also provide a critique of existing research to identify gaps in understanding on the roles played by signals. For instance, we discuss how signals can create contracting problems during M&A negotiations, how the value of signals might vary across deals, and how bidder heterogeneity and bidders’ own signals matter for certain transactions. Finally, in addition to taking stock of this stream of research, we identify some of the most important areas that deserve research attention. Signaling theory can contribute to an improved understanding of acquisition performance outcomes, and signals need to be investigated along with other solutions to enhance M&A deal making and execution. We identify new research methods that would help to advance signaling theory in the acquisitions literature.

The Opportunities and Challenges of Entrepreneurial Acquisitions

Recent research has documented new ventures’ activity in acquisitions, and we build upon this work and the mergers and acquisition (M&A) literature in order to compare the acquisition performance of new ventures and established firms. The central rationale for our work is that new ventures hold distinct resources and capabilities that are bound to affect the outcome of their acquisition strategies in unique ways. Thus, from a conceptual standpoint, it is appropriate to isolate the implications of M&A activity by this class of firms, rather than assume that new ventures experience the same M&A performance outcomes as other acquirers. Empirically, our findings support this broad proposition as they indicate that new ventures are more subject to due diligence and valuation problems. However, they also seem to perform better than established firms when acquiring targets with high growth opportunities.