In an effort to explain why business acquisitions often fail, scholars have begun to focus on the role of top executives of acquired companies. Acquired companies that retain their top executives tend to have more successful outcomes than those that do not. Furthermore, existing research suggests that retaining the highest-level top executives, such as the CEO (chief executive officer) and COO (chief operating officer), is related more positively to post acquisition success than retaining lower-ranked top executives. However, this explanation, while insightful, suffers from two limitations. First, the focus on positional rank does not recognize the variation in length of service that may exist in top executive posts across companies, nor does it address which particular top executives (with respect to length of service) should be retained to achieve a successful acquisition outcome. Second, the relationship between retained top executives and acquisition outcomes offered by existing research is subject to opposing theoretical explanations related to length of service. The resource-based view (RBV) suggests that keeping acquired company top executives with longer organizational tenure would lead to more successful outcomes, as those executives have idiosyncratic and nontransferable knowledge of the acquired company that would be valuable for the effective implementation of the acquisition. The opposing position, offered by the upper echelons perspective (UEP), suggests that retaining top executives having short organizational tenure would lead to more successful outcomes, as they would have the adaptability to manage most effectively during the uncertainty of the acquisition process.
Responding to these limitations, Bergh conducted a study of executive retention and acquisition outcome that focused on the organizational tenure of retained company top executives in 104 acquisitions, followed over 5 years. Bergh considered the acquisition successful if the acquired company was retained and unsuccessful if it was divested. Bergh's findings support the RBV position. Apparently, the benefits of long organizational tenure lead to more successful outcomes than the benefits of short organizational tenure, While longer tenured top executives may have trouble adapting to change, it appears that their perspectives and knowledge bases offer unique value after the acquisition. Although from the UEP position it seems sensible to retain less tenured executives and allow more tenured ones to leave, such a strategy appears to lower the probability of acquisition success.
According to the passage, prior to Bergh's study, research on the role of top executives of acquired companies in business acquisition success was limited in which of the following ways?
It did not address how the organizational tenure of top executives affects postacquisition success.
It did not address why some companies have longer-tenured CEOs than others.
It did not consider strategies for retaining long-tenured top executives of acquired companies.
It failed to differentiate between the contribution of highest-level top executives to postacquisition success and that of lower-ranked top executives.
It underestimated the potential contribution that lower-level top executives can make to post acquisition success.
题目分析:
文章细节题:在Bergh之前的研究都有啥缺陷?
原文:没考虑服务时长;没考虑应该留时长长的还是短的。
选项分析:
A选项:正确。没强调任期长短对成功的影响:一致。
B选项:没强调为啥有的CEO任期长:无关。
C选项:没考虑留任期长的领导的策略:无论长短 都没考虑。
D选项:没能区别高级和低级领导的贡献:无关。
E选项:低估了低级领导的贡献:无关。
prior to == before a particular time or event
First, the focus on positional rank does not recognize the variation in length of service that may exist in top executive posts across companies/Responding to these limitations, Bergh conducted a study of executive retention and acquisition outcome that focused on the organizational tenure of retained company top executives
首先要搞清楚Prior to B' study的research究竟是指什么?
B‘study在文章最后一段,而这之前有1)关于职位高低的讨论;2)RBV和UEP的讨论,其中RBV和UEP是有讨论到任职时间的。
可能通过RBV和UEP会觉得A是错误的,因为RBV和UEP正是讨论了任期长短。
但是这里的research指的是1)。
另外其他选项也可以通过排除法排除。
B选项:没强调为啥有的CEO任期长:无关。
错误原因在于题目没仔细读&prior to的理解还不够强。prior to Bergh's study意思是在b的研究之前有啥缺陷,我理解成,对于b的研究,有啥缺陷,在rc里面脑子好像不转的。。。
a。。。没认真读此选项意思 the organizational tenure
A选项: the role of highest-level executives in acquisitions is limited by its failure to consider tenure.
B选项:The passage does not mention
C选项: The passage does not mention
D选项:existing research suggests that retaining the highest-level top executives is related more positively to post acquisition success than retaining lower-ranked top executives.
E选项:underestimated the contribution of lower-level top executives不是limitations
Post 后的
postacquisition 收购后
Acquired 被兼并企业
nor does it address which particular top executives (with respect to length of service) should be retained to achieve a successful acquisition outcome.这句已经说了
Bergh conducted a study of executive retention and acquisition outcome第二段开头句B做的,就是前面research limited的。