Post-Merger Influences of Human Resource

Practices and Organizational Leadership

on Employee Perceptions and Extra-Role
Behaviors
Juliette E. M. Buiter, Aon in Rotterdam, the Netherlands
Christopher M. Harris, Texas Woman's University

Mergers and acquisitions have increased over

the past few decades as a way for organizations
to try to improve their strategic position and performance (Andrade, Marks, and Stafford, 2001;
Daly, Pouder, and Kabanoff, 2004) as well as
enter new markets, share (development) costs,
and hedge against environmental uncertainties
(Hemineriks and Duysters, 2007). Research on
mergers and acquisitions has tended to focus on
economic or financial outcomes (King, Dalton,
Daily, and Covin, 2004), while the impact of
mergers and acquisitions on employees have
received less attention. This is surprising, since
an estimated one-third of employees will face
a merger or acquisition at some point in their
careers (Hubbard, 1999). Mergers and acquisitions have been found to have negative effects
on employees such as increased stress, anxiety,
turnover, and layoffs (Amoit, Terry, Jimmieson,
and Callan, 2006; Marmenout, 2010; Rafferty
and Restubog, 2010). "Change has become the
organizational norm" (Child, 2005) and therefore, examining ways organizations can help
employees function effectively during and after
a merger is increasingly important.
Human resource practices can help reduce
employee uncertainty and anxiety after a merger,
which may allow employees to perform at a high
level (Napier, 1989; Weber and Tarba, 2010).
While a positive relationship between human
resource practices and performance has been
established in previous research (e.g., Huselid,
1995; Takeuchi, Lepak, Wang, and Takeuchi,
2007), it is less clear if this positive relation-

ship will continue following a merger. From a

social exchange perspective (Sun, Aryee, and
Law, 2007; Nishii, Lepak, and Schneider, 2008),
when human resource practices are viewed as
supportive, employees may have more favorable
perceptions of the merger.
Organizational leadership and communication can also help mitigate the harmful effects
of mergers on employees (e.g., Amiot, 2006;
Marmenout, 2010; Rafferty et al., 2010; Weber
and Tarba, 2010). For example, when leadership
provides information about the merger (Schweiger and DeNisis), is supportive and visible
(Fgate, Kinick, and Scheck, 2002; Houghton,
Anand, and Neck, 2003) and interacts with employees (Marks, 1997) during the merger process, employee uncertainty, stress, and anxiety
are reduced. Reduced uncertainty may lead to
more favorable perceptions of the merger (Appelbaum, Gandell, Shapiro, Behsle, and Hoeven,
2000; Schweiger and DeNisis, 1991). Based on
social exchange theory, organizational leadership and communication about the merger can
be viewed as a form of interactional fairness by
employees (Seo and Hill, 2005). Therefore, organizational leadership and cotnmunication may
encourage employees to view the merger more
favorably and lead them to exhibit increased inrole and extra-role performance.
With this study we contribute to previous research by examining the lesser-studied attitudes
and behaviors of employees following a merger.
We examine ways in which organizations can
illicit positive responses and behaviors.

14

SAM Advanced Management Joumal Autumn 2013

Mergers and Their Influence on People

Mergers may have harmful effects on employees, including their behavior, performance,
well-being, stress, commitment, satisfaction, and
identification (e.g., Appelbaum, Gandell, Yortis,
Proper, and Jobin, 2001; Cartwright and Cooper,
1995; Marks and Midvis, 1985; Schweiger and
DeNisi, 1991; Seo and Hill, 2005). Additionally,
mergers have heen associated with increased
employee turnover and layoffs (e.g., Rafferty
and Restubog, 2010). These harmful effects
are particularly apparent in horizontal mergers
that typically require a high degree of physical,
managedal, and sociocultural integration (Napier, 1989).
Social exchange theory can explain the negative effects of mergers on employees and possible remedies. Social exchange relationships
are an exchange of socio-emotional benefits,
mutual trust, and open-ended commitments
(Blau, 1964), and high-quality social exchange
relationships encourage employees to form attitudes and exhibit behaviors that have favorable
consequences (Van Dyne et al., 1995). Additionally, human resource practices dudng and after
a merger will be regarded as "fair" if they are
objective and applied consistently across people,
time, and place (e.g., Ployhart and Ryan, 1997).

(Kotter and Schlisinger, 2008; Child, 2005; Kotter, 1995). According to Wieckrmasinghe and
Karunaratne (2009), employees are particularly
concerned about "changes in pay and benefits,
changes in the job, role, and assignments, changes in performance evaluation systems, transfers
to new jobs, and changes in career paths" (Ivancevich, Schweiger, and Power, 1987). These
uncertainties could trigger negative reactions,
including less motivation and lower performance
(Papadakis, 2005; Schweiger and Weber, 1989).
When employees perceive HRM practices
as supporting them and reducing uncertainty,
social exchange theory (Sun et al., 2007) states
that they are more committed, perform better,
and will go above and beyond what is expected
(extra-role performance). Similarly, aecording
to social exchange theory, when employees have
a voice in the changes and the HR practices are
apphed in a fair and consistent manner, employees may reciprocate by exhibiting extra-role
performance (Blau 1964; Seo and Hill, 2005).
Hypothesis 1: Employee perceptions of human
resource practices are positively related to
employee extra-role performance.

Human Resource Practices and Employee

Performance
Human resource management (HRM) is "conceptualized in terms of carefully designed practices geared towards improving organizational
effectiveness and hence better performance
outcomes" (Boselie et al., 2005). Aecording
to Takeuehi et al. (2007), a focus on a firm's
overall HR system is needed to understand
the impact of HR practices on organizational
outcomes. Studies in strategic human resource
management have shown that an effective highperformance work system includes dgorous and
selective staffing, extensive training and development, participation, information shadng, team
work, and incentive pay (e.g., Huselid, 1995;
Takeuehi et al., 2007).
Following a merger, especially a hodzontal
one, an organization should focus on its HR
practices (e.g., Napier, 1989, Weber and Tarba,
2010; Wieckrmasinghe, and Karunaratne, 2009).
This type involves a high level of organizational
change (e.g., Napier, 1989; Wieckrmasinghe
and Karunaratne, 2009) involving uncertainty,
complexity, changes in power, adaptations in
structure, and difficult moments for employees

Organization Leadership, HR Practices, and

Employee Performance
Leadership and communication are important
after a merger (e.g., Amiot, 2006; Marmenout,
2010; Rafferty et al., 2010; Weber and Tarba,
2010) because uncertainty, rather than the
change itself, causes employee stress (Weber and Tarha, 2010). Immediate, honest, and
consistent communication from leadership to
employees after a merger helps avoid negative
reactions and resistance by employees (Ford and
Ford, 1995).
Social exchange theory, huilt on the principle
of reciprocity, posits that when employees feel
they are being treated fairly, they may reciprocate by performing at a higher level. Since
communication from leadership can represent
a form of interactional fairness (Seo and Hill,
2005), employees may perceive they are being
treated fairly when leadership communicates the
importance of the merger, the need for its associated changes, and acknowledges the anxiety and
uncertainty employees face after a merger (e.g.,
Fded, Tiegs, Naughton, and Ashforth, 1996;
Gutknecht and Keys, 1993).
Hypothesis 2: Employee perceptions of organizational leadership are positively related to
extra-role performance.
Hypothesis 3: Employee perceptions of human

SAM Advanced Management Journal Autumn 2013

15

resource practices are positively related to

their perceptions ofthe merger.
Organization Leadership and Employee Perceptions of the Merger
Organizational leadership and communication
can help ensure the merger goes according to
plan and the associated changes create less anxiety and stress for employees (DiGeorgio, 2003).
Additionally, it has been noted that when leaders
conmiunicate a clear vision of the organization
following the merger, are attentive to employee
concerns, and communicate clear guidelines
about the merger and associated changes, employees are more likely to view the merger as
less stressful and feel they have more control
(Appelhaum et al., 2000). Such communication
from leadership also increases employee perceptions that the organization is trustworthy, honest,
and caring (Schweiger and DeNisis, 1991). For
example, a realistic merger preview can reduce
employee uncertainty (Schweiger and DeNisis,
1991) and workshops that communicate the
logic and rationale for the merger have been
found to reduce negative feelings (Leroy and
Ramanantsoa, 1997). Additionally, employees
who are more satisfied with communication
from leadership typically have a more positive
view ofthe merger (Napier, 1989).
Hypothesis 4: Employee perceptions of organizational leadership are positively related to
their perceptions ofthe merger.

exchange relationship that leads employees to

view the merger favorably, which may, in turn,
positively influence employee extra-role performance.
Hypothesis 6: Employee perceptions ofthe
merger mediate the relationship between their
perceptions of organizational leadership and
their extra-role performance.
Methods
Design and procedure. The data used in this
study are from the employment survey of a large
international service firm. Exactly two months
after the firm had started to merge with another
company, the firm sent an e-mail to 30% of its
global combined workforce. The organization
ensured that those chosen to participate represented the population diversity within the organization. The e-mail linked to an online survey
developed by an internal consulting group. To
ensure anonytnity, the survey did not ask employees for their gender, date of hirth (age), or
education level.

Employee Perceptions of the Merger as a

Mediator
The four hypotheses indicate the influence of
HR practices and organizational leadership on
employee perceptions of the merger and extrarole performance. Following social exchange
theory, employee perceptions of the merger may
serve as a mediator between HR practices and
employee performance and as a mediator between organizational leadership and employee
performance.
Hypothesis 5: Employee perceptions ofthe
merger mediate the relationship between their
perceptions of human resource practices and
their extra-role performance.
Social exchange theory also explains why
employee perceptions of the merger mediate the
relationship between leadership and their own
performance. Communication from leadership
after the merger can be a form of interactional
fairness and support for employees, as mentioned. This communication begins the social

Sample. Data were collected in a multinational

organization with roots dating back to 1688 in
the Netherlands, but the company in its current form dates to the mid-1980s. The period
between 1988 and 2003 was marked by global
expansion, strategic mergers and acquisitions,
and rapid growth whereby over 300 companies
were acquired. At the time of the survey, the
organization had over 60,000 employees operating in 120 countries and total revenue of $8.5
billion. For its global engagement survey, the
company wanted a target population representing employees from different business units and
global regions. For that reason, the survey was
translated into nine languages and sent to 30%
of the workforce globally. The response rate was
62%, with 5,499 employees fully completing the
survey.
With reference to joh status, the survey revealed that 95.6% ofthe employees worked
full-time. Each employee worked in one of fotir
different business consulting segments, with the
largest pool of participants (34.2%) working
in benefits administration consulting while the
smallest pool (12.4%) worked in HR business
process outsourcing consulting. Multiple regions
were surveyed: nearly half of the participants
worked in the U.S. and Latin America (48.2%),
while the other 50% was divided among India
with 27.3%, Europe, Middle East and Africa with
8.9%, United Kingdom with 6.9%, Canada 5.1%

16

SAM Advanced Management Journal Autumn 2013

and 3.6% in Asia Pacific. Pre-merger, the two

companies, A and B, were of equal size (about
30,000 employees). The survey was sent to an
equal number of employees from both pre-merger
firms, but the respondents did not match this SOSO distribution. Only 17.8% of the respondents
came from pre-merger company A, while the
remaining 82.2% came from pre-merger company
B (which had initiated the survey process).
Measures
Human resource practices. Employees rated
the HR practices of the organization using 12
items. The items related to staffing and talent,
training and development, and compensation.
Sample items included: "This company recruits
and hires the best talent in the industry," "We
make substantial investments in developing our
talent," and "Our pay system effectively differentiates different levels of performance." Each item
was rated on a six point Likert scale (1 = strongly
disagree and 6 = strongly agree). We ran a factor
analysis with varimax rotation to determine if the
HR practice items all loaded on a single factor.
One factor had an eigen value above one and
explained 61% of the variance. Each item had a
loading above .70 on the single factor. The HR
practice scale had a coefficient alpha of .94.
Organizational leadership. Employees assessed the leadership of the organization with
four items. Sample items included: "Our leaders are appropriately visible and accessible to
employees" and "Our senior leadership has
clearly communicated the company's strategy
and business objectives." Each item was rated on
a six point Likert scale (as explained). A factor
analysis with varimax rotation on the leadership
items was run to ensure that all items loaded on
a single factor. One factor had an eigen value
above one and explained 73% of the variance.
Each item had a loading above .80 on the single
factor. The organizational leadership scale had a
coefficient alpha of .87.
Perceptions of the merger. Employee perceptions of the merger were assessed with three
items: "I understand the strategic intent behind
the merger," "The integration process is going well," and "I am confident about the future
success of the merged orgatiization (organization name)." Each item was rated on a six point
Likert scale, as noted. We ran a factor analysis
with varimax rotation on the merger process
items to ensure that all items loaded on a single

SAM Advanced Management Journal Autumn 2013

factor. One factor had an eigen value above one

and explained 70% of the variance. Each item
had a loading above .75 on the single factor. The
organizational leadership scale had a coefficient
alpha of .78.
Performance. Employees rated their extra-role
performance with four items. Sample items included: "This organization motivates me to contribute
more than is normally required to complete my
work" and "I would without hesitation recommend
this organization to a friend seeking employment."
Each item was rated on the same scale as those
preceding. We ran a factor analysis with varimax
rotation on the extra-role performance items. One
factor had an eigen value greater than one and
explained 84% of the variance. The four extra-role
performance items loaded on a single factor with
loadings above .90. The extra-role performance
scale had an alpha of .94.
Control variables. The control variables included: region (Americas, Asia Pacific, Canada,
EMEA, India and UKI); business consulting
group (benefits administration, consulting, shared
services, and HR business process outsourcing); as well as organization role (individual
contributor, manager or leader). Organization
legacy refers to the pre-merged company A or
pre-merged company B. We also controlled for
organizational tenure. Employees had the option to choose from six subgroups: 0-1 year, 1-3
years, 3-5 years, 5-7 years, 7-10 years, and lO-iyears. We recoded tenure from one to six with 1
= 0-1 year and 6=10+ years.
Results
The means, standard deviations, and correlations
for each variable in this study are listed in Table
1. To test each hypothesis, hierarchical regression analysis was used, with results in Table 2.
As shown in Table 1, Hypotheses 1, 2, 3, and
4 were all supported. For Hypotheses 5 and 6
we tested for mediation by following Baron
and Kenny (1986). Hypothesis 5 was supported
since the beta weight for HR practices predicting extra-role performance decreased from .56 to
.50 and remained significant when employees'
perceptions of the merger were entered in the
regression. A Sobel test was conducted using Preacher and Hayes's (2004) procedure for
simple mediation for each of the mediations. The
Sobel test also supported employees' perceptions of the merger acting as a partial mediator
= 24.57, p < .01) between HR practices

17

t/3

01

18

I
.00
.02
-.39**
-.01
.11**

-.16**

.16**
-.38**

.22

.28

.45

.47

.46

.43

.96

.87

1.20

.04

.05

.09

.27

.34

.30

.24

3.64

4.38

4.54

4.20

7. India

8. Benefits
Business Group
9. Consulting
Business Group

10. HR
Business Group

U. HR Practices

12. Organization
Leadership

13. Merger
Perceptions

14. Extra-Role
Performance

ON

*
*
,(

ON

.03**

.02
-.22**

-.13**
.09**

-.07**

-.02
-.01
-.03

.02

-.01

-.10**

21**

.15*

.62**
.66**

13**
.07*

13** .21**

.56**

-.16** .16** .68**

.05*

-.15** .17**

-.14**

-.16** .18**

34**

-.40** -.36**

-.47**

.00

-.10**

-.14** .16**

-.03*

.22**

.07**

-.26**

-.13** .11**

.02

.01

.04**

-.23**

-.02

in

.07**

ON

-.05**

*
*
p

-.14**

o
m

-.05**

.02

11

*
*

- 31**

O\

-.07**

00

.08**

*
*

*
*

.05**

-.19**

O\

.18**

(Tl

-.07**

-.06**

2u

6. Europe

-.05**

(ti

-.23**

5. Canada

1 4. Asia

-.13**

-.10**

-.06**

ON

1 3. Americas

33**

-.05**
-.05**

.50

3.52

.38

.82

.48

1 2. Tenure

1 1. Organization

S.D.

2
.2

Mean

et

1 Variable
ci

*
*

r~:

*
*

CM

V
*
*

V
*

ON"

Os

SAM Advanced Management Journal Autumn 2013

.61**

Table 2. Regression Analyses for Hypotheses

Variables
Step 1
Organization
Tenure
Americas
Asia
Canada
Europe
India
Benefits
Business Group
Consulting
Business Group
HR
Business Group

Extra-Role
Performance

Extra-Role
Performance

Extra-Role
Performance

Merger
Process

-.04**
-.16**
.09**
.05**
.02
-.01
.19**
.04

-.05**
-.03**
.10**
.02
.02
.03*
.04*
.01

-.03**
-.04**
.08**
.01
.01
.03
.02
-.01

-.07**
-.06**
.09**
.06**
.04*
-.03
22**

-.08**
.03**
.06**
.03**
.02
.00
.11**
.07**

.00

.02

.02

.00

.01

.12**

.02

.01

.05**

.56**

.50**

.25**

.28**

.18**

44**

Step 2
HR
Practices
Organizational
Leadership
Step 3
Merger
Perceptions

Merger
Process

22**

R2
AR2

.09**

AF

52.95**

.60
.51**
3442.78**

.62
.02**
204.09**

.08**
34.78**

.44
.36**
1293.43**

N=5,499, *p < .05, **p< .01

and extra-role performance. Additionally, Hypothesis 6 was supported because the beta weight
for employees' perceptions of the organization's
leadership predicting extra-role performance was
reduced from .28 to .18 when employees' perceptions of the merger were entered in the regression. The Sobel test also provided support for
employees' perceptions of the merger acting as a
partial mediator iZ^^^ = 24.84, p < .01) between
their view of the organization's leadership and
extra-role performance.

Discussion
This study contributes to human resource management and merger and acquisition Uterature by

SAM Advanced Management Joumal Autumn 2013

theoretically developing and empirically exatnining employee perceptions of HR practices and

organizational leadership and their influences
on employee extra-role performance following a merger. Previous research on mergers and
acquisitions focused on organizational outcomes
of mergers and acquisitions while fewer studies
have examined the effects of mergers and acquisitions on employees (King et al., 2004). In this
study we examined employee perceptions of HR
practices and organizational leadership to see if
they would create more positive outcomes after a
merger, such as positive perceptions of the merger and increased extra-role performance. Our
study examined individual employees directly

19

following a merger and the influence of human

resource practices and organizational leadership
on positive employee attitudes and behaviors.
Following social exchange theory, HR practices may be viewed as a form of organizational
support (Sun et al., 2007), and employees may
reciprocate this support by exhibiting extra-role
behaviors. So when employees perceive practices as being implemented for their personal
well-being, they are more committed and likely
to display extra-role behaviors (Van Dyne et al.,
1995). HR practices, such as staffing, training
and development, and compensation are key following a merger as they can help ensure employees are in the proper jobs, have the appropdate
skills, and are compensated and rewarded accordingly. Our findings in this study support this
theoretical reasoning because employee perceptions of HR practices were positively related to
employee extra-role performance.
We also found that employee perceptions of
HR practices positively influenced their perceptions of the merger. As mentioned, mergers create a high degree of uncertainty for employees.
HR practices can help reduce this uncertainty
and anxiety by ensuring employees are prepared
to function effectively in the new environment.
Additionally, employees may view the HR
practices as a source of organizational support,
which, from a social exchange perspective, may
encourage them to view the merger more favorably. Therefore, HR practices that help to reduce
uncertainty may lead employees to form more
positive perceptions of the merger.
Employee perceptions of organizational leadership following the merger and their influence
on extra-role performance and perceptions of the
merger were also examined. We found employee
perceptions of organizational leadership were
positively related to employee extra-role performance and perceptions of the merger. These
results follow from prior theodzing and studies
on the influence of organizational leadership
during an organizational change (e.g., Amiot,
2006; Marmenout, 2010; Rafferty et al., 2010;
Weber and Tarha, 2010). An important aspect of
leadership following a merger is communication
to employees. As mentioned, this type of communication can include information about new
policies and procedures, facts about the merger,
and how the merger and its associated changes
will be implemented (Rafferty et al., 2010). This
information ean prepare employees and enhance
their functioning following the merger. Additionally, our results follow a social exchange per-

spective, as communication from leadership after

the merger can be seen as a form of interactional
fairness. If employees feel they are being treated
fairly, they reciprocate with increased extra-role
performanee. Our finding that employee perceptions of organization leadership is positively
related to their perceptions of the merger is also
supported by pdor theorizing and research. For
example, employees are more likely to view a
merger as favorable when leaders convey a clear
vision of the organization post-merger, are attentive to employee concerns, and communicate
clear guidelines about the merger and associated
changes (Appelbaum et al., 2000).
Following social exchange theory, we hypothesized that employee perceptions of the merger
would mediate the relationships between HR
practices and employee extra-role performance
and the relationships between employee perceptions of organizational leadership and employee
extra-role perfonnanee. Our findings supported
these hypotheses. Reflecting social exchange
reciprocity, employees may have viewed the
HR practices as a source of support, which led
them to view the merger more favorably, and,
therefore, respond with increased extra-role
performance. Similarly, employees may have felt
they were being treated fairly by organizational
leadership following the merger, leading them to
have more favorable perceptions of the merger
and, therefore, reciprocate with increased extrarole performanee. These findings indicate that if
organizations use HR practices effectively and
communicate with employees following a merger, employees may have more favorable perceptions of the merger and perform at a higher level.

20

SAM Advanced Management Journal Autumn 2013

Limitations and Future Research

In this section we outline limitations with the
current study and provide recommendations for
future research. The first limitation is eommon
method bias. Future research could avoid this
by collecting the independent and dependent
vadahles from different sources. For example,
objective performance data on employees could
be collected or supervisors could provide performanee ratings of employees. A second limitation
is the cross-seetional nature of the study. Future
research could avoid this by conducting a longitudinal study. In the context of a merger it would
he desirable to collect data pdor to the merger,
dudng and after. A third limitation is that data
were collected in a single organization and all
employees worked in HR and business consulting. Therefore, it may be difficult to generalize

conclusions outside of this organization's parameters. This limitation can be addressed hy collecting data in multiple organizations.

Practical Implications
The findings of this study have implications
for researchers, hut particularly for managers specifically for managers in the focal company.
For scholars this study contrihutes to an area of
research that has received little attention in the
M&A literature. Our aim was to generate insights
and increase our understanding of the relationship between HRM practices and performance
in the context of a merger as well as encourage
other scholars to examine the impact of HRM
practices in a merger context.
The results provide valuable information
for managers as they show that HR practices
positively affect individual employee extra-role
performance. Important practices in this process
include clarity in performance objectives, rewards for what gets done right, acknowledging
what is not working, as well as being transparent, visible, open, and honest. Additionally, this
paper shows the importance of good leadership
in an M&A process. According to Nadeler and
Tushman (1989), a "leader serves as the focal
point for the change. His/her presence needs to...
capture and mohihze the hearts and minds of the
people in the organization." Other ways managers can assist employees during and after a merger include helping them be open-minded, patient,
positive, and giving them the tools they need to
be flexible and agile, while using humor to keep
the working atmosphere pleasant. As over a
third of the working population will experience
a merger or acquisition at some point in their
careers, both employees and managers will gain
experience in dealing with this type of organizational change and discover which practices work
best for them and the organization.
Juliette Buiter has an extensive academic background in management and human resources,
and currently serves as HR business partner at
Aon in Rotterdam, the Netherlands. Dr. Harris,
who has published and presented at conferences,
focuses his research on strategic human resource
management, human capital, and organizational
citizenship behaviors.
REFERENCES
Amiot, C.E., Terry, D.J., Jimmieson, N.L., and Callan, V.J.
(2006). A longitudinal investigation of coping process-

SAM Advanced Management Journal Autumn 2013

es during a merger: Implications for job satisfaction and

organizational identification. Journal of Management,
32(4): 552-574.
Andrade, G., Marks, M., and Stafford, E. (2001). New
evidence and perspectives on mergers. Journal of Economic Perspectives, ]5: 103-120.
Appelbaum, S.H., Gandell, J., Shapiro, B.T., Belisle, P.,
and Hoeven, E. (2000). Anatomy of a merger: Behavior
of organizational factors and processes throughout the
pre, during, and post-stages. Management Decision, 38:
674-680.
Baron, R.M., and Kenny, D.A. (1986). The moderatormediator variable distinction in social psychological
research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
5L- 1173-1182.
Blau, P.M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life.
New York: John Wiley.
Boselie, P., Dietz, G., and Boon, C. (2005). Commonalities and contradictions. Human Resource Management
Journal, 15(3), 67-94.
Cartwright, S., and Cooper, C.L. (1995). Organizational
marriage: Hard versus soft issues? Personnel Review,
24(3): 32-42.
Child, J. (2005). Organization: Contemporary Principles
and Practice. Oxford: Blackwell.
Daly, J.P., Pouder, R.W., and Kabanoff, B. (2004). The
effects of initial differences in firms' espoused values
on their post-merger performance. Journal of Applied
Behavioral Science, 40: 323-343.
DiGeorgio, R.M. (2003). Making mergers and acquisitions
work: Australian organizations in transition. Sydney:
McGraw-Hill.
Ford, J.D., and Ford, L.W. (1995). The role of conversations in producing intentional change in organizations.
Academy of Management Review, 20: 541-570.
Fried, Y., Tiegs, R.B., Naughton, T.J., and Ashforth, B.E.
(1996). Managers' reactions to a corporate acquisition:
A test of an integrative model. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 7.-401-427.
Fgate, M., Kinicki, A.J., and Scheck, C.L. (2002). Coping
with organizational merger over four stages. Personnel
Psychology, 55: 905-928.
Gutknecht, J.E., and Keys, J.B. (1993). Mergers, acquisitions and takeover: Maintaining morale of survivors
and protecting employees. Academy of Management
Executive, 7: 26-36.
Heimeriks, K.H., and Duysters, G. (2007). Alliance capability as a mediator between experience and alliance
Performance: An empirical investigation into the alliance capability development process. Journal of Management Studies, 44(1): 25-49.
Houghton, J.D., Anand, V., and Neck, C.P (2007). Toward a framework of corporate merger processes and
outcomes: A behavioral perspective. International
Journal of Public Administration, 26(1): 97-117.
Hubbard, N. (1999). Acquisition strategy and implementation. London: McMillian.
Huselid, M. A. (1995).The impact of human resource
management practices on turnover, productivity, and

21

corporate financial performance. Academy of Management Journal, i(38), 635-672.

Ivancevich, J.M., Schweiger, D.M., and Power, F.R.
(1987). Strategies for managing human resources during mergers and acquisitions. Human Resource Planning, 70(1): 19-35.
King, D.R., Dalton, R.R., Daily, CM., and Covin, J.G.
(2004). Meta-Analyses of post-acquisition performance: Indicators of unidentified moderators. Strategic
Management Journal, 25: 187-200.
Kotter, J. P. (1995). Leading change: Why transfonnation
efforts fail. Harvard Business Review, 73(2) 59-67.
Leroy, F., and Ramanantsoa, B. (1997). The cognitive and
behavioral dimensions of organizational learning in a
merger: An empirical study. Journal of Management
Studies, 34: 871-894.
Marmenout, K. (2010). Employee sensemaking in mergers:
How deal characteristics shape employee attitudes. The
Journal ofApplied Behavioral Sciences, 46(3): 329-359.
Marks, M.L., and Mirvis, PH. (1985). Merger syndrome:
Stress and uncertainty. Mergers and Acquisitions, 20:
70-76.
Marks, M.L., and Mirvis, PH. (1992). Rebuilding after the
merger: Dealing with "survival sickness." Organizational Dynamics: 50-55.
Napier, N.K. (1989). Mergers and acquisitions. Humati
resource issues and outcomes: A review and suggested typology. Journal of Management Studies, 26(3): 271-289.
Nelson, A., Cooper, C.L., and Jackson, PR. (1995). Uncertainty amidst change: The impact of privatization on
employee job satisfaction and well-being. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 68: 57-71.
Nishii, L. H., Lepak, D. P, and Schneider, B. (2008). Employee attributions of the "why" of HR practices: Their
effects on employee attitudes and behaviors, and customer satisfaction. CAHRS Working Paper #08-03. Ithaca,
NY: Cornell University, School of Industrial and Labor
Relations, Center for Advanced Human Resource Studies.
Papadakis, V.M. (2005). The role of broader context and

the communication program in merger and acquisition

implementation success. Management Decision, 43(2):
236-255.
Raferty, A.E., and Restubog (2010). The impact of change
process and context on change reactions and turnover
during a merger. Journal of Management, 36(5): 13091338.
Schweiger, D.M., and DeNisi, A.S. (1991). Communication with employees following a merger: A longitudinal
field experiment. Academy of Management Journal, 34:
110-135.
Schweiger, D.M., and Weber, Y. (1989). Strategies for
managing human resources during mergers and acquisitions: An empirical investigation. Human Resource
Planning, 12(2): 69-86.
Seo, G.S., and Hill, N.S. (2005). Understanding the human
side of merger and acquisition: An integrative framework. The Journal ofApplied Behavioral Sciences,
41(4): 422-443.
Sun, L., Aryee, S., and Law, K.S. (2007). High performance work practices, citizenship behavior, and
organizational performance: A relational perspective.
Academy of Management Journal, 50(3) 228-577.
Takeuchi, R., Lepak, D., Wang, H., and Takeuchi, K.
(2007). An empirical examination of the mechanisms
mediating between high-performance work systems and
the performance of Japanese organizations. Journal of
Applied Psychology 92(4), 1069-1083.
Van Dyne, L., Cummings, L.L., and Parks, J. (1995).
Extra-role behaviors: In pursuit of construct and definitional clarity a bridge over muddied waters. Research in
Organizational Behavior, 17, 215-285.
Weber, Y, and Tarba, S.Y. (2010). Human resource practices
and performance of mergers and acquisitions in Israel.
Human Resource Management Review, 20: 203-211.
Wickramasinghe, V., and Karunaratne, C. (2009). People
management in mergers and acquisitions in Sri Lanka:
Employee perceptions. International Journal of Human
Resource Management, 20(3): 694-715.

SAM MEMBERSHIP APPLICATION

(Membership benefits include; the Journal, Newsletter, Discount at the Conference, and Other Benefits)
(Please Type or Print)
Name:

Position Title:

Company/University:.
Address:
Country:
For Students, University:.

_ Telephone:

_ City:.

_ State:_

. Fax: _

_ E-mail:.

^ Degree Sought:.

Zip:

Graduation Date:

Membership (PLEASE CHECK)

Professional (International or U.S.)
$80.00/yr.
D Associate*/Graduate Student (U.S. only)
$40.00/yr.
n Retired
$45.00/yr.
Associate*/Graduate Student (International)
$50.00/yr.
n Academic (U.S. only)
$55.00/yr.
Q Student (U.S. only)
$30.00/yr.
n Academic (International)
$65.00/yr.
Student (International)
$40.00/yr.
*Former campus member, within six months of gradutation, for a two year period.
n Check (Make Check Payable to SAM and Mail to the Address Below)
D Charge to: VISAD MasterCard D Card #:
. Expiration Date:.
Mail or Fax to: SAM, Society for Advancement of Management
6300 Ocean Dr., OCNR 383, Unit # 5808, Corpus Christi, TX 78412-5808 USA
Fax: (361) 825-5609
Telephone: (361) 825-3045
E-maU: moustafa.abdelsamad@tamucc.edu
9/2007

Copyright of SAM Advanced Management Journal (07497075) is the property of Society for
Advancement of Management and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites
or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However,
users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.