Analyzing Human Dynamics in M&As Through MOBA Framework: A Systematic Literature Review and Thematic Analysis

Arzoo Gupta
Research Scholar, Dr. APJ Abdul Kalam Technical University, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India; and is the corresponding author. E-mail: aarzoogupta08@gmail.com

Vandana Pareek
Professor, Lloyd Group of Institutions, Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh, India. E-mail: vandanapareek1@gmail.com

This paper systematically examines human influence on M&A success, addressing a literature gap by proposing managerial, organizational and behavioral attributes (MOBA) framework. The study uses a systematic literature review and thematic analysis to investigate the impact of executives' traits on M&A success, analyzing 124 studies from 2017 to 2023. It identifies eight key themes: leadership styles, decision-making capabilities, managerial abilities, psychological biases, risk attitudes, stress management strategies, sociocultural factors, and language influences. The MOBA framework, a three-dimensional model, is developed to understand the interplay between managerial attributes, behavioral attributes, and organizational factors in M&A success. The paper emphasizes the importance of non-financial metrics for a comprehensive post-merger performance evaluation. It provides insights into managerial capability's impact on performance, revealing connections between various managerial dimensions. The findings are particularly relevant to the banking sector and M&A-intensive industries, highlighting the need for assessing individual characteristics for strategic decision making. The paper suggests future research to refine our understanding of managerial ability in M&A contexts. It enriches our understanding of M&A by studying the interconnections between various managerial aspects, and offers a comprehensive framework for future studies.

Introduction

Mergers and acquisitions (M&A) have become essential strategic tools for businesses seeking growth, competitiveness, and synergy in today's dynamic landscape. However, the successful integration of merged entities is a multifaceted process significantly influenced by various factors, among which managerial attributes play a pivotal role. This study emphasizes the critical impact of managerial capabilities and qualities on shaping the financial performance of the combined entity, following M&A endeavors (Sahu and Agarwal, 2017; and Anthony, 2019).

While M&A can yield positive financial outcomes (Anthony, 2019), boost market share, and improve solvency, research also highlights potential pitfalls. Studies (Hachem and Sujud, 2018; Hassan et al., 2018; and Lewis and Bozos, 2019) consistently emphasize the importance of effective leadership and strategic decision making (Hossain, 2021) throughout the M&A process, with recent works (Tao et al., 2017; and Renneboog and Vansteenkiste, 2019) recognizing the significance of sociocultural and human resource integration for successful outcomes.

M&As can lead to financial synergy and benefits that align with strategic and financial objectives (Smeulders et al., 2019; and Ai and Tan, 2020). This can be achieved through various means, including the adoption of innovative technologies and expansion into new markets (Bedi, 2018; and Hong et al., 2019). Many researchers argue that the improvement in a firm's financial performance and profitability (Hachem and Sujud, 2018; Anthony, 2019; and Lewis and Bozos, 2019) is contingent on the dynamic managerial capacity (Hassan et al., 2018). In the past, research primarily focused on financial performance, market value, and shareholder value (Ahmad and Ray, 2020). However, recent studies emphasize the importance of taking sociocultural and human resource integration processes into account when assessing the outcomes of M&A comprehensively. By incorporating personality insights into the merger process, organizations can achieve smoother and more successful integration of human resources in the ever-evolving organizational landscape (Wang et al., 2020).

The role of executives in steering organizations through the complexities of integration has garnered attention (Hsieh et al., 2018; Shi et al., 2019a; and Ferris and Sainani, 2021), and researchers have sought to uncover patterns, best practices, and potential pitfalls associated with various managerial attributes. Based on the research conducted by Wang et al. (2020), the upper echelons theory posits that the personal traits of senior executives influence firm performance. Malhotra et al. (2018) presented the ramifications of CEO personality traits on M&A activities. Moreover, Renneboog and Vansteenkiste (2019) identified that synergy gains arising from M&A offer economic advantages that positively impact shareholders. Scholars have devoted attention to investigate how recent research conceptualizes and how it tests the impact of institutional distance on the choice of equity-based entry modes, considering both sociological and economic perspectives within institutional theory (da Silva et al., 2023). Previous research indicates that specific CEO personality traits and biases play a role in shaping decisions related to significant corporate activities such as M&A (Hammer et al., 2018; Malhotra et al., 2018; and Aabo et al., 2023).

Most reviews concentrated solely on the entry mode (Klier et al., 2017; and Carneiro et al., 2022), distances (Cuypers et al., 2017; and Beugelsdijk et al., 2018), or institutional perspectives (Kostova et al., 2020). Such exploration is deemed essential for guiding both theoretical and empirical advancements in the field, ultimately enhancing the effectiveness of strategic decision-making processes (Sinnaiah et al., 2023). In this study, the focus lies in establishing connections among various dimensions of managers. An exploratory approach is employed to explore existing literature within the field. The systematic literature review findings are analyzed qualitatively through thematic analysis. Going beyond mere description, the study develops a conceptual framework-managerial and behavioral attributes (MOBA) framework-which emerges from recurring themes in the literature and their interrelationships. This conceptual model aims to uncover the human aspects of M&A and contributes to a more holistic understanding of success factors.

The rest of the paper is organized as follows: the next section delves into a comprehensive discussion on the SLR methodology, utilizing the three-stage PRISMA framework. It covers review questions, research scope, and established boundaries. Providing a contextual backdrop, the subsequent section presents a summary of the influence of various human factors on the performance of firms over time, coupled with its classification. It also incorporates a detailed examination of the frequency distribution of papers by year, across different categories, and the distribution of the sample. Moving forward, the conceptual framework-MOBA framework-is developed. Finally, a discussion of the study's findings, followed by conclusion with suggestions for future research that will provide a road map for further exploration in the field of M&A are presented.

Methodology
A systematic literature review (SLR) following the three-stage PRISMA framework was conducted. The initial stage involved searching relevant databases and previous literature, yielding 500 records. After duplication and removal of ineligible entries, 387 records proceeded to screening. Further assessment excluded irrelevant studies, resulting in 124 articles for final analysis (Figure 1). Careful consideration was given to the keywords used, conceptual grounding, publication type, and time frame to ensure a representative and high-quality sample. Following the SLR, this study presents a comprehensive report on a detailed qualitative and deductive approach of thematic analysis. This scoping study outlines a research protocol that aims at transparency for the review (Table 1).

Results
Papers Categorized by Frequency Distribution
In order to explore the evolving research landscape concerning human influence and its effects on firm performance in the context of M&A, we undertook a comprehensive analysis of 124 scholarly articles. The results of this descriptive examination are meticulously presented in Table 2.

Yearly Distribution of Sample Publications
Table 3 presents the distribution of papers across different years from 2017 to 2023, along with their corresponding percentages. These percentages show yearly contribution of papers. Most researchers within the field of M&A believe that human variables should be viewed as a distinct domain. Such a belief has shaped the way M&A performance of a firm is conceptualized.

Thematic Analysis
Human factors, including employee retention, leadership dynamics, organizational culture, employee emotions, and communication strategies, play a significant role in determining the success of M&A. There is a growing recognition of the importance of human factors beyond financial metrics. Researchers are focusing on post-merger integration challenges, emphasizing leadership styles and considering employee engagement.

To gain a deeper insight into the fluctuations in M&A performance, researchers have directed specific attention to the potential influence of human factors on M&A outcomes. Realizing that strategic, economic, or financial considerations alone may not be exhaustive in comprehending these phenomena, there is an increasing recognition that the reasons for M&A failures are intertwined with how individuals within merging organizations navigate and respond to the deal. Research, primarily within organizational behavior and, to a lesser extent, in HRM, sociology, and psychology, has pinpointed numerous ways in which human elements can shape the performance of M&A.

This study delves into the intricate human factors impacting M&A success, employing a rigorous and deductive approach of thematic analysis. The thematic analysis revealed eight significant themes encompassing the research on human factors and their influence on M&A performance. These themes include the interplay between human characteristics and firm success in M&A deals, exploration of psychological biases, risk tolerance levels, stress management strategies, leadership styles, managerial capabilities, decision-making approaches, the impact of cultural and social influences, and language differences. While some papers delve into multiple themes, each has been categorized based on its most relevant theme for a clearer understanding.

Discussion
Conceptual Framework
This SLR employed an inductive approach to explore current understandings of human factors in M&A success. By analyzing and synthesizing existing literature, the study identified emerging themes and potential areas for future research. However, the process went beyond simply summarizing existing knowledge. As some papers spanned multiple themes, the analysis revealed interesting relationships between them. These insights ultimately informed the development of a novel conceptual framework of MOBA (Figure 2).

The present paper argues that M&A success is a complex concept that benefits from diverse perspectives that have contributed to its understanding. These perspectives have been categorized based on their impact on M&A success: managerial attributes, behavioral factors, and organizational factors. Recognizing the interconnectedness of these categories, the paper acknowledges the mutual influence and benefit that emerge as research in this field progresses. This allows for the integration of multiple perspectives, often seen as a limitation, and enriches the field by viewing them as complementary rather than conflicting.

Theoretical Development
The study introduces the MOBA, a novel conceptual framework that integrates diverse perspectives on human factors influencing M&A success. The MOBA framework recognizes the interplay between three key dimensions:

1. Managerial Attributes: Leadership styles, decision-making approaches, and managerial capabilities.
2. Behavioral Attributes: Psychological biases, risk tolerance, and stress management strategies.
3. Organizational Attributes: Sociocultural elements and language differences.

By considering these interlinked dimensions, the MOBA framework offers a comprehensive lens for understanding and analyzing the complex role of human factors in M&A performance. This framework contributes as a valuable tool for both practitioners in the field and researchers seeking to explore diverse perspectives, and acknowledges the multifaceted nature of human influence on M&A outcomes. It promotes a holistic understanding of managerial, behavioral, and organizational factors. It provides a foundation for further exploration of specific human attributes and their nuanced influence on M&A success.

Behavioral Dynamics
Psychological Biases
In the intricate landscape of organizational consolidation, the effectiveness of post-merger operations is significantly influenced by psychological predispositions inherent in decision makers. These inclinations encompass overconfidence, loss aversion, herd behavior, anchoring, temporal considerations, and hubris (Dervishaj, 2021). Overconfidence bias, for instance, may lead to the overestimation of acquisition prices and inflated bidding, resulting in impairment losses. Similarly, loss aversion and herd behavior biases can impact decision making, contributing to overvaluation. Anchoring (Broekema et al., 2022), temporal, and hubris biases further exert influence during the negotiation phase, impeding the integration process. To address these biases, implementing appropriate corporate governance structures and a deeper understanding of human emotions (Akansu et al., 2017) and psychology become crucial. Loss aversion detrimentally affects economic performance, while overconfidence positively influences firm performance (Souissi and Jarboui, 2018). Additionally, CEO overconfidence is correlated with enhanced firm performance (emphasizing the role of overconfidence).

Numerous studies have explored various aspects of how CEO overconfidence influences a firm, delving into areas such as corporate performance, investment behavior, board of directors, and CEO compensation, especially in emerging or developing markets (Yung and Chen, 2017). However, only a limited number of studies have specifically delved into the connection between CEO personal traits, CEO overconfidence, and the subsequent impact on firm value post M&A (Renneboog and Vansteenkiste, 2019). While some studies have touched upon CEO overconfidence concerning corporate investment decisions, abnormal returns turnover, or synergies post-acquisition, none have specifically addressed or investigated the interplay between firm value and managerial overconfidence (Renneboog and Vansteenkiste, 2019) within the context of a firm's M&A strategies or explored how overconfidence influences the overall firm value (Tang et al., 2020).

Delving into scholarly literature on the market for corporate control, the authors identified key determinants influencing post-takeover deal performance. Acquiring firms often face challenges in performing up to par in M&A, necessitating a thorough discussion in the academic literature on the market for corporate control and its impact on firms' performance after takeovers (Tarba et al., 2019).

Degbey et al. (2021) explore the psychological phenomenon based on the concept of possession, specifically psychological ownership. In the realm of psychology, M&A is acknowledged as a significant and intricate process of organizational change (Samal et al., 2020), impacting employees' lives substantially. Souissi and Jarboui (2018) hold that psychological ownership, which is positively associated with organizational performance, is a critical asset for the acquired firm. However, the M&A process has the potential to undermine this psychological ownership. Building on insights from previous literature, the paper anticipates discovering that CEOs hold considerable sway in shaping corporate M&A strategies, especially when the goal is to maximize overall firm value.

Risk Attitudes
The relationship between managerial risk-taking and ability is a nuanced interplay. Managers with high abilities tend to embrace risks, contrasting with their low-ability counterparts, who often shy away from taking substantial risks (Yung and Chen, 2017); and it unfolds a fascinating dynamic-high-ability and low-ability managers exert opposing influences on both a company's risk-taking behavior and its overall value. Notably, this willingness to take risks, identified by Burkhard et al. (2023), is associated with enhanced firm performance.

Numerous studies (e.g., Ou et al., 2015; Cragun et al., 2019; and Harrison et al., 2020) have underlined the profound impact of CEO attributes on shaping a firm's strategy and performance. For CEOs, navigating strategic decisions involves a careful consideration of strategic risk-taking-a complex process influenced by cognitive, motivational, and social factors (Campbell et al., 2018; Shi et al., 2019b; and Connelly et al., 2020). Strategic risk-taking, defined by Kolev and McNamara (2020), encapsulates the degree to which strategic decisions involve uncertain, challenging-to-reverse capital investments with critical consequences for a company's structure and destiny.

Additionally, Burkhard et al. (2023) shed light on the fact that overconfident CEOs embrace strategic risk-taking through cognitive, motivational, and social mechanisms, establishing a positive connection between such risk-taking and a company's overall performance. In the realm of M&A, Avinadav et al. (2017) proposed a mutually beneficial approach, suggesting that the less risk-averse party tends to fare better when assuming the role of the acquirer.

The propensity for executive risk aversion or risk-taking holds a noteworthy impact on the landscape of M&A activity. In their illuminating study, they unveiled a compelling correlation, viz., firms led by more risk-tolerant executives tend to be the initiators of a higher number of mergers (Maung et al., 2021). This insight sheds light on the pivotal role that executive psychological traits play in steering the course of M&A endeavors, adding a distinctly human dimension to strategic decision making in the corporate realm.

According to Zhou et al. (2023), the CEOs' risk-taking entrepreneurial spirit has the transformative power to elevate the value of a firm. Delving deeper into the CEOs' risk preferences, Zhao and Tang (2023) offer a compelling insight-CEOs with a penchant for embracing higher levels of risk are more inclined to accept a greater value of goodwill. The economic implications analysis indicates that a CEO's reputation can ultimately enhance firm value by encouraging corporate risk-taking (Lin et al., 2018).

Stress Coping Mechanism
M&As are strategic endeavors often accompanied by significant emotional and psychological challenges for managers. The emotional impact, including stress, fear, and insecurity, can negatively affect their performance and overall wellbeing (Akansu et al., 2017; and Ayers, 2019). The stress and uncertainty caused by M&A can result in lowered morale, job dissatisfaction, unproductive behavior, increased turnover, and absenteeism (Jung et al., 2018). This, in turn, can ripple through the organization, impacting employee morale, retention, and performance (Li and Singal, 2017). Recognizing this, organizations must equip managers with effective stress-coping mechanisms to mitigate the potential negative consequences of M&A on individual and organizational performance (Le and Lee, 2023).

Blaik Hourani et al. (2023) emphasize the significance of emotional intelligence attributes, encompassing values, beliefs, and capabilities relevant to leadership and management. These attributes span various domains, including intra and interpersonal communication, stress management, conflict resolution, adaptability, and general mood. The integration of these emotional intelligence variables is highlighted as a pathway to enhance firm performance.

Managerial Attributes
Managerial Ability
In the ever-changing landscape of corporate M&A, the skill and expertise of managers play a pivotal role in determining the long-term success of the acquiring company. However, achieving success in these endeavors involves more than just financial transactions; it heavily relies on the leadership abilities of those guiding the integration and post-merger processes. The leadership profiles cover various aspects of a person's life, including their family, education, and career background (Park and Gould, 2017).

Leadership at the top echelons of companies holds the reins for critical decisions such as investments, financing, and overall strategic directions (Park and Gould, 2017). In the realm of M&A, adept managers are deemed more proficient in pinpointing suitable target firms, adding value to acquirers (Yung and Chen, 2017; and Dong and Doukas, 2021), navigating the intricate process of merging organizational resources, and mitigating conflicts. Surprisingly, only a handful of studies have explored whether managerial ability significantly impacts M&A performance (Bonsall et al., 2017; De Franco et al., 2017; and Chen and Lin, 2018). Yet, it remains unclear whether the managerial prowess exhibited in revenue generation has a corollary effect on achieving superior post-M&A performance. Demerjian et al. (2017) and Cui and Chi-Moon Leung (2020) suggested that firms that acquire stronger managerial prowess tend to outperform those with lesser managerial capabilities in post-acquisition performance.

Recent research emphasizes the critical role of managerial expertise in navigating the complexities of M&A. Bereskin et al. (2017) and Hoberg and Phillips (2018) opined that skilled managers and congruent cultures can result in positive returns from acquisitions. Fernando et al. (2020) suggested that managerial ability plays a crucial role in mediating the relationship between firm performance and gender diversity. The findings by Chandren et al. (2021) proposed that operational performance can be significantly enhanced by considering the age and ownership status of the chairman.

Leadership Style
Leadership styles significantly impact M&A performance. Transformational leadership, characterized by inspiring and guiding employees through change, is crucial for navigating the complexities of M&A (Savovi and Babi, 2021). It fosters trust (Lind and Lattuch, 2021), encourages collaboration, and helps employees adapt to the new environment (Juyumaya and Torres, 2022). The study emphasizes the crucial role of transformational leader in steering the integration process and nurturing a robust organizational culture (Savovi and Babi, 2021). The associated case study by Park and Gould (2017) demonstrated the pivotal nature of transformational leadership in effectively managing change and motivating employees within the dynamics of M&A transactions.

Extensive research has indicated that transformational leadership is linked to motivating employees for high performance (Khan et al., 2020). This is achieved through the establishment of an appealing vision, setting challenging yet attainable goals, and emphasizing team spirit and shared values (Su et al., 2019). Furthermore, the study asserts that transformational leaders play a significant role in enhancing employee motivation (Su et al., 2019), thereby increasing job satisfaction and performance, even amid the uncertainties of the integration process (Khan et al., 2020). Substantial evidence supports the positive relationship between transformational leadership and employee performance and job satisfaction (Alwali and Alwali, 2022).

On the other hand, transactional leadership emphasizes clear roles, responsibilities, and short-term goals, promoting task completion and performance (Kafetzopoulos and Gotzamani, 2022). The study reveals a positive connection between leadership, job satisfaction (Yoon and Suh, 2020) and normative commitment to change.

Some other kinds of leadership styles, like democratic, charismatic, entrepreneurial, and visionary leadership, are essential for guiding employees through the challenges of M&A and helping them understand the long-term benefits of the mergers. Democratic leadership involves making decisions with input from employees (Abdullahi et al., 2020), encouraging open communication, and creating a sense of shared responsibility. Charismatic leadership is characterized by strong communication skills, emotional intelligence, and trust (Rouine, 2018), all crucial for managing M&A transactions. Entrepreneurial leadership (Latif et al., 2020; and Djalil et al., 2023) and visionary leadership contribute to organizational performance (Paudel, 2019), and entails leaders with a clear vision for the future of the company and the ability to communicate that vision effectively to employees.

According to an SLR done by Alblooshi et al. (2020), various leadership styles can positively influence organizational innovation through direct and indirect means, such as fostering a supportive organizational climate, encouraging employee innovation, and promoting learning and knowledge sharing.

Decision-Making Approach
M&A process is a complex and strategic decision-making process (Chung et al., 2017) that necessitates careful consideration of various factors. Understanding the impact of decision-making approaches of managers on firm value in M&A is crucial for businesses and investors, providing insights into the potential success or failure of M&A transactions (Angwin et al., 2022).

According to Sun et al. (2023), initial considerations in M&A pricing decisions involve scrutinizing the individual decision-making behavior of stakeholders. Individuals may exhibit a predominant or favored cognitive thinking style, and their decision-making conduct can be swayed by situational or task-related demands (Wu, 2022). Although managers frequently rely on intuition, there is insufficient empirical research examining the specific role of intuition in the process of managerial decision making (Kuusela et al., 2020; and Kopalle et al., 2023).

In the context of entering new cultural clusters, dual CEOs exhibit the greatest risk aversion to internationalization (Garcia-Garcia et al., 2022). They tend to become risk-seekers in attempts to prevent potential wealth losses and revert to a risk-averse stance when they perceive their wealth to be secure. Recent research has provided insights into the decision-making processes of managers in making strategic decisions (Chung et al., 2017; Benischke et al., 2020; and Mount and Baer, 2022). However, despite the growing body of research in this area, there is still a need for a more integrated and comprehensive understanding of the relationship between decision-making approaches and firm performance in M&As.

Firms that take a strategic and carefully planned approach to decision-making in M&A transactions tend to have better performance outcomes. These firms typically conduct thorough due diligence and analysis, considering factors such as cultural fit, financial synergies, and strategic alignment, and involve key stakeholders in the decision-making process to ensure a successful merger or acquisition (Almazur et al., 2018).

Additionally, the decision-making approach can also impact the success of post-merger integration efforts (Aghazade et al., 2019). On the other hand, a top-down decision-making approach that is solely focused on efficiency and cost-cutting measures may neglect the importance of employee engagement and cultural alignment, which can hinder post-merger integration and negatively impact firm performance.

It is imperative to explore the specific characteristics of each decision-making approach and how they translate into tangible outcomes for firm performance (Graebner et al., 2016; Zhang, 2020; Doukas and Zhang, 2021; and King et al., 2021). By thoroughly examining and analyzing these aspects, a more comprehensive understanding of the relationship between decision-making approaches and firm performance in M&As can be achieved, paving the way for more informed and strategic decision-making in the corporate landscape (Jacob, 2020).

Organizational Factors
Sociocultural Influence
Numerous studies have examined how cultural differences affect post-merger integration, alignment of organizational cultures (Panibratov, 2017) and communication and coordination, and employee attitudes and behaviors. Notably, cultural integration plays a significant role in determining the success of M&A, with studies suggesting that cultural misalignment can lead to increased failure rates and lower performance outcomes (Bereskin et al., 2017). Recent attention to human factors within M&A may herald important advancements in this research domain (Liu et al., 2017; and Sarala et al., 2019). The variations in cultures, buyer preferences, institutional discrepancies, and government directives give rise to diverse emotional challenges for employees (Haapanen et al., 2019).

The argument now shifts to exploring how human resources functions and practices interact with bicultural individuals in the context of M&As. It is imperative not to neglect or marginalize bicultural employees through managerial actions in the context of cross-cultural M&A as this oversight could endanger the success of the entire process (Liu et al., 2021). Samal et al. (2020) discussed that managers must create a culture of trust aligned with sociocultural factors (Zahoor et al., 2022), ensuring employees perceive top management decisions as fair. This approach taps into the micro-foundations and human aspects of M&A (Liu et al., 2017; and Sarala et al., 2019). The challenges become more pronounced in cross-cultural situations, where companies from different national contexts merge, necessitating the consideration of additional cultural issues and differences.

During mergers between companies from different countries, a distinctive amalgamation of corporate cultures, national cultures, human elements, and talent management becomes prominent (Liu et al., 2021). The impact of M&A on individuals and groups varies significantly depending on the diversity of national and organizational cultural contexts (Panibratov, 2017; and Tarba et al., 2017), HRM practices, sociocultural integration (Sarala et al., 2019) and knowledge transfer (Tarba et al., 2017). Adapting to a new cultural background and managing conflicts arising from cross-cultural differences can be time-consuming and expensive, ultimately negatively affecting the subsidiary's performance. On the flip side, research by Konara and Wei (2021) also suggested a positive relationship between cultural diversity and overall performance of the company.

Influence of Language Difference
Differences in culture are found to have a positive impact on the performance of foreign subsidiaries. However, this positive effect is weakened by language disparities. Previous research has demonstrated that language disparities create hurdles in communication, hinder the flow of information and knowledge transfer, and influence relationships between headquarters and subsidiaries, as well as among subsidiaries. This impact is particularly notable in aspects such as control, communication, coordination, and foreign direct investment (FDI) (Ly et al., 2018; and Konara and Wei, 2019).

Tenzer et al. (2017) noted a lack of systematic studies linking language to subsidiary performance. Recent research has explored language beyond cultural boundaries, adopting three distinct perspectives (Karhunen et al., 2018). When businesses operate internationally, they often grapple with diverse language environments, creating a significant research gap.

In smaller market settings, language differences significantly and adversely affect subsidiary performance. However, the challenges associated with language barriers can be mitigated in larger markets (Konara and Wei, 2021). Despite language being inherent in international business, marketing, and management contexts, it has recently gained prominence in academic research (Holmqvist et al., 2017; and Tenzer et al., 2017). Employing contemporary communication techniques, providing language training, utilizing translators, and leveraging multilingual staff as language intermediaries can effectively mitigate language barriers.

Multinational enterprise (MNE) subsidiaries, being cross-national in nature, often involve stakeholders from diverse backgrounds, leading to potential cross-cultural conflicts. These conflicts can escalate when parties cannot communicate effectively, resulting in negative consequences for overall performance (Konara and Wei, 2021).

Relationship Between Variables
In recent decades, the pronounced surge in M&A, utilized as effective tools for fostering synergies and corporate growth (Feldman and Hernandez, 2021), has been accompanied by notable strategic shifts, structural changes, and efforts towards cultural integration. Bansal (2017) sought to understand how people-related issues influence the overall performance of firms undergoing M&A.

As emphasized by Floyd and Sung (2023) and Kempton and Sarala (2021), there is a noted lack of consistency in evaluating M&A outcomes, encompassing financial, operational, attitudinal, and behavioral dimensions. Kar and Kar (2017) highlighted the uncertainty that managers and employees face during crossborder M&A. Gada et al. (2021) investigated the influence of CEOs' perception of risks, specifically their prevention focus, on the duration of the due diligence process in M&A.

Kim and Park (2019) focused on the specific issues for success in post-merger integration. They identified employee retention and culture management as critical factors. The study by Surawan et al. (2023) underscored the significance of elements like efficient operational integration, management of organizational culture, robust leadership, adept change management, and effective HRM in determining the outcome of M&A, whether in success or failure.

Conclusion
This study investigated the influence of managerial, behavioral, and organizational attributes on firm performance within the context of M&As. Our findings align with the broader literature on managerial ability, highlighting the multifaceted nature of human factors impacting M&A success.

From the findings of thematic analysis and SLR, a conceptual framework-MOBA framework-is developed, which highlights the importance of considering human-centered approaches for unlocking long-term value creation. The study contributes to a more nuanced understanding of M&A dynamics by emphasizing the critical role of human factors in significantly influencing M&A performance. By highlighting the importance of diverse perspectives, considering personality traits, psychological biases, and risk attitudes provides valuable insights into individual decision-making within M&A contexts. The identified factors, such as stress management strategies and sociocultural influences offer crucial considerations for navigating the complexities of M&A processes.

The study identifies potential gaps and areas for further development that includes reliance on specific databases and keyword choices, paving the way for future research avenues to explore alternative methodologies and broader fields of study. Moving forward, embracing human-centered approaches and integrating the lessons learned from this exploration can equip decision makers with greater confidence, deeper understanding, and inclusive practices, ultimately fostering successful M&A outcomes that benefit all stakeholders involved.

Implications: This research introduces the MOBA framework, a new way to understand how managers, their behaviors, and the company itself influence the success of M&A.

For academics and researchers, this framework highlights the importance of considering both a manager's skills and personal qualities, alongside company factors, when studying M&A success. It also suggests using non-financial measures to judge how well a merger goes, which can give a more complete picture than just looking at money. The study paves the way for future studies that can delve deeper into the specific skills managers need for successful M&A.

The study is useful for businesses, especially banks and other companies that do a lot of M&A. By considering the eight key areas identified in the MOBA framework, companies can assess and develop their executives' strengths and weaknesses. This leads to better M&A decisions and, ultimately, more successful mergers. The study also suggests that companies should consider non-financial factors, not just financial ones, when judging how well a merger is going.

Limitations: Despite the valuable insights gained from this review, there are certain limitations that pave the way for future research avenues. Firstly, the reliance on an electronic database for paper selection, while offering accessibility, might have omitted relevant studies not indexed or not accessible through this method. Secondly, the use of various keywords, although extensive, may not have comprehensively covered all studies on managerial ability due to the diverse terminology used in this broad field of study. Lastly, the focus on accounting, business, and management journal categories may have overlooked the progress on managerial ability in other fields of study, indicating a potential gap in our understanding.

Future Scope: To address these limitations and enhance the depth of knowledge in this area, future research could explore alternative methods for studying manager fixed effects, such as adopting experimental approaches. Experiments allow researchers to isolate specific effects through manipulation or post-experimental questionnaires, offering a nuanced understanding of managerial ability. Additionally, delving into board member characteristics at a more aggregated level, considering differences in interests and managerial traits across board members, could provide valuable insights. The exploration of board diversity, a topic gaining attention in both research and practice, may uncover nuanced effects not captured in the current paper.

The paper contributes to existing literature by offering empirical and analytical insights, illustrating the evolution of the literature and suggesting avenues for future research. However, the identified limitations underscore the need for further exploration and refinement of methodologies to advance our understanding of managerial ability and its multifaceted implications. Future studies should aim to bridge these gaps by employing diverse research approaches and extending the focus to broader fields, ensuring a more comprehensive understanding of the complexities surrounding managerial ability.

References

1. Aabo T, Hanousek J, Pantzalis C and Park J C (2023), "CEO Personality Traits and Corporate Value Implication of Acquisitions", Journal of Empirical Finance, Vol. 73, pp. 86-106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jempfin.2023.05.006
2. Abdullahi A Z, Anarfo E B and Anyigba H (2020), "The Impact of Leadership Style on Organizational Citizenship Behavior: Does Leaders' Emotional Intelligence Play a Moderating Role?", Journal of Management Development, Vol. 39, Nos. 9&10, pp. 963-987. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMD-01-2020-0012/FULL/PDF
3. Aghazade H, Heidari A, Dehghan Dehnavi M A and Abolmolouki H (2019), "Presenting a Comprehensive Framework for Integration and Acquisition Management in the Financial Services Industry", Journal of Management and Development Process, Vol. 32, No. 3, pp. 105-138. https://doi.org/10.29252/jmdp.32.3.105
4. Ahmad S and Ray S K S (2020), "Mergers and the Psychology of the Acquiring: Is It That of Conquest?", NHRD Network Journal, Vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 141-151. https://doi.org/10.1177/2631454120919831
5. Ai Q and Tan H (2020), "Uncovering Neglected Success Factors in Post-Acquisition Reverse Capability Transfer: Evidence from Chinese Multinational Corporations in Europe", Journal of World Business, Vol. 55, No. 3. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JWB.2019.101053
6. Akansu A, Cicon J, Ferris S P and Sun Y (2017), "Firm Performance in the Face of Fear: How CEO Moods Affect Firm Performance", Journal of Behavioral Finance, Vol. 18, No. 4, pp. 373-389. https://doi.org/10.1080/15427560.2017.1338704
7. Alblooshi M, Shamsuzzaman M and Haridy S (2020), "The Relationship Between Leadership Styles and Organizational Innovation: A Systematic Literature Review and Narrative Synthesis", European Journal of Innovation Management, Vol. 24, No. 2, pp. 338-370. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-11-2019-0339/FULL/XML
8. Almazur B, Arize A C, Andreopoulos G C et al. (2018), "The Reasons and Evaluations of Mergers and Acquisitions", Accounting and Finance Research, Vol. 7, No. 3, p. 211. https://doi.org/10.5430/afr.v7n3p211
9. Alwali J and Alwali W (2022), "The Relationship Between Emotional Intelligence, Transformational Leadership, and Performance: A Test of the Mediating Role of Job Satisfaction", Leadership and Organization Development Journal, Vol. 43, No. 6, pp. 928-952. https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-10-2021-0486/FULL/PDF
10. Angwin D N, Urs U, Appadu N et al. (2022), "Does Merger & Acquisition (M&A) Strategy Matter? A Contingency Perspective", European Management Journal, Vol. 40, No. 6, pp. 847-856. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.EMJ.2022.09.004
11. Anthony M (2019), "Effects of Merger and Acquisition on Financial Performance: Case Study of Commercial Banks". https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:197889897
12. Avinadav T, Chernonog T and Perlman Y (2017), "Mergers and Acquisitions Between Risk-Averse Parties", European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 259, No. 3, pp. 926-934. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.EJOR.2016.11.030
13. Ayers A A (2019), "Dealing with the Emotional Impact of a Merger or Acquisition", Journal of Urgent Care Medicine. Retrieved on January 20, 2024, from https://www.jucm.com/dealing-with-the-emotional-impact-of-a-merger-or-acquisition/
14. Bansal A (2017), "A Revelation of Employee Feelings of Alienation During Post-Mergers and Acquisition: An Outcome of Perceived Organizational Justice", Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 30, No. 3, pp. 417-439. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-06-2016-0122
15. Bedi A (2018), "Post Acquisition Performance of Indian Telecom Companies: An Empirical Study", Pacific Business Review International, Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 56-62.
16. Benischke M H, Martin G P, Gomez-Mejia L R and Ljubownikow G (2020), "The Effect of CEO Incentives on Deviations from Institutional Norms in Foreign Market Expansion Decisions: Behavioral Agency and Cross-Border Acquisitions", Human Resource Management, Vol. 59, No. 5, pp. 463-482. https://doi.org/10.1002/HRM.22006
17. Bereskin F L, Byun S K, Officer M S and Oh J M (2017), "The Effect of Cultural Similarity on Mergers and Acquisitions: Evidence from Corporate Social Responsibility". https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2920129
18. Beugelsdijk S, Kostova T, Kunst V E et al. (2018), "Cultural Distance and Firm Internationalization: A Meta-Analytical Review and Theoretical Implications", Journal of Management, Vol. 44, No. 1, pp. 89-130. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206317729027
19. Blaik Hourani R, Litz D R and Parkman S (2023), "Linking Emotional Intelligence to Professional Leadership Performance Standards", International Journal of Leadership in Education, Vol. 26, No. 6, pp. 1005-1036. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2020. 1818134
20. Bonsall S B, Holzman E R and Miller B P (2017), "Managerial Ability and Credit Risk Assessment", Management Science, Vol. 63, No. 5, pp. 1425-1449. https://doi.org/10.1287/MNSC.2015.2403
21. Broekema M J R, Strohmaier N, Adriaanse J A A and van der Rest J P I (2022), "Are Business Valuators Biased? A Psychological Perspective on the Causes of Valuation Disputes", Journal of Behavioral Finance, Vol. 23, No. 1, pp. 23-42. https://doi.org/10.1080/15427560.2020.1821687
22. Burkhard B, Siren C, van Essen M et al. (2023), "Nothing Ventured, Nothing Gained: A Meta-Analysis of CEO Overconfidence, Strategic Risk-Taking, and Performance", Journal of Management, Vol. 49, No. 8, pp. 2629-2666. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920 63221110203/ASSET/IMAGES/LARGE/10.1177_01492063221110203-FIG3.JPEG
23. Campbell R J, Jeong S and Graffin S D (2018), "Born to Take Risk? The Effect of CEO Birth Order on Strategic Risk Taking", Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 62, No. 4, pp. 1278-1306. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:150242404
24. Carneiro J, Moreira A A and Sheng H H (2022), "Influences of Foreign and Domestic Venture Capitalists on Internationalization of Small Firms", Brazilian Administration Review, Vol. 19, No. 2. https://www.scielo.br/j/bar/a/x3ykpYNf8rxXSQhSF8qS99M/?lang=en
25. Chandren S, Qaderi S A and Ghaleb B A A (2021), "The Influence of the Chairman and CEO Effectiveness on Operating Performance: Evidence from Malaysia", Cogent Business & Management, Vol. 8, No. 1. DOI: 10.1080/23311975.2021.1935189
26. Chen S S and Lin C Y (2018), "Managerial Ability and Acquirer Returns", Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Vol. 68, pp. 171-182. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.QREF.2017.09.004
27. Chung C Y, Hur S K and Wang K (2017), "Strategic Merger Decisions Across Business Cycles: Evidence from Bidders' Time-Varying Appetite for Operating Leverage", International Review of Economics & Finance, Vol. 47, pp. 143-158. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IREF.2016.10.010
28. Connelly B L, Li Q, Shi W and Lee K B (2020), "CEO Dismissal: Consequences for the Strategic Risk Taking of Competitor CEOs", Southern Medical Journal, Vol. 41, No. 11, pp. 2092-2125. https://doi.org/10.1002/SMJ.3190
29. Cragun O, Olsen K and Wright P (2019), "Making CEO Narcissism Research Great: A Review and Meta-Analysis of CEO Narcissism", Journal of Management, Vol. 46. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206319892678
30. Cui H and Chi-Moon Leung S (2020), "The Long-Run Performance of Acquiring Firms in Mergers and Acquisitions: Does Managerial Ability Matter?", Journal of Contemporary Accounting & Economics, Vol. 16, No. 1. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcae.2020.100185
31. Cuypers I R P, Cuypers Y and Martin X (2017), "When the Target May Know Better: Effects of Experience and Information Asymmetries on Value from Mergers and Acquisitions", Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 38, No. 3, pp. 609-625. https://doi.org/10.1002/SMJ.2502
32. da Silva F M, Ogasavara M H and Pereira R (2023), "Institutional Distances and Equity-Based Entry Modes: A Systematic Literature Review", Management Review Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-023-00346-4
33. De Franco G, Hope O K and Lu H (2017), "Managerial Ability and Bank-Loan Pricing". https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2972668
34. Degbey W, Rodgers P, Kromah M D and Weber Y (2021), "The Impact of Psychological Ownership on Employee Retention in Mergers and Acquisitions", Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 31, No. 3. Retrieved on September 8, 2023, from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053482220300139.
35. Demerjian P, Lewis-Western M and McVay S (2017), "How Does Intentional Earnings Smoothing Vary With Managerial Ability?", Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance, Vol. 35, No. 2, pp. 406-437. https://doi.org/10.1177/0148558X17748405
36. Dervishaj B (2021), "Psychological Biases, Main Factors of Financial Behaviour - A Literature Review", European Journal of Medicine and Natural Sciences, Vol. 4, No. 2, p. 25. https://doi.org/10.26417/EJNM.V1I2.P25-35
37. Djalil M A, Amin M, Herjanto H et al. (2023), "The Importance of Entrepreneurial Leadership in Fostering Bank Performance", International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 41, No. 4, pp. 926-948. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJBM-11-2022-0481/FULL/XML
38. Dong F and Doukas J (2021), "The Effect of Managers on M&As", Journal of Corporate Finance, Vol. 68. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2021.101934
39. Doukas J A and Zhang R (2021), "Managerial Ability, Corporate Social Culture, and M&As", Journal of Corporate Finance, Vol. 68. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCORPFIN.2021. 101942
40. Feldman E and Hernandez E (2021), "Synergy in Mergers and Acquisitions: Typology, Life Cycles, and Value", The Academy of Management Review. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2018.0345
41. Fernando G D, Jain S S and Tripathy A (2020), "This Cloud Has a Silver Lining: Gender Diversity, Managerial Ability, and Firm Performance", Journal of Business Research, Vol. 117, pp. 484-496. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JBUSRES.2020.05.042
42. Ferris S P and Sainani S (2021), "Do CFOs Matter? Evidence from the M&A Process", Journal of Corporate Finance, Vol. 67. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCORPFIN.2020.101856
43. Floyd T M and Sung W (UJ) (2023), "A Review and Future Research Opportunities of the Post-Merger Integration Research Using the Social Network Perspective", in C L Cooper and S Finkelstein (Eds.), Advances in Mergers and Acquisitions, Vol. 22, pp. 91-112. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1479-361X20230000022007
44. Gada V P, Popli M and Malhotra S (2021), "Time to Complete the Due Diligence Phase in Mergers and Acquisitions: Impact of CEO Psychological Characteristics", Applied Economics, Vol. 53, No. 50, pp. 5812-5825. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2021 1931005
45. Garcia-Garcia R, Garcia-Canal E and Guillen M F (2022), "Walking on Thin Ice: CEOs' Internationalization Decisions in Underperforming Firms", Long Range Planning, Vol. 55, No. 5. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LRP.2022.102243
46. Graebner M E, Heimeriks K H, Huy Q N and Vaara E (2016), "The Process of Postmerger Integration: A Review and Agenda for Future Research", The Academy of Management Annals, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 1-32. https://doi.org/10.5465/ANNALS.2014.0078
47. Haapanen L, Hurmelinna-Laukkanen P, Nikkila S and Paakkolanvaara P (2019), "The Function-Specific Microfoundations of Dynamic Capabilities in Cross-Border Mergers and Acquisitions", International Business Review, Vol. 28, No. 4, pp. 766-784. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IBUSREV.2019.03.002
48. Hachem B and Sujud H (2018), "Effect of Mergers and Acquisitions on Performance of Lebanese Banks", International Research Journal of Finance and Economics, Issue 166, pp. 69-77.
49. Hammer B, Hinrichs H and Schwetzler B (2018), "Does Culture Affect the Performance of Private Equity Buyouts?", Journal of Business Economics, Vol. 88, No. 3, pp. 393-469. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11573-017-0886-0
50. Harrison J S, Thurgood G R, Boivie S and Pfarrer M D (2020), "Perception is Reality: How CEOs' Observed Personality Influences Market Perceptions of Firm Risk and Shareholder Returns", Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 63, No. 4, pp. 1166-1195. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2018.0626
51. Hassan I, Ghauri P N and Mayrhofer U (2018), "Merger and Acquisition Motives and Outcome Assessment", Thunderbird International Business Review, Vol. 60, No. 4, pp. 709-718. https://doi.org/10.1002/TIE.21967
52. Hoberg G and Phillips G M (2018), "Product Integration and Merger Success". https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2933283
53. Holmqvist J, Van Vaerenbergh Y and Gronroos C (2017), "Language Use in Services: Recent Advances and Directions for Future Research", Journal of Business Research, Vol. 72, pp. 114-118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.10.005
54. Hong P C, Chennattuserry J C and Kureethara J V (2019), "Organization Culture and Work Values of Global Firms: Merging Eastern and Western Perspectives", IBA Journal of Management & Leadership, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp. 82-92. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3507562
55. Hossain M S (2021), "Merger & Acquisitions (M&As) as an Important Strategic Vehicle in Business: Thematic Areas, Research Avenues and Possible Suggestions", Journal of Economics and Business, Vol. 116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconbus.2021.106004
56. Hsieh T S, Wang Z and Demirkan S (2018), "Overconfidence and Tax Avoidance: The Role of CEO and CFO Interaction", Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Vol. 37, No. 3, pp. 241-253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2018.04.004
57. Jacob A B (2020), "Leadership Strategies for Improving Mergers and Acquisitions Performance", Thesis for Doctor of Business Administration. https://search.proquest.com/openview/6021cb509058a50662f8a01ec6ae9a12/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y
58. Jung J I, Son J S, Kim Y O et al. (2018), "Changes of Depression and Job Stress in Workers After Merger Without Downsizing", Annals of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Vol. 30, No. 1, p. 54. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40557-018-0266-4
59. Juyumaya J and Torres J (2022), "Effects of Transformational Leadership and Work Engagement on Managers' Creative Performance", Baltic Journal of Management, Vol. 18. https://doi.org/10.1108/BJM-11-2021-0449
60. Kafetzopoulos D and Gotzamani K (2022), "The Effect of Talent Management and Leadership Styles on Firms' Sustainable Performance", European Business Review, Vol. 34, No. 6, pp. 837-857. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-07-2021-0148/FULL/PDF
61. Kar R N and Kar M (2017), "Cross-Cultural Issues in M&As: Experiences and Future Agenda from Asia-Pacific Deals", Transnational Corporations Review, Vol. 9, No. 3, pp. 140-149. https://doi.org/10.1080/19186444.2017.1362861
62. Karhunen P, Kankaanranta A, Louhiala-Salminen L and Piekkari R (2018), "Let's Talk About Language: A Review of Language-Sensitive Research in International Management", Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 55, No. 6, pp. 980-1013. https://doi.org/10.1111/JOMS.12354
63. Kempton B and Sarala R M (2021), "Employee Perspective on Mergers and Acquisitions (M&As): A State-of-the-Art Literature Review and Synthesis", in C L Cooper and S Finkelstein (Eds.), Advances in Mergers and Acquisitions, Vol. 20, pp. 81-98. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1479-361X20210000020007
64. Khan H, Rehmat M, Butt T H et al. (2020), "Impact of Transformational Leadership on Work Performance, Burnout and Social Loafing: A Mediation Model", Future Business Journal, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1186/S43093-020-00043-8
65. Kim K and Park H (2019), "Effect of South Korean Corporate Culture on Employees at Subsidiary Firms in China", International Journal of China Studies, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp. 83-105. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:216634976
66. King D R, Wang G, Samimi M and Cortes A F (2021), "A Meta-Analytic Integration of Acquisition Performance Prediction", Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 58, No. 5, pp. 1198-1236. https://doi.org/10.1111/JOMS.12636
67. Klier H, Schwens C, Zapkau F B and Dikova D (2017), "Which Resources Matter How and Where? A Meta-Analysis on Firms' Foreign Establishment Mode Choice", Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 54, No. 3, pp. 304-339. https://doi.org/10.1111/JOMS.12220
68. Kolev K D and McNamara G (2020), "The Role of Top Management Teams in Firm Responses to Performance Shortfalls", Strategic Organization, Vol. 20, No. 3, pp. 541-564. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476127020962683
69. Konara P and Wei Y (2019), "The Complementarity of Human Capital and Language Capital in Foreign Direct Investment", International Business Review, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp. 391-404. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IBUSREV.2018.10.009
70. Konara P and Wei Y (2021), "Does Language Matter to Foreign Subsidiary Performance?", International Marketing Review, Vol. 38, No. 2, pp. 276-299. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMR-05-2019-0129/FULL/PDF
71. Kopalle P K, Kuusela H and Lehmann D R (2023), "The Role of Intuition in CEO Acquisition Decisions", Journal of Business Research, Vol. 167. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JBUSRES.2023.114139
72. Kostova T, Beugelsdijk S, Scott W R et al. (2020), "The Construct of Institutional Distance Through the Lens of Different Institutional Perspectives: Review, Analysis, and Recommendations", Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 51, No. 4, pp. 467-497. https://doi.org/10.1057/S41267-019-00294-W
73. Kuusela H, Koivumaki S and Yrjola M (2020), "M&As Get Another Assist: When CEOs Add Intuition to the Decision Mix", Journal of Business Strategy, Vol. 41, No. 3, pp. 57-65. https://doi.org/10.1108/JBS-01-2019-0021
74. Latif K F, Nazeer A, Shahzad F et al. (2020), "Impact of Entrepreneurial Leadership on Project Success: Mediating Role of Knowledge Management Processes", Leadership and Organization Development Journal, Vol. 41, No. 2, pp. 237-256. https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-07-2019-0323/FULL/PDF
75. Le Q A and Lee C Y (2023), "Below-Aspiration Performance and Risk-Taking Behaviour in the Context of Taiwanese Electronic Firms: A Contingency Analysis", Asia Pacific Business Review, Vol. 29, No. 3, pp. 654-677. https://doi.org/10.1080/13602381.2021.1932091
76. Lewis Y and Bozos K (2019), "Mitigating Post-Acquisition Risk: The Interplay of Cross-Border Uncertainties", Journal of World Business, Vol. 54, No. 5. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JWB.2019.100996
77. Li Y and Singal M (2017), "CEO Attributes and Firm Performance in the Hospitality Industry", The Journal of Hospitality Financial Management, Vol. 25, No. 2, pp. 77-89. https://doi.org/10.1080/10913211.2017.1398941
78. Lin C, Officer M S and Shen B (2018), "Managerial Risk-Taking Incentives and Merger Decisions", Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Vol. 53, No. 2, pp. 643-680. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022109017001260
79. Lind S C and Lattuch F (2021), "Trust, Leadership and Conflict: The Impact of HR Practices During Family Firm M&As", Strategic HR Review, Vol. 20, No. 6, pp. 221-225. https://doi.org/10.1108/SHR-09-2021-0044
80. Liu Y, Sarala R M, Xing Y and Cooper C L (2017), "Human Side of Collaborative Partnerships", Group & Organization Management, Vol. 42, No. 2, pp. 151-162. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601117695138
81. Liu Y, Vrontis D, Visser M et al. (2021), "Talent Management and the HR Function in Cross-Cultural Mergers and Acquisitions: The Role and Impact of Bi-Cultural Identity", Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 31, No. 3. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.HRMR.2020.100744
82. Ly A, Esperanca J and Davcik N S (2018), "What Drives Foreign Direct Investment: The Role of Language, Geographical Distance, Information Flows and Technological Similarity", Journal of Business Research, Vol. 88, pp. 111-122. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JBUSRES.2018.03.007
83. Malhotra S, Reus T H, Zhu P C and Roelofsen E M (2018), "The Acquisitive Nature of Extraverted CEOs", Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 63, No. 2, pp. 370-408. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839217712240
84. Maung M, Tang Z, Wilson C and Xu X (2021), "Religion, Risk Aversion, and Cross Border Mergers and Acquisitions", Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Vol. 70. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.INTFIN.2020.101262
85. Mount M P and Baer M (2022), "CEOs' Regulatory Focus and Risk-Taking When Firms Perform Below and Above the Bar", Journal of Management, Vol. 48, No 7, pp. 1980-2008. https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063211016029
86. Ou A Y, Waldman D A and Peterson S J (2015), "Do Humble CEOs Matter? An Examination of CEO Humility and Firm Outcomes", Journal of Management, Vol. 44, No. 3, pp. 1147-1173. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206315604187
87. Panibratov A (2017), "Cultural and Organizational Integration in Cross-Border M&A Deals: The Comparative Study of Acquisitions Made by EMNEs from China and Russia", Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 30, No. 7, pp. 1109-1135. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-01-2016-0011
88. Park K M and Gould A M (2017), "The Overlooked Influence of Personality, Idiosyncrasy and Eccentricity in Corporate Mergers and Acquisitions: 120 Years and Six Distinct Waves", Journal of Management History, Vol. 23, No. 1, pp. 7-31. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMH-09-2016-0056
89. Paudel S (2019), "Entrepreneurial Leadership and Business Performance: Effect of Organizational Innovation and Environmental Dynamism", South Asian Journal of Business Studies, Vol. 8, No. 3, pp. 348-369. https://doi.org/10.1108/SAJBS-11-2018-0136
90. Renneboog L and Vansteenkiste C (2019), "Failure and Success in Mergers and Acquisitions", Journal of Corporate Finance, Vol. 58, pp. 650-699. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2019.07.010
91. Rouine I (2018), "Target Country's Leadership Style and Bidders' Takeover Decisions", International Review of Financial Analysis, Vol. 60, pp. 17-29. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IRFA.2018.08.004
92. Sahu S K and Agarwal N (2017), "Inter-Firm Differences in Mergers and Acquisitions: A Study of the Pharmaceutical Sector in India", Journal of Economic Studies, Vol. 44, No. 5, pp. 861-878. https://doi.org/10.1108/JES-12-2015-0239
93. Samal A, Patra S and Chatterjee D (2020), "Impact of Culture on Organizational Readiness to Change: Context of Bank M&A", Benchmarking, Vol. 28, No. 5, pp. 1503-1523. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-10-2019-0454
94. Sarala R M, Vaara E and Junni P (2019), "Beyond Merger Syndrome and Cultural Differences: New Avenues for Research on the 'Human Side' of Global Mergers and Acquisitions (M&As)", Journal of World Business, Vol. 54, No. 4, pp. 307-321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2017.10.001
95. Savovi S and Babi V (2021), "Impact of Behaviour Factors on Acquisition Performance: Mediating Role of Speed of Post-Acquisition Change", Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 34, No. 5, pp. 929-956. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-02-2020-0056
96. Shi W, Connelly B L, Mackey J D and Gupta A (2019a), "Placing Their Bets: The Influence of Strategic Investment on CEO Pay for Performance", Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 40, No. 12, pp. 2047-2077. https://doi.org/10.1002/SMJ.3050
97. Shi W, Zhang Y and Hoskisson R E (2019b), "Examination of CEO-CFO Social Interaction Through Language Style Matching: Outcomes for the CFO and the Organization", Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 62, No. 2, pp. 383-414. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2016.1062
98. Sinnaiah T, Adam S and Mahadi B (2023), "A Strategic Management Process: The Role of Decision-Making Style and Organizational Performance", Journal of Work-Applied Management, Vol. 15, No. 1, pp. 37-50. https://doi.org/10.1108/JWAM-10-2022-0074
99. Smeulders D, Dekker H C and Van den Abbeele A (2019), "Information Availability in Acquisition Decisions: The Role of Prior Relations and Rival Bidders", Journal of Management Accounting Research, Vol. 31, No. 3, pp. 201-228. https://doi.org/10.2308/JMAR-52302
100. Souissi Y and Jarboui A (2018), "Does CEO Emotional Bias Affect Performance?", Cogent Economics & Finance, Vol. 6. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:56309444
101. Su F, Cheng D and Wen S (2019), "Multilevel Impacts of Transformational Leadership on Service Quality: Evidence from China", Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01252
102. Sun Y, Xu S and Wang Y (2023), "Managerial Decision, Anchoring Effects and Acquisition Premiums", Finance Research Letters, Vol. 58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2023.104480
103. Surawan Syamsurizal, Ihsan N, Khaidir Firda D et al. (2023), "Factors Influencing Success and Failure in Mergers and Acquisitions: A Case Study of PT Unilever Indonesia Tbk", Journal of Accounting Research, Utility Finance and Digital Assets, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 445-449.
104. Tang C H, Lee Y H, Lee M C and Huang Y L (2020), "CEO Characteristics Enhancing the Impact of CEO Overconfidence on Firm Value After Mergers and Acquisitions - A Case Study in China", Review of Pacific Basin Financial Markets and Policies, Vol. 23. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219091520500034
105. Tao F, Liu X, Gao L and Xia E (2017), "Do Cross-Border Mergers and Acquisitions Increase Short-Term Market Performance? The Case of Chinese Firms", International Business Review, Vol. 26, No. 1, pp. 189-202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2016.06.006106. Tarba S Y, Ahammad M F, Junni P et al. (2017), "The Impact of Organizational Culture Differences, Synergy Potential, and Autonomy Granted to the Acquired High-Tech Firms on the M&A Performance", Group & Organization Management, Vol. 44, No. 3, pp. 483-520. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601117703267
106. Tarba S, Cooke F, Weber Y et al. (2019), "Mergers and Acquisitions in the Global Context: The Role of Human Resource Management", Journal of World Business, Vol. 55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2019.101048
107. Tenzer H, Terjesen S and Harzing A W (2017), "Language in International Business: A Review and Agenda for Future Research", MIR: Management International Review, Vol. 57, No. 6, pp. 815-854. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44985725
108. Wang Q, Lau R Y K and Yang K (2020), "Does the Interplay Between the Personality Traits of CEOs and CFOs Influence Corporate Mergers and Acquisitions Intensity? An Econometric Analysis with Machine Learning-Based Constructs", Decision Support Systems, Vol. 139. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2020.113424
109. Wu H (2022), "Intuition in Investment Decision-Making Across Cultures", Journal of Behavioral Finance, Vol. 23, No. 1, pp. 106-122. https://doi.org/10.1080/15427560. 2020.1848839
110. Yoon J and Suh M G (2020), "Determinants of Organizational Performance: Some Implications for Top Executive Leadership in Korean Firms", Asia Pacific Business Review, Vol. 25, No. 2, pp. 251-272. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429320347-6
111. Yung K and Chen C (2017), "Managerial Ability and Firm Risk-Taking Behavior", Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Vol. 51, No. 4, pp. 1005-1032. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11156-017-0695-0
112. Zahoor N, Khan Z and Sinkovics R R (2022), "The Role of Emotions in Cross-Border Mergers & Acquisitions: A Systematic Review of the Inter-Disciplinary Literature and Future Research Agenda", Journal of International Management, Vol. 28, No. 4. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.INTMAN.2022.100958
113. Zhang C M (2020), "Mergers and Acquisitions as Strategic Decisions for a Decision-Making Theory", Advances in Mergers and Acquisitions, Vol. 19, pp. 49-64. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1479-361X20200000019006
114. Zhao X and Tang M (2023), "CEO Age and Entry Timing Within Industry Merger Waves: Evidence from China", Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Vol. 40, No. 2, pp. 517-552. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-021-09796-4
115. Zhou M, Li R, Cao J and Lin B (2023), "Does CEO Risk-Taking Entrepreneurial Spirit Matter in Firm Cash Holdings?", China Journal of Accounting Studies, Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 543-573. https://doi.org/10.1080/21697213.2023.2239667