Diversifikation war gestern, aber vielleicht auch morgen. Überlegungen zur Portfoliogestaltung

Chapter

Zusammenfassung

Wie diversifiziert soll ein Unternehmen sein? Die Antwort auf diese Frage variierte im Laufe der letzen 50 Jahre sehr stark. Bis in die 1980er Jahre vertrauten insbesondere die grossen Unternehmen auf ein breites Portfolio, um Branchenrisiken nicht voll ausgeliefert zu sein. Die 1970 von Bruce Henderson eingeführte BCG Matrix lieferte ein Instrument das Unternehmen die Logik einer breiten Aufstellung vor Augen führte. Doch im Zuge der Globalisierung und den damit verbundenen Chancen und Herausforderungen schienen Konglomerate nicht länger konkurrenzfähig. Die Konzentration auf das Kerngeschäft war jetzt angesagt (Hamel and Prahalad, 1996). Dementsprechend setzt sich in den letzten 15 Jahren auch im deutschsprachigen Raum ein Trend hin zur Konzentration durch (Mayer and Whittington, 1999; Hautz, Mayer, Stadler, 2013), der in den USA bereits in den 1980er Jahren begann (Markides, 1995).

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literaturverzeichnis

  1. Aggarwal RK und Samwick AA (2003). Why Do Managers Diversify Their Firms? Agency Reconsidered. Journal of Finance. 58. 71–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arregle JL. Hitt MA. Sirmon DG und Very P (2007). The Development of Organizational Social Capital: Attributes of Family Firms. The Journal of Management Studies. 44. 73–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barney J (1991). Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage. Journal of Management. 17 (1). 99–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Casson M (1999). The economic of the family firm. Scandinavian Economic History Review. 47. 10–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. David P, O’Brien JP, Yoshikawa T und Delios A (2010). Do Shareholders or Stakeholders Appropriate the Rents from Corporate Diversification? The Influence of Ownership Structure. Academy of Management Journal. 53. 636–655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Davis L und North D (1970). Institutional Change and American Economic Growth. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.Google Scholar
  7. Denis DJ, Denis DK und Sarin A (1997). Agency problems. equity ownership. and corporate diversification. Journal of Finance. 52. 135–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Encarnation D (1989). Dislodging Multinationals: India’s Comparative Perspective. Cornell University Press: Ithaca NY.Google Scholar
  9. Faccio M und Lang LHP (2002). The ultimate ownership of Western European corporations. Journal of Financial Economics. 65. 365–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Faccio M und Stolin D (2006). Expropriation vs. Proportional Sharing in Corporate Acquisitions. Journal of Business. 79. 1413–1444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fama EF und Jensen MC (1983). Separation of Ownership and Control. Journal of Law and Economics. 26. 301–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fatemi AM (1984). Shareholder Benefits from Corporate International Diversification. Journal of Finance. 39. 1325–1345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fiss PC und Zajac E (2004). The Diffusion of Ideas over Contested Terrain: The (Non)adoption of a Shareholder Value Orientation among German Firms. Administrative Science Quarterly. 49. 501–534.Google Scholar
  14. Fisman R (2000). Estimating the value of political connections. American Economic Review 91 (4). 1095–2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fox MA und Hamilton R (1994). Ownership and diversification: Agency theory or stewardship theory. Journal of Management Studies. 31. 69–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gomez-Mejia LR, Nunez-Nickel M, Jacobson K und Moyano-fuentes J (2007). Socioemotional Wealth and Business Risks in Family Controlled Firms. Administrative Science Quarterly. 52. 103–127.Google Scholar
  17. Grant T (1999). International Directory of Company Histories. St. James Press: Chicago.Google Scholar
  18. Hamel G und Prahalad CK (1996). Competing for the Future. Harvard Business Press.Google Scholar
  19. Hautz J, Mayer M und Stadler C (2013) Ownership Identity and Concentration: A Study of their Joint Impact on Corporate Diversification. British Journal of Management. 24. 102–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hinterhuber HH (2004). Strategische Unternehmungsführung. I. Strategisches Denken. Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  21. Hitt MA, Hoskisson RE und Kim H (1997). International diversification: Effects on innovation and firm performance in product-diversified firms. Academy of Management Journal 40(4). 767–798CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hoshi T, Kashyap A und Scharfstein D (1991). Corporate structure. liquidity. and investment: evidence from Japanese industrial groups. Quarterly Journal of Economics. 106. 33–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hoskisson RE und Turk T (1990). Corporate Restructuring: Governance and Control Limits of the Internal Capital Market. Academy of Management Review. 15. 459- 477.Google Scholar
  24. Jensen MC und Meckling WH (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior. agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics. 3. 305–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Khanna T und Palepu K (1997). Why focused strategies may be wrong for emerging markets. Harvard Business Review 75(4): 41–51.Google Scholar
  26. Khanna T und Rivkin JW (2001). Estimating the performance effect of business groups in emerging markets. Strategic Management Journal 22: 45–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lee K, Peng MW und Lee K (2008). From diversification premium to diversification discount during institutional transitions. Journal of World Business 43(1). 47–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lincoln JR, Gerlach ML und Ahmadjian CL (1996). Keiretsu networks and corporate performance in Japan. American Sociological Review. 61. 67–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Markides CC (1995). Diversification. restructuring and economic performance. Strategic Management Journal. 16. 101–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Markides CC und Williamson O (1994). Related diversification. core competencies and corporate performance. Strategic Management Journal. 15 (summer special issue). 149–165.Google Scholar
  31. Mayer M und R. Whittington R (2003). Diversification in context: A cross-national and cross-temporal extension. Strategic Management Journal. 24. 773–781.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Miller D und Breton-Miller IL (2005). Management Insights from Great and Struggling Family Businesses. Long Range Planning. 38. 517–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Montgomery CA und Singh H (1984). Diversification Strategy and Systematic Risk. Strategic Management Journal. 5. 181–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. North D (1990). Institutions. institutional change. and economic performance. Harvard University Press: Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Palich LE, Cardinal LB und Miller CC. (2000). Curvilinearity in the diversificationperformance linkage: An examination of over three decades. Strategic Management Journal. 21. 155–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Peng MW und Delios A (2006). What determines the scope of the firm over time and around the world? An Asia Pacific perspective. Asia Pacific Journal of Management 23(4). 385–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Peng MW, Seung-Hyun L und Wang DYL (2005). What determines the scope of the firm over time? A focus on institutional relatedness. Academy of Management Review 30(3). 622–633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Penrose E (1959). The Theory of the Growth of the Firm. Basil Blackwell: London.Google Scholar
  39. Ramaswamy K, Mingfang L und Veliyath R (2002). Variations in Ownership Behavior and Propensity to Diversify: A Study of the Indian Corporate Context. Strategic Management Journal. 23. 345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Roechling Group (2008). The History of the Röchling Family Firm.Google Scholar
  41. Schwartz A (1994). A Nation in Waiting: Indonesia in the 1990s. Allen & Unwin: St Leonards, Australia.Google Scholar
  42. Stadler C und Wältermann P (2012). Die Jahrhundert-Champions: Fünf Prinzipien für dauerhaften Unternehmenserfolg oder Was wir aus der Geschichte europäischer Top- Unternehmen lernen können. Schäffer-Poeschel.Google Scholar
  43. Strachan H (1976). Family and Other Business Groups in Economic Development: The Case of Nicaragua. Praeger: New York.Google Scholar
  44. Tanriverdi H und Venkatraman N (2005). Knowledge relatedness and the performance of multibusiness firms. Strategic Management Journal. 26. 97–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Teece DJ (1980). Economies of scope and the scope of the enterprise. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization. 1. 223–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Teece DJ (1982). Toward an Economic Theory of the Multiproduct Firm. Journal of Economic and Organization. 3(1). 39–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Thomsen S und P. Pedersen (2000). Ownership Structure and Economic Performance in the Largest European Companies. Strategic Management Journal. 21. 689–705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Tihanyi L, Johnson RA, Hoskisson RE und Hitt MA (2003). Institutional Ownership differences and international diversification: The effect of boards of directors and technological opportunity. Academy of Management Journal. 46. 195–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Wan WP (2005). Country Resource Environments. Firm Capabilities. and Corporate Diversification Strategies. Journal of Management Studies. 42(1). 161–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Wernerfelt B (1984). A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal. 5. 171–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. White LJ (1974). Industrial Concentration and Economic Power in Pakistan. Princeton University Press: Princeton. NJ.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of WarwickWarwickGroßbritannien
  2. 2.PWI GmbHMünchenDeutschland

Personalised recommendations