SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Uluslararası Yönetim İktisat ve İşletme Dergisi / 2019 / Cilt: 15 - Sayı: 3

USING THE CARRYING CAPACITY AS A LEADING INDICATOR IN MERGER STRATEGIES

TAŞIMA KAPASİTESİNİN BİRLEŞME STRATEJİLERİNDE ÖNCÜL BİR GÖSTERGE OLARAK KULLANILMASI

Çiğdem BASKICI
Yavuz ERCİL
Pages
783–796
Publication Date
2019-10-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

This shows that 77.3% of all sectors may face sectorial resource problems in the future. 10 sectors in which merger strategies could have a more critical importance for the continuity of companies are identified from 68 sectors

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Company mergers can be considered as one of the ways for companies surviving in a situation if the sector population reaches to the end point.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The aim of this study is to determine the key sectors in Turkey in which the merger strategies could be primarily needed.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:This shows that 77.3% of all sectors may face sectorial resource problems in the future. 10 sectors in which merger strategies could have a more critical importance for the continuity of companies are identified from 68 sectors
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2006-2016 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Taşıma Kapasitesi · Birleşme Stratejisi · Lojistik Büyüme Modeli

Abstract

Company mergers can be considered as one of the ways for companies surviving in a situation if the sector population reaches to the end point. The aim of this study is to determine the key sectors in Turkey in which the merger strategies could be primarily needed. In this respect, the carrying capacities of 88 sectors according to the NACE level 2 codes were calculated with the sector population, company founding and disbanding data during 2006-2016. It was determined that in 68 sectors, the sectors populations are above the carrying capacities of sectors. This shows that 77.3% of all sectors may face sectorial resource problems in the future. 10 sectors in which merger strategies could have a more critical importance for the continuity of companies are identified from 68 sectors

Özet

Şirket birleşmeleri, sektör popülasyonunun sürdürülemez noktaya geldiği bir durumda şirketlerin hayatta kalma yollarından biri olarak düşünülebilir. Çalışmanın amacı Türkiye’de birleşme stratejilerinin öncelikli olarak ihtiyaç duyulabileceği sektörleri belirlemektir. Bu doğrultuda NACE düzey 2 koduna göre 88 sektöre ait 2006-2016 yılları arasındaki sektör popülasyonu, şirket kuruluş ve kapanış verileri kullanılarak sektör taşıma kapasiteleri hesaplanmıştır. 68 sektörde, sektör popülasyonunun sektör taşıma kapasitesinin üstünde olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Bu durum, tüm sektörlerin %77,3’ünün gelecekte sektörel kaynak sorunu ile karşı karşıya kalabileceğini göstermektedir. 68 sektörden şirketlerin devamlılığı için birleşmelerin daha kritik bir öneme sahip olabileceği 10 sektör belirlenmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

BASKICI, Ç., ERCİL, Y. (2019). USING THE CARRYING CAPACITY AS A LEADING INDICATOR IN MERGER STRATEGIES. Uluslararası Yönetim İktisat ve İşletme Dergisi, Cilt: 15 - Sayı: 3, 783–796. https://ajindex.com/articles/169713

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Aldrich, H. E. (1979). Organizations and environments. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. Aldrich, H. E., & Ruef, M. (2006). Organizations evolving. London: SAGE Publications. Aldrich, H. E., & Wiedenmayer, G. (1993). From traits to rates: An ecological perspective on organizational foundings. In J. Katz, R. Brockhaus (Eds.), Advances in entrepreneurship, firm emergence, and growth, Cilt 1, s. 145-195. CT: JAI Press.
  2. Barnett, W. P., & Carroll, G. R. (1987). Competition and mutualism among early telephone companies. Administrative Science Quarterly, 32, 400-421.
  3. Barnett, W. P., & Hansen, M. T. (1996). The red queen in organizational evolution. Strategic Management Journal, 17, 139-157.
  4. Boone, C., & van Witteloostuijn, A. (1995). Industrial organization and organizational ecology: The potentials for cross-fertilization. Organization Studies, 16(2), 265-298.
  5. Carroll, G. R. (1984). Organizational ecology. Annual Review of Sociology, 10, 71-93.
  6. Carroll, G. R., & Hannan, M. T. (1989). Density dependence in the evolution of populations of newspaper organizations. American Sociological Review, 54, 524-541.
  7. Carroll, G. R., Preisendoerfer, P., Swaminathan, A., & Wiedenmayer, G. (1993). Brewery and brauerei: The organizational ecology of brewing. Organization Study, 14(2), 155-188. da Silva, A. A., e Meirelles, D. S., & Porto, E. C. (2015). Development cycle and carrying capacity: An equilibrium number study of financial institutions in Brazil’s banking sector. Management Research: The Journal of the Iberoamerican Academy of Management, 13(3), 285-314.
  8. Delacroix, J., Swaminathan, A., & Solt, M. E. (1989). Density dependence versus population dynamics: An ecological study of failings in the California wine industry. American Sociological Review, 54, 245-262.
  9. Durand, R. (2001). Firm selection: An integrative perspective. Organization Studies, 22(3), 393–417.
  10. Enz, C. A. (2005). Hospitality strategic management: Concept and cases. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons. Geroski, P. A. (2001). Exploring the niche overlaps between organizational ecology and industrial economics. Industrial and Corporate Change, 10(2), 507-540.
  11. Hannagan, T. (2002). Mastering strategic management. Great Britain: Palgrave Macmillan. Hannan, M. T. (1986). Competitive and institutional processes in organizational ecology. Technical Report 86-13,
  12. Cornell University, Department of Sociology, Ithaca, NY. Hannan, M. T., & Carroll, G. R. (1992). Dynamics of organizational populations: Density, legitimation,