Editorial

摘要

In this edition, we have a number of papers that provide important insights into not only management but also the modern world. The lead article in this edition, "The Overlooked Influence of Personality, Idiosyncrasy and Eccentricity in Corporate Mergers and Acquisitions: 120 Years and Six Distinct Wave", is in my opinion the most important study that this journal has published since I have been the editor. Authored by Anthony Gould, Professeur Titulaire at Laval University in Quebec, and Kathleen Park, Research Fellow at MIT's Sloan School of Management, this article provides a new explanation for shifts in management behaviour and organisational success over the past 150 years. In essence, it argues that the past 150 years have been characterised by six "merger waves", each shaped by peculiarities in "political, social and legal contexts". In each instance, Gould and Park argue, the distinctive characteristics of the merger wave called forth Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) whose personalities were of a special hue. Conceptually, therefore, the paper draws on organisational psychology, economic history and strategic management. In contrast to the deliberate (and safe) choice of a narrow field of endeavour that characterises most academic papers, this work fits into what Fernard Braudel and the French Annals School characterise as "histoire de la longue duree" (history of the long movement). CEOs are successful to the extent that their personality conforms to the nature of the times. Invariably, such sweeping generations are prone to criticisms. One could certainly think of different ways of categorising long waves into the schema used by Gould and Park: 1885-1905 (monopoly wave), 1920s (oligopoly wave), 1960s (conglomerate wave), 1980s ("discipline wave") and 2000-2007 (defensive wave). Similarly, it would not be hard to find a successful CEO whose personality appeared contrary to the times. However, it is in the nature of human existence that we search for generalisable patterns in life, i.e. if I leave home before 7.30 a.m. to go to work, then I will have much less traffic than if I leave at 7.40 a.m. Generalised rules hold good to the extent that they are, more rather than less, supported by the evidence. In this, Gould and Park have done a commendable job, providing convincing evidence in a sweeping and well-researched narrative. The paper is, I am pleased to note, also very well written, for which I commend the authors.