The DOI matches its Crossref record; 102 of the 102 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Impact of Acquisitions on Innovation: Poison Pill, Placebo, or Tonic?
Abstract
Do acquisitions increase, decrease, or have no effect on innovation? The empirical research on this question suggests that acquisitions may hurt innovation; that is, they may be a “poison pill” for innovation. The authors present an alternative view. For firms that first engage in internal knowledge development, the knowledge-based view the authors present suggests that acquisitions can help innovation; that is, they can be a tonic for innovation. Analysis of cross-sectional, time-series data on a sample of pharmaceutical firms during 1988–97 provides evidence to support the thesis.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
(1994) · Journal of the American Dietetic Association · doi:10.1016/0002-8223(94)92216-0 · Cited by 45,910
Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation
Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393553 · Cited by 35,728
Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning
March, J. G. (1991) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.2.1.71 · Cited by 21,942
A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation
Nonaka, I. (1994) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.5.1.14 · Cited by 17,809
Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm
Grant, R. M. (1996) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.4250171110 · Cited by 16,157
Econometric Analysis of Panel Data
Baltagi, B. H. (2021) · Springer Texts in Business and Economics · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-53953-5 · Cited by 15,104
Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology
Kogut, B., & Zander, U. (1992) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.3.3.383 · Cited by 12,939 · cited 5×
“We use arguments from organizational theory on absorptive capacity (Cohen and Levinthal 1990; Kogut and Zander 1992) and the knowledge-based view of the firm (Bierly and Chakrabarti 1996; Grant 1996; Nonaka 1994; Spender 1996; Winter 1987) as well as recent work in marketing (especially John,…”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialAbsorptive Capacity: A Review, Reconceptualization, and Extension
Zahra, S. A., & George, G. (2002) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.2002.6587995 · Cited by 10,758
Academy of Management Executive
(2010) · The Academy of Management executive/Academy of Management executive · doi:10.5465/ame · Cited by 8,844
Innovation and Learning: The Two Faces of R & D
Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1989) · The Economic Journal · doi:10.2307/2233763 · Cited by 7,530
Cited by
Zhou, K. Z., & Li, C. B. (2012) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.1959 · Cited by 1,122
Bauer, F., & Matzler, K. (2014) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.2091 · Cited by 498
De Luca, L. M., & Atuahene-Gima, K. (2007) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1509/jmkg.71.1.095 · Cited by 445
Wuyts, S., Dutta, S., & Stremersch, S. (2004) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1509/jmkg.68.2.88.27787 · Cited by 289
Mishra, A. N., Konana, P., & Barua, A. (2007) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.1070.0115 · Cited by 267
Metadata
- Authors
- Prabhu, J. C., Chandy, R. K., & Ellis, M. E.
- Venue
- Journal of Marketing
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2005-01
- Volume
- 69
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 114-130
- ISSN
- 0022-2429 (ISSN-L)
- 1547-7185
- OpenAlex
- W2121905715
- Cited by
- 391
- References
- 102
- FWCI
- 31.22
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Impact of Acquisitions on Innovation: Poison Pill, Placebo, or Tonic? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1509/jmkg.69.1.114.55514
- The paper
- Prabhu, J. C., Chandy, R. K., & Ellis, M. E. (2005). The Impact of Acquisitions on Innovation: Poison Pill, Placebo, or Tonic? Journal of Marketing. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.69.1.114.55514
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
