Kurumsal Çeşitlendirme, Grup Bağlantıları ve Firma Değeri: Türkiye Örneği

Year 2014, Volume: 8 Issue: 2, 151 - 174, 01.12.2014

Elif Akben Selçuk

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı, 2006 ve 2012 yılları arasında 255 Türk firmasından oluşan bir örneklemde kurumsal çeşitlendirmenin firma değerine etkisini incelemektir. Regresyon sonuçlarına göre, çeşitlendirilmiş firmalar uzman firmalara kıyasla çeşitlendirme primiyle faaliyet göstermektedir. Bu bulguyu açıklamak amacıyla işletme gruplarıyla bağlantıların çeşitlendirme-değer ilişkisi üzerinde olası bir etkileşim etkisi araştırılmıştır. Analiz sonuçları, çeşitlendirme primi bulgusunun yalnızca işletme gruplarıyla bağlantılı olmayan firmalarda geçerli olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır. Bu sonuçlar grup şirketlerinin çeşitlendirmenin faydalarını elde ettiklerini ve firma düzeyinde ek bir çeşitlendirmeye ihtiyaç duymadıklarını göstermektedir.

Keywords

Kurumsal Çeşitlendirme, İşletme Grupları, Türkiye

Corporate Diversification, Grup Affiliation and Firm Value: Evidence from Turkey

Abstract

The objective of this study is to investigate the impact of corporate diversification in a sample of 255 Turkish firms for the period between 2006 and 2012. Regression results indicate that diversified firms trade at a premium compared to single-segment firms. To explain this finding, we also investigate the possible moderating role of business group affiliation for the diversification-value relationship. Analysis results reveal that the diversification premium is confined to firms that are not affiliated with business groups. These results suggest that group members already capture the benefits of diversification without the need to diversify further at the firm level

Keywords

Corporate Diversification, Business Groups, Turkey

References

• Amihud, Y., and Lev, B. (1981). Risk reduction as a managerial motive for conglomerate mergers. The Bell Journal of Economics, 12(2): 605-617.
• Anderson, R. C., Bates, T. W., Bizjak, J. M., and Lemmon, M. L. (2000). Corporate governance and firm diversification. Financial Management, 29(1): 5-22.
• Berger, P. G., and Ofek, E. (1995). Diversification’s effect on firm value. Journal of Financial Economics, 37: 39-65.
• Bhide, A. (1990). Reversing corporate diversification. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 3(2): 70-81.
• Brost, M. A., and Kleiner, B. H. (1995). New developments in corporate diversification strategies. Management Research News, 18(3): 24-33.
• Campa, J. M., and Kedia, S. (2002). Explaining the diversification discount. The Journal of Finance, 57(4): 1731-1762.
• Chen, C. N., and Chu, W. (2012). Diversification, resource concentration, and business group performance: Evidence from Taiwan. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 29: 1045-1061.
• Denis, D. J., Denis, D. K., and Sarin, A. (1997). Agency problems, equity ownership and corporate diversification, The Journal of Finance, 52: 135-160.
• Denis, D. J. , Denis, D. K., and Yost, K. (2002). Global diversification, industrial diversification and firm value. The Journal of Finance, 57: 1951-1979.
• Dey, T. and Banerjee, R. (2011). Can corporate diversification promote firm value? A survey, University of Munich Working Paper, No. 28928, http://mpra. ub.uni-muenchen.de/28928/
• Erdorf, S., Hartmann-Wendels, T., Heinrichs, N., and Matz M. (2013). Corporate diversification and firm value: A survey of recent literature. Financial Markets and Portfolio Management, 27(2): 187-215.
• Errunza, V., and Senbet, L. (1984). International corporate diversification, market valuation, and size-adjusted evidence. The Journal of Finance, 39: 727- 745.
• Fauver, L., Houston, J., and Naranjo, A. (2003). Capital markets development, international integration, legal systems, and the value of corporate diversification: A cross-country analysis. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 38(1): 135-157.
• Fleming, G., Oliver, B., and Skourakis, S. (2003). The valuation discount of multi-segment firms in Australia. Accounting and Finance, 43: 167–185.
• Gonenc, H., Kan, O. B., and Karadaglı, E. D. (2007). Business groups and internal capital markets. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, 43(2): 63–81.
• Gunduz, L., and Tatoglu, E. (2003). A comparison of the financial characteristics of group affiliated and independent firms in Turkey. European Business Review, 15(1): 48-54.
• Harris, M., Kriebel, C.H., and Raviv, R. (1982). Asymmetric information, incentives and intrafirm resource allocation. Management Science, 28(6): 604– 620.
• Hausman, J. A. (1978). Specification tests in econometrics. Econometrica, 46(6): 1251–1271.
• He, X. (2009). Corporate diversification and firm value: Evidence from post- 1997 data. International Review of Finance, 9(4): 359-385.
• Hoechle, D., Schmid, M. M., Walter, I., and Yermack, D. (2012). How much of the diversification discount can be explained by poor corporate governance? Journal of Financial Economics, 103: 41-60.
• Jensen, M. C. (1986). Agency costs of free cash flow, corporate finance, and takeovers. The American Economic Review, 76(2): 323-329.
• Jensen, M. C., and Murphy, K. J. (1990). Performance pay and top management incentives. The Journal of Political Economy, 98(2): 225-264.
• Khanna, T., and Palepu, K. (1997). Why focused strategies may be wrong for emerging markets. Harvard Business Review, 75(4): 41-51.
• Khanna, T., and Palepu, K. (2000a). Is group affiliation profitable in emerging markets? An analysis of diversified Indian business groups. The Journal of Finance, 55(2): 867-891.
• Khanna, T., and Palepu, K. (2000b). The future of business groups in emerging markets, long-run evidence from Chile. Academy of Management Journal, 43(3): 268-285.
• Khanna, T., and Rivkin, J. (2001). Estimating the performance effects of business groups in emerging markets. Strategic Management Journal, 22(1): 45-57.
• Kim, H., Hoskisson, R. E., Tihanyi, L., and Hong, J. (2004). Evolution and restructuring of diversified business groups in emerging markets: The lessons from chaebols in Korea. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 21: 25-48.
• Kuppuswamy, V., and Villalonga, B. (2010). Does diversification create value in the presence of external financing constraints? Evidence from the 2008-2009 financial crisis, Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 1569546, http:// ssrn.com/ abstract=1569546
• Lang, L. H. P., and Stulz, R. M. (1994). Tobin’s q, corporate diversification, and firm performance. Journal of Political Economy, 102: 1248-1280.
• Lee, K. T., Hooy, C. W., and Hooy, G. K. (2012). The value impact of international and industrial diversifications on public listed firms in Malaysia. Emerging Markets Review, 13(3): 366-380.
• Lee, K., Peng, M. W., and Lee, K. (2008). From diversification premium to diversification discount during institutional transitions. Journal of World Business, 43(1): 47-65.
• Lewellen, W. G. (1971). A pure financial rationale for the conglomerate merger. The Journal of Finance, 26(2): 521-537.
• Li, M., and Wong, Y. (2003). Diversification and economic performance: An empirical assessment of Chinese firms. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 20(3): 243-265.
• Lins, K., and Servaes, H. (1999). International evidence on the value of corporate diversification. The Journal of Finance, 54(6): 2215–2239.
• Lins, K., and Servaes, H. (2002). Is corporate diversification beneficial in emerging markets? Financial Management, 31(2): 5–31.
• Majd, S., and Myers, S. C. (1987). The effects of taxation on capital accumulation. In M.Feldstein (Ed.), Tax asymmetries and corporate tax reform. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
• Maksimovic, V., and Phillips, G. (2007). Conglomerate firms and internal capital markets. In B.E. Eckbo (Ed.), Handbook of corporate finance. Amsterdam, North Holland: Elsevier.
• Mansi, S. A., and Reeb, D. M. (2002). Corporate diversification: What gets discounted? The Journal of Finance, 57(5): 2167–2183.
• Marinelli, F. (2010). The shareholder value and diversification puzzle, IESE Business School Working Paper, No. 853, http://ssrn.com/abstract=1645206
• Martin, J. D., and Sayrak, A. (2003). Corporate diversification and shareholder value: a survey of recent literature. Journal of Corporate Finance, 9: 37-57.
• Meyer, M. A., Milgrom, P., and Roberts, D. J. (1992). Organizational prospects, influence costs, and ownership changes. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 1(1): 9-35.
• Miller, D. J. (2006). Technological diversity, related diversification, and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 27(7): 601–619.
• Morck, R., and Yeung, B. (1991). Why investors value multinationality? Journal of Business, 64: 165-187.
• Nachum, L. (2004). Geographic and industrial diversification of developing country firms. Journal of Management Studies, 41(2): 273-294.
• Palich, L. E., Cardinal, L. B., and Miller, C. C. (2000). Curvilinearity in the diversification-performance linkage: An Examination of over three decades of research. Strategic Management Journal, 21: 155–174.
• Peng, M.W., and Delios, A. (2006). What determines the scope of the firm over time and around theworld? An Asia Pacific perspective. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 23(4): 385–405.
• Ramaswamy, K., Li, M., and Petit, B. S. P. (2004). Who drives unrelated diversification? A study of Indian manufacturing firms. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 21(4): 403-423.
• Saloner, G. (1987). Predation, mergers, and incomplete information. RAND Journal of Economics, 18: 165–186.
• Scherer, F. M. (1980). Industrial market structure and economic performance. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
• Servaes, H. (1996). The value of diversification during the conglomerate merger wave. The Journal of Finance, 51(4): 1201–1225.
• Shleifer, A., and Vishny, R. W. (1992). Liquidation values and debt capacity: A market equilibrium approach. The Journal of Finance, 45: 379-396.
• Singh, M., Nejadmalayeri, A., and Mathur, I. (2007). Performance impact of business group affiliation: An analysis of the diversification-performance link in a developing economy. Journal of Business Research, 60(4): 339–347.
• Stein, J. C. (1997). Internal capital markets and the competition for corporate resources. The Journal of Finance, 52: 111-133.
• Teece, D. J. (1980). Economies of scope and the scope of the enterprise. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 1(3): 223-247.
• Teece, D. J. (1982). Towards an economic theory of the multiproduct firm. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 3(1): 39-63.
• Whited, T. M. (2001). Is it inefficient investment that causes the diversification discount? The Journal of Finance, 56(5): 1667-1691.
• Villalonga, B. (2003). Research roundtable discussion: the diversification discount, Social Science Research Network Working Paper, No. 402220, http:// ssrn.com /abstract=402220.
• Villalonga, B. (2004a). Does diversification cause the ‘diversification discount’? Financial Management, 33(2): 5–27.
• Villalonga, B. (2004b), Diversification discount or premium? New evidence from the Business Information Tracking Series. The Journal of Finance, 59(2): 479- 506.
• Williamson, O. E. (1975). Markets and hierarchies: Analysis and antitrust implications. New York, NY: Collier Macmillan Publishers.
• Wulf, J. (2009). Influence and inefficiency in the internal capital market. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 72(1): 305-321.
• Yiu, D., Bruton, G., and Lu, Y. (2005). Understanding business group performance in an emerging economy: Acquiring resources and capabilities in order to prosper. Journal of Management Studies, 42(1): 183-206.
• Yucel, E., Ozmen, M., and Onal, Y. B. (2012). Firma çeşitlendirmesinin etkilerinin Berger ve Ofek yöntemiyle incelenmesi. BDDK Bankacilik ve Finansal Piyasalar, 6(2): 147-184.
• Yurtoglu, B. B. (2000). Ownership, control and firm performance of Turkish listed firms. Empirica, 27(2): 193-222.