Systematic literature review identifies integration challenges and policymakers' strategies within distressed M&A efforts, suggesting implications for international marketing.
Purpose While international business and strategic management have explored various dimensions of cross-border transactions, distressed mergers and acquisitions (M&As) remain underexamined despite their significant impact on firms’ strategic decisions (e.g. international marketing strategy) and financial resilience. This study conducts a systematic literature review (SLR) on distressed M&A, identifying key themes on antecedents, decisions and outcomes (ADO), as well as theories, contexts and methods (TCM). Design/methodology/approach A framework-based review synthesizes the literature on distressed M&A. The review examines 71 papers published by the end of 2024, distinguishing between transactions where the target company is distressed and those where the acquiring company faces financial distress. Findings The review identifies key motivations for distressed M&A, including bankruptcy avoidance and strategic reorganization for business continuity. Critical decision-making areas include deal structuring, financing, counterparty selection, post-M&A integration and cultural differences. While short-term performance improvements are common, long-term success is often hindered by integration challenges and high debt. Additionally, distressed M&A research mainly focuses on specific regions, especially the USA, limiting the applicability of findings to broader contexts. Originality/value This study provides theoretical insights by systematically reviewing distressed M&A literature, offering a foundation for future research in this evolving area. It also offers practical recommendations for policymakers, organizations and stakeholders to shape strategies to restructure firms and ensure business continuity.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Laus et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: