Literature review examines the impact of cross-border acquisitions on performance in Indian multinationals, suggesting significant implications.
This paper aims to review the growing phenomenon of inbound and outbound cross-border mergers and acquisitions declared by Indian multinational enterprises, as well as to survey the internationalization-performance relationship in the context of emerging economies. To do so, a semi-systematic review method was employed to collect and survey the existing literature. Thus, a total of 205 journal research articles published over the period of 26 years, 2000-2026, were reviewed, tabulated, and discussed meaningfully. This review is organized around both inbound and outbound research tracks, covering motives, markets and industries, firm and transaction characteristics, short-term stock market returns, knowledge transfer, innovation, long-term financial performance, corporate governance, and valuation. This literature survey notices that the majority of outbound acquisitions by Indian firms are completed in industries like information technology and pharmaceuticals, primarily targeting developed economies, while inbound acquisitions to India remain relatively stable. Equity investors of outbound acquirers and inbound targets have earned significant positive stock returns on the deal announcement event. Specifically, Indian multinationals have accelerated the internationalization of their domestic operations and are catching up with the global factory model in terms of R&D, innovation, and foreign revenues, regardless of their post-merger book profits. Finally, this study discusses several important implications for future research, firm managers, and government agencies. Additionally, online supplementary work presents bibliometric analyses of the India-focused M&A literature, like by year, subject area, journals, citations, most cited papers, and frequent authors.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
K. Viswantha Reddy (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: