Abstract Research Summary High‐tech firms often pursue serial cross‐border acquisitions (CBAs) to sustain innovation and competitive advantage, thereby—intentionally or unintentionally—creating distinct patterns of temporal rhythm. While prior research highlights intra‐firm rhythm dimensions (frequency, regularity, scope) or inter‐firm dimensions (tempo, phase, scope entrainment), the empirical findings remain ambivalent. Drawing on fuzzy‐set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA) of 22 US high‐tech serial cross‐border acquirers, we identified four equifinal configurations—opportunistic experimentation, focused adaptation, cautious synchrony, and disciplined independence—linked to high performance, and three—rigid imitation, sporadic alignment, and erratic expansion—associated with low performance. Abductive theorizing from qualitative data reveals how firms manage change–stability and conformity–differentiation contradictions through the mechanisms of intensification, tilting, and suppression. Managerial Summary Analyzing serial CBAs, we show how rhythm dimensions combine into configurations that shape performance. Four rhythm configurations enhance outcomes, while three hinder them. Managers should avoid treating attributes such as frequency or regularity as “silver bullets” and instead orchestrate rhythms holistically across firm and industry levels. In an era of rapid technological change, geopolitical risk, and rising nationalism, effective strategies often involve combinations characterized by high frequency, irregularity, narrow scope, and selective non‐entrainment, assembled either to sustain independent rhythms or to pursue change‐seeking and differentiation‐seeking paths. By contrast, low‐performing patterns tend to over‐rely on external synchrony while neglecting internal constraints. Managers should adopt a configurational mindset, tailoring acquisition rhythms to their firm's strategic context rather than imitating competitors.
Yan et al. (Wed,) studied this question.