ABSTRACT

Most accounts of corporate failure offer explanation in terms of fundamental changes in the environment or strategic inertia. The case of Lucas Industries is different: a firm that was actively restructuring itself but still lost its 100-year-old identity in 1996 as a result of a merger. The firm actively pursued the merger but found that the smaller merger partner in fact became dominant. Comparative analysis with other firms, together with interrogation of the results of three studies of the firm over the period 1978–95, points to a threefold explanation: (1) some weaknesses in the restructuring strategy which were brought into focus by (2) an economic downturn and belief at the time in the rationalization of the industry into fewer firms and amplified by (3) some specific contingencies in parts of the firm. The analytical lesson is that failure can be more historically contingent than extant accounts recognize. The practical one is to urge more independent scrutiny of the decisions of company boards.

摘要

关于企业失败的大多数说法都根据环境的根本变化或战略惯性提供了解释。卢卡斯工业公司（Lucas Industries）的情况则不同：该公司积极地进行自我重组，但由于合并而在1996年仍然失去了100年的悠久历史。该公司积极进行合并，但发现较小的合并伙伴实际上已成为主导。与其他公司的比较分析，以及对1978-95年间公司三项研究结果的质疑，提出了三方面的解释：（1）重组策略中的一些弱点被（2）经济不景气和当时对将行业合理化为更少的公司的信念，并被（3）部分公司的某些特殊情况所放大。分析的教训是，失败在历史上可能比现有帐户所能识别的更为偶然。实际的做法是敦促对公司董事会的决定进行更独立的审查。