We compare the post-merger financial performance of acquiring firms that have wellconnected
(central) boards with the performance of less-connected (non-central) boards
and find that central boards are associated with better performing acquisitions as
evidenced by larger post-merger buy-and-hold abnormal returns, stronger improvements
in the ROA, and a 7-12% annual abnormal return based on calendar time portfolios.
Central firms are more likely to use cash, to make an acquisition, and to be acquired. Our
results suggest that board networks affect the decision to acquire, the choice of target, the
method of payment, and ultimately the financial performance of the firm around the
merger.