EVALUATING MERGER PERFORMANCE ON A LoNGITUDINAL BASIS: AN EMPmICAL INvEsTIGATION Ram Subramanian Grand Valley State University Allendale, Michigan Essam Mahmoud American Graduate School of International Management Glendale, Arizona Mary S. Thibodeaux University of North Texas Denton,Texas Bahman Ebrahimi University of North Texas Denton, Texas Introduction In the past, researchers from a myriad of disciplines have attempted a number of studies on merger performance and related issues. Even using a wide range of performance measures (e.g., stock returns, return on investment, risk, market share), the essence of their results was that mergers benefit the acquired firm and its stockholders, but do not result in any significant benefit to the acquiring firm or its stockholders ([14], [16]). However, researchers from the field of strategic management have recently found evidence that contradicts the earlier findings of scholars who were predominantly from the finance discipline. The strategic management researchers ([21], [32]), using the same methodology as the finance scholars but with different time frames and slightly different assumptions, have concluded that mergers yield significant benefits to stockholders of both firms. Thus, a question currently exists as to whether mergers benefit only one (the acquired) or both firms involved. A priori, from the recent merger wave [4] it would appear as though both firms benefit. The clarion call for researchers in the area of mergers and acquisitions research is for more micro studies (focusing on individual industries) rather than macro approaches (pooling firms from different industries into one single sample) that examine merger outcomes from a longitudinal perspective ([9], [29]). This is seen as a way of resolving the current controversy that exists regarding merger performance. The purpose of this study was to measure merger performance on a longitudinal basis using a micro perspective. Specifically, this study looked at the performance of