“Kicked by the same kangaroo”?

Metaphor’s effects in tragic tales of acquisition

Cindy Liu

Victoria University of Wellington

Sally Riad*

Victoria University of Wellington

P O Box 600

Tel. +64 4 463 5079

Fax. +64 4 463 5253

Sally.Riad@vuw.ac.nz

*Presenting author

1

“Kicked by the same kangaroo”?

Metaphor’s effects in tragic tales of acquisition

Abstract

In this paper we identify salient metaphors in tragic acquisition tales with the purpose of reflecting on

their effects, on what they do. The paper is premised on interrelated theoretical strands: narrative,

tragedy and metaphor; these form the foundation for content analysis of New Zealand and Australian

media representations of three acquisitions. Across the three tales, ‘war’ is the most entrenched

business metaphor. When viewed with the second most dominant metaphor, biology (evolution and

life cycle), we have language replete with notions of social Darwinism wherein struggle is essential to

survival – blended with nationalist sentiments. In closing, the call is for us to envision a “pacific

century” wherein we explore ‘new’ language and alternative ways of framing business life.

2

Introduction

The Warehouse is getting kicked by the same kangaroo that has sent other New Zealand firms to their sickbeds (Chapple, 2003).

This statement appeared in an article titled “True Blues hit the ‘Red Shed’” in The New Zealand

Herald. The “kangaroo”, an animal symbolic of Australia, relentlessly “kicked” The Warehouse, the

largest and one of the most popular retailers in New Zealand. The article reproduces a precarious

notion, not uncommon in the media, that New Zealand firms generally “have a sad history of

unravelling across the Tasman” (Chapple, 2003). This paper examines media representations of three

New Zealand acquisitions in Australia; one thing these acquisitions have in common is a tragic tale of

a well-regarded, almost iconic, New Zealand firm, whose acquisition of an Australian firm does not

end with ‘happily-ever-after’. In the paper, we focus on identifying the salient metaphors deployed in

such media accounts, and exploring the effects they hold in tragic acquisition tales. In doing so, we

take also into account the role of such metaphors within the long-standing historic and economic

relationship between New Zealand and Australia.

Mergers and acquisitions (M&As) are change phenomena that are increasingly relevant to

organizations and everyday life, particularly as organizations seek to establish and maintain

competitiveness in an increasingly globalized economy (Fitzgibbon & Seeger, 2002). Why failed

acquisitions? Whereas the high probability of failure is one of the most common statements

reproduced in the literature on acquisition, there is a paucity of studies that examine failed acquisitions

more broadly, and their representation specifically. Moreover, the reproduction of stories of failure can

shape a nation’s business identity; in the case of New Zealand, this can be compounded by its close

relationship to Australia – wherein accounts of failure are not mere representations of business

problems, but may also involve nationalistic sentiments. Hence, understanding of the dynamics of

framing failure matters just as much as understanding the dynamics of representing success. This is

where we turn to the media, a central player in today’s business world. Specifically, in shaping

perceptions of organizations’ activities and performance, it affects investors’ decision-making and

hence share price (Chatterjee et al., 1992). More broadly, the media creates realities through its broad

reader base, and can also serve to stir up the public with nationalistic sentiments in cross-border

acquisitions (Tienari et al., 2003; Vaara et al., 2003). Here we get to metaphor. In tragic narratives of

acquisition, metaphor contributes to the cohesion of the text, the tightness and consistency of the

argumentation, and the construction of a particular view of reality (Koller, 2003); in this paper, we

emphasise the last of these effects through an analysis of three acquisition cases: The Warehouse’s

acquisition of Clint’s Crazy Bargains and Silly Solly’s, Telecom’s takeover of AAPT to Air New

Zealand’s purchase of Ansett.

3

Narrative, Tragedy and Metaphor in Organizational Change

In examining acquisitions as a form of organizational change, this paper is premised on three

interrelated theoretical strands; we discuss each in turn.

On narrative…

We live immersed in narrative, some of which we create ourselves in our conversations and in

the texts we author (Gabriel, 2004). However, its relevance once easily went unnoticed because of its

ubiquity. Over the past twenty years, interest in narrative has rapidly risen in organization studies,

predominantly on the premise that individuals often make sense of the world and their place within it

through narrative form (e.g. Bruner, 1990; Feldman et al., 2004). Weick (1995) notes that many

organization theorists have shifted their attention to the analysis of such interaction processes through

which organizations are constituted, maintained or change over time.

The word “narrative” derives from the Latin “narre”, which means “to make known”. What

distinguishes narrative from other forms of communicating information, such as a flight timetable, is

that it presents information as a connected sequence of events (Lacey, 2000). To Bruner, there are five

characteristics to a narrative: it is an account of events occurring over time, it poses a retrospective

interpretation of sequential events from a certain point of view, it focus on human action, it is an

ongoing part of identity construction processes, and it is co-authored by the audience or readers.

We organize our experience and our memory of what has happened mainly in the form of

narrative, including stories, excuses, myths, reasons for doing and not doing (Gergen, 2001). We

engage in narrative in order to understand our own lives as well as the lives of other people

(Polkinghorne, 1988). And specific to the topic at hand, the broadcast and print media also efficiently

engage with narrative, having achieved a logical contrivance: that of “fishing for the story even as they

proclaim themselves to be tracking down the fact” (Gabriel, 2004: 2).

Organizational research into change has been increasingly shaped by the ‘linguistic turn’ that

has spread across the social sciences, leading to a focus on ‘stories’, ‘narratives’, ‘myths’, ‘legend’,

‘fantasies’, ‘fables’, ‘tales’ and ‘sagas’ (Alvesson & Karreman, 2000; Brown, 2005; Czariawska,

1998). The focus of research is on language and its role in constructing, rather than simply mirroring

reality (Alvesson & Karreman, 2000) through an emphasis on how stories, embedded in what is called

‘narrative knowledge’, come to provide guidance or ‘recipes’ for action (Czarniawska-Joerges, 1995;

Gabriel, 2002). Specifically, Czarniawska (1997) claims that narrating is organizing, a process of

social construction that is interactionally both relevant and constraining.

On tragedy…

In his highly influential Poetics, Aristotle introduced the earliest formal definition of tragedy,

and all subsequent discussions of tragic form have been influenced by his concepts (Bernays, 2004;

4

Downey, 1999; Kelly, 1993). To Aristotle, tragedy is an imitation of action concerning the fall of a

person whose character is good (though not pre-eminently just or virtuous), whose misfortune is

brought about not by vice or depravity but by some error or frailty, with incidents arousing pity and

fear, and thereby accomplish the catharsis of these emotions (Kelly, 1993). In organizational texts,

tragedies are narratives of fatal loss – along the lines of Aristotle’s “change of fortune from good to

bad” – that are linked to a quest (Kelly, 1993). In discussing narrative forms in organizational

interpretation Jeffcut (1994: 231) defines the ‘tragic’ form thus: “obstacles triumph, opponents gain

their revenge, and any reconciliation or reintegration occurs in a sacrificial mode or in another world”.

Taking this to an analytical level, Gergen (1999; 2001) classifies some rudimentary forms of narrative

that include the progressive and regressive narrative. The progressive narrative poses optimistic

accounts of life, in which the endpoint is positive (a success, victory, etc.). Conversely, the regressive

narrative depicts a continued downward slide of events, in which the endpoint is negative (a failure,

loss, etc.). These narratives also imply “directionality” (p. 254), the former foreseeing further

increments and the latter further decrements. The tragic narrative usually tells the story of a downfall

from a high position; so, in general, it features a regressive narrative following from a previous

progressive narrative.

Seen through the Aristotelian lens, a basic narrative of an unsuccessful acquisition goes along

the following lines. A company with a vision of growth acquires another company, claiming this

would enable more profit. However, after a troubled period of time, it confronts failure in meeting the

goals set prior to the deal. The critical decision becomes whether to continue the struggle or give up.

As illustrated in Brown and Humphreys’ (2003) study, the ‘heroic’ is not the only story that can be

told in organizations. An acquisition can be constructed as a tragedy if the members of the

organization, the researchers or the media represent and interpret the events in tragic terms. Yet,

whereas Aristotle introduced the stylistic elements of tragedy, he is particularly interested in

metaphors: “but the greatest thing by far is to have a command of metaphor […] it is the mark of

genius, for to make good metaphors implies an eye for resemblances” (Aristotle, trans. 1968).

On metaphor…

Derived from Greek words “meta”, meaning “over”, and “pherein”, meaning “to carry”,

metaphor is an implied comparison between two dissimilar objects, such that the comparison results in

aspects that normally apply to one object being transferred or carried over to the second (Sopory &

Dillard, 2002). In other words, a metaphor allows an object to be perceived and understood from the

viewpoint of another object; this involves the mix of similarity and difference between the transferred

word and the focal one (Alvesson, 1994). From the cognitive point of view, “metaphor does not record

pre-existing similarities in things; rather, it is the linguistic means by which we bring together and fuse

into a unity of diverse thoughts and thereby reform our perceptions of the world” (Kittay, 1987: 6).

The major advantage of metaphors is their generative power; their ability to open up creativity and

5

new insights (Czarniawska-Joerges, 1995; Morgan, 1997). They also enable people to voice what were

previously tacit perceptions, which makes them valuable for exploring organization (Oswick and

Montgomery 1999). Since metaphors are not mere neutral or impartial literary devices, they seem to

“express particular concerns and interests in ways that make claims on the nature of the target or those

concerns and interests” (Broussine & Vince, 1996: 59).

Over the past two decades, the role of metaphor has increasingly acquired salience in

organization studies; the literature has included debates on the dynamics of metaphor as well as

metaphor-based analyses of organization. Rather than ‘ornaments’ (Vaara et al., 2003), metaphors

have been cast as the cognitive lenses through which we make sense of various situations, including

organizations and organizing (Palmer & Lundberg, 1995). As a central constitutive element of

language, “metaphors often play an important part in determining how we think and act in the world”;

they do not only “name a state”, they also “communicate an attitude to that state” (Palmer & Dunford,

1996b: 7-8). As part of our cognitive structure (Lakoff & Johnson, 2003; Morgan, 1997), they are “so

deeply embedded in our daily language that we become blind to the important ways in which they

shape our thought and influence our behaviour” (Kendall & Kendall, 1993, p. 149). Thus the analysis

of metaphors is also a powerful way of gleaning knowledge on attitudes to organizational change

events (Oswick & Montgomery, 1999).

Mergers and Acquisitions: Metaphor and Media

Mergers and acquisitions, although legally different, combine firms to allow them to compete

in ways that each would not have been able to do on its own. Acquisitions, specifically, offer a means

for organizations to access resources, capabilities or markets which can be critical to improving their

competitiveness (Pablo & Javidan, 2002). Yet, the terms “merger” and “acquisition” are often used

interchangeably, and in practice, they are hard to distinguish; however, practitioners often use the term

“merger” to imply a marriage of equals, and the term “acquisition” to refer to the purchase of one

organization by another, “with the purchaser in the dominant role” (Hogan & Overmyer-Day, 1994:

248). Friendly and unfriendly takeovers, mergers of equal and not-so-equal firms and speculation

about who is next have become a consistent part of daily news (Pelzer, 2002).

An increasingly central argument in the M&A literature is that such organizational change

phenomena are presented, described and re-described in narrative form (Vaara, 2002). Hence,

examining narrative is useful for studying sense-making and sense-giving in the radical change

instigated by acquisitions (Soderberg, 2003). Within the context of M&A narratives, metaphor has

attracted the attention of researchers for several decades. In 1970, Levinson (1970) made the now

famous analogy between merger and marriage. Then, in a study of language of corporate takeovers as

early as the 1980s, Hirsch and Andrews (1983) identified various metaphors, classified by genres

including ‘the western’, ‘the love affair and/or marriage’, ‘warfare’ and ‘sport’ among others. The

authors also argued that the metaphors deployed often depended ton the perceived “friendliness” of the

6

parties involved. Whereas courtship and marriage metaphors dominate in friendly mergers

(Anonymous, 2003; Cartwright & Cooper, 1995; Demers et al., 2003; Dooley & Zimmerman, 2003;

Haper & Cormeraie, 1995), the war metaphor is not only salient in hostile takovers, but also in M&As

more broadly (e.g. “Air wars,” 2001; Boyd, 2003; Cummings & Riad, 2006; Dunford & Palmer, 1996;

Hirsch, 1986; Koller, 2005; Schneider & Dunbar, 1992). Metaphor analysis in M&As has also been

relevant to understanding identity-building processes, particularly in cross-border acquisitions wherein

images of ‘us’ and ‘them’ become salient (Vaara et al., 2003).

Media texts have been a key resource for analysing narrative and metaphor in M&As (Fursich,

2002; Hellgren et al., 2002; Kuronen et al., 2005; Vaara & Tienari, 2002). Whereas reporters generally

draw on the power of metaphor in their ongoing search for “fresh and dramatic ways to keep their

audience or readership attentive” (Malszecki, 1995: 199), in M&A accounts this becomes more salient

since the combined organizations’ share price as well as decisions on controversial topics can be

shaped by the media’s portrayal of the event and the respective public engagement. This is particularly

relevant in cross-border acquisitions since, in simplifying complex issues and resorting to evocative

metaphors, the media can also stir up nationalist sentiments that can both enable and constrain the

acquisition’s management. Indeed, the analysis of media representations of nationalism in M&As is

acquiring increasing attention (e.g. Risberg et al., 2003; Tienari et al., 2003) due to the role that such

accounts play in reproducing and fuelling the circulation of nationalistic dynamics.

Setting the Scene: The Australia-and-New-Zealand context

All people think that New Zealand is close to Australia, or Asia, or somewhere, and that you cross to it on a bridge. But that is not so. It is not close to anything, but lies by itself, out in the water. It is nearest to Australia, but still not near. The gap between is very wide (Twain, 1989: 251-252).

The Australia-New Zealand story is about two adjacent peoples – of the same kind, and mostly from the same place on the other side of the world – who have grown apart rather than together (McLean, 2003: 13).

Australia and New Zealand have a bilateral relationship seemingly as close as can be between

any two countries. The basic attributes of culture, history, institutions and beliefs intertwine and

overlap (McLean, 2003). A common market is discussed based on the Australia New Zealand Closer

Economic Relations Trade Agreement (CER) formed in 1983. The two countries allow free movement

of goods, services, and labour – and the citizens of either country can live and work freely in the other.

In the construction of their separate national identities, New Zealanders and Australians influence each

other to a greater degree, through common stories, than has been historically conceded (Rolfe, 2004).

Such stories include the ANZAC legend, sporting contests, migration experiences, and intermarriage.

Australian and New Zealand national identities were formed in interaction, with each side

clearly marking off its identity from the other. In The Prickly Pair, Denis McLean (2003: 21)

7

compares the trans-Tasman relationship to magnetism, in that like poles repel and unlike poles attract.

Australia and New Zealand are alike in many ways and accordingly “the more effort is devoted to

pretending otherwise”. New Zealanders pretend to look down upon their Australian cousins. In turn, to

most Australians, New Zealand is simply out of sight and out of mind, only “a butt for bizarre jokes

about sheep, a backward and unkempt provincial place”. This is echoed by New Zealand historian

Keith Sinclair: the relationship between the two has been “a feeling of comradeship and a friendly

rivalry in which the Australians regarded the ‘Kiwis’ as genteel country cousins, while the latter

professed to see the ‘Aussies’ as coarse fellows” (Sinclair, 2000: 240). Yet, the rivalry is not always

friendly. Due to the inherent historical and geographical connection and the similarities in their

economic structure, the competition between the two countries can be strong underneath the seemingly

close relationship (McLean, 2003; Rolfe, 2004; Smith & Hempenstall, 2005). For example, the two

countries are fierce sporting rivals, and the ‘battles’ – whether in sports or in markets – between the

two countries are like “a war of siblings in their own backyard, fought without regard to differences of

size and strength” (MacLean, 2003: 27).

Within this context of the close relationship and rivalry between the two countries, cross-

border mergers and acquisitions have also become increasingly common phenomena (Anonymous,

2005; Hawser, 2005; Hargreaves, 2006; Rebstock, 2006; Vaughan, 2006). Currently, Australian

investment in New Zealand is increasing to its highest level in history. Both the flow of capital and the

number of Australian managers sent to New Zealand on behalf of Australian companies’ interests are

higher than ever before. However, in such joint business contexts, “New Zealanders hate Australians

telling them what to do” (McKay, 2004) and worry about the possible “Australianization” of New

Zealand business (Simon, 2005). So whereas Australians and New Zealanders may bond over rugby

and beer, the similarities may not always extend to business acquisition. For New Zealand firms: “It’s

like being a tourist – you’re always paying a higher price for things and don’t know what you’re

getting” (Chapple, 2003). Whereas Australia is often regarded as the first step in internationalization

by New Zealand firms, in practice this step is often tenuous and arguably more difficult than

expansion into other countries (Campell-Hunt et al., 2001).

The Three Tragic Tales

The three acquisition cases included in this study share several characteristics: they are each

an acquisition by a New Zealand firm of an Australian one; in each, the acquirer is a relatively large,

publicly owned and well-regarded firm in New Zealand; and central to this study, they each pose a

tragic narrative. We discuss the acquisitions in turn.

The Warehouse’s acquisition of Clint’s Crazy Bargains and Silly Solly’s

Since Stephen Tindall founded the company from scratch in 1982, The Warehouse has been a

company synonymous with growth and success in New Zealand (Bowden, 2003), and is one of New

8

Zealand’s largest general merchandise and apparel retailers. Tindall had been known as a cautious

investor, and the first major strategic move came two decades after The Warehouse was established

(Scherer, 2000b). The Warehouse’s expansion across the Tasman was premised on the potential

saturation of the New Zealand market some time in 2004, with Australia was perceived as easier for

expansion than Asia (Scherer, 2000b). On 1 August 2000, The Warehouse took possession of their

first Australian outlets: it acquired a 115-store Australian discount retail chain for $A118 million,

which, having had a long-standing relationship with The Warehouse, traded as Clint’s Crazy Bargains

in New South Wales, ACT, and Victoria, and as Silly Solly’s in Queensland (“History”, 2005b). In

due course, the Australian stores were rebranded to “Clint’s Warehouse” and “Solly’s Warehouse” as

an interim measure so that The Warehouse brand would replace Clint’s and Silly Solly’s after two

years (Todd, 2000; Howie, 2001).

Media reports at the time suggested that The Warehouse was expanding to Australia with

caution, “buying itself an adolescent and confident it can lead it to adulthood” (Morrison, 2000).

Although it would need significant investment, the acquisition was expected to boost profits from day

one, with steady growth thereafter (Scherer, 2000b). Yet things did not proceed accordingly. By the

end of October 2000, sales of the acquired companies were below plan, and by April 2001, The

Warehouse Group shares suffered their biggest one-day drop in three years after the retailer announced

publicly that full-year profit would be 15% below analysts’ forecasts (“Clint’s crazy losses”, 2001).

Two years later, and after changes in CEOs, media representations focused on The Warehouse’s

failure to repeat its New Zealand success in Australia (“Silly to stay,” 2003). In November 2005, The

Warehouse confirmed that it would sell its Australian business to private equity funds Catalyst

Investment Managers and Castle Harlan for $A92 million. According to ASB Securities head of

advisory Stephen Wright, it was “buy on the rumour, sell on the fact”. Although the new CEO Ian

Morrice did not rule out returning to Australia or expanding elsewhere overseas, he thought The

Warehouse had learnt a lot from the experience of the previous five years (Vaughan, 2005b).

Telecom’s acquisition of AAPT

Telecom Corporation of New Zealand Limited (Telecom) was formed in 1987 and became

one of the first telecommunication companies in the world to be fully privatized in 1990. Since then,

its business has changed from simple telephony in New Zealand to complex communications

throughout Australasia (“History”, 2005a). Like The Warehouse, Telecom is large and one of the well

regarded companies in New Zealand. With a market capitalization of around $US4.1 billion, it was

once the nation’s largest listed company. However, public claims were that its takeover of AAPT in

1999 brought it tremendous trouble and affected its profit for a couple of years.

Telecom expanded into the Australian market with the expectation of expectation of “buying

into a winner” (“Telecom planned,” 1999), raising its shareholding in AAPT to 100% in 2000. For

Telecom, the acquisition was the fundamental transformation towards the goal “to become the best

9

performing, customer focused, online and communications company in Australasia” (Annual Report,

2001:3). However, matters did not proceed along this positive track, and by 2002 Telecom’s profits

and share price had declined. This was attributed to a range of factors including decline in customer

number because of price rises (Griffin, 2002a), an inflated purchase price for AAPT and worldwide

disillusionment with telecommunications companies (Steeman, 2002). From there on, analysts began

to consider the potential sale of AAPT, some blaming poor New Zealand management as the cause for

the firm’s downturn (Griffin 2002b; Colquhoun, 2005). Throughout 2005 and 2006, as AAPT’s poor

performance and Telecom’s write-offs of its value continued (from 2.1 billion in 2001 to 270 million

in 2006), speculation was rife and Telecom would sell it (e.g. Steeman, 2005b; Hunter, 2005). Instead,

Telecom restructured, downsized, and integrated it in 2007 with PowerTel, another Australian

acquisition (closing down AAPT’s network and relying on PowerTel’s) with the aim of continuing its

presence in the Australian market.

Air New Zealand’s acquisition of Ansett

Air New Zealand has always been considered a national icon by New Zealanders (“How two

men,” 2002). It is an international and domestic airline group providing air passenger and cargo

transport services within New Zealand and internationally (“About us”, 2006). In 1978, Air New

Zealand became a national flag carrier, then in 1989, the New Zealand Government completed the

privatization of Air New Zealand through an outright sale of the company (“Company history”, 2006).

Since then, it had been expanding its international network, including its expansion into Australia, by

acquiring Ansett Holdings Limited. This final case in the analysis of tragic media accounts represented

“the largest corporate collapses on each side of the Tasman” (Lockhart, 2004: 11).

In September 1996, Air New Zealand entered into an agreement to acquire 50 percent of

Ansett for a total investment of NZ$540 million, which provided Air New Zealand with a stake in the

Australasian aviation market (“Company history,” 2006). The acquisition formed a partnership

between Air New Zealand and the remaining shareholder, News Corporation, which kept control of

Ansett’s management team. The first half of Ansett was a “good buy” because along with Qantas it

operated a duopoly within Australia, with almost 90 percent of all passenger air traffic (Espiner,

2001b). During the period from 1996 to 2000, the Australian economy was strong and Ansett’s

problems such as its high costs, old aircrafts and inadequate information systems were well concealed

(Rankin, 2001; Oram, 2001).

Air New Zealand then bought the remaining half of Ansett from The News Corporation in

2000; it won the bidding competition against Singapore Airlines, the Australian government’s

preferred bidder, paying NZ$744 million for the remaining 50 percent shareholding with capital debt

which was well above what the airline’s aging fleet and declining market share were worth (Lockhart,

2004). Commentators then quickly pointed to problems including maintenance (Braddock, 2001), 10-

year high fuel prices and increasing competition (Paxinos, 2001).

10

By June 2001, the losses by Ansett reached $1.3 million per day (“Company history,” 2006).

Prepared to save Ansett and Air New Zealand, Singapore Airlines proposed raising its shareholding in

Air New Zealand from 25 to 49 percent and investing $650 million in the company. However, this

proposal was rejected by the New Zealand government due to restrictions on foreign ownership. In

September 2001, the tragic ending of the Ansett acquisition set in. Air New Zealand placed its wholly

owned subsidiary Ansett Australia into voluntary administration. This meant that Air New Zealand

could then only continue when rescued (Braddock, 2001). To save Air New Zealand from collapse, the

New Zealand government injected $855 million to keep it operating, which gave the government an

83% shareholding (Lockhart, 2004). The demise of Ansett under the control of Air New Zealand is

considered by some the biggest corporate failure in New Zealand history (Espiner, 2001a).

Data and Analysis

The metaphor analysis is based on a text corpus constituted of 136 magazine and newspaper

articles sourced through two databases: NewztextPlus and Australian/New Zealand Reference Centre,

using the names of the firms involved as keywords. New Zealand publications included National

Business Review, The Independent, New Zealand Management Magazine, The Sunday Star Times, The

Dominion Post, The New Zealand Herald, and The Press. Australian publications included Daily

Telegraph, Herald Sun, The Sydney Morning Herald, The Age, The Australian, The Courier Mail and

The Daily Telegraph. For details of publications across the three cases, see Tables 1-3.

The data was analysed using qualitative content analysis (Bryman, 2004; Titscher et al. 2000).

The approach emphasises the role of the researcher in constructing the meaning of and in texts, and the

significance of context in such analysis (Bryman, 2004). The three-tiered process involves

summarizing, explicating and structuring the textual content into coherent dimensions (Titscher et al.,

2000). Content analysis has been applied to media texts more broadly (Mazza and Alvarez, 2000) and

to media accounts of mergers and acquisitions more specifically (e.g. Hellgren et al., 2002; Vaara and

Tienari, 2002); it has also been deployed by Koller (2005) in analyzing metaphors in business media

discourse.

In analyzing the data, we excluded ‘dead metaphors’, expressions of metaphoric origin now

opaque to users, and which have been stabilized into language (e.g. network, highlight). Some

metaphor categories were identified through the literature, a priori, e.g. love and marriage, sports and

war/violence. Other categories were iteratively developed such as biology, pathology or mobility. In

some cases, the article title introduces the main metaphor (e.g. fairytale or sport) that the topic is

structured around (Koller, 2005). However, the metaphor categories identified are not mutually

exclusive; there is relevant overlap to which we return in our discussion. Altogether, there were ten

metaphor categories: biology, farming/manufacturing, love affair, mobility/navigation, natural

sciences, pathology, sport/game, theatre and war/violence. For details of these metaphors across the

three cases, see Tables 4-6. We now turn to a discussion of these categories in more detail.

11

Metaphors in the Three Tragic Tales

Many New Zealand companies are unwilling to take the slow, innings-building approach. They make little attempt to familiarize themselves with foreign conditions or to build a long innings from scratch. Instead, they adopt the high-risk approach and start swinging for the boundary before they have had the opportunity to assess the state of the wicket […]. (Gaynor, 2003)

Across the three tragic narratives, metaphors were deployed to varying effects. Two

metaphors appeared early to mid-narrative: fairy tale and love affair; the latter’s inclusion was minor,

unlike the prominent space it is accorded in the literature on M&As. In all three narratives, the

war/violence metaphor was the most extensive and diverse category, followed by the biology

metaphor. These two categories appeared across the narrative, but always in the context of threat,

struggle or tension in an ordeal. Other metaphors with both progressive and regressive effect include

sports/games metaphors, mobility/navigation metaphors, farming/manufacturing and theatre.

Fairy Tale

Metaphors adapted from fairy tale genres or literary masterpieces (e.g. Oliver Twist, A Tale of

Two Cities) were deployed in the progressive phase of two cases, The Warehouse and Telecom. An

example of the former is a New Zealand article titled “Kiwi magic arrives in Oz” (Morrison, 2000)

that discusses The Warehouse’s prospects in Australia in a tone of optimism. Since “Oz” is a common

substitute for the word “Aussie” across the three cases, at times it also enables the pun on the fairy

tale, “The Wizard of Oz”. This pun was also deployed in an Australian account of the Telecom case,

wherein an article was titled “NZ telco spins Oz Wizardry” (Elliot, 2003); here, however, the

“wizardry” is cast in its negative light since it is associated with “severe cost-cutting”. Another

example in Telecom’s case, is its description as a “white knight” (Sainsbury, 2005), a term commonly

used in business literature for an acquirer that prevents a hostile takeover by a “black knight”.

Love and Marriage

Unlike broader M&A narratives, metaphors in this category made minor appearances early in

two of the cases, The Warehouse and Air New Zealand. In the former, the terms “love affair” and

“honeymoon” are also non-specific to the acquisition case; rather, the describe New Zealanders’

attitude to The Warehouse, and the early phase for the new CEO. In the second case, Air New

Zealand’s “marriage” with Ansett was cast both positively (to make the airline more competitive;

McNabb, 1995, 1997) and negatively in that “mergers don’t necessarily make for happy marriages”

(“Can the Air NZ”, 1996). Further metaphors are deployed in the latter article such as “flirting”,

“courtship”, “altar”, “wedded bliss” and “divorce”.

12

Biology

The metaphors in this category are grounded in life cycle models, evolution, body parts (arms,

branches) and non-human living creatures (e.g. animals, worms, etc.). Whereas it is common to

conceptualize business and organization through corporate parenting and life cycle models such as the

BCG matrix, it is particularly common in M&As (Lubatkin and Lane, 1996). Whereas the BCG matrix

has four categories (star, cash cow, question mark and dog), the “dog” was the one deployed by New

Zealand articles on The Warehouse and Air New Zealand cases. In the former, articles described the

Australian discount chains as “Aussie dogs” (McMillan et al., 2003’ “Why doesn’t,” 2003). In the Air

New Zealand case, the terms “dog”, and the Australian “dingo”, are used scathingly by Espiner

(2001b). In discussing “the dingo that brought down our airline”, he poses: “Why isn’t Ansett back up

and flying again? Because it is a dog and dogs don’t fly.” A commonly used life-cycle metaphor

across all three cases is “growth”, but also “nurture”, “new blood”, “ageing”, and specifically in

relation to the tragic ending we find “demise” or “death”.

Another group of biological metaphors are grounded in notions of evolution, struggle and

survival. Whereas these were identified across all three cases, they were more salient in the Telecom

and Air New Zealand cases. Specifically, the notion of “struggle” is repeated in relation to AAPT

(Haynes, 2005; Kruger, 2005; Steeman, 2005a), whereas Telecom had been transformed “from a

lumbering dinosaur into a much more highly evolved beast (Hunter, 2005). With Air New Zealand and

Ansett, unlike “the dinosaur age” of aviation (Bell, 1996), “the world airline industry has become a

highly volatile, cut-through business where only the mighty survive” (Espiner, 2001a).

War/violence

This category of metaphors is the most easily identified and most pervasive across all three

cases (134, 204, 322) appearances in The Warehouse, Telecom and Air New Zealand respectively).

Whereas war metaphors are common in business language more broadly and in M&As more

specifically (Cummings & Riad, 2006; Koller, 2005), they were particularly salient in these tragic

narratives. Where they appeared early in the tale, it was either to describe the acquisition as a “foray”

into Australia wherein a “beachhead” is established, or in a context of negation; for example, The

Warehouse did not want to go into Australia “with guns blazing” (Scherer, 2000a). However, as stated

by a commentator: “Analysts and the media love a big tricky corporate control battle” (“Telecom

Optus,” 1999). As circumstances become more challenging and competition “fierce”, firms “fight” and

“battle”, and are “hit”. In the case of The Warehouse, warnings that it will “be hamstrung” (“Aust

likely to drag,” 2002), are followed by metaphors of the tragic consequence: “The Warehouse Group

has rolled up the drawbridge to stay in fortress New Zealand” (Vaughan, 2005a). In the Telecom case,

it is ironic that even though Telecom was AAPT’s “white knight”, war/violence metaphors were

pervasive: “Telecom targets AAPT in takeover” (Braddell, 1999). In this case, competition is mostly

13

discussed in terms of ‘rivals’ and ‘rivalry’. When the “struggle” continues with Telecom’s AAPT

“raid” (“AAPT positive,”1999; “Telecom Optus,” 1999), it, too, is inclined “to retreat to fortress New

Zealand” (Griffin, 2002a).

Finally, the Air New Zealand case featured more than twice the metaphors in the first case and

50% more than the second. In some situations, occasional terms such as “captive” and “bombshell”

strengthen the hostile tone of the story. Indeed, in this case, there is no fairy tale at the outset, only

foreshadowing that the step was the “first punch of a double whammy” (Ries, 1995) what would create

a powerful Australasian airline. The airline market is depicted as a place to be “dominated” because of

“cutthroat” competition (“Can the Air NZ,” 1996), so Air New Zealand is “forced” into various

positions and decisions. Both the acquisition and its industry dynamics are depicted in aggressive

terminology wherein firms are dealt “hits” and “blows” and are “outflanked”, “beaten”, “crippled” and

“bleeding”; thereafter the New Zealand Government comes to “rescue” or “salvage” Air New Zealand.

Sport/Games

This category supplements the war/violence metaphor – although in a socially palatable way –

in emphasising competition and notions of winning/losing across all three cases. Sometimes a specific

sport is deliberately used as a theme such as the article titled “Go in for a quick slog, go out for a

duck” in which (Gaynor, 2003) uses the cricket analogy both for The Warehouse and other New

Zealand firms. More broadly, “playing” is the theme, such as “play ball” (McNabb, 1999) or “play

with the big boys” (Van den Bergh, 2001). It is also often deployed to regressive effect (e.g. “the

company had taken its eye off the ball operationally while it concentrated on integration”, Stride,

2001) or to depict situations were competitors were “playing harder ball” (“Telecom rings,” 2005).

Pathology

Although not a major category, terms in this metaphor group convey a picture of “suffering”

particularly as the tragic tale unfolds; this can be caused by disease (e.g. “plague”) or, more

commonly, from battlefield or sports-ground afflictions (e.g. “trauma”).

Mobility/Navigation

The metaphoric deployment of ‘up’ for positive improvement, and ‘down’ for negative

decline, is common more broadly and especially in business (Feyaerts and Brône, 2005) – one that is

also entwined with elation and deflation (as in a share prices “boosting” and “plummeting”). (Indeed,

Gergen’s 1999 depiction of progressive and regressive dimensions to the tragic that we deploy in this

paper is metaphorical.) Consistent with the narrative, the early acquisition stage could involve a “big

step” whereas later regressive stage could involve a “slide” or a “plunge”.

14

Chemistry, Physics and Natural Environmental Phenomena

Metaphors in this category spanned chemistry (such as “saturation” and “dilution”) and

physics (“pressure” and “pump”) – and also natural environmental phenomena. Terms deployed in the

last enabled reflections on a “gloomy season” and “economic headwinds”; but where they came to

most tragic effect was through terms such as “disaster” and “collapse”.

Theatre

The few metaphors in this category were mainly deployed to emphasise the attention accorded

to the acquiring firms which were in the “spotlight”.

Farming, Manufacturing and Building

Metaphors in this category serve to link business concepts with every-day vernacular familiar

to the readers. At times, the acquisition deal was “forged” or “cemented”; but mostly terms in this

category were non-specific to the acquisition, offering colourful forms of narrating ongoing business

activities through “sowing seeds”, anticipating “fruition” or “rebuilding”.

Discussion

While we identify salient metaphors in tragic acquisition tales, our core concern in this paper

is to reflect on these metaphors’ effects, what they do. In what follows, we discuss dynamics across

the three cases as well as some consequences of the metaphors deployed.

The three cases pose a master narrative of “attack” and likely “retreat”; more broadly, the

word ‘target’, which is core to military and sports language, is now commonly deployed to discuss

acquisition (e.g. ‘target firm’). We had indicated earlier that the metaphors are not mutually exclusive;

rather, the reinforce each other. The war metaphor is interrelated to both the sports metaphor and to the

biology metaphor. For example, “win” and “lose” can be part of war or sports; and, as Monin and

Monin (1997) indicate, sports and business can be analogous to warfare through competitive elements

of aggression, strategy and committed group action. Both metaphors also reproduce gendered

perspectives on organization that favour ‘blokeishness’ over ‘femininity’ (Cummings and Riad, 2007;

Malszecki, 1995; Wilson, 1992). Further, the effects of both metaphors are compounded by the

suffering depicted through the pathology metaphor. Further, “transformation” is a concept related to

evolution, but when it is used with “heroes”, it is also linked to the war/violence category. Biology

metaphors of feeding/eating can be implicated in war/violence, as in “The Aussies will eat us alive”

(McManus, 2001). Crucially, “struggle” is relevant both to war and to evolutionary survival (Byrne,

1999; Koller, 2005; White and Herrera, 2003); so, to adopt a cinematic metaphor, when we ‘zoom

out’, we find that the big picture created by the master narrative is that of social Darwinism – entwined

with nationalism across Kiwis/Aussies, the theme to which we now turn.

15

Whereas dominant claims are that media stories pose ‘objective’ news, there are several

instances where the article’s judgment is influenced by the national affiliation of the publication,

whether New Zealand or Australia, and fuels ‘us’ and ‘them’ sentiments through “here” and “there”

conceptions. On the Australian side, the tales bring out “poor kiwi management” (Griffin, 2002b) as

part of constrained business acumen on a national scale; for example: “New Zealand has a reputation

as a cowboy market on the outer fringes of global acceptance” (Westfield, 2001). On the New Zealand

side, the stories pose problems with the Australian firm acquired wherein all three were a “dog”; for

example: “It’s abundantly clear… that Air NZ didn’t just buy a pup… it bought a fully fledged, 100

percent Australian dingo” (Espiner, 2001b).

Indeed, such nationalism is not uncommon in media accounts of M&As (Tienari et al, 2005;

Risberg et al., 2003) wherein national identity constitutes a symbolic resource that is actively deployed

in the social struggles instigated by globalization (Ailon-Souday and Kunda, 2003); however,

nationalist sentiments can also constrain business relations, particularly within the tradition of

discussing New Zealand’s “inferior” position in NZ/AUS bilateral relations. Entwining nationalism

with business failure, therefore, can symbolize to New Zealanders an imbalanced relationship with

Australia: “Those Aussies keep underarm bowling us. And we just keep on taking it” (Espiner, 2001b)

– a nationalist sports metaphor used to negative effect in reflecting on business interactions. A term

that is increasingly circulating in both countries’ media in relation to business is “fortress New

Zealand” – an ironic term considering that New Zealand is one of the most deregulated countries in the

world, and that popular local narratives harbour exploration, ingenuity and a ‘global’ worldview

(Campbell-Hunt et al., 2001) – the antithesis to the insularity in ‘fortress’. Another precarious effect is

that authors often tend to extend the specific experience being discussed to a discussion of New

Zealand firms more broadly in the generalizing tone of a cautionary tale.

In finalizing our discussion of metaphors’ effects, we return to the overarching theme of social

Darwinism, specifically in relation to the naturalization of ability – as if it were in the organization’s

‘genes’. Examples can be gleaned from the animal metaphors used at both national level and

organizational level. In discussing Australia and New Zealand, the metaphors deployed were the

kangaroo and the kiwi, respectively. The former is strong and hopping; the latter is flightless and

endangered. Yet, the metaphors are deployed to double effect: to nation, and by extension, to

organization. For example, in contrast to the kicking Kangaroo (e.g. Chapple, 2003), The Warehouse

is presented as “an iconic but faltering Kiwi” (Storey, 2005). Naturalizing metaphors at the

organizational level include cash cow and dog (indigenized into dingo). Life-cycle frames can be

detrimental to organizations in M&As (Lubatkin and Lane, 1996) since they result in judgement based

on ‘natural’ abilities that limits potential (e.g. “dogs don’t fly”). So if organizational and national

abilities come to appear ‘natural’, they become contained in a deterministic narrative that is

constraining rather than productive.

16

Afterword: Toward a ‘pacific century’?

A picture held us captive. And we could not get outside it, for it lay in our language and language seemed to repeat itself inexorably (Wittgenstein, 1953).

Aptly, Wittgenstein uses the metaphor ‘captive’ to discuss the dynamics of imagery in

language. It is ironic that as we talk of a ‘pacific’ century, ‘war’ is the most entrenched business

metaphor. Victory has become the standard for value and all participants must fight for it. Whereas

Australia and New Zealand share legends of war and camaraderie in commemorating ANZAC, they

enact their own war against each other in business, with the media posing a fertile arena. While one

can argue that this is only a version of reality as forwarded through the media, people can, and often

do, approach it as the main version. Further, the wider implications of reproducing the language of war

in business is that it normalizes war as part of everyday life, expected and accepted.

Yet, “struggle” can be particularly problematic in M&As since it challenges the constructive

relational dimensions wherein the metaphors needed during integration are those that enable a

“common future” (Vaara et al., 2003). Genuine organizational change, therefore, needs to start through

a change in our language and our attitudes. What we have is language replete with notions of social

Darwinism wherein struggle is essential to survival. What we need is language that enables us to

respond to Byrne’s (1999: 27) call to “give peace a chance”. If we only focus on a “Pacific century”

(capital P), we promote a ‘region’, and regionalism includes and excludes, creates ‘us’ and ‘them’. So

as we envision a “pacific century” (small p), we will need to craft our way towards ‘new’ language

and explore alternative ways of living it.

References

About us. (2006). Retrieved on 20 Jan 2006 from Air New Zealand Website: http://www.airnz.co.nz/aboutus/default.htm

Ailon-Souday, G., & Kunda, G. (2003). The local selves of global workers: The social construction of national identity in the face of organizational globalization. Organization Studies, 24 (7), p. 1073-1096.

Air wars, the week from hell. (2001, September 16). Sunday Star Times.

Alvesson, M. & Karreman, D. (2000). Taking the linguistic turn in organizational research: challenges, responses, consequences. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 36, 136-158.

Alvesson, M. (1994). The play of metaphor. In J. Hassard & M. Parker (Eds.), Postmodernism and Organizations, 1994, London: Sage, p. 115-131.

Anonymous. (2003). Taking care with the wedding speech. Human Resource Management International Digest, 11(7), 29-31.

17

Anonymous (2005, December 12). Worldwide trend towards mergers. The Daily Telegraph, 27.

Aristotle. (1968). Poetics (L. Golden, Trans.) with commentary by O. B. Hardison, Jr. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

Aust likely to drag on Warehouse. (2002, March 9). The Press., Edition 2, p. 22.

Bell, C. (1996, April 8). Closing Ansett viewed as ‘worst option’. The Dominion Post.

Bowden, S. (2003). The Warehouse Group: entry into Australia. Journal of the Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management, 9(2), 58-68.

Boyd, J. (2003). A quest for cinergy: The war metaphor and the construction of identity. Communication Studies, 54(3), 249-262.

Braddell, R. (1999, June 8). Tale of two countries’ views on competition. The New Zealand Herald.

Braddock, J. (2001). Another airline crisis – the case of Air New Zealand. Retrieved on 20 Jan 2006 from: http://www.wsws.org/articles/2001/nov2001/nz-n03.shtml

Brown, A. D. (2005). Book Review on Myths, Stories, and Organizations: Premodern Narratives for our Times by Yiannis Gabriel. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004, Organization Studies, 26(9), 1421-1426.

Brown, A. D., & Humphreys, M. (2003). Epic and tragic tales: Making sense of change. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 39(2), 121-144.

Bryman, A. (2004). Social Research Methods. New York: Oxford University Press.

Bernays, J. (2004). On catharsis: From fundamentals of Aristotle's lost essay on the “Effect of Tragedy”. American Imago. 61(3), 319-341.

Bruner, J. S. (1990). Acts of Meaning. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Byrne, E. F. (1999). Give peace a chance: a mantra for business strategy. Journal of Business Ethics, 20(1), 27-37.

Campbell-Hunt, C., Brocklesby, J. Chetty, S. Corbett, L., Davenport, S. Jones, D., Walsh, P. (2001) World famous in New Zealand: How New Zealand’s leading firms became world-class competitors. Auckland, NZ: Auckland University Press.

Can the Air NZ-Ansett merger survive the culture clash? (1996, July 5). The Independent.

Cartwright, S., & Cooper, C. L. (1995). Organizational marriage: “hard” versus “soft” issues? Personnel Review, 24(3), 32-42.

Chapple, I. (2003, May 10). True Blues hit the “Red Shed”. The New Zealand Herald.

Chatterjee, S., Lubatkin, M. H., Schweiger, D. M., & Weber, Y. (1992). Cultural differences and shareholder value in related mergers: linking equity and human capital. Strategic Management Journal, 13(5), p. 319-334.

Clint’s crazy losses. (2001, April 27). Daily Telegraph.

Colquhoun, L. (2005, February 11). Outspoken analyst slams AAPT. The National Business Review.

Company history. (2006). Retrieved on 20 Jan 2006 from Air New Zealand Website: http://www.airnz.co.nz/aboutus/corporateprofile/companyhistory/default.htm#national_carrier

Cummings, S., & Riad, S. (2007). Warspeak in mergers and acquisitions. In D. Angwin (Ed.), Images of Mergers and Acquisitions. London: Sage.

Czarniawska, B. (1997). Narrating the Organization: Dramas of Institutional Identity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Czarniawska, B. (1998). A Narrative Approach to Organization Studies. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Czarniawska-Joerges, B. (1995). Narration or science? Collapsing the division in organization studies.

18

Organization, 2(1), 11-33.

Demers, C., Giroux, N., & Chreim, S. (2003). Merger and acquisition announcements as corporate wedding narratives. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 16(2), 223-242.

Dooley, K. J., & Zimmerman, B. J. (2003). Merger as marriage: communication issues in postmerger integration. Health Care Management Review, 28(1), 55-67.

Downey, P. (1999). Tragedy and the truth. International Philosophical Quarterly, 39(1), p. 47-58.

Dunford, R., & Palmer, I. (1996). Metaphors in popular management discourse: The case of corporate restructuring. In Grant, D. & Oswick, C. (Eds.), Metaphor and Organizations, London: Sage, p. 95-119.

Elliott, G. (2003, March 20). NZ telco spins Oz wizardry. The Australian.

Espiner, C. (2001a, September 17). How to lose $1b and anger people. The Press.

Espiner, C. (2001b, October 6). A dingo stole our airline. The Press.

Feyaerts, K., & Brône, G. (2005). Expressivity and metonymic inferencing: Stylistic variation in nonliterary language use. Style, 39 (1): 12-36.

Feldman, M. S., Sköldberg, K., Brown, R. N., & Horner, D. (2004). Making sense of stories: A rhetorical approach to narrative analysis. Journal of Public Administration Research andTheory, 14(2), 147-170.

Fitzgibbon, J. E., & Seeger, M. W. (2002). Audiences and metaphors of globalization in the DaimlerChryslerAG merger. Communication Studies, 53(1), 40-55.

Fürsich, E. (2002). Nation, Capitalism, Myth: Covering News of Economic Globalization. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 79(2), 353-373.

Gabriel, Y. (2004). (Eds). Myths, Stories, and Organizations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Gaynor, B. (2003, December 6). Go in for a quick slog, go out for a duck. The New Zealand Herald.

Gergen, K. J. (1999). An Invitation to Social Construction. London: Sage.

Gergen, K. J. (2001). Self-Narration in Social Life. In M. Wetherell, S. Taylor & S. J. Yates (Eds.). Discourse Theory and Practice, London: Sage, 247-260.

Griffin, P. (2002a, November 23). Telecom’s Australian challenge. The New Zealand Herald.

Griffin, P. (2002b, December 30). Critic savages Telecom’s AAPT. The New Zealand Herald.

Hargreaves, D. (2006, April 5). Big deals a sign of things to come. The Dominion Post.

Hawser, A. (2005). Dealbreakers. Global Finance, 19(11), 26-28.

Haynes, R. (2005, August 6). Downturn for AAPT in tough conditions. Courier Mail.

Hellgren, B., Löwstedt, J., Puttonen, L., Tienari, J., Vaara, E. & Werr, A. (2002). How issues become (re)constructed in the media: discursive practices in the AstraZeneca merger. British Journal of Management, 13 (2), 123-140.

Hirsch, P. M., & Andrews, J. A. (1983). Ambushes, shootouts, and knights of the roundtable: The language of corporate takeovers. In L. Pondy, P. Frost, G. Morgan, & T. Dandridge (Eds.), Organizational symbolism, Greenwich, CT: JAI, p. 145-155.

History. (2005a). Telecom New Zealand’s website. Retrieved on 22 Dec 2005 from: http://www.telecom.co.nz/content/0,3900,200633-1548,00.html

History. (2005b). The Warehouse’s website. Retrieved on 16 Nov 2005 from http://www.thewarehouse.co.nz/Content.aspx?id=100000058

Hogan, A., & Overmeyer-Day, L. (1994). The psychology of mergers and acquisitions. International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 9, 247-281.

19

How two men helped halt Air NZ’s tailspin. (2002, January 20). Sunday Star Times.

Howie, C. (2001, March 21). Tindall prodigy gets his chance at The Warehouse. The Dominion.

Hunter, T. (2005, March 27). Telecom’s Cultural Revolution. Sunday Star Times.

Jeffcutt, P. (1994). The interpretation of organization: A contemporary analysis and critique. Journal of Management Studies, 31(2), 225-250.

Kelly, H. A. (1993). Ideas and Forms of Tragedy: From Aristotle to the Middle Ages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kendall, J. E. & Kendall, K. E. (1993). Metaphors and methodologies: living beyond the systems machine. MIS Quarterly, 17(2), 149-171.

Kittay, E. F. (1987). Metaphor: Its Cognitive Force and Linguistic Structure. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Koller, V. (2005). Critical discourse analysis and social cognition: evidence from business media discourse. Discourse and Society, 16(2), 199-224.

Kruger, C. (2005, October 13). Telecom NZ talks to unload AAPT. Sydney Morning Herald.

Kuronen, M. L., Tienari, J., & Vaara, E. (2005). The merger storm recognizes no borders: An analysis of media rhetoric on a business manoeuver. Organization, 12(2), 247-273.

Lacey, N. (2000). Narrative and Genre. New York: Palgrave.

Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (2003). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Levinson, H. (1970). A psychologist diagnoses merger failures. Harvard Business Review, March/April, 84-101.

Lockhart, J. C. (2004). Kicked for Touch: How compliance killed strategy at Air NZ and the NZRFU. The Director, 2(1), p. 8-12.

Lubatkin, M. & Lane, P. (1996) Psst…The merger mavens still have it wrong! Academy of Management Executive, 10, 1: 21-37.

Malszecki, G. M. (1995). He shoots! He scores!: Metaphors of War in Sport and the Political Linguisticsof Virility. PhD Dissertation, York University, North York, Ontario.

Mazza, C. & Alvarez, J. L. (2000). Haute Couture and Pret-à-Porter: The Popular Press and the Diffusion of Management Practices. Organization Studies, 21(3), 567-588.

McKay, B. (2004, September 29). Warehouse gets soaked across the Tasman. The Independent, p. 13.

McLean, D. (2003). The Prickly Pair: Making Nationalism in Australia and New Zealand. Dunedin, NZ: University of Otago Press.

McMillan, V., Sinoski, K., & Vaughan, G. (2003, October 29). The Warehouse where succession remains a mystery. The Independent.

McNabb, D. (1995, November 18). Air NZ pledges `hands off' Ansett. The Dominion Post.

McNabb, D. (1997, August 22). Qantas seems to give up on Ansett NZ. The Dominion Post.

McNabb, D. (1999, April 17). Air NZ hits turbulence over Ansett. The Dominion Post.

McManus, J. (2001, September 12). Singapore shoots down Air NZ. The Independent.

Monin, N., & Monin, D. J. (1997). Rhetoric and action: when a literary drama tells the organization’s story. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 10(1), 47-60.

Morgan, G. (1997). Images of Organization. London: Sage.

Morrison, T. (2000, June 24). Kiwi magic arrives in Oz. The Dominion.

Oram, R. (2001, September 16). Our national icon in freefall. Sunday Star Times.

20

Oswick, C., & Montgomery, J. (1999). Images of an organization: the use of metaphor in a multinational company. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 12(6), 501-523.

Pablo, A. L., & Javidan, M. (2002). Thinking of a merger…Do you know their risk propensity profile? Organizational Dynamics, 30(3), 206-222.

Palmer, I., & Dunford, R. (1996). Conflicting uses of metaphors: reconceptualizing their use in the field of organizational change. Academy of Management, 21 (3), 691-717.

Palmer, I., & Dunford, R. (1996b). Understanding organizations through metaphor. In C. Oswick, & D. Grant, (Eds.) Organization Development: Metaphorical Explorations, 7-19, London: Pitman Publishing.

Palmer, I., & Lundberg, C. (1995), Metaphors of hospitality of organizations: an exploratory study, Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administrative Quarterly, 36(3), 80-86.

Pelzer, P. (2002). Dead man – an encounter with the unknown past. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 15(1), 48-62.

Polkinghorne, D. E. (1988). Narrative Knowing and the Human Sciences. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

Rankin, K. (2001). An Ansettling Experience. Retrieved on 20 Jan 2006 from: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0109/S00157.htm

Rebstock, P. (2006, March 6). Rebstock Speech: Mergers and Acquisitions Summit, 5th Annual Mergers and Acquisitions Summit, Commerce Commission, Wellington, NZ.

Ries, I. (1995, April 13). Aerobatics put heat on Australian government. The National Business Review.

Risberg, A., Tienari, J., & Vaara, E. (2003). Making sense of a transnational merger: Media texts and the (Re)construction of power relations, Culture and Organization, 9(2), 121-137.

Rolfe, J. (2004). Australia-New Zealand relations: allies, friends, rivals. Special Assessment: Asia’s Bilateral Relations, October 2004, 1-8.

Sainsbury, M. (2005, October 13). Optus faces a fight for AAPT. The Australian.

Scherer, K. (2000a, March 10). Warehouse partner: is it Crazy or Silly? The New Zealand Herald.

Scherer, K. (2000b, June 21). Between the lines: nothing silly in Solly’s venture. The New Zealand Herald.

Schneider, S. C. & Dunbar, R. L. M. (1992). A psychoanalytic reading of hostile takeover events. The Academy of Management Review, 17(3), 537-567.

Simon, F. G. (2005, April). Aussie rules. Metro, 286, 4.

Smith, P. M., & Hempenstall, P. (2005). Changing community attitudes to the New Zealand/Australia relationship. Paper presented at the Australia New Zealand Leadership Forum, 30 April 2005.

Silly to stay, but on notice – Discounters under cloud. (2003, November 29). Daily Telegraph.

Søderberg, A. M. (2003). Sensegiving and sensemaking in an integration process: A narrative approach to the study of an international acquisition. In B. Czarniawska, & P. Gagliardi (Eds.). Narratives We Organize By. (eds.) Philadelphia: John Benjamins North America.

Sopory, P., & Dillard, J. P. (2002). The persuasive effects of metaphor: A meta-analysis. Human Communication Research, 28(3), 382-419.

Steeman, M. (2002, December 14). Telecom put to the sword. The Dominion Post, p. 1.

Steeman, M. (2005a, September 24). AAPT feels the Aussie heat. The Dominion Post.

Steeman, M. (2005b, October 13). Telecom confirms interest in Aussie offshoot. The Press.

Story, M. (2005, February 1). Leadership – Ian Morrice – The CEO The Warehouse is bargaining on.

21

Management.

Stride, N. (2001, May 4). Beefed-up management team tackles Aussie ills. The National Business Review.

Telecom, Optus in AAPT stalemate. (1999, May 28). The National Business Review.

Telecom planned Aust move for years. (1999, May 21). The Evening Post.

Telecom rings changes for Aussie offshoot. (2005, December 16). The New Zealand Herald.

Tienari, J., Vaara, E., & Björkman, I. (2003). Global capitalism meets national spirit: Discourses in media texts on a cross-border acquisition. Journal of Management Inquiry, 12(4), 377-393.

Tienari, J., Søderberg, A. M., Holgersson, C., & Vaara, E. (2005). Gender and national identity constructions in the cross-border merger context. Gender, Work and Organization, 12(3), 217-241.

Titscher, S., Meyer, M., Wodak, R., & Vetter, E. (2000). Methods of Text and Discourse Analysis. Translated by Bryan Jenner. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Todd, M. (2000, July 3). Warehouse looks to an Australian listing. Sydney Morning Herald.

Twain, M. (1989). Following the Equator: A Journey Around the World. NY: Dover Publications.

Vaara, E. (2002). On the discursive construction of success/failure in narratives of post-merger integration. Organization Studies, 23(2), 211-248.

Vaara, E., & Tienari, J. (2002). Justification, legitimization and naturalization of mergers and acquisitions: A critical discourse analysis of media texts. Organization, 9(2), 275-304.

Vaara, E., Tienari, J., & Santti, R. (2003). The international match: Metaphors as vehicles of social identity-building in cross-border mergers. Human Relations, 56(4), 419-451.

Van den Bergh, R. (2001, September 15). The downward trajectory of our national airline. The Dominion Post.

Vaughan, G. (2005a, November 25). Yellow sheds ditched for $99m. The Dominion Post.

Vaughan, G. (2005b, November 25). Crazy Clint and Silly Solly sally over for Warehouse. The Press.

Vaughan, G. (2006, March 31). Mergers and buy-ups tipped to boost market. The Dominion Post.

Weick, K. (1995). Sensemaking in Organizations. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.

Westfield, M. (2001, September 15). Absolutely – Going…Going…Gone. The Australian.

Wilson, F. (1992). Language, technology, gender, and power. Human Relations, 45(9), 883-904.

Wittgenstein, L. (1953) Philosophical Investigations. New York: Macmillan.

White, M. and Herrera, H. (2003). Metaphor and ideology in the press coverage of Telecom Corporate consolidations. In R. Dirven, R. Frank and M. Pütz (Eds) Cognitive Models in Language and Thought: Ideology, Metaphors and Meanings, pp. 277-323. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Why doesn’t The Warehouse ditch its Aussie dogs? (2003, December 10). The Independent.

22

Table 1 Data: The Warehous/Clint’s Crazy Bargains and Silly Solly’s

Name of publication Type of publication Date range Number of articles

The Dominion Post (formerly The Dominion and The Evening Post)

Daily newspaper 24 Jun 2000 – 26 Nov 2005 15

The New Zealand Herald Daily newspaper 10 Mar 2000 – 25 Nov 2005 15

The Press Daily newspaper 28 Apr 2001 - 25 Nov 2005 5

The Independent Business newspaper 21 Jun 2001 - 22 Jun 2005 10

The National Business Review Business newspaper 30 Jun 2000 - 28 Jun 2002 3

Sunday Star Times Weekend newspaper 25 Jun 2000 – 13 Feb 2005 2

NZ

New Zealand Management Magazine

Business magazine Feb 2005 1

Sub-total51

Daily Telegraph Daily newspaper 24 Nov 2000 - 11 Sep 2004 10

Herald Sun Daily newspaper 25 Nov 2000 - 11 Sep 2004 4

Sydney Morning Herald Daily newspaper 22 May 2000 - 3 Jul 2000 2

The Age Daily newspaper 18 Mar 2004 1

AU

S

The Courier Mail Daily newspaper 18 May 2001 - 11 Sep 2004 2

Sub-total19

TOTAL 70

23

Name of publication Type of publication Date range Number of articles

The Dominion Post (formerly The Dominion and The Evening Post)

Daily newspaper 21 May 1999 - 13 Feb 2006 24

The New Zealand Herald Daily newspaper 22 May 1999 –16 Dec 2005 9

The Press Daily newspaper 16 Sep 1999 - 16 Dec 2005 10

The Independent Business newspaper 13 Oct 1999 1

The National Business Review Business newspaper 28 May 1999 - 8 July 2005 4

NZ

Sunday Star Times Weekend newspaper 27 Mar 2005 - 1

Sub-total 49

Daily Telegraph Daily newspaper 24 Nov 2000 - 11 Sep 2004 10

Herald Sun Daily newspaper 13 Oct 2005 - 21 Jan 2006 3

Sydney Morning Herald Daily newspaper 13 Oct 2005 - 3 Feb 2006 4

The Age Daily newspaper 18 Mar 2004 - 9 Feb 2006 2

The Australian (incl. Weekend Australian)

Daily newspaper 20 Mar 2003 - 3 Feb 2006 12

AU

S

The Courier Mail Daily newspaper 6 Aug 2005 - 14 Jan 2006 4

Sub-total 35

TOTAL 84

Table 2 Data: Telecom/AAPT

Table 3 Data: Air New Zealand/Ansett

Name of publication Type of publication Date range Number of articles

The Dominion Post (formerly The Dominion and The Evening Post)

Daily newspaper 18 Nov 1995 - 4 Feb 2002 23

The New Zealand Herald Daily newspaper 24 Apr 1999 - 4 Mar 2002 6

The Press Daily newspaper 24 Mar 1999 - 6 Oct 2001 6

The Independent Business newspaper 5 July 1996 - 2 Aug 2000 10

NZ

The National Business Review Business newspaper 13 Apr 1995 1

Sub-total 46

Herald Sun Daily newspaper 4 Nov 2001 - 6 Mar 2002 3

Sunday Star Times Weekend newspaper 15 Sept 1996 - 29 Sept 2002 9

Sydney Morning Herald Daily newspaper 12 Feb 2000 - 8 Mar 2002 9

The Age Daily newspaper 14 Jun 2000 - 8 Mar 2002 9

The Australian + Weekend Australian

Daily newspaper 15 Sept 2001 - 2 Mar 2002 5

AU

S

The Courier Mail Daily newspaper 5 Mar 2002 1

Sub-total 36

TOTAL 82

24

Table 4 Glossary of metaphors – The Warehouse/Clint’s Crazy Bargains and Silly Solly’s

Category MetaphorsBiology adolescent, adulthood, aging, arm, dog, evolutionary pathway, fortune, grow,

growth, kangaroo, kiwi, new kid at school, nurture, organically, shape up, struggle, worms

Fairy tale Kiwi magic arrives in Oz, Oliver TwistFarming/manufacturing carve, rev up, revamp, seeds to be sownLove affair honeymoon, love affairMobility/navigation

across Tasman, big step, cross the ditch, helm, head backwards, head for, make its entry

Chemistry formula, erode, reach saturation point, saturatedPhysics heighten the pressure, magnet, trickle up, under pressureNatural

sciences Natural environmental phenomena

headwinds, lightening speed, red wave, season to be gloomy, under cloud, wane

Pathology crazy, headache, hiccup, ill, malaise, plague, plaguing, silly, suffer, teething problem, weaker

Sport/game batsman, bowler, cartwheel, dive, inning, knuckle down, playing cricket, score, take eye off, wicket, wrestle

Theatre debut, in the spotlightWar/violence add string to the bow, battleground, beachhead, bumped off, combat,

commando, cut-throat, dominated, double-edged sword, fierce, fight, firing line, foray, force, fortress, front, hamstrung, hit, impact, kick, kill, knock, launch, retaliate, roll up the drawbridge, shaken up, slash, struggle, subdued, threaten, tough, target, war, whip, win, walking wounded, wipe off

Table 5 Glossary of metaphors – Telecom/AAPT

Category MetaphorsBiology digest, foster, grow, growth, kiwi, languish, revitalizing, parent, prosper,

resuscitate, struggle, survive, thrive, transformFairy tale white knight, spin Oz wizardryFarming/Manufacturing cherrypicking, greener grass, offload, overhaul, prune, revamp, tough row to

hoe, wringMobility/navigation

boost, boom, declined, downhill, dropped, expand, missed the boat, plummet, plunge, rollercoaster ride, shrink, slumped, soar, stride, swelling, tailspin,

Chemistry erode, dilute, exposure, volatile,Physics accelerate, pull back, pump, pressure, speed up,Natural

sciences Natural environmental phenomena

cloud, collapse, debacle, disaster, disastrous, echo, water to flow under the bridge

Pathology ailing, handicaps, medicine, recover, sufferSport/game ball, contender, hurdles, race, player, punter, sprinter, turf, winner,Theatre backdrop, in the spotlight, sing from the same hymn sheet, sit back and enjoy

the showWar/violence aggressive, assault, attack, axe, bash, battle, bite, bleed, campaign, capture,

casualty, conflict, damage, defence, destructive, explode, fierce, fight, flak, foray, force, formidable, fortress, frontline, grab, hammer, hit, hostile, impact, inroad, intrusion, jab, kill, knife, launch, outgun, raid, retreat, rival, savage, shield, shock, slap, slash, squash, stifle, strike, stronghold, struggle, swing, sword, target, threat, torpedo, tough, turbulent, undermine, victim, war, withdraw

25

Table 6 Glossary of metaphors – Air New Zealand/Ansett

Category MetaphorsBiology ageing, alive, breathe, dead, destined, demise, dingo, dog, feed, fertile, grow,

growth, kiwi, parent, pup, reincarnation, resuscitate, revitalize, roo, starve, struggle, survive, survival

Farming/manufacturing cement, fruition, fruitless, forge, knit, pave, rebuild, reconstruct, refurbish, repair, ring-fencing, stitch

Love affairs at the altar, attractive, courtship, flirt, marriage, wed, wedded blissMobility/navigation

adrift, afloat, boost, climb, decline, descent, dive, downfall, downturn, freefall, head, hike, jump, leap, move, nose-diving, pace, plumb, plummet, plunge, propel, push up, slide, slip, slump, soar, stretch, tumble, wade

Chemistry erode , exposure, rot, volatilePhysics accelerate, friction, inject, pressure, pump, siphon, slow-down, suckNatural

sciences Natural environmental phenomena

bonanza, black hole, blow, catastrophe, clouded, collapse, dawn, disaster, echo, fiasco, ripples, tidal waves, vacuum

Pathology basket case, heartburn, impotent, quarantine, recover, suffer, trauma, weakened, weakness

Sport/game ball, bat, bowling, gambit, gamble, heavyweight, hurdles, player, play, race, streak, toys

Theatre behind the scene, drama, spotlight

Warfare/violence aggressive, ammunition, attack, axe, bash, battle, beat, beleaguer, bite, bleed, blow, bombshell, breakthrough, buffet, bust, campaign, capture, catapult, clash, clinch, conflict, coup, crash, cripple, cut, damage, defence, deploy, dominance, eat, entrench, fight, under fire, foray, force, front, gulp, hammer, hit, impact, jettison, knife, knock, offend, outflank, paralyze, punch, razor, rescue, rival, in ruins, salvage, savage, save, shield, shock, slash, strife, strike, strip, struggle, swallow, target, threat, throw, torpedo, tough, turbulent, undermine, victim, war, whittle, wield, win, withdraw, wreckage, wrest