We open the black box of the M&A decision process by examining whether specialized M&A staff, who perform a wide range of acquisition-related functions, improve acquisition performance. We find that the presence and the quality of specialized M&A staff is one of the most economically important determinants of acquisition performance. We explore mechanisms through which specialized M&A staff improve acquisition performance and investigate why only less than half of US firms employ such staff. Agency costs are a first-order determinant for specialized M&A staff's value-creation role. Such staff do not improve acquisition performance in firms with heightened agency conflicts.

Combining novel data on analyst employment history and mutual fund commission payments, we show that client funds generate higher returns on stocks for which they have access to research by industry expert analysts. The outperformance is greater when funds are more important clients and cannot be attributed to tipping. Client funds place modestly higher weights on stocks covered by industry expert analysts and allocate more commissions to brokers providing such coverage. For identification, we exploit exogenous analyst coverage disruptions. Our findings contribute to the debate on whether mutual funds obtain any investment value from access to analysts through the soft-dollar arrangement.