Fragile Legitimacy and the Structure‐First Advantage: Leadership in Emerging Economy Cross‐Border Acquisitions

ABSTRACT Research on post‐merger integration typically assumes that acquirers enter with baseline legitimacy and authority, a condition that rarely holds in emerging‐economy firm (EEF) acquisitions of developed‐economy firms (DEFs). Country‐of‐origin stereotypes and institutional distance generate credibility deficits that shape how employees evaluate acquirer leadership. Re‐centering the Ohio State dimensions of initiating structure and consideration, this paper develops a configurational framework of early PMI under fragile legitimacy. We theorize that a structure‐first stance sends credible competence signals to skeptical employees, while early relational gestures are read as impression management. Three propositions develop this argument: structure‐first leadership outperforms alternatives under fragile acquirer legitimacy, with the advantage amplified by power distance gaps and formal institutional distance. The paper contributes a credibility‐first account of early integration leadership, an explanation of why relational leadership backfires under fragile legitimacy, and an explanation of how Structure simultaneously coordinates tasks and signals institutional conformity to skeptical employees.