(MONEY Magazine) – With its headline-making pairings like Daimler/Chrysler and Exxon/Mobil, 1998 was the most active merger-and-acquisition year ever. But history shows that two out of three mergers fail to create lasting value. So why do executives pursue takeovers with such gusto?

To find out, three researchers--Christopher Avery of Harvard, Judith Chevalier of the University of Chicago and Scott Schaefer of Northwestern--tracked the salaries and bonuses of 346 CEOs who undertook major acquisitions between 1986 and 1988. The trio also tracked the CEOs' board memberships to see how mergers affected executives' status in the business community.

Their findings? There's more power than pay in the takeover game. There was no correlation between a CEO's acquisitiveness and salary; but the takeover artists were more likely to be named to boards. So the next time the head of a company whose stock you own strikes what seems like a boneheaded deal, consider the motivation: It might be more about impressing his peers than about feathering his--or your--pockets.

--JIM FREDERICK