Journal of Family Business Strategy最新文献

Building on recent advances in the socioemotional wealth (SEW) literature and the concept of bifurcation bias, we explore the first turnaround response of family firms to a decline in financial performance. We argue that heterogeneity among family firms in terms of their levels of family ownership and family involvement in management alters their response to an economic crisis situation. We also contend that severity of a crisis situation significantly moderates the relationships. Our multi-level analysis of a sample of crisis situations pertaining to family firms supports our hypotheses.

Vulnerability is a defining and fundamental but under-researched, quality of many family firms. We define family vulnerability (FV) as the degree to which family owners and executives realistically perceive that they and their firms are susceptible to material and socioemotional losses from their ventures. Building on social exchange theory, we offer a model that specifies conditions by which FV allows family firm owner-managers to establish mutually beneficial and enduring relationships with prospective resource providers. These relationships improve strategic options for such parties who gain support when they most need it and are more committed and loyal to those who provide it, thereby engendering goodwill and social capital.

While principal–principal problems are prevalent in emerging economies, the severity of these problems could vary based on the identity of shareholders and the institutional context. This study theoretically and empirically analyzes the effect of state and family blockholders as well as their possible interaction on financial firm performance in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries. Using a dataset of 389 non-financial firms and 2607 observations (2009–2015), we found that ownership held by the state as the largest shareholder has a negative effect on firm performance, whereas this negative effect disappears when the state owns between 15 % and 50 % of shares and coexists with local families as other large shareholders. Our findings contribute to the nexus between the family business and corporate governance literature by studying principal–principal agency problems and the impact of owner combinations on firm performance in emerging economies in the GCC region.

Surviving a constantly changing environment is one of the challenges for the longevity of family firms. We assume that navigating through disruptive environments is inextricably linked to strategy and/or identity adaptation, modification and change. From a strategy-identity nexus point of view, these changes bear the risk of discontinuous shifts in strategy and identity. In this paper, we offer three types of strategy-identity inconsistencies and assume an alignment in strategy and identity as key for business survival. To uncover how family businesses bring order into their strategy and identity orientations, we draw upon the literature on the use of organizational history. We conducted a qualitative in-depth and longitudinal case study of a 100-year old German family business, which managed to survive major changes in the clothing industry. By exploring distinctive strategy-identity inconsistencies, we found three modes of the use of history (‘adjusting history’, ‘inventing history and historical forgetting’ and ‘invoking history’) whereby the family business drew upon historical accounts to ensure that identity was continuously enacted and expressed via strategy, and inferred, modified and affirmed from strategy. Our insights have significant implications not only for understanding the strategy-identity nexus in family businesses but also for research on the use of history.

Drawing on agency and stewardship theories, we examine how two dimensions of family governance influence family firm innovation strategy. Specifically, we differentiate between the effects of Family Management (family CEO, family managerial involvement, and next-generation involvement in the business) and Family Guardianship (trustees and family council) and study their effects on explorative and exploitative modes of innovation strategy. Our analysis of unique survey data from 328 UK private family firms shows that specific dimensions of Family Management (next-generation involvement) and Family Guardianship (the existence of a family council) are significantly positively associated with exploration. Exploitation, however, is positively associated with next-generation involvement only. These findings answer calls to theorize and empirically examine the heterogeneity of family firms’ innovation modes. These findings further respond to calls to better understand the relationship between governance and behavior, advancing scholarly debate at the intersection of agency and stewardship, family governance, and innovation.

In this study we reconcile the contradictory evidence found in the risk taking-performance relationship. We study the distinction between risk taking orientation and entrepreneurial risk taking and their effects on performance and find a non-linear, U-shaped relationship when it comes to risk taking orientation. Even though we did not find evidence that pursuing risky activities has an inverted u-shaped form, our results confirm that pursuing risky activities in family firms has similar effects than in non-family firms. We also study the role of context on family business risk attitudes and actions, and performance and find moderating effects at the industry, market and country levels on the risk taking orientation-performance relationship and partially, on the entrepreneurial risk taking-performance relationship.

The role of brinkmanship in politics and international affairs has captured headlines and popular attention around the globe. It is a behavioral phenomenon whereby to gain concessions actors like states and governments take actions that may not only harm their adversaries, but also themselves. However, hidden from view, and far less understood is its role in business and management. This is an important oversight not only because stakes can be high in business, but also because how members of a firm's dominant coalition respond to existential threats can be critical for organizational outcomes. We introduce the notion of organizational brinkmanship and outline how the process unfolds in a context where family engagement in the business can also serve to heighten potential stakes. With our focus on family business we unravel circumstances where the propensity to maintain historical and current family control over the business can increase susceptibility to engaging in organizational brinkmanship. The cornerstone of our contribution is to develop a conceptual model that explains how the process of brinkmanship can unfold in a family business. We also offer a future research agenda to guide scholarly attention on this important yet under-explored area of research and suggest propositions. This work is particularly timely in light of increasing environmental instability around the globe.

This study examines gender equity – representation and compensation in top management – in listed family and non-family firms in the U.S. We integrate diversity, gender, and family firm perspectives, to understand how family firms vary from their non-family peers when making strategic choices about achieving gender parity in executive positions. Our empirical analyses confirm that family firms lag non-family firms in gender representation, suggesting they do not fully harness the potential advantages of female leadership. Our novel finding, however, is that family firms are successful in attenuating the gender compensation gap in their top management teams. Our results illustrate how family firms leverage their distinct ‘familial’ features to both preserve their socioemotional wealth and add to their inimitable resource cache, while also being socially responsible on a societal level. This study advances our understanding of the important role of ownership structure in bridging the persistent gender equity divide.

Although previous studies have recognized the contingent nature of family firms’ aspirations, they have largely neglected cross-cultural heterogeneity. Drawing on the behavioral theory and socio-emotional wealth perspective (SEW), we reexamine the construct of family aspirations in a Chinese context. We argue that Chinese family firms have culturally specific aspirations that can influence their strategic behaviors. Based on a three-phase study employing both qualitative and quantitative methods, we develop and validate a measure of aspirations of Chinese families-in-business. Six dimensions of Chinese family aspirations are explored: family harmony, financial wealth, health and longevity, continuity of family line, family honor and guanxi, and great ambitions for the younger generation. Our findings also identify a set of topics that can be pursued in future research using our Chinese family aspirations scale.