Pub Date : 2021-12-27DOI: 10.1177/08944865211064410
Anneleen Michiels, Isabel C. Botero, Roland E. Kidwell
In family firms, the family often plays a central role in the strategic decisions of the business. However, until recently, research has primarily focused on exploring the role that business factors play in firm decision-making, with less attention given to the role of the family system. This article reviews the research on executive compensation in family firms to understand whether and how the family system has been considered within this work. Guided by the application of family science theories, we provide a framework to explain why it is important to incorporate the family system in the future study of executive compensation in family firms. We conclude by discussing a research agenda outlining how elements of the family system can be integrated into future executive compensation research to inspire scholars to think differently about this important research topic.
{"title":"Toward a Family Science Perspective on Executive Compensation in Family Firms: A Review and Research Agenda","authors":"Anneleen Michiels, Isabel C. Botero, Roland E. Kidwell","doi":"10.1177/08944865211064410","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/08944865211064410","url":null,"abstract":"In family firms, the family often plays a central role in the strategic decisions of the business. However, until recently, research has primarily focused on exploring the role that business factors play in firm decision-making, with less attention given to the role of the family system. This article reviews the research on executive compensation in family firms to understand whether and how the family system has been considered within this work. Guided by the application of family science theories, we provide a framework to explain why it is important to incorporate the family system in the future study of executive compensation in family firms. We conclude by discussing a research agenda outlining how elements of the family system can be integrated into future executive compensation research to inspire scholars to think differently about this important research topic.","PeriodicalId":51365,"journal":{"name":"Family Business Review","volume":"35 1","pages":"45 - 67"},"PeriodicalIF":8.8,"publicationDate":"2021-12-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47875774","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-07DOI: 10.1177/08944865211059467
James M. Vardaman, Erik T. Markin, Christopher R. Penney, Laura E. Marler, D. Mckee
This article develops a two-part theoretical framework synthesizing the socioemotional wealth (SEW) perspective with image theory to explain the ways in which family decision makers screen and potentially adopt habitual new venture opportunities. The model theorizes that opportunities are initially screened according to their ability to preserve SEW and fit with the family’s value images and subsequently explains how SEW willingness interacts with the family entrepreneur’s trajectory and strategic images to predict whether the venture will be pursued as a serial or portfolio opportunity. Theoretical implications and directions for future research are also discussed.
{"title":"Willing and Able? The Screening and Adoption of Habitual Family Venture Opportunities","authors":"James M. Vardaman, Erik T. Markin, Christopher R. Penney, Laura E. Marler, D. Mckee","doi":"10.1177/08944865211059467","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/08944865211059467","url":null,"abstract":"This article develops a two-part theoretical framework synthesizing the socioemotional wealth (SEW) perspective with image theory to explain the ways in which family decision makers screen and potentially adopt habitual new venture opportunities. The model theorizes that opportunities are initially screened according to their ability to preserve SEW and fit with the family’s value images and subsequently explains how SEW willingness interacts with the family entrepreneur’s trajectory and strategic images to predict whether the venture will be pursued as a serial or portfolio opportunity. Theoretical implications and directions for future research are also discussed.","PeriodicalId":51365,"journal":{"name":"Family Business Review","volume":"35 1","pages":"126 - 139"},"PeriodicalIF":8.8,"publicationDate":"2021-12-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45658492","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-07DOI: 10.1177/08944865211057854
Jengfang Chen, Ni-Yun Chen, Liyu He, C. Patel
Despite the substantial degree of heterogeneity within family firms, little is known about how their heterogeneity affects firm behavior and the implication for the shareholder–debtholder agency problem. Our study contributes to the literature by examining whether family firms with a higher level of control-ownership divergence would disclose less information and whether Big 4 auditors play a moderating role in mitigating the negative impact of control-ownership divergence on disclosure quality resulting in improved credit ratings. Using data from the emerging economy of Taiwan, we provide support for our three hypotheses. Our contributions will interest family firm owners, researchers, auditors, and policymakers.
{"title":"The Effect of Ownership Structure on Disclosure Quality and Credit Ratings in Family Firms: The Moderating Role of Auditor Choice","authors":"Jengfang Chen, Ni-Yun Chen, Liyu He, C. Patel","doi":"10.1177/08944865211057854","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/08944865211057854","url":null,"abstract":"Despite the substantial degree of heterogeneity within family firms, little is known about how their heterogeneity affects firm behavior and the implication for the shareholder–debtholder agency problem. Our study contributes to the literature by examining whether family firms with a higher level of control-ownership divergence would disclose less information and whether Big 4 auditors play a moderating role in mitigating the negative impact of control-ownership divergence on disclosure quality resulting in improved credit ratings. Using data from the emerging economy of Taiwan, we provide support for our three hypotheses. Our contributions will interest family firm owners, researchers, auditors, and policymakers.","PeriodicalId":51365,"journal":{"name":"Family Business Review","volume":"35 1","pages":"140 - 158"},"PeriodicalIF":8.8,"publicationDate":"2021-12-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46227672","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-26DOI: 10.1177/08944865211052195
Alfredo De Massis, J. Kotlar, Luca Manelli
While entrepreneurial families often expand their activity over multiple businesses and patrimonial assets, this complexity is rarely addressed in mainstream family business research, where the predominant focus is on the family business or, at best, on the family controlling the operational business. We advance a more holistic understanding of entrepreneurial families that contemplates the variety of assets they create or acquire over time that jointly generate financial and socioemotional wealth for the family, and call for attention to the variety of organizations that entrepreneurial families establish to preserve, manage, and/or administer such assets. We theorize that each of these organizations can be devised as a family boundary organization (FBO), which operates at the interface of the entrepreneurial family and other systems, and such FBOs form a family-related organizational ecosystem. We propose a new framework that extends the scope of research beyond the family business and focuses more directly on entrepreneurial families and on the boundaries between the entrepreneurial family, its multiple assets, and the FBOs in the family-related organizational ecosystem. This framework paves the ground to extend the three-circle model, broadening the scope of family business research to consider a wider range of organizations besides the family firm, such as family foundations, family business foundations, family offices, family holdings, family academies, and family museums. Drawing on the organizational boundaries literature, we integrate organizational boundaries in the theory of the family firm and propose a research agenda to examine the entrepreneurial family and its assets in a broader way.
{"title":"Family Firms, Family Boundary Organizations, and the Family-Related Organizational Ecosystem","authors":"Alfredo De Massis, J. Kotlar, Luca Manelli","doi":"10.1177/08944865211052195","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/08944865211052195","url":null,"abstract":"While entrepreneurial families often expand their activity over multiple businesses and patrimonial assets, this complexity is rarely addressed in mainstream family business research, where the predominant focus is on the family business or, at best, on the family controlling the operational business. We advance a more holistic understanding of entrepreneurial families that contemplates the variety of assets they create or acquire over time that jointly generate financial and socioemotional wealth for the family, and call for attention to the variety of organizations that entrepreneurial families establish to preserve, manage, and/or administer such assets. We theorize that each of these organizations can be devised as a family boundary organization (FBO), which operates at the interface of the entrepreneurial family and other systems, and such FBOs form a family-related organizational ecosystem. We propose a new framework that extends the scope of research beyond the family business and focuses more directly on entrepreneurial families and on the boundaries between the entrepreneurial family, its multiple assets, and the FBOs in the family-related organizational ecosystem. This framework paves the ground to extend the three-circle model, broadening the scope of family business research to consider a wider range of organizations besides the family firm, such as family foundations, family business foundations, family offices, family holdings, family academies, and family museums. Drawing on the organizational boundaries literature, we integrate organizational boundaries in the theory of the family firm and propose a research agenda to examine the entrepreneurial family and its assets in a broader way.","PeriodicalId":51365,"journal":{"name":"Family Business Review","volume":"34 1","pages":"350 - 364"},"PeriodicalIF":8.8,"publicationDate":"2021-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41477118","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-21DOI: 10.1177/08944865211051148
B. Cosson, M. Gilding
The family business literature barely addresses wives’ influence in family business succession. Where it does so, the result is often tokenistic, stereotypical, and imprecise. Drawing on 34 in-depth interviews, this article makes three contributions. First, it identifies wives’ critical influence in family business succession through socialization across the life span of the family business; specifically, through normative, interactive, and experiential socialization. Second, it demonstrates the diverse dynamics and impact of wives’ influence on family business continuity. Third, it highlights the particular significance of experiential socialization, whereby changing expectations of marriage and family life have amplified wives’ influence in succession outcomes.
{"title":"“Over My Dead Body”: Wives’ Influence in Family Business Succession","authors":"B. Cosson, M. Gilding","doi":"10.1177/08944865211051148","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/08944865211051148","url":null,"abstract":"The family business literature barely addresses wives’ influence in family business succession. Where it does so, the result is often tokenistic, stereotypical, and imprecise. Drawing on 34 in-depth interviews, this article makes three contributions. First, it identifies wives’ critical influence in family business succession through socialization across the life span of the family business; specifically, through normative, interactive, and experiential socialization. Second, it demonstrates the diverse dynamics and impact of wives’ influence on family business continuity. Third, it highlights the particular significance of experiential socialization, whereby changing expectations of marriage and family life have amplified wives’ influence in succession outcomes.","PeriodicalId":51365,"journal":{"name":"Family Business Review","volume":"34 1","pages":"385 - 403"},"PeriodicalIF":8.8,"publicationDate":"2021-10-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42372726","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-15DOI: 10.1177/08944865211050858
Claudia Pongelli, A. Calabrò, Fabio Quarato, A. Minichilli, G. Corbetta
Based on the socioemotional wealth approach and a sample of 3,904 subsidiary ownership choices made by 586 family firms, this study shows that family-managed firms (i.e., those family firms with a family member in a leadership position) prefer wholly owned subsidies over joint ventures when entering foreign markets. Family-managed firms are also more likely to revise their subsidiary ownership choices and form joint ventures when in vulnerability conditions, that is, when they experience performance below aspirations and when entering a culturally distant market.
{"title":"Out of the Comfort Zone! Family Leaders’ Subsidiary Ownership Choices and the Role of Vulnerabilities","authors":"Claudia Pongelli, A. Calabrò, Fabio Quarato, A. Minichilli, G. Corbetta","doi":"10.1177/08944865211050858","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/08944865211050858","url":null,"abstract":"Based on the socioemotional wealth approach and a sample of 3,904 subsidiary ownership choices made by 586 family firms, this study shows that family-managed firms (i.e., those family firms with a family member in a leadership position) prefer wholly owned subsidies over joint ventures when entering foreign markets. Family-managed firms are also more likely to revise their subsidiary ownership choices and form joint ventures when in vulnerability conditions, that is, when they experience performance below aspirations and when entering a culturally distant market.","PeriodicalId":51365,"journal":{"name":"Family Business Review","volume":"34 1","pages":"404 - 424"},"PeriodicalIF":8.8,"publicationDate":"2021-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44684266","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-06DOI: 10.1177/08944865211049092
Xinrui Zhang, H. Fang, Junsheng Dou, James J. Chrisman
Although the family business research field and related disciplines are paying increasing attention to improvements in methodology, there is still insufficient attention being paid to endogeneity issues. We therefore raise awareness of endogeneity and suggest ways to reduce biased results in family business studies. We review publications in the family business literature in terms of (1) the consideration of endogeneity issues, (2) sources of endogeneity for different research topics, and (3) various methods that researchers have used to control for endogeneity. We discuss important lessons learned from the review and offer methodologically oriented recommendations for future family business studies.
{"title":"Endogeneity Issues in Family Business Research: Current Status and Future Recommendations","authors":"Xinrui Zhang, H. Fang, Junsheng Dou, James J. Chrisman","doi":"10.1177/08944865211049092","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/08944865211049092","url":null,"abstract":"Although the family business research field and related disciplines are paying increasing attention to improvements in methodology, there is still insufficient attention being paid to endogeneity issues. We therefore raise awareness of endogeneity and suggest ways to reduce biased results in family business studies. We review publications in the family business literature in terms of (1) the consideration of endogeneity issues, (2) sources of endogeneity for different research topics, and (3) various methods that researchers have used to control for endogeneity. We discuss important lessons learned from the review and offer methodologically oriented recommendations for future family business studies.","PeriodicalId":51365,"journal":{"name":"Family Business Review","volume":"35 1","pages":"91 - 116"},"PeriodicalIF":8.8,"publicationDate":"2021-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41552386","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-01DOI: 10.1177/08944865211032503
Donald O. Neubaum, E. Micelotta
Every management scholar is keenly aware of the need for contemporary research to make a theoretical contribution to the literature. As editors and reviewers, we wear the hat of “gatekeepers of the quality of the journal” (Chrisman et al., 2017, p. 214) and our assessment of the theoretical contributions of the manuscripts we appraise significantly color our editorial recommendations and decisions. As authors, we recognize the magnitude of this threshold and invest (or should invest) considerable effort in developing, expressing, and highlighting the theoretical contribution(s) of our own work. Despite this effort, more than 90% of the manuscripts submitted to journals like Family Business Review (FBR) are rejected, and the majority of those ill-fated submissions suffer from unclear or underdeveloped theoretical contributions. Over our respective careers, we have read, reviewed, and written decision letters for hundreds of family businesses manuscripts. In every case, we have commented on the extent to which the manuscript makes a theoretical contribution, and we have recommended rejection, revision, or acceptance based, significantly, on our assessment of the accomplishment of this threshold. Even for those papers we have evaluated positively, we have often pushed authors to clarify, deepen, or extend their contributions to theory and/or to the literature in general. Clearly, the need to contribute theoretically is imperative, and each paper’s ultimate ability to make a theoretical contribution varies. While the potential contribution of each manuscript varies, we have noticed persistent patterns in the types of family business papers we have reviewed. In our reviews and decision letters, we often find ourselves expressing a common set of criticisms and concerns that plague many of the papers we evaluate. In essence, we find that many authors, and consequently many family business papers, are repeatedly falling into the same few “theoretical pitfalls.” Based on our collective experience, we have identified four categories that capture many of these potential pitfalls. While research from each of these (and other) categories may indeed present a strong theoretical contribution, we observe that the relative ability (and manner) of each category to contribute to the literature can vary significantly. Furthermore, we find that the types of theoretical pitfalls associated with each category are generally consistent. This is troubling as many submissions are being rejected (oftentimes without even being sent out for full review) for largely the same few overarching reasons. In this editorial, we provide some guidance to authors by explaining what it means to make a theoretical contribution. We then identify and discuss four categories of family business papers, each of which presents different avenues or likelihood of making a theoretical contribution. For each type, we highlight common shortcomings found in manuscripts and offer authors ideas to furt
每一位管理学者都敏锐地意识到，当代研究需要对文献做出理论贡献。作为编辑和审稿人，我们戴着“期刊质量守门人”的帽子(克里斯曼等人，2017年，第214页)，我们对所评估手稿的理论贡献的评估显着影响了我们的编辑建议和决策。作为作者，我们认识到这个门槛的重要性，并投入(或应该投入)相当大的努力来发展、表达和突出我们自己工作的理论贡献。尽管如此，提交给《家族企业评论》(Family Business Review, FBR)等期刊的90%以上的手稿都被拒绝了，而且这些不幸的投稿大多是因为理论贡献不明确或不发达。在我们各自的职业生涯中，我们已经阅读、审阅和撰写了数百份家族企业手稿的决定函。在每种情况下，我们都对稿件的理论贡献程度进行了评论，并根据我们对该阈值的完成情况的评估，建议拒绝、修改或接受。即使是那些我们给予积极评价的论文，我们也经常要求作者澄清、深化或扩展他们对理论和/或一般文献的贡献。显然，理论上的贡献是必要的，而每篇论文做出理论贡献的最终能力各不相同。虽然每个手稿的潜在贡献各不相同，但我们注意到，在我们所审查的家族企业论文类型中，存在持续的模式。在我们的评论和决定信中，我们经常发现自己表达了一组共同的批评和关注，这些批评和关注困扰着我们评估的许多论文。从本质上讲，我们发现许多作者，以及许多家族企业论文，都在反复陷入同样的几个“理论陷阱”。根据我们的集体经验，我们已经确定了捕捉这些潜在陷阱的四个类别。虽然这些(和其他)类别的研究可能确实有很强的理论贡献，但我们观察到，每个类别对文献的贡献的相对能力(和方式)可能会有很大差异。此外，我们发现与每个类别相关的理论陷阱类型通常是一致的。这是一个令人困扰的问题，因为许多提交内容都因为相同的几个主要原因而被拒绝(通常甚至没有被发送出去进行全面审查)。在这篇社论中，我们通过解释什么是做出理论贡献来为作者提供一些指导。然后，我们确定并讨论了四类家族企业论文，每一类都提出了不同的途径或做出理论贡献的可能性。对于每种类型，我们都强调了手稿中发现的常见缺点，并为作者提供了进一步提高理论工作的想法。在此基础上，本文提供了一个实用的指导，以帮助家族企业学者理解、澄清和深化他们的工作贡献。具体来说，我们鼓励研究人员决定他们的论文打算贡献什么对话，并讨论作者可以采取的各种途径，以最大限度地提高他们对家族企业文献的贡献。
{"title":"WANTED—Theoretical Contributions: An Editorial on the Pitfalls and Pathways in Family Business Research","authors":"Donald O. Neubaum, E. Micelotta","doi":"10.1177/08944865211032503","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/08944865211032503","url":null,"abstract":"Every management scholar is keenly aware of the need for contemporary research to make a theoretical contribution to the literature. As editors and reviewers, we wear the hat of “gatekeepers of the quality of the journal” (Chrisman et al., 2017, p. 214) and our assessment of the theoretical contributions of the manuscripts we appraise significantly color our editorial recommendations and decisions. As authors, we recognize the magnitude of this threshold and invest (or should invest) considerable effort in developing, expressing, and highlighting the theoretical contribution(s) of our own work. Despite this effort, more than 90% of the manuscripts submitted to journals like Family Business Review (FBR) are rejected, and the majority of those ill-fated submissions suffer from unclear or underdeveloped theoretical contributions. Over our respective careers, we have read, reviewed, and written decision letters for hundreds of family businesses manuscripts. In every case, we have commented on the extent to which the manuscript makes a theoretical contribution, and we have recommended rejection, revision, or acceptance based, significantly, on our assessment of the accomplishment of this threshold. Even for those papers we have evaluated positively, we have often pushed authors to clarify, deepen, or extend their contributions to theory and/or to the literature in general. Clearly, the need to contribute theoretically is imperative, and each paper’s ultimate ability to make a theoretical contribution varies. While the potential contribution of each manuscript varies, we have noticed persistent patterns in the types of family business papers we have reviewed. In our reviews and decision letters, we often find ourselves expressing a common set of criticisms and concerns that plague many of the papers we evaluate. In essence, we find that many authors, and consequently many family business papers, are repeatedly falling into the same few “theoretical pitfalls.” Based on our collective experience, we have identified four categories that capture many of these potential pitfalls. While research from each of these (and other) categories may indeed present a strong theoretical contribution, we observe that the relative ability (and manner) of each category to contribute to the literature can vary significantly. Furthermore, we find that the types of theoretical pitfalls associated with each category are generally consistent. This is troubling as many submissions are being rejected (oftentimes without even being sent out for full review) for largely the same few overarching reasons. In this editorial, we provide some guidance to authors by explaining what it means to make a theoretical contribution. We then identify and discuss four categories of family business papers, each of which presents different avenues or likelihood of making a theoretical contribution. For each type, we highlight common shortcomings found in manuscripts and offer authors ideas to furt","PeriodicalId":51365,"journal":{"name":"Family Business Review","volume":"34 1","pages":"242 - 250"},"PeriodicalIF":8.8,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43029776","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-06-23DOI: 10.1177/08944865211026175
Mohammad Fuad, Vinod Thakur, A. Sinha
We draw upon the mixed gamble perspective to investigate the entry timing decisions made by family firms in the context of cross-border acquisition (CBA) waves. We argue that family-controlled firms trade-off short-term SEW and financial losses in favor of long-term SEW and financial gains, while moving early in CBA waves. Findings suggest that family-controlled firms have a higher preference for early movement compared with nonfamily-controlled firms. Further, we show that founder’s presence on the board and acquirer’s superior performance amplifies the mixed gamble trade-offs, thereby strengthening the relationship between family control and early movement within CBA waves.
{"title":"Entry Timing as a Mixed Gamble in Cross-border Acquisition Waves: A study of Family Firms","authors":"Mohammad Fuad, Vinod Thakur, A. Sinha","doi":"10.1177/08944865211026175","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/08944865211026175","url":null,"abstract":"We draw upon the mixed gamble perspective to investigate the entry timing decisions made by family firms in the context of cross-border acquisition (CBA) waves. We argue that family-controlled firms trade-off short-term SEW and financial losses in favor of long-term SEW and financial gains, while moving early in CBA waves. Findings suggest that family-controlled firms have a higher preference for early movement compared with nonfamily-controlled firms. Further, we show that founder’s presence on the board and acquirer’s superior performance amplifies the mixed gamble trade-offs, thereby strengthening the relationship between family control and early movement within CBA waves.","PeriodicalId":51365,"journal":{"name":"Family Business Review","volume":"34 1","pages":"323 - 341"},"PeriodicalIF":8.8,"publicationDate":"2021-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/08944865211026175","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46958313","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-06-01DOI: 10.1177/08944865211012139
R. Humphrey, A. Massis, P. Picone, Yi Tang, Ronald F. Piccolo
Exploring the psychological foundations of management in family firms is necessary to understand why they formulate and implement strategies differently from nonfamily firms, and why and how family firm behavior varies across different family firms. Picone et al. (2021. The psychological foundations of management in family firms: Values, biases, and heuristics. Family Business Review, 34(1), 12-32) have proposed a conceptual framework for the psychological foundations of management in family business, examining how the values, biases, and heuristics of family firm members affect strategic decision-making and family firm outcomes. Drawing on this framework, we examine emotions, memories, and experiences in family firms, disentangling “what we know” from “what we should know”, and offering some relevant questions to advance the field.
{"title":"The Psychological Foundations of Management in Family Firms: Emotions, Memories, and Experiences","authors":"R. Humphrey, A. Massis, P. Picone, Yi Tang, Ronald F. Piccolo","doi":"10.1177/08944865211012139","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/08944865211012139","url":null,"abstract":"Exploring the psychological foundations of management in family firms is necessary to understand why they formulate and implement strategies differently from nonfamily firms, and why and how family firm behavior varies across different family firms. Picone et al. (2021. The psychological foundations of management in family firms: Values, biases, and heuristics. Family Business Review, 34(1), 12-32) have proposed a conceptual framework for the psychological foundations of management in family business, examining how the values, biases, and heuristics of family firm members affect strategic decision-making and family firm outcomes. Drawing on this framework, we examine emotions, memories, and experiences in family firms, disentangling “what we know” from “what we should know”, and offering some relevant questions to advance the field.","PeriodicalId":51365,"journal":{"name":"Family Business Review","volume":"34 1","pages":"122 - 131"},"PeriodicalIF":8.8,"publicationDate":"2021-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/08944865211012139","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45938939","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：