Pub Date : 2020-09-01DOI: 10.1177/0894486520945053
History is pervasive in family business settings, where values, beliefs, narratives, and artefacts of the founding family are handed down from generation to generation (Colli, 2003). The history of a family and its business therefore pervades family business goals, practices, and outcomes, creating a close link between the history of family businesses, their present traditions, and future aspirations (De Massis et al., 2016; Jaskiewicz et al., 2015; Zellweger et al., 2012). Because of the prominence of history in family businesses, these firms have often been stigmatized as a form of business organization that is steadfast to its history and traditions, path dependent, conservative, resistant to changes and unable to adapt to dynamic and constantly evolving markets (Chandler, 1977; Morck & Yeung, 2003; Poza et al., 1997). Yet, family businesses remain dominant in any economy (La Porta et al., 1999), many of them are highly innovative (De Massis et al., 2018), resilient to crises, and equipped with the stamina to pursue entrepreneurial projects over generations (Jaskiewicz et al., 2016; Sinha, Jaskiewicz, Gibb, & Combs, 2020). The latter is consistent with emerging research suggesting that the history and traditions of families and their businesses do not have to be a rigid burden but, in some cases, can be a holy grail for enduring innovation and change (Erdogan et al., 2020; Jaskiewicz, Combs, & Ketchen, 2016; Suddaby & Jaskiewicz, 2020). While researchers thus recognize the paradoxical nature of the family business as an organization that can be burdened or empowered by history, theory on how history actually ties into family business’ tradition, change, and aspiration remains scarce (De Massis, Frattini, Kotlar, Messeni Petruzzelli, & Wright, 2016; Erdogan et al., 2020; Sinha et al., 2020; Suddaby, Coraiola, Harvey, & Foster, 2020; Suddaby & Jaskiewicz, 2020). One reason for this unsatisfactory status quo is the weak connection between history and family business scholarship that has limited current understanding of what family business scholars can learn from the wealth of history and historical research, and how they can integrate related learnings in the study of family business (e.g., Colli, 2003; Colli & Fernandez Perez, 2020). Considering the rapidly growing interest in studying the link between history and family businesses, we believe that it is warranted and timely to build a strong foundation for a history-informed approach to the study of family businesses, by which we refer to family business research that draws on historical research methods and/or leverages history as a key component (or variable) of theory or empirical analysis (Argyres et al., 2020; Sasaki et al., 2020; Sinha et al., 2020; Suddaby & Foster, 2017; Suddaby et al., 2020). 945053 FBRXXX10.1177/0894486520945053Family Business Review research-article2020
历史在家族企业环境中无处不在，创始家族的价值观、信仰、叙事和手工艺品代代相传（Colli，2003）。因此，家族及其企业的历史贯穿于家族企业的目标、实践和结果，在家族企业的历史、当前传统和未来愿望之间建立了紧密的联系（De Massis等人，2016；Jaskiewicz等人，2015；Zellweger等人，2012）。由于历史在家族企业中的突出地位，这些公司经常被污名化为一种商业组织形式，它坚持其历史和传统，依赖路径，保守，抗拒变化，无法适应动态和不断发展的市场（Chandler，1977；Morck&Yeung，2003年；Poza等人，1997年）。然而，家族企业在任何经济体中仍然占主导地位（La Porta et al.，1999），其中许多都具有高度创新性（De Massis et al.，2018），能够抵御危机，并具备几代人追求创业项目的毅力（Jaskiewicz et al.，2016；Sinha、Jaskiewich、Gibb和Combs，2020）。后者与新兴研究一致，这些研究表明，家庭及其企业的历史和传统不一定是一种刚性负担，但在某些情况下，可以成为持久创新和变革的圣杯（Erdogan et al.，2020；Jaskiewicz、Combs和Ketchen，2016；Suddaby和Jaskiewich，2020）。因此，尽管研究人员认识到家族企业作为一个可以被历史负担或赋予权力的组织的矛盾性质，但关于历史如何与家族企业传统实际联系的理论发生了变化，愿望仍然匮乏（De Massis，Frattini，Kotlar，Messeni-Petruzzelli，&Wright，2016；埃尔多安等人，2020；Sinha等人，2020年；Suddaby，Coraiola，Harvey，&Foster，2020；Suddaby&Jaskiewicz，2020）。这种不令人满意的现状的一个原因是历史和家族企业学术之间的联系薄弱，目前对家族企业学者可以从丰富的历史和历史研究中学习到什么，以及他们如何将相关知识整合到家族企业研究中的理解有限（例如，Colli，2003；Colli和Fernandez-Perez，2020）。考虑到人们对研究历史与家族企业之间联系的兴趣迅速增长，我们认为，为家族企业的历史研究方法奠定坚实的基础是有必要和及时的，我们指的是利用历史研究方法和/或利用历史作为理论或实证分析的关键组成部分（或变量）的家族企业研究（Argyres等人，2020；Sasaki等人，2020年；Sinha等人，2020，Suddaby&Foster，2017；Suddaby等人，2020）。945053 FBRXXX10.1177/0894486520945053家族企业评论研究-文章2020
{"title":"Call for Papers for the 2023 Family Business Review (FBR) Special Issue on History-informed Family Business Research","authors":"","doi":"10.1177/0894486520945053","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0894486520945053","url":null,"abstract":"History is pervasive in family business settings, where values, beliefs, narratives, and artefacts of the founding family are handed down from generation to generation (Colli, 2003). The history of a family and its business therefore pervades family business goals, practices, and outcomes, creating a close link between the history of family businesses, their present traditions, and future aspirations (De Massis et al., 2016; Jaskiewicz et al., 2015; Zellweger et al., 2012). Because of the prominence of history in family businesses, these firms have often been stigmatized as a form of business organization that is steadfast to its history and traditions, path dependent, conservative, resistant to changes and unable to adapt to dynamic and constantly evolving markets (Chandler, 1977; Morck & Yeung, 2003; Poza et al., 1997). Yet, family businesses remain dominant in any economy (La Porta et al., 1999), many of them are highly innovative (De Massis et al., 2018), resilient to crises, and equipped with the stamina to pursue entrepreneurial projects over generations (Jaskiewicz et al., 2016; Sinha, Jaskiewicz, Gibb, & Combs, 2020). The latter is consistent with emerging research suggesting that the history and traditions of families and their businesses do not have to be a rigid burden but, in some cases, can be a holy grail for enduring innovation and change (Erdogan et al., 2020; Jaskiewicz, Combs, & Ketchen, 2016; Suddaby & Jaskiewicz, 2020). While researchers thus recognize the paradoxical nature of the family business as an organization that can be burdened or empowered by history, theory on how history actually ties into family business’ tradition, change, and aspiration remains scarce (De Massis, Frattini, Kotlar, Messeni Petruzzelli, & Wright, 2016; Erdogan et al., 2020; Sinha et al., 2020; Suddaby, Coraiola, Harvey, & Foster, 2020; Suddaby & Jaskiewicz, 2020). One reason for this unsatisfactory status quo is the weak connection between history and family business scholarship that has limited current understanding of what family business scholars can learn from the wealth of history and historical research, and how they can integrate related learnings in the study of family business (e.g., Colli, 2003; Colli & Fernandez Perez, 2020). Considering the rapidly growing interest in studying the link between history and family businesses, we believe that it is warranted and timely to build a strong foundation for a history-informed approach to the study of family businesses, by which we refer to family business research that draws on historical research methods and/or leverages history as a key component (or variable) of theory or empirical analysis (Argyres et al., 2020; Sasaki et al., 2020; Sinha et al., 2020; Suddaby & Foster, 2017; Suddaby et al., 2020). 945053 FBRXXX10.1177/0894486520945053Family Business Review research-article2020","PeriodicalId":51365,"journal":{"name":"Family Business Review","volume":"33 1","pages":"331 - 334"},"PeriodicalIF":8.8,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0894486520945053","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48343920","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 : 2020-08-19DOI: 10.1177/0894486520948992
N. Simarasl, D. Jiang, F. Kellermanns, Bart J. Debicki
Research often assumes that a controlling family’s social bonds contributes to superior firm performance. However, there is little theory to address these relationships and findings are often mixed. Here, we integrate resource-based and need-to-belong theories to address these issues, introducing family business potency as a key mediating variable between family cohesion, participative strategy processes, and firm performance in 109 family firms. Altogether, our study answers ongoing theoretical calls for more need-based psychological research in family firms, introduces family business potency to the literature, and contributes to research on family firm heterogeneity. Implications for future research and practice are also discussed.
{"title":"Unmasking the Social Ghost in the Machine: How the Need to Belong and Family Business Potency Affect Family Firm Performance","authors":"N. Simarasl, D. Jiang, F. Kellermanns, Bart J. Debicki","doi":"10.1177/0894486520948992","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0894486520948992","url":null,"abstract":"Research often assumes that a controlling family’s social bonds contributes to superior firm performance. However, there is little theory to address these relationships and findings are often mixed. Here, we integrate resource-based and need-to-belong theories to address these issues, introducing family business potency as a key mediating variable between family cohesion, participative strategy processes, and firm performance in 109 family firms. Altogether, our study answers ongoing theoretical calls for more need-based psychological research in family firms, introduces family business potency to the literature, and contributes to research on family firm heterogeneity. Implications for future research and practice are also discussed.","PeriodicalId":51365,"journal":{"name":"Family Business Review","volume":"33 1","pages":"351 - 371"},"PeriodicalIF":8.8,"publicationDate":"2020-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0894486520948992","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41409308","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 : 2020-07-29DOI: 10.1177/0894486520944282
Philipp Julian Ruf, Michael Graffius, Sven Wolff, Petra Moog, Birgit Felden
This study examines the influence of individual owner-manager values on the different dimensions of socioemotional wealth in family firms. We argue that values of owner-managers in family firms are one of the underlying motivators for socioemotional wealth behavior and used structural equation modeling to test the assumed connection. The results of our data set with 1,003 cases show, in accordance with Schwartz’s value dimensions, that social- and person-oriented values influence different dimensions of the FIBER scale. Our findings help understand the importance of individual values, advance socioemotional wealth research, and contribute to the understanding of family firm behavior.
{"title":"Back to the Roots: Applying the Concept of Individual Human Values to Understand Family Firm Behavior","authors":"Philipp Julian Ruf, Michael Graffius, Sven Wolff, Petra Moog, Birgit Felden","doi":"10.1177/0894486520944282","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0894486520944282","url":null,"abstract":"This study examines the influence of individual owner-manager values on the different dimensions of socioemotional wealth in family firms. We argue that values of owner-managers in family firms are one of the underlying motivators for socioemotional wealth behavior and used structural equation modeling to test the assumed connection. The results of our data set with 1,003 cases show, in accordance with Schwartz’s value dimensions, that social- and person-oriented values influence different dimensions of the FIBER scale. Our findings help understand the importance of individual values, advance socioemotional wealth research, and contribute to the understanding of family firm behavior.","PeriodicalId":51365,"journal":{"name":"Family Business Review","volume":"34 1","pages":"48 - 70"},"PeriodicalIF":8.8,"publicationDate":"2020-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0894486520944282","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41700591","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 : 2020-07-27DOI: 10.1177/0894486520942611
R. Suddaby, Peter Jaskiewicz
Our purpose in this editorial is to draw attention to the powerful but undertheorized role played by traditions in family businesses. Our core argument is that traditions are the foundational element of successful family businesses. As we elaborate here, we believe that family business success and longevity are directly correlated with the capacity to successfully manage the creation, maintenance, and intergenerational transmission of traditions. Because of their unique nature, family business tensions are often intergenerational in character and, thus, rest on the family business’s capacity to integrate past, present, and future. We examine two key family business tensions in this editorial. The first is the tension between the need to maintain the business or innovate. De Massis et al. (2016) refer to this tension as the “innovation paradox,” but for reasons that will become obvious later, we refer to it as the Theseus paradox, a classic thought experiment from ancient Greek philosophy premised on the mythological hero best known for killing the Minotaur. The second is the tension between the need to honor the founder’s vision of the firm or adapt to the vision of the children. While this tension is commonly labelled as an issue of succession, we view the tension as broader and deeper than mere succession and term this tension the Oedipus paradox, a reference to another character of Greek myth who, in his efforts to save his city, unwittingly kills his father. While the two paradoxes derive from broader tensions of continuity versus change, they differ in that the first is premised on theories of path dependence and the second is premised on theories of imprinting. Traditions are the primary mechanism by which these tensions are navigated in family businesses. While research has acknowledged traditions as a distinguishing characteristic of family businesses (Lumpkin et al., 2008), the construct of traditions is only weakly theorized. In the absence of a strong theoretical frame, however, the empirical evidence of the role played by traditions in navigating these essential tensions of the family business remains unclear. We initiate the process of theorizing traditions in this editorial. We begin by describing how the hybrid structure of traditions as both structure (what gets transmitted across generations) and agency (the process of transmission) creates the opportunity to view traditions both as essentialist constructs that endure through time and as subjective constructs that are constantly being reinterpreted in an ever moving present. We then introduce the literature on rhetorical history that provides a framework explaining how the process of reinterpreting the past to manage the present actually occurs. Finally, we use this emergent theoretical framework to explain how traditions are used to resolve the Theseus paradox and the Oedipus paradox in family businesses.
我们这篇社论的目的是让人们注意到传统在家族企业中发挥的强大但未被理论化的作用。我们的核心论点是，传统是成功家族企业的基本要素。正如我们在这里详细阐述的那样，我们认为家族企业的成功和长寿与成功管理传统的创造、维护和代际传播的能力直接相关。由于其独特的性质，家族企业的紧张关系往往是代际的，因此，依赖于家族企业整合过去、现在和未来的能力。在这篇社论中，我们审视了两个关键的家族企业紧张关系。首先是维持业务还是创新之间的紧张关系。De Massis等人(2016)将这种紧张关系称为“创新悖论”，但出于稍后会变得显而易见的原因，我们将其称为忒修斯悖论，这是古希腊哲学中的一个经典思想实验，以杀死牛头怪(Minotaur)而闻名的神话英雄为前提。其次是在尊重创始人对公司的愿景和适应孩子们的愿景之间的紧张关系。虽然这种张力通常被称为继承问题，但我们认为这种张力比单纯的继承更广泛、更深刻，并将这种张力称为俄狄浦斯悖论，这是希腊神话中的另一个人物，他在努力拯救他的城市时，无意中杀死了他的父亲。虽然这两个悖论源于更广泛的连续性与变化的紧张关系，但它们的不同之处在于，第一个是以路径依赖理论为前提，第二个是以印记理论为前提。在家族企业中，传统是处理这些紧张关系的主要机制。虽然研究已经承认传统是家族企业的一个显著特征(Lumpkin et al.， 2008)，但传统的建构理论却很薄弱。然而，在缺乏强有力的理论框架的情况下，传统在应对家族企业这些基本紧张关系中所起作用的经验证据仍不清楚。我们在这篇社论中开创了传统理论化的过程。我们首先描述传统的混合结构是如何作为结构(在几代人之间传播的东西)和代理(传播的过程)创造了一个机会，既可以将传统视为贯穿时间的本质主义结构，也可以将传统视为在不断变化的当下不断被重新解释的主观结构。然后，我们介绍了修辞学的历史文献，这些文献提供了一个框架，解释了重新解释过去以管理现在的过程实际上是如何发生的。最后，我们用这个新兴的理论框架来解释传统如何被用来解决家族企业中的忒修斯悖论和俄狄浦斯悖论。
{"title":"Managing Traditions: A Critical Capability for Family Business Success","authors":"R. Suddaby, Peter Jaskiewicz","doi":"10.1177/0894486520942611","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0894486520942611","url":null,"abstract":"Our purpose in this editorial is to draw attention to the powerful but undertheorized role played by traditions in family businesses. Our core argument is that traditions are the foundational element of successful family businesses. As we elaborate here, we believe that family business success and longevity are directly correlated with the capacity to successfully manage the creation, maintenance, and intergenerational transmission of traditions. Because of their unique nature, family business tensions are often intergenerational in character and, thus, rest on the family business’s capacity to integrate past, present, and future. We examine two key family business tensions in this editorial. The first is the tension between the need to maintain the business or innovate. De Massis et al. (2016) refer to this tension as the “innovation paradox,” but for reasons that will become obvious later, we refer to it as the Theseus paradox, a classic thought experiment from ancient Greek philosophy premised on the mythological hero best known for killing the Minotaur. The second is the tension between the need to honor the founder’s vision of the firm or adapt to the vision of the children. While this tension is commonly labelled as an issue of succession, we view the tension as broader and deeper than mere succession and term this tension the Oedipus paradox, a reference to another character of Greek myth who, in his efforts to save his city, unwittingly kills his father. While the two paradoxes derive from broader tensions of continuity versus change, they differ in that the first is premised on theories of path dependence and the second is premised on theories of imprinting. Traditions are the primary mechanism by which these tensions are navigated in family businesses. While research has acknowledged traditions as a distinguishing characteristic of family businesses (Lumpkin et al., 2008), the construct of traditions is only weakly theorized. In the absence of a strong theoretical frame, however, the empirical evidence of the role played by traditions in navigating these essential tensions of the family business remains unclear. We initiate the process of theorizing traditions in this editorial. We begin by describing how the hybrid structure of traditions as both structure (what gets transmitted across generations) and agency (the process of transmission) creates the opportunity to view traditions both as essentialist constructs that endure through time and as subjective constructs that are constantly being reinterpreted in an ever moving present. We then introduce the literature on rhetorical history that provides a framework explaining how the process of reinterpreting the past to manage the present actually occurs. Finally, we use this emergent theoretical framework to explain how traditions are used to resolve the Theseus paradox and the Oedipus paradox in family businesses.","PeriodicalId":51365,"journal":{"name":"Family Business Review","volume":"33 1","pages":"234 - 243"},"PeriodicalIF":8.8,"publicationDate":"2020-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0894486520942611","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46609590","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 : 2020-07-19DOI: 10.1177/0894486520941944
Fabian Bernhard, Rania Labaki
In this article, we explore intergenerational moral emotions as a psychological root of ethical management practices. We develop a conceptual model of next-generation guilt in family business by building on family systems and identification theories. We test it with a scenario approach depicting an ethical dilemma. Our findings suggest that the less identified the next generation is with the family, the more likely vicarious guilt emerges. Guilt then leads to intentions of more responsible behaviors, such as reparative actions, apologies, and change in business practices. The implications encourage future research on family business guilt and moral decisions across generations.
{"title":"Moral Emotions in Family Businesses: Exploring Vicarious Guilt of the Next Generation","authors":"Fabian Bernhard, Rania Labaki","doi":"10.1177/0894486520941944","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0894486520941944","url":null,"abstract":"In this article, we explore intergenerational moral emotions as a psychological root of ethical management practices. We develop a conceptual model of next-generation guilt in family business by building on family systems and identification theories. We test it with a scenario approach depicting an ethical dilemma. Our findings suggest that the less identified the next generation is with the family, the more likely vicarious guilt emerges. Guilt then leads to intentions of more responsible behaviors, such as reparative actions, apologies, and change in business practices. The implications encourage future research on family business guilt and moral decisions across generations.","PeriodicalId":51365,"journal":{"name":"Family Business Review","volume":"34 1","pages":"193 - 212"},"PeriodicalIF":8.8,"publicationDate":"2020-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0894486520941944","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45991281","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 : 2020-07-15DOI: 10.1177/0894486520938890
Jeffrey A. Chandler, O. Petrenko, A. Hill, Nathan T. Hayes
In this study, we build on upper echelons theory and insights from psychology to suggest that CEO Machiavellianism is manifested in the alliance behaviors of family firms. Specifically, we argue that more Machiavellian chief executive officers (CEOs) seek out strategic alliances—as doing so provides opportunities to manipulate, control, and exploit others—and that their tendency toward manipulative and controlling behaviors results in less sustainable alliances. We also argue that the effect of CEO Machiavellianism on the engagement and sustainability of strategic alliances is affected by operating in family firms. Since the owning family often intervenes and mitigates any concerns regarding the organization or its leadership, we argue that any concerns that alliance partners have regarding more Machiavellian CEOs will be weaker as family ownership increases; as such, we argue that as family ownership increases, the positive relationship between CEO Machiavellianism and strategic alliance engagement will be more strongly positive while the negative relationship between CEO Machiavellianism and alliance sustainability will be less strongly negative. Our study presents and tests a theory of how more Machiavellian CEOs affect the decisions surrounding strategic alliances by providing a novel antecedent of the decisions surrounding strategic alliances in family firms. We find support for our arguments with a sample of Standard & Poor’s 500 firms.
{"title":"CEO Machiavellianism and Strategic Alliances in Family Firms","authors":"Jeffrey A. Chandler, O. Petrenko, A. Hill, Nathan T. Hayes","doi":"10.1177/0894486520938890","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0894486520938890","url":null,"abstract":"In this study, we build on upper echelons theory and insights from psychology to suggest that CEO Machiavellianism is manifested in the alliance behaviors of family firms. Specifically, we argue that more Machiavellian chief executive officers (CEOs) seek out strategic alliances—as doing so provides opportunities to manipulate, control, and exploit others—and that their tendency toward manipulative and controlling behaviors results in less sustainable alliances. We also argue that the effect of CEO Machiavellianism on the engagement and sustainability of strategic alliances is affected by operating in family firms. Since the owning family often intervenes and mitigates any concerns regarding the organization or its leadership, we argue that any concerns that alliance partners have regarding more Machiavellian CEOs will be weaker as family ownership increases; as such, we argue that as family ownership increases, the positive relationship between CEO Machiavellianism and strategic alliance engagement will be more strongly positive while the negative relationship between CEO Machiavellianism and alliance sustainability will be less strongly negative. Our study presents and tests a theory of how more Machiavellian CEOs affect the decisions surrounding strategic alliances by providing a novel antecedent of the decisions surrounding strategic alliances in family firms. We find support for our arguments with a sample of Standard & Poor’s 500 firms.","PeriodicalId":51365,"journal":{"name":"Family Business Review","volume":"34 1","pages":"93 - 115"},"PeriodicalIF":8.8,"publicationDate":"2020-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0894486520938890","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46749266","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 : 2020-07-15DOI: 10.1177/0894486520938891
Julia K. de Groote, Alexandra Bertschi-Michel
By building on foundations from psychology, we aim to enhance academic understanding of the advising process in family businesses. We find evidence, based on rich qualitative data, suggesting that trust serves as a key construct in the relationship between family businesses and their advisors. In particular, we empirically show and theorize that trusting relationships evolve via a nonlinear process characterized by a constant interplay between cognitive and—increasingly important—affective assessments of family business trustors. The following types of trust emerge from these internal assessments: an intention to trust, which develops into perceived trust and finally results in behavioral trust.
{"title":"From Intention to Trust to Behavioral Trust: Trust Building in Family Business Advising","authors":"Julia K. de Groote, Alexandra Bertschi-Michel","doi":"10.1177/0894486520938891","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0894486520938891","url":null,"abstract":"By building on foundations from psychology, we aim to enhance academic understanding of the advising process in family businesses. We find evidence, based on rich qualitative data, suggesting that trust serves as a key construct in the relationship between family businesses and their advisors. In particular, we empirically show and theorize that trusting relationships evolve via a nonlinear process characterized by a constant interplay between cognitive and—increasingly important—affective assessments of family business trustors. The following types of trust emerge from these internal assessments: an intention to trust, which develops into perceived trust and finally results in behavioral trust.","PeriodicalId":51365,"journal":{"name":"Family Business Review","volume":"34 1","pages":"132 - 153"},"PeriodicalIF":8.8,"publicationDate":"2020-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0894486520938891","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45883112","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}
{"title":"Nothing so practical as a good theory","authors":"N. Robinson","doi":"10.4324/9781315440323-2","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315440323-2","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51365,"journal":{"name":"Family Business Review","volume":"111 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.8,"publicationDate":"2020-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80656157","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}
{"title":"Family firms","authors":"Carole Howorth, N. Robinson","doi":"10.4324/9781315440323-3","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315440323-3","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51365,"journal":{"name":"Family Business Review","volume":"88 1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.8,"publicationDate":"2020-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85609079","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}
{"title":"Succession issues and alternatives","authors":"Carole Howorth, N. Robinson","doi":"10.4324/9781315440323-6","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315440323-6","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51365,"journal":{"name":"Family Business Review","volume":"31 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.8,"publicationDate":"2020-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85594065","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：