Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this article is to systematically review existing literature concerning the transmission of entrepreneurial values within the context of family entrepreneurship. Specifically, the study aims to address two primary inquiries: First, which entrepreneurial values transferred across generations have been discerned in family entrepreneurship literature? Second, what mechanisms for the transmission of these values have been identified within family entrepreneurship literature?
Design/methodology/approach
We utilized the Web of Science database to identify relevant articles. We employed a broad set of Boolean search terms related to family, entrepreneurship and values. Ultimately, 77 articles were selected for detailed analysis based on their relevance to the topic.
Findings
Our review identified a diverse array of entrepreneurial values that can be categorized into three themes: family values, family business values and societal entrepreneurial values. Furthermore, mechanisms facilitating the transmission of these values were classified into eight distinct types, i.e. relational embeddedness, vicarious learning, explicit communication, imprinting, educating, parenting styles, community-zeitgeist and genetics. The paper concludes with an agenda for future research on entrepreneurial value transmission in enterprising families.
Practical implications
Understanding how entrepreneurial values are transmitted within family firms can inform practices such as succession planning, leadership development and fostering a culture of entrepreneurship across generations.
Originality/value
This paper contributes to the theoretical development of family entrepreneurship by consolidating and synthesizing existing knowledge on entrepreneurial value transmission. It provides a comprehensive overview that can guide future empirical and conceptual investigations in this field.
Keywords
Citation
Tessema, D.A., Brunninge, O. and Cestino, J. (2024), "Transmission of entrepreneurial values in enterprising families: a systematic literature review", Journal of Family Business Management, Vol. ahead-of-print No. ahead-of-print. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFBM-06-2024-0132
Publisher
:Emerald Publishing Limited
Copyright © 2024, Demeke Afework Tessema, Olof Brunninge and Joaquín Cestino
License
Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode
Introduction
In recent years, family business literature has paid increasing attention to how entrepreneurial values are transferred in enterprising families (Kupangwa et al., 2023). This question is embedded in a broader discussion of family entrepreneurship, focusing on the intersection of entrepreneurship, the family firm and the entrepreneurial family (Uhlaner et al., 2012). Recent family business literature has increasingly emphasized the mutual relationship among the individual, the family and the family firm, including the consequences that firm activities have on the family and its individual members (Wielsma and Brunninge, 2019). This is not least apparent in the popular notion of socioemotional wealth (Boers et al., 2017; Gomez-Mejia et al., 2007). Entrepreneurship in a family firm depends on the individual or collective entrepreneurial behaviors of family members (Aldrich et al., 2023; Cardella et al., 2020). Conversely, entrepreneurial behaviors of the family firm impact family members and family entrepreneurial behavior (Aldrich et al., 2023; Cardella et al., 2020; Heck and Mishra, 2008; Poutziouris et al., 2006; Rogoff and Heck, 2003) by shaping cognitions, values, abilities and relationships of family and non-family members (Soleimanof et al., 2018). Families play a fundamental role in developing or constraining the entrepreneurial behaviors of offspring (Aldrich and Jennings, 2003; Bettinelli et al., 2014; Heck and Mishra, 2008). Family entrepreneurial values are one of the most important factors that influence the transgenerational success and longevity of family businesses (Brunninge and Melander, 2015; Ruf et al., 2020; Zellweger et al., 2012; Zwack et al., 2016). They are sometimes communicated to external audiences as evidence of the firm’s track record and trustworthiness (Blombäck and Brunninge, 2016). The transmission of family entrepreneurial values involves developing and transferring family entrepreneurial values across generations (Quéniart and Charpentier, 2013). The present article provides a systematic review of the literature addressing how family entrepreneurial value transmission happens.
Despite the interest in family entrepreneurship, we are still lacking a literature review with that focus. Recently, Bettinelli et al. (2017), Cardella et al. (2020), Aldrich et al. (2021) as well as Capolupo et al. (2022) have published reviews addressing family entrepreneurship in a wider sense. While all four reviews have made valuable contributions to our understanding of the family entrepreneurship field, the broad approaches they take to limit the insights they bring to entrepreneurial value transmission. Value transmission is conceptualized as an antecedent to family entrepreneurship (Bettinelli et al., 2017) or is subsumed as a part of different literature clusters, such as succession or parental role modeling (Cardella et al., 2020). Aldrich et al. (2021) partly address value transmission as being connected to family, norms, attitudes and values, while Capolupo et al. (2022) focus on entrepreneurial activities and factors connected to them, where of course value transmission may play a role. However, none of these reviews attempts to create any comprehensive picture of how entrepreneurial values are transmitted from one generation to the other. Such a picture would help. This is where our review makes its main contribution:
The purpose of this article is to make a systematic review of the literature on family entrepreneurial value transmission. Specifically, we focus on two research questions:
What entrepreneurial values that are transmitted between generations, have been identified in the family entrepreneurship literature?
What mechanisms for transmitting these values have been identified in the family entrepreneurship literature?
This review contributes to the theoretical development of family entrepreneurship in two ways. First, it addresses the call for additional investigations into how families influence the entrepreneurship process (Barbera et al., 2018; Clinton et al., 2021; Dou et al., 2021; Klyver et al., 2020; Staniewski and Awruk, 2021) by reorganizing and consolidating extant contributions on entrepreneurial value transmission and identifying three groups of entrepreneurial values as well as eight transmission mechanisms. Second, it develops a research agenda for further investigations, empirical and conceptual, on entrepreneurial value transmission in family firms. The remaining part of the paper is structured in four major parts: first, we present the review method; after summarizing the descriptive results, we provide an integrative view of entrepreneurial value transmission, focusing on values that are transmitted and mechanisms transmitting these values. This results in a discussion of the findings in the field and the development of a research agenda.
Methods
In our systematic literature review, we followed the framework by Kraus et al. (2020) and took inspiration from the framework’s application by Palmaccio et al. (2020) and Girma Aragaw et al. (n.d.). It divides the review process into four stages, (1) plan the review; (2) identify and evaluate articles; (3) synthesize data; and (4) disseminate the results.
Stage 1: plan the review
We decided to use the Web of Science database, which provides strong coverage of diversified international research (Birkle et al., 2020). Journals in the Web of Science are considered a source of validated knowledge and likely have an impact on their field (Calabrò et al., 2018; James et al., 2021; Kraus et al., 2020; Ordanini et al., 2008; Podsakoff et al., 2003). To capture entrepreneurial values and their transmission, we chose keywords relatively broadly, using the following Boolean search terms: (Famil* And Entrepr*) or (Parent* And Entrepr*) or (Famil* and Value*) or (Transgen* and Value*).
Stage 2: identify and evaluate the articles
Our search and selection process included five consecutive steps, following the PRISMA structure (Moher et al., 2009). A PRISMA flow chart is included in Figure 1.
Searching for the keywords
In this first step, we searched in September 2023 for articles containing our search terms in their titles, abstracts, author keywords and keywords plus in the database (Bettinelli et al., 2014; Calabrò et al., 2018; Keupp et al., 2012) without setting any specific time limit. The outcome of this step was 2,318 hits from two hundred journals.
Pre-screening
Before proceeding to screen the articles, we restricted the document type to articles with English language, also excluding those not in the research areas of Business, Management and Economics. After this step, 1,422 articles remained.
Screening 1: title and abstract analysis
After collecting all the results in EndNote 20 reference-manager software, we read—assisted by relevant automatically highlighted keywords (Famil, Entrepr, Parent, Entrepr, Value, Transngener)—the titles, keywords and abstracts to assess whether the basic criteria of relevance was fulfilled (Rashman et al., 2009) and eliminated those that fell outside the scope and focus of the analysis. A total of 656 studies were admitted to the next step (Calabro et al., 2018; Kraus et al., 2020).
Setting inclusion and exclusion criteria
In a second step, before proceeding with the content analysis, we established inclusion and exclusion criteria (see Table 1) in terms of quality and fit for the topic under investigation (Fan et al., 2022). Concerning fit, the articles had to explicitly meet two criteria when analyzing (empirically or theoretically) the transmission of entrepreneurial values from entrepreneurial families to their members and the family firm. First, they had to focus on the family and, second, they had to show family dynamics as mechanisms of value transmission. Papers exclusively analyzing firm-level factors or only presenting entrepreneurial values were excluded- Table 1 elaborates on quality and fit criteria in more detail.
Screening 2: full-text assessment
To further confirm the relevance of the remaining articles, we read their complete contents, assessing them based on our inclusion and exclusion criteria. This resulted in our final selection of 77 articles. All these articles were published in 2002 or later.
Stage 3: extract and synthesize the data
After the process of selection, we analyzed the remaining articles using an excel data extraction sheet (Rashman et al., 2009), in which the descriptive elements (authors, journal, purpose, theoretical framework, context, research typology, main findings and propositions, as well as the entrepreneurial values and value transmission mechanisms) were summarized for each article. A simplified version of this table, focusing on values and value transmission mechanisms is provided in Appendix A. The data were synthesized by grouping the identified values and value transmission mechanisms into categories. First, the three researchers grouped them individually. The results were then discussed with the research team and reconciled into the categories listed in Tables 2 and 3.
Stage 4: disseminating the review results
Our systematic literature review synthesizes the result of 77 scholarly articles by identifying three categories of values and eight aggregate-level value transmission mechanisms. These categorizations allow us to capture all the values and value transmission mechanisms addressed in our sample of articles. We present the categories of values in Table 2, where we specify all the specific values belonging to each group, as well as key references for each group. The value transmission mechanisms are presented in Table 3, where also more specific examples of each mechanism are stated and key references are provided. The three groups of values and the eight value transmission mechanisms are then defined and discussed, following the tables.
Descriptive results
Although we did not per se exclude articles published prior to a specific date, eventually only publications from 2002 onwards met all criteria for being included in our final sample. Family entrepreneurial value transmission is a phenomenon that has only attracted the interest of scholars relatively recently. Even the early stages of our selection process, capturing family entrepreneurship literature in a broader sense, only included a few scattered contributions pre-2000. Family entrepreneurship, as a subject matter and notably family entrepreneurial value transmission, emerges as relatively nascent. A surge started around 2011. The data, curated until 2023, implies a continuous evolution in this research trajectory, slowing down somewhat in 2022, possibly due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Figure 2 visually delineates the trend in publications pertaining to family entrepreneurship from 2000 to 2023.
Among the 36 journals in our final sample, the top 5 are Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice (7 articles), International Journal of Entrepreneurship Behavior and Research (6 articles), Family Business Review (5 articles) and Journal of Business Venturing and Journal of Small Business Economics (4 articles). Figure 3 summarizes the distribution of journals.
Among the 77 articles, 10 (13%) are theoretical and 67 articles (87%) are empirical, of which 27 studies (40%) are qualitative studies, 38 (57%) are quantitative papers and 2 (3%) use mixed methods. Regarding the geographic scope of the data in empirical papers, 19% use North American data, 56% data from Europe, 13% Asia, 5% Africa, 3% Latin America and 3% Middle East. While the papers represent diversified contexts across different continents, the Global North clearly dominates, standing for more than ¾ of the publications Figure 4 summarizes the geographical contexts where in the empirical studies were conducted.
Most of the articles reviewed, used social theories, including socio-historical view, family capital, socio-emotional wealth, family embeddedness and socio-cognitive, social systems and social identity theories (e.g. Dyer et al., 2014; Ng et al., 2020; Nordstrom and Steier, 2015; Shepherd and Haynie, 2009; Steier, 2009). These perspectives facilitate interpretations about how the family social interaction influences the entrepreneurial behaviors, orientations and values of family members and the family firm. Others, such as Soleimanof et al. (2018), use institutional theory considering the family as an institution. Few others use the resource-based view of the firm (e.g. Carnes and Ireland, 2013) assuming familiness as a non-financial resource. Some of the reviewed articles were literature reviews (e.g. Aldrich and Cliff, 2003; Bettinelli et al., 2017; Soleimanof et al., 2018).
Findings
Guided by our research questions, we group our findings into two sections: the entrepreneurial values that are transmitted across generations (the what) and the mechanisms used to transmit them (the how).
Entrepreneurial values
The articles in our sample address many different values (listed in Table 2). These values can be aggregated into three different themes, depending on the level of analysis they relate to family values, family business values and societal entrepreneurial values.
We label family values as those entrepreneurial values connected primarily to the family level. These values are typically broad rather than being delimited to business issues although they are often applied to business. They may address who the family is, how they do things, what they love, hate or are just indifferent about. Family values unite family members in one culture (Duh et al., 2010; Sorenson and Milbrandt, 2023). Examples of family values include loyalty, long-term orientation or humility.
Family business values are connected to the family but focus on the business level, i.e. how the family is approaching business matters, its stance on entrepreneurship, and what is desirable, good or bad, right or wrong in relation to business. These values include innovativeness, decentralized decision-making, individual and collective orientations (Sorenson and Milbrandt, 2023), adventure, exploitation of opportunity and challenging the status quo (Abun et al., 2021).
Finally, societal entrepreneurial values refer to the community level. While these values are held and reproduced by families, they are common to the community that the family is a part of. In this sense, they may overlap with family values, but rather than characterizing a specific family, they are shared by the community. These values may include gender roles in business, philanthropic giving or community beliefs and values toward entrepreneurship that hinder or stimulate entrepreneurial activity (Pinkovetskaia et al., 2020).
Values transmission mechanisms
The sampled articles address a wide range of different mechanisms (listed in Table 3) that specify how values are transmitted between generations. We identified eight different transmission mechanisms: relational embeddedness, vicarious learning, explicit communication, imprinting, educating, parenting socialization styles, community level and zeitgeist and genetics.
Relational embeddedness
Values are transmitted through family members’ embeddedness in various relations connected to the family. Relational embeddedness refers to the quality of relationships and the overall pattern resulting from ties and interaction among network members, such as family (Sorenson and Milbrandt, 2023; Zhou et al., 2022). In general, attending unified business decisions (Eze et al., 2021); regularly integrating the successor’s partner in family events (Jaskiewicz et al., 2015); showing parental altruism (Eddleston and Kidwell, 2012); and familiness (Carnes and Ireland, 2013) are some of the mechanisms through which family entrepreneurial values transmitted across generations. These mechanisms typically associated with group cohesion, solidarity and social interaction in the family (Dana et al., 2020). Family cohesiveness amplifies the effect of family social capital on the scope of start-up activities (Edelman et al., 2016) and binding social connections link family members to the business (Razzak et al., 2019).
Family relationships are associated with altruism and family logic and are distinct to friends and business people relationships, which—while also providing social support and societal expectations—are more linked to mutualism and community logic and egoism and market logic (Klyver et al., 2020). Family and kinship relations as a business resource base significantly help the entrepreneurial household and the household strategy in determining business growth activities (Alsos et al., 2014). Intergenerational interaction ensures long-term entrepreneurial orientation (Cherchem, 2017). Family embeddedness combines with the goals and attributes of individuals with a family business background and facilitates value transmission (Pittino et al., 2018). Family embeddedness also influences entrepreneurial leadership (Kansikas et al., 2012). Finally, family embeddedness contributes to family social capital—including family ties, entrepreneurs’ social network (Arregle et al., 2015; Chereau and Meschi, 2022)—feeding and sustaining an entrepreneurial culture across generations (Hanson et al., 2019) and developing both the resilience of the individual family member and the family business at the organizational level (Mzid et al., 2019).
Vicarious learning
While partly overlapping with relational embeddedness, vicarious learning is distinctly related to activities where children observe and imitate business-related activities that reflect entrepreneurial values. In doing so the children note the consequences of that behavior for those being observed without the need for the observer to experience feedback directly (Bandura et al., 1963; Mayes, 2015). Childhood involvement in the family firm and early experiences with parents directly shape the values and beliefs of children. Children early experiences with parents directly shape the values and beliefs of children (Mungai and Velamuri, 2011). Observation processes in the family result in common symbols, rituals, stories and heroes or models (Monticelli et al., 2020; Simsek et al., 2015). Family business exposure and family institutional forces develop the individuals’ entrepreneurial values and intentions (Liguori et al., 2018; Zaman et al., 2021).
Parents affect their children’s values through modeling (learning through observation of parents’ behavior and expressed attitudes) moderated by the individual’s openness (Chlosta et al., 2012; Igwe et al., 2020; Jaskiewicz et al., 2015; Mungai and Velamuri, 2011; Schölin et al., 2016). Exposing children to role models has an impact on their entrepreneurial values (Entrialgo and Iglesias, 2018). They use career-related modeling of the parents to perpetuate entrepreneurial values (Hahn et al., 2021; Lindquist et al., 2015; Mishkin, 2021). Similarly, serial entrepreneurial families also provide role models through apprenticeships (Igwe et al., 2020; Wyrwich, 2015) and through employment in their parents’ businesses helping children to understand—by watching their parents at work—how to make products, find customers and make sales (Dyer et al., 2014). Role models can also originate from and impact, people from the same generation (Discua Cruz et al., 2013).
Childrens’ vicarious learning in relation to entrepreneurship includes learning about oneself, managing relationships and business management (Zozimo et al., 2017). Their self-employed parents also provide role models for their children to become self-employed themselves (Chereau and Meschi, 2022; Hoffmann et al., 2015). There is a positive relationship—mediated by individual’s openness—between the presence of paternal role models and the likelihood of being self-employment (Chlosta et al., 2012). Offspring’s family business exposure strengthens the impact of entrepreneurial self-efficacy of the offspring (Wang et al., 2018). Vicarious learning explains why students with a family business background are more pessimistic about being in control in an entrepreneurial career but optimistic about their efficacy in pursuing it (Zellweger et al., 2011). While vicarious learning can antecede entrepreneurial intentions (Bloemen-Bekx et al., 2019), it can also stifle entrepreneurial values when the entrepreneurial experience ends in failure (Mungai and Velamuri, 2011).
Explicit communication
While vicarious learning largely rests on tacit processes, parents can also explicitly or implicitly communicate to children through words and stories what is desirable and what should be valued in life (Ahn and Reeve, 2021). This can happen publicly (Igwe et al., 2018a, b) or through informal conversations, for example over the dinner table (Dyer et al., 2014). Entrepreneurial values and behaviors can also be transmitted through a process of negotiation and reification, informed by differences among families in response to critical incidents (Clinton et al., 2021; Greene et al., 2013). Communication mechanisms also include direct family business advice (Arregle et al., 2015) and can be facilitated by other family communication patterns (Soleimanof et al., 2018) such as a learning culture and visible schemes - “visible framework” or “explicit structure,” which refer to a deliberate and tangible plan or system implemented within the family business to facilitate the transmission of entrepreneurial values, knowledge and skills across generations (Au and Kwan, 2009), often conditioned by the family of origin in which an individual is born and raised and from which they inherit certain values (Staniewski and Awruk, 2021; Tao et al., 2021).
The core values of a family can be successfully transmitted in family businesses via narratives. By telling stories, family members and family businesses can build identity and shared meanings which can lead to successful performance in terms of revenue, reputation, shared identity and continuity of the family business history (Igwe et al., 2018a, b; Jose Parada and Viladás, 2010; Zwack et al., 2016). For instance, narratives about ancestors’ entrepreneurial achievements or resilience transmit family entrepreneurial values in the family (Jaskiewicz et al., 2015) Grandparents, either directly or “indirectly” via the parents, impact the offspring’s entrepreneurial intentions through stories (Laspita et al., 2012). Family-shared stories are positively associated with innovation, mediated by the scope of decision-making options, the distribution of decision-making power between generations and the role of conflict in families (Kammerlander et al., 2015).
Imprinting
Imprinting is a process whereby a focal entity develops characteristics of the imprinters (i.e. prominent features of the environment, individuals/groups and organizations) that tend to persist independently of the imprinter (Marquis and Tilcsik, 2013; Simsek et al., 2015). Although imprinting can happen because of relational embeddedness and other value transmission mechanisms, it is distinct from them in the sense that the imprinting of entrepreneurial family values focuses on the lasting imprint that families, their members and family firms can leave on individuals, explaining distal outcomes. Imprinting is influencing siblings during sensitive periods such as childhood and adolescence (Dawson et al., 2015) or during events related to family or business “crises” (Clinton et al., 2017) with a lasting influence on their willingness to join the family business or become a successor (Marques et al., 2022). Imprinting, however, can also result in less unequivocal outcomes. For example, the legacy of previous family generations shapes approaches to both innovation and tradition. Imprinted content can become resources that the current family generation uses through “temporal symbiosis” to concurrently perpetuate tradition and achieve innovation (Altinay et al., 2012; Erdogan et al., 2020).
Educating
This mechanism includes the bi-directional, spontaneous, participatory, interest-driven intergenerational informal teaching and learning process in the family of ideas and traditions and values (Schmidt-Hertha et al., 2014; Stephan, 2021). Although the training and experimenting that constitutes educating transpires in family and business socialization (García-Élvarez et al., 2002; Wiedeler and Kammerlander, 2021), this mechanism differs from vicarious learning to the extent that it goes beyond the dynamics of observation and imitation that constitute vicarious learning.
Families can provide a learning environment for risk-taking, creativity and innovation, for example, through informal apprenticeships (Bika et al., 2019; Igwe et al., 2020; Jayawarna et al., 2014), which prepare the younger generation for business as a way of life (Igwe et al., 2020; Wang et al., 2021). Educating includes on-the-job interactive learning and mentoring from previous generations and other agents and stakeholders (Bika et al., 2019). Formal training includes specific instructions and verbal discipline enforcing conformity (Chlosta et al., 2012; Igwe et al., 2020; Mungai and Velamuri, 2011) but also strategic education (Jaskiewicz et al., 2015) such as encouraging kids to read entrepreneurial books and kid entrepreneurs’ showcases. Educating can also take place in rather informal ways, for example, buying toys and games for kids that encourage entrepreneurship (Maziriri et al., 2022).
Parenting styles
Several authors highlight the significance of general parenting styles in influencing the transmission of entrepreneurial values. Different parenting styles, such as authoritative, authoritarian and permissive parenting styles, have the potential to hinder the transmission process of values (Brenøe and Epper, 2022). Families transmit values by guiding or restricting the choices available to family members through limiting, imposing, defining boundaries and creating opportunities for its members (Monticelli et al., 2020). In nations with higher levels of power distance or lower individualism (where social norms and culture may be less hospitable to startups), family encouragement plays an important role in value transmission (Maleki et al., 2021). Similarly, encouraging children to take autonomous and empowered action, facilitates the family member in balancing individual-versus-group orientation (Zahra et al., 2004).
Family parenting styles lead to the development of specific approaches to entrepreneurship. For instance, entrepreneur leaders who grew up in an authoritative parental style at home are more likely to adopt a people-centered leadership approach at work (Bindah, 2017). Parenting styles also affect corporate venture learning (Covin et al., 2020) and the entrepreneurial intention of children (Schmitt-Rodermund, 2004). Additionally, families with high emotional support foster optimism and creativity, helping people to find their purpose and career and making it easier to deal with stress (Klyver et al., 2020; Mari et al., 2016). Similarly, family capital in the form of social and emotional support contributes to venture preparedness and the start-up decision, suggesting that it has both a direct and an indirect influence on venture creation (Chang et al., 2009; Edelman et al., 2016). Moreover, value for innovation is transmitted and reinforced through family management and family control styles (Hillebrand, 2019). Finally, generational ownership dispersion, family management involvement and family member reciprocity affect firm performance with the moderating role of innovativeness (Kellermanns et al., 2012).
Community-zeitgeist
Family values are embedded in wider social systems. Hence, community-level processes play an important role in value transmission. The community-zeitgeist mechanism stands for cultural stereotyping or the shared social conventions in a specific community or the prevailing value context in a society which is shared by both parents and their children (Kupangwa et al., 2023). Socialization and value transmission are not limited to the internal family system only. Rather it goes beyond the internal family system and involves interactions (resolving competing role demands through peer interactions) and experiences (interacting with both peer groups and malleable societal/economic frames) unfolding over time (Bika et al., 2019). Community-zeitgeist value transmission includes a distinct set of dimensions, values, challenges and processes such as interactive learning from multiple agents and stakeholders, peer pressure and mentoring (Bika et al., 2019; Hammond et al., 2016). Community experiences and social persuasion are antecedents of the entrepreneurial intentions of family members (Bloemen-Bekx et al., 2019). This mechanism drives a balance between values instilled by the parents and encounters with other values in larger social contexts (Albanese et al., 2016). This type of mechanism includes societal-level norming, social expectations for action, active use of community centers to educate, guide and recruit and role modeling out of the family (Dana et al., 2020). The interplay of social contexts—household, social, ethnic—has been shown to impact the propensity to find a new venture and to join incubators and opportunity platforms for venture creation (Steier, 2009).
Genetics
So far, all mechanisms discussed have been social. In stark contrast to them, Nicolaou et al. (2008) have suggested the importance of considering genetic factors in explanations for why people engage in entrepreneurial activity in the family. They claim that entrepreneurship could be transmitted from the parents to offspring through genes and that there is relatively high heritability for entrepreneurship across different operationalizations of the phenomenon. In this view, thus, family environment and upbringing would have little impact on family entrepreneurial value transmission.
Conclusions and future research
This article’s main contribution is the systematic categorization of family entrepreneurial values as well as the mechanisms transmitting these values across generations. This has been achieved by systematically reviewing and synthesizing extant literature on family entrepreneurial value transmission, published in reputable journals so far. While the review shows that the literature on this topic has expanded significantly since 2010, each publication alone only addresses a narrow range of values and value transmission mechanisms. To the best of our knowledge, no attempt has so far been made to create the comprehensive overview of values and value transmission mechanisms that this article offers. The values and value transmission mechanisms can help future family entrepreneurship research in the following ways:
- (1)
Scholars can consciously look for, distinguish between and analyze different types of values and value transmission mechanisms.
- (2)
The definitions of values and value transmission mechanisms allow us to investigate what values and value transmission mechanisms prevail under different contextual circumstances, addressing the call for contextualizing family entrepreneurship (Welter, 2011).
- (3)
Our definitions of values and value transmission mechanisms can be used to address the call for disentangling family heterogeneity (Jaskiewicz and Dyer, 2017), by looking at what values and transmission mechanisms come to play in different families.
Family entrepreneurial value transmission refers to the extent of entrepreneurial value similarity or dissimilarity in the business-owning family members or generations in the family (Kupangwa et al., 2023). We found a wide range of entrepreneurial values that we grouped into three categories: family values, family business values and societal entrepreneurial values. The latter category shows that the study of entrepreneurial values in a family business context needs to consider the societal embeddedness of the family. Family values, even if they are characteristic of a particular family, relate to values on a community level and they also to some extent relate to community-level transmission mechanisms.
The societal embeddedness of family entrepreneurs plays a crucial role in value transmission, showcasing differences between regions like the West and the Global South. In the West, family entrepreneurs emphasize non-financial performance goals, social responsibility, regional community embeddedness and societal respect (Clinton et al., 2021). Conversely, in the Global South, family embeddedness may have a darker side, potentially hindering an entrepreneur’s psychological ownership and impeding firm development (Bichler et al., 2022). In addition to that, according to Jennings et al. (2015), family-oriented socio-emotional wealth influences firms within families differently in the West (the USA, Switzerland/Germany) and the Global South (China, Brazil, India), revealing varied societal embeddedness impacts. This contrast highlights how family embeddedness can vary in its impact on entrepreneurial values and outcomes across different societal contexts, shedding light on the complexities of value transmission within family businesses in diverse regions.
The value transmission mechanisms that we identified were grouped into eight categories: relational embeddedness, vicarious learning, communication, imprinting, educating, parental styles, community-zeitgeist and genetics. These mechanisms can work either separately or in parallel (Capolupo et al., 2022). Often, these mechanisms overlap and reinforce each other (Clinton et al., 2021). Most of the reviewed articles focus on the family business context, while family- and individual-level contexts are less emphasized (Cardella et al., 2020). Some articles also consider a wider community level (Alrubaishi et al., 2021; Anderson et al., 2005; Arz, 2019; Benavides-Salazar et al., 2022; Muigai et al., 2023). Importantly, note that these mechanisms operate not only from parents to children vertically (across different generations) but also horizontally (within the same generation) (Bagherian et al., 2022). Value transmission is hence not only a process of passing on values but also a process of their continuous and collective reconstruction. This process can happen in different directions, both within and across generations.
Our systematic literature review has focused on the identification and definition of family entrepreneurial values and the mechanisms transmitting such values. This focus was necessary to answer our research questions thoroughly. At the same time, it constitutes a limitation. We believe that there is room for additional systematic literature reviews with different foci on family entrepreneurship-related topics, adding to the present work as well as that of Bettinelli et al. (2017), Cardella et al. (2020), Aldrich et al. (2021) and Capolupo et al. (2022).
Based on our review, we propose an agenda with questions for future research. While such a list makes no claim of being exhaustive, it raises several topics that the articles in the review touch upon, yet the literature does not comprehensively address.
- (1)
How do family values, family business values and society entrepreneurial values interact? Is there always a mutual interaction with these sets of values influencing each other or can there be situations where they develop independently from each other, e.g. family business values that deviate from the entrepreneurial values in the surrounding community or (general) family values that are different from the family business values that are only applied in firm-related situations?
- (2)
Do entrepreneurial values and value transmission mechanisms correlate with demographic characteristics of families and family businesses, i.e. can the prevalence of values and value transmission mechanisms be explained by variables such as firm size, firm age, family involvement or generation in control?
- (3)
How are entrepreneurial values and value transmission mechanisms distributed across different geographical and cultural contexts? Are there specific values and/or transmission mechanisms that are over- or underrepresented in certain contexts?
- (4)
What role do different actors play in the transmission of values? Much of the literature we review focuses on value transmission from parents to children but can there be a role for more remote relatives in value transmission or can non-family members be included in the process of transmitting family values? Particularly interesting is also the phenomenon of horizontal value transmission (between members of the same generation), although little research has explored this. Relatedly, horizontal value transmission can also be shaped by interactions within the same generation. This is an interesting possibility that requires further research. As much of the research in the field has been conducted in a Western context, we believe that research from contexts with different family structures can play an important role in answering questions related to what entrepreneurial values, transmission mechanisms and actors’ roles transpire in different contexts?
- (5)
Some research acknowledges a mutual relationship in value transmission processes, i.e. value transmission is not a one-way street (Muigai et al., 2023). Yet, there is relatively little said on what mutuality in value transmission means in practice. What about value transmission processes other than those from the older generation to the younger? To what extent can the younger generation transmit values to their parents and how—by which mechanisms—would that happen?
- (6)
Most of the papers we reviewed have a relatively static concept of values with the exception of (e.g. Igwe et al., 2018a, b; Markowska and Wiklund, 2020; Monticelli et al., 2020). However, it seems unlikely that values would be unchanged during the process of transmission. How and when do values change during transmission and what decides to what extent values change?
- (7)
How entrepreneurial values are transmitted at micro, meso and macro levels considering society's cultural orientation help to understand entrepreneurial behaviors? How does familiness shape the entrepreneurial values of family members, family businesses, business families, even in non-business families? What are the factors (individual, family, organizational) affecting transgenerational entrepreneurship? What role does the family system play in transmitting entrepreneurial values in the entrepreneurial process? How is entrepreneurship developed in a family and how does the family system influence it? How is entrepreneurial learning happening in a family context?
Figures
Figure 1
PRISMA flow chart
Figure 2
Evolution of publications
Figure 3
Journals represented in the final sample
Figure 4
Geographical distribution of the studied papers
Family entrepreneurial values
| Aggregate themes | Specific family entrepreneurial values |
|---|---|
| Family values | Hard work, enjoying the labor’s fruits, empathy, trust, social responsibility, integrity, humility, goodwill, manners, obedience, harmony, loyalty, continuity, adaptiveness, long-term orientation, vision, goal orientation, achievement need, vision making, success, strategic education, decision making, trust, respect, altruism, relationship management, interpersonal heuristics, proactiveness, observance, skills, self-confidence, motivations, emotional intelligence, internal locus of control, self-fulfillment, personal status, self-discovery and learning competence |
| Family business values | Entrepreneurial legacy, pride, preservation, succession portfolio, commitment, wealth pursuit, transgenerational culture, legitimacy, confidence, small business learning, family performance, entrepreneurial orientation, identity preservation, capacity, resilience, stewardship, opportunism, competitive advantage, bridging, growth, diversification, opportunity-seeking, efficiency, professionalization, growth attitude, leadership, economic liberation, risk-taking, opportunity identification, independence, determination, self-employment, creativity, innovation, resourcefulness, frugality, resource mobilization, entrepreneurial careers and company choice |
| Societal entrepreneurial values | Values of hard work and business ethics, gender roles in business, philanthropic activities, binding social ties, community involvement, favorable attitudes, community beliefs and values towards entrepreneurship and enterprising behavior |
Source(s): Authors’ own creation
Aggregate family entrepreneurial value transmission mechanisms
| Aggregate themes | Specific family entrepreneurial value transmission mechanisms |
|---|---|
| Relational embeddedness | Family bond, cohesion, business-household connections, kinship ties, legacy unification, familiness, solidarity, quasi-family building, networking, relationship maintenance, interaction, social ties, family-firm identification |
| Vicarious learning | Perceived rewards of parental careers, exposure to role models, observing parent entrepreneurs, vicarious experience in the family business, parental entrepreneurship exposure, imitation, quasi-parental role modeling, parental work observation |
| Explicit communication | Clarifying career paths, storytelling, symbolic gestures, narratives, discussions by the senior generation, story sharing, daily intergenerational communication, family communication patterns, parental encouragement, family meetings, sharing cultural expectations, symbolic interactionism, informal dinner conversations |
| Imprinting | Filial imprinting, secondhand imprinting, promoting entrepreneurial reading for kids, piggy banks, kid entrepreneur showcases, purchasing entrepreneurial toys and games, entrepreneurship-themed competitions and team activities for children |
| Educating | On-the-job learning, mentoring, entrepreneurial education, guidance from senior generations, participation in business decisions, social and strategic learning, early childhood business education, role-playing, problem-solving, fostering a learning culture, hands-on experience, formal and informal apprenticeships, childhood involvement, co-leadership, family members’ reciprocity and summer employment |
| Parental styles | Guiding or restricting children’s choices, imposing limits, developing common entrepreneurial values and culture, family tradition for control, socialization via family, junior generation’s involvement in decision-making from an early age, family and business gatherings, successor’s partner integration, family members’ continued presence in the firm, intergenerational interaction, developing a supportive culture, professionalization encouragement, emotional support, business inheritance, family capital support, occupational transmission, autonomous action, inspired family business leaders, commitment culture, family emotional support |
| Community-zeitgeist | Interplay of the social context (family, social, ethnic), venture creation incubators, legacy artifacts, deep community ties, social interaction, networking, multi-agent learning, peer pressure, norming, community center utilization for education and recruitment, role modeling, societal norm sharing, entrepreneur social networks (advice, support, resources), cultural expectation sharing, cognition-emotion-social influence intersection, social structure |
| Genetics | Entrepreneurship is genetically inherited from the parents |
Source(s): Authors’ own creation
Article summary table
| Group A: Qualitative empirical | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Authors, year, journal | Country | Focus | What? | How? | Aggregate VT mechanisim | Key findings |
| Alrubaishi et al. (2021) International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior and Research | Saudi Arabia | Cultural influence on the entrepreneurial activities family enterprises | Enterprising behavior/mindset, new venture creation, work values and ethics | Family cohesion, kinship ties, preservation of good manners | Relational embeddedness, Zeitgeist | Family ties and social culture influence how family businesses behave entrepreneurially and intergenerational transfer of family legacy |
| Alsos et al. (2014) Entrepreneurship and Regional Development | Norway and Scotland | Entrepreneurial households’ role in the process of business development | Business growth | Connecting the business and the household using family and kinship relations | Relational embeddedness | The dynamics between business activities and entrepreneurial households determine the entrepreneurial household and the household strategy, which in turn affects business growth activities |
| Anderson et al. (2005) Family Business Review | Scotland | Family resources utilization by entrepreneurs outside the family firm’s formal boundaries | Resourcefulness | Networking | Relational embeddedness, Zeitgeist | Professional and affective family resources were made available via entrepreneurial network outside the official family firm, allowing the family firm to grow without the usual risks associated with external linkages |
| Arz (2019) Journal of Family Business Strategy | Germany | The gap between the micro (family) and macro (firm-level EO) | Altruism, long-term orientation, Preserving family identity | Empowering, building quasi-family, servant leadership | Family socialization events | Family values of altruism, psychological safety empowering climates and preservation are basis for organizational culture as well as entrepreneurial orientation through family involvement |
| Au et al. (2013) Asia Pacific Journal of Management | Hong Kong, China | The role of families as entrepreneurship engines | Value for innovation, Succession, portfolio entrepreneurship | Clearing career path, mentoring, facilitating learning culture, visible scheme | Communicating, educating | Family’s learning culture, visible plan, a clear career path, mentoring, R&D infrastructure, good governance and devoted management determine the success of an inventive family firm |
| Barbera et al. (2018), Family Business Review | USA | How entrepreneurial heritage is formed through time | Value for Independence, vision, hard-work, enjoying fruits of labor, determination | Mentoring, Storytelling symbolic gestures, familial relationships and narratives, second-hand imprinting | Communicating, educating, relational embeddedness, imprinting | Entrepreneurial legacies are shaped by an ongoing intersubjective meaning-making process that develops through symbolic gestures, familial relationships and narratives that inspire, support and disrupt entrepreneurship over many generations |
| Benavides-Salazar et al. (2022), Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies | Colombia, South America | The effects of cultural and social characteristics EFs’ on the development of the entrepreneurial ecosystem | Entrepreneurial mindset, attitude | Entrepreneurial stories, mentoring Role models, Supportive culture, networking | Educating, communicating, parental socialization styles, relational embeddedness, Zeitgeist | Embedded entrepreneurial families strengthen both the entrepreneurial ecosystem and entrepreneurship in general through mentoring and sharing their stories |
| Bika et al. (2019) Family Business Review | Scotland | The socialization of family members into the family business | Family Business Succession, obedience, Harmony, loyalty, continuity and legacy, adaptiveness, innovation, risk-taking questioning, resilience, empathy and trust | Family Socialization, apprenticeship, On the job learning from previous generations, interactive learning from multiple agents and stakeholders, peer pressure, mentoring | Educating, parental socialization styles, Zeitgeist | Three layers of socialization develops over time: internal (passing on knowledge within the family), interactive (resolving conflicting role demands through peer interactions) and experiential (interacting with both peer groups and malleable societal/economic frames) |
| Entrepreneurship and Regional Development | Northern Europe | How entrepreneurial behaviors are passed down and ingrained throughout the generations | Risk Taking | Mentoring, predecessor legacy building, entrepreneurial education and experience, family legacy unification and emulation | Commutating, educating, relational embeddedness, vicarious learning | Variations in how families react to key occurrences determine the negotiation and reification of entrepreneurial behaviors within TEFs |
| Dana et al. (2020), Journal of Family Business Management | Pakistan | Social mechanisms that facilitate the reproduction of an entrepreneurially oriented community structure | Value of self-employment, Frugality, business orientation, entrepreneurial orientation, goal orientation, trust, social responsibility | Group cohesion, solidarity, social interaction, networking, norming, expectation for action, active use of community centers to educate guide and recruit, role modeling | Relational embeddedness, Zeitgeist | Community entrepreneurship is made possible by the interdependence of family, community and ethnic capital as contextual manifestations of social capital that appear at various levels of the ethnic social system |
| Discua Cruz et al. (2012), Journal of Family Business Strategy | Honduras | How entrepreneurial cultures are passed down and sustained in family business | Value for opportunity identification and pursuit | Involving junior generations in the identification and pursuit of opportunities, Early and prolonged guidance by senior generations in business, Scenarios, discussing how to approach the ‘‘Mature’’ ideas of the senior generation, Current involvement in business, Role Playing, problem-solving, From early age at home, business and family gatherings with nuclear and extended family | Relational embeddedness, educating, communicating | In a family entrepreneurial team, entrepreneurial cultures are passed down and sustained across generations through junior generations’ participation in the identification and pursuit of possibilities |
| Dou et al. (2021) Entrepreneurship and Regional Development | China | The values and knowledge components shared between two generations | Moral Values (integrity, humility, responsibility and loyalty) Competence values (creativity, ambition, social responsibility and tenacity), Heuristic portfolio (opportunity recognition and interpersonal heuristics | Family meeting, Dinner time and story-telling | Communicating, relational embeddedness | Moral values, competency values and cognitive heuristics were transmitted between the two generations through transgenerational encounters (family gatherings, mealtimes, storytelling), and it is values rather than heuristics that are further conveyed in new entrepreneurial situations |
| Erdogan et al. (2020) Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice | Turkey | The interaction between tradition and innovation in family firms | Value for innovation | Imprinting | Imprinting | Depending on the content imprinted on the current family generation, the long-standing traditions and generations of prior families influence various approaches to innovation and tradition |
| Eze et al. (2021), Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice | Nigeria | Influence of religious and cultural variations on family business practices in maintaining transgenerational entrepreneurship | Moderate risk-taking orientation, Opportunity exploitation orientation | Attending unified business decisions/Cohesiveness | Relational embeddedness, parental socialization styles | Religion and tradition within a sub-regional context in a developing country shape the capacity of family businesses to achieve transgenerational entrepreneurship, through family structure, functioning and mindset |
| García-Élvarez et al. (2002), Family Business Review | Spain | The socialization of future family business succession | Founder values (self-fulfillment values, the group value orientation, Group values and the idea of the business as an end) | Family socialization, training and business socialization | Parental socialization styles, education | Values are passed down to the next generation through family socialization and training in business, which is available only to the founder’s possible successors |
| Igwe et al. (2020). International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior and Research | Nigeria | Entrepreneurial characteristics of Igbo Families and the underlying causes affecting their entrepreneurial behavior and values | Need for Achievement, Pursuit of personal status Risk-taking, Pursuit of economic liberation, Pursuit of family wealth, Pursuit of entrepreneurial opportunities, strategic education | Entrepreneurial learning, Social learning, Family cohesion, networking, individual learning, Society norms, early childhood business learning, informal apprenticeship | Educating, relational embeddedness, individual learning, Zeitgeist | Igbo families and extended families encourage children and young people to pursue entrepreneurship at a young age by offering a platform for entrepreneurial leadership, a secure environment for taking risks, an informal apprenticeship system, entrepreneurial learning, role models and narratives of family social learning |
| Jaskiewicz et al. (2015), Journal of Business Venturing | Germany | How exceptional family firms accomplish transgenerational entrepreneurship | Entrepreneurial legacy (EL) Pursuit of entrepreneurship from perseveration of key resources, entrepreneurial leaps from increased entrepreneurial capacity and orientation of children, entrepreneurial opportunities identification and utilization, succession pride of past generations, entrepreneurial behaviors of family | Family Cohesion, Childhood involvement in the family firm, strategic education (formal and experiential), entrepreneurial bridging Integrating the successor’s partner participates regularly in family events, narratives about ancestors’ entrepreneurial achievements or resilience | Relational embeddedness, Vicarious learning, educating | Transgenerational entrepreneurial families differ from traditional families in that they have an entrepreneurial legacy, which they successfully pass on to the following generation and which then inspires both generations to take part in deliberate activities that foster the entrepreneurship of the next generation |
| Jose Parada and Viladás (2010), Journal of Organizational Change Management | Spain | How core values are successfully transmitted in family businesses via narratives | Entrepreneurial values and identities of the family | Narratives-telling stories | Communicating | Narratives are a potent tool for passing values down across generations and entrepreneurial families can develop identity and shared meanings through storytelling |
| Kammerlander et al. (2015) Family Business Review | Italy | The role of stories shared among family members across generations and the family firms’ innovations | Innovativeness, Decision making | Story sharing | Communicating | Stories about the founders, the range of available options, the division of decision-making authority among generations, and the significance of family conflict all influence the relationship between family emphasis and innovation, both favorably and adversely |
| Kansikas et al. (2012) International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research | Finland | How familiness and entrepreneurial leadership interact in family businesses | Entrepreneurial leadership (innovativeness; opportunity recognition; proactiveness; risk-taking; and vision making.) professionalization, strong growth-oriented attitude extending across both generations. | Familiness entrepreneurial leadership of a family firm, Open daily communication between the two generations, Co-leadership by two different generations. Encouraging professionalization | Relational embeddedness, Parental socialization styles, communication | Familiness is a resource that influences entrepreneurial leadership through structural (social contacts and networks), cognitive (shared vision and purposes) and relational (relationships creating attachments) |
| Klyver et al. (2020) International Small Business Journal: Researching Entrepreneurship | Denmark | How cultural norms affect how entrepreneurs feel about receiving support | Entrepreneurs emotional response to receiving support | sharing cultural expectations of emotional support from family, friends and business persons, respectively | Communicating, parenting socialization styles, zeitgeist | Entrepreneurs’ emotional responses to receiving support—or lack thereof—from role-relations are influenced by cultural expectations and as a result, the results of the support are about “what you get” in comparison to “what you anticipate.” |
| Monticelli et al. (2020) International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior and Research | Brazil | Relating entrepreneurship across generations of family-owned enterprises | Transgenerational culture, values of legitimacy, business professionalization, succession planning and entrepreneurial behavior | Guiding or restricting the agents’ choices by imposing limits on them, developing common entrepreneurial values and culture | Parenting socialization styles, Vicarious learning | The family, as an institution, exerts a strong influence across generations in which the responses of the family founders and their successors are modeled by institutional forces that guide or restrict the agents’ choices by imposing limits on them |
| Mzid et al. (2019), Journal of International Entrepreneurship | Tunisia | How a family-run firm help it to be resilient in a challenging business environment | Family Capital: Goodwill, trust and confidence in family members or their firm, trust, respect, and altruism among owing family members, employees, managers and leaders, social norms and reciprocated favors, values and beliefs | Continued presence of family members in the firm in order to quickly manage arising problems, Family firms maintain partner relations | Parenting socialization styles, relational embeddedness | Social capital of family businesses, which may be made up of local and/or international contacts, contributes most to firms’ capacity to absorb shocks, reallocate existing resources and internalize practices that enable firms to cope with future disturbances while financial capital mediates the impact of human and social capital in order to strengthen firms’ resilience |
| Maziriri et al. (2022), Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies | South Africa | How couplepreneurs help their children develop an entrepreneurial mindset | Entrepreneurial mindset (creativity, innovation, self-employment) | Encouraging kids to read entrepreneurial books, the piggy bank, kid entrepreneur showcases, buying toys and games for kids that encourage entrepreneurship, competition and team activities among kids that are related to entrepreneurship | Imprinting | Couplepreneurs foster an entrepreneurial mindset in their kids by encouraging kids to read entrepreneurial books, the piggy bank, kid entrepreneur showcases, buying toys and games for kids that encourage entrepreneurship, competition and team activities among kids that are related to entrepreneurship |
| Tao et al. (2021), Journal of Small Business Management | Netherlands | How second-generation Chinese American business owners in the Netherlands create their many identities | Entrepreneurial mindset (Self-employment) | Role modeling | Vicarious learning | Considering generation as a marker of identity for ethnic minority entrepreneurs within complex trajectories, role models, escaping from the kitchen, the evolving definitions of business success and family and cultural resources are the four subthemes related to the Chinese immigrant families which create their identities |
| Zozimo et al. (2017), Entrepreneurship and Regional Development An International Journal | UK | Entrepreneurial learning through the observation of role models | Learning about oneself, managing relationships, the business and small business management) | Observation, Role- modeling and Entrepreneurial learning | Vicarious learning, educating | People pick up complex practices and behaviors over time by watching role models (parents, teachers, colleagues and other entrepreneurs), both in the pre-start-up phase (unplanned learning) and in the post-start-up phase (intentional learning) connected to a variety of personal or professional challenges |
| Zwack et al. (2016), Management Learning | German | How storytelling might help family businesses transmit cultural family values | Entrepreneurial values | Storytelling | Communicating | Stories may therefore be a good tool for passing down traditional family values in family businesses in which he intended values of the selected stories are perceived accurately by the individuals |
| Group B: Quantitative empirical | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Authors, journals | Country | Purpose | Family predictors | Entrepreneurial output | What? | How_? | Aggregate VT mechanisim | Main findings |
| Albanese et al. (2016), Journal of Population Economics | Italy | The role of family transmission of values | Values received from parents | values transmitted to descendants | Tolerance, hard-work, obedience and observance | Socialization | Parental socialization styles | Parents’ values and the values passed down to offspring are positively connected and during the formative years—when children somehow strike a balance between the values instilled in them by their parents and what they encounter in the (possibly different) environment where they grow up—are what matter for breaking the family bonds |
| Altinay et al. (2012), International Journal of Hospitality Management | UK | The impact of psychological characteristics and family tradition on the entrepreneurial intent of students | Family tradition family background and personality traits | Entrepreneurial intention | Entrepreneurial intention | Using family tradition, experiencing business in the family business | Vicarious learning, educating | The ambition to launch a new business is influenced by family tradition and innovation; risk-taking propensity and tolerance of ambiguity are positively correlated, whereas locus of control and risk-taking propensity are negatively correlated |
| Arregle et al. (2015), Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice | Multiple countries | The relationship between family ties and new venture growth in entrepreneurs’ social networks | Family ties | Venture growth | New venture growth | Family ties, entrepreneurs’ social network (business advice, emotional support and business resources) | Relational embeddedness, communication, parental socialization styles | An inverted U-shape for advising and emotional support networks, but a U-shape for the business resource network, indicating the contribution of kin to new venture growth or, conversely, its detriment |
| Arz (2021) International Studies of Management and Organization | Germany | The cultural interactions between family and corporate social systems | Family commitment culture; long-term orientation; stewardship climate | Entrepreneurial orientation | Family firm Entrepreneurial orientation, long-term orientation | Family commitment culture, stewardship climate, strong identification with the firm, inspiring and visionary behavior of family business leaders | Parenting socialization styles, imprinting | Only long-term priorities within the firm’s dominant coalition and an organizational climate typified by collective stewardship appear to stimulate entrepreneurial orientation when a family has a strong commitment to the company |
| Bloemen-Bekx et al. (2019), International Small Business Journal | Netherlands | The effect of the family environment on the emergence of entrepreneurial intention (EI) in young adults with entrepreneurial parents | Family context (‘vicarious learning’ and ‘social persuasion’), gender | Entrepreneurial Intention youths | Entrepreneurial intention | Vicarious learning (Perceived rewards parental careers Perceived self-direction of parental careers) and Parental preference (Parental encouragement by work Parental encouragement by talk) | Vicarious learning, parental socialization styles, individual learning | Children’s EI is influenced by gender directly and parental preference indirectly (via social impact and indirect learning) |
| Cherchem (2017), Journal of Family Business Strategy | France | How generational influence affects the ways that clan and hierarchical cultures affect entrepreneurial orientation | Generational involvement in a family firm | Family Firm Entrepreneurial orientation | entrepreneurial orientation (EO | intergenerational interaction. generational involvement | Relational embeddedness | While clan culture fosters higher levels of EO when only one generation is involved, hierarchical culture fosters higher levels of EO when multiple generations are simultaneously involved |
| Chereau and Meschi (2022), Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development | France | How exposure to entrepreneurship education and training (EET), affects post-creational entrepreneurs’ sense of self-efficacy | Intense exposure to entrepreneurship education and Family environment as mediator | Entrepreneurial self-efficacy, for entrepreneurs in the post-creation stage | entrepreneurial intention, business opportunity recognition, entrepreneurial skills and knowledge and entrepreneurial self-confidence | parental ties, quasi-parental role modeling | Relational embeddedness, vicarious learning, educating | The direct effects of EET intensity on the various components of entrepreneurial self-efficacy are not statistically significant especially with the entrepreneurial parenting environment and higher effect on the non-entrepreneurial parental environment context |
| Chlosta et al. (2012), Small Business Econonomics | Germany | The offspring’s openness and the different effects of the role models on an individual’s decision to become self-employed | Parental role models mediated by Personality (openness) of the family member | The decision to become self-employed | Self-employment | Role modeling | Vicarious learning | Parental role models are considerably positively connected with the possibility of being self-employed, yet the impact of role models also depends on how open a person is |
| Covin et al. (2020), Journal of Business Venturing | USA | The effects parenting style has on (internal corporate venture ICV proficiency or learning capacity | Parenting style | Adeptness (learning proficiency) of ICV managers at acquiring extensive new strategy | Learning competence | Parenting style | Parenting socialization styles | Parenting styles have an impact on how well children learn and when a venture’s initial strategic clarity is high, a short leash parenting style is linked to the highest levels of venture learning competence. and when venture beginning strategic clarity is poor, a long-leash parenting style is related to the highest degrees of venture learning competence |
| Edelman et al. (2016), Journal of Business Venturing | Multiple Countries | How family support affects the start-up activities carried out by university students | Family support | Youths’ start-up activities | Startup activities | Family cohesiveness | Relational embeddedness | Family support, financial and social capital all positively influence the scope of youths’ start-up activities and the effect of instrumental family support is enhanced by the level of emotional support |
| Entrialgo and Iglesias (2018), Entrepreneurship Research Journal | Spain | How exposure to role models and entrepreneurship courses affect men and women’s views and attitudes about entrepreneurship | Exposure to role models and entrepreneurship education | Perceptions and attitudes toward entrepreneurship | Value for Entrepreneurship/self-employment | Exposure to role models | Vicarious learning | Women are much more likely than males to have a positive attitude toward entrepreneurship when exposed to parental role models, and women are more likely than men to think that they have more control over their entrepreneurial behavior when exposed to entrepreneurship education |
| Greene et al. (2013), Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice | UK | How gender stereotypes and roles “imprint” on entrepreneurial propensities | Maternal self-employment | Daughter’s self-employment | Gender stereotyping for business | Imprinting | Imprinting | Daughters are more likely to become self-employed because of the counter-stereotypical effect that mom self-employment produces, though daughters’ own stereotypes that it is also shaped by key life events affects it |
| Hahn et al. (2021), Technological Forecasting and Social Change | Multiple countries | How the family business, helps to foster the emergence of entrepreneurship by influencing the aspirations of the following generation to start their own businesses | Enterprising family and the family enterprise | Next generation’s preferences for succeeding over founding | Entrepreneurial intentions | Career-related modeling | Vicarious learning | The entrepreneurial family and the family enterprise, are two intertwined units of analysis pertaining to the family business context, have an impact on a person’s decision to launch a new business or continue working for the family enterprise |
| Hillebrand (2019) Journal of Family Business Management | Germany | How generational change, family management involvement and the desire to transmit family control affect innovation in family businesses | Family influence (family management and intention to transfer family control) | Innovation output over generations | Innovation | Family control | Family socialization styles | Family influence can have both positive and negative effects on innovation Since family firms increase their innovation output over generations and the increase occurs via indirect paths, particularly via the intent to transfer family control to succeeding generations |
| Hoffmann et al. (2015), Small Business Economics | Denmark | The significance of parental “role models” | Parental role models | Individuals’ probability of becoming self-employed | Self-employment | Role modeling | Vicarious learning | Parental role models play a significant role in explaining why self-employment runs in the family and for males, the impact of a self-employed father (or mother) is much greater than for females |
| Jayawarna et al. (2014), International Small Business Journal | UK | Connect the literature on human capital and cultural capital | Family background (Human and Cultural capital) | Entrepreneurship potential of individuals | entrepreneurial careers | Apprenticeship | Educating | Family cultural capital plays a key role in developing individuals’ entrepreneurial aspirations by influencing the materialization of the human capital that people accumulate throughout their lives |
| Kellermanns et al. (2012), Small Business Economics | USA | The connections between family influence and family firm performance | Family influence | Family firm performance | Innovativeness | Family member reciprocity | Relational embeddness | Family dynamics can affect a family business’ performance in both positively and negatively and single-generational businesses seem to benefit from innovation considerably more than multigenerational ones |
| Laspita et al. (2012), Journal of Business Venturing | Multiple countries | The effects of entrepreneurial position of parents and grandparents on the growth of offspring’s entrepreneurial impulses | Parents and grandparents’ entrepreneurial positions | Entrepreneurial intentions of children | Entrepreneurial intentions | exposure to parental entrepreneurship | Vicarious learning, relational embeddedness | Parents and grandparents can have an impact on how entrepreneurial ambitions are passed on to children, either directly or “indirectly” through the parents |
| Lindquist et al. (2015) Journal of Labor Economics | Sweden | The origins of the intergenerational association in entrepreneurship | Prebirth and post-birth factors | Probability of children’s entrepreneurship | Value for Self-employment | Role modeling | Vicarious learning | Both the biological and adoptive parents of adopted people significantly raise the likelihood of children becoming entrepreneurs, in which post-birth factors dominate prebirth factors by a factor ratio of two to one |
| Maleki et al. (2021), The International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation | Multiple countries | The influence of family support on young people’s perceptions of the attractiveness and viability of starting a business | Perceived family support moderated by national cultural dimensions | Young individuals’ perceptions towards self-employment | Entrepreneurial intention | Family bondage and cohesiveness | Relational embeddedness | Family support increases the perceived desirability and feasibility of starting a business, depending on national culture more in nations with higher levels of power distance or lower individualism |
| Mari et al. (2016), Management Decision | Italy | How the family context may affect the performance of female firms | Family context | Female firms’ performance | the motivations to start a business | Emotional support | Parental socialization styles | The performance of a firm is correlated with the family context for women |
| Mishkin (2021), Management Science | How entrepreneurship is passed down through generations | Gender and sibling dynamics | Intergenerational transmission of entrepreneurship | self-employment | Business inheritance, family capital support, Occupational transmission (role modeling) | Vicarious learning, Parental socialization styles | When there are sons in the family, the transfer of self-employment from fathers to daughters is dramatically diminished while sons prevent daughters from acquiring as much human capital | |
| Mungai and Velamuri (2011), Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice | USA | The impact of parental entrepreneurial role models on the self-employment choices of male offspring | Parental entrepreneurial role model | Male Offspring self-employment decisions | Self-employment | Role modeling | Vicarious learning | Parental failure in self-employment lessens the beneficial effect of parental self-employment on the likelihood of becoming self-employed, and this effect is particularly prominent when the kid is a young adult |
| Nicolaou et al. (2008), Management Science | UK | Whether entrepreneurship is genetically inherited from patents | The genetic shared environmental and nonshared environmental effects | The propensity of people to become entrepreneurs | Entrepreneurial traits | Genetics | Genetics | There is a relatively high heritability of entrepreneurship with little effect of family environment and upbringing, highlighting the significance of taking genetic factors into account when attempting to explain why people engage in entrepreneurial activity |
| Pittino et al. (2018), Family Business Review | Italy | How family embeddedness circumstances interact with individual-level elements | Family Embeddedness and Individual attributes | Entrepreneurial Entry decision by next generation | Entrepreneurial intention | Family embeddedness Family support Experience in the family business Motivations and attitudes | Relational embeddedness, parental socialization styles | The degree and kind of family embeddedness are key factors in determining the intention to stay and the interaction between family embeddedness and personal characteristics encourages different types of business commitment from members of the next generation |
| Schölin et al. (2016), International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior and Research | Sweden | How a person’s intention to be self-employed is influenced by their family | Family factors (family involvement | Individual’s intention to be self-employed and company type | Choice of company type and self-employment | Role models for self-employment who can inspire to seek out a similar situation | Vicarious learning | Both the intention and the propensity are passed down through families and the transferred intention within a given family influences the type of business that family members are likely to select |
| Staniewski and Awruk (2021), Journal of Business Research | Poland | How family issues, such as parental views and the makeup of one’s family of origin, affect achieving entrepreneurial success | Parental factors -parental attitude | Family members Entrepreneurial success | Entrepreneurial orientation and success | Conditioning by the family of origin. Modeling processes and communication Attitudes displayed by the parents | Vicarious learning, imprinting | Entrepreneurial success has not been found to significantly correlate with parental attitudes (e.g. acceptance, autonomy) or family structure dimensions (e.g. cohesion and flexibility). Instead, family communication style and level of satisfaction with family life have emerged as crucial determinants of entrepreneurial success |
| Schmitt-Rodermund (2004), Journal of Vocational Behavior | Germany | The relation between Personality traits and parenting style on entrepreneurial competence (EC) and entrepreneurial interests (EI) | Personality traits and parenting | Entrepreneurial competence (EC) and entrepreneurial interests (EI) | Entrepreneurial intention | Parenting style | Parenting socialization styles | EI was predicted by EC, which in turn was related to the students’ potential for an entrepreneurial career and to the founders’ first company ventures starting sooner than expected and a relationship between authoritarian parenting and entrepreneurial personality (low agreeableness and neuroticism, high extraversion, openness and conscientiousness) |
| Staniewski and Awruk (2021), Journal of Business Research | Poland | Whether family characteristics, such as parental behavior and family structure, have an impact on one’s ability to succeed as an entrepreneur | Family factors, family attitudes, family structure | Entrepreneurial performance | Entrepreneurial orientation and success | Role modeling in the family | Vicarious learning | Parental traits like unreasonable expectations, inconsistent behavior and business success have been linked negatively |
| Wang et al. (2021), Management Decision | China | Analyze the ways in which social ties between family members can influence their collective entrepreneurial decision-making behavior (ED) | Social relationships between family members | Collective entrepreneurial decision-making behavior | entrepreneurial decision-making | intersection of cognition, emotion and social influence subjective or social constructive process | Educating | There are significant connections between the entrepreneur’s decision-making and the cognitive dimension of the family social capital |
| Wang et al. (2018), International Entrepreneurship Management | China | The substance of family business exposure, we may reveal the impact of exposure to family businesses on the development of offspring’s entrepreneurial inclinations | Family business exposure | Entrepreneurial intentions of offspring | Entrepreneurial intentions | Vicarious learning through observing parent entrepreneurs. Offspring’s interpretation of the rewards their parents received from their entrepreneurial experiences | Vicarious learning, individual learning | Perceived parental entrepreneurial incentives have a beneficial impact on children’s entrepreneurial goals. Family business engagement, however, has a negative moderating effect on this relationship |
| Wyrwich (2015), Small Business Economics | Germany | The influence of self-employed parents on their n children | Parental background (Self-employed parents, parental values | Children’s’ value mastery and | Self-employment | Parental role models | Vicarious learning | Children of parents who were self-employed in a setting with limited institutional support for entrepreneurship appear to have absorbed values that are particularly important to “survive” as an entrepreneur in such unfriendly conditions |
| Zahra et al. (2004), Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice | USA | Examines the association between of organizational culture in family vs non-family businesses and entrepreneurship | Organizational culture in family vs non-family businesses | Entrepreneurship | Family Firm Entrepreneurial activity | Autonomous and empowered action | Parental Socialization styles | The cultural factors of individualism and entrepreneurship are found to be nonlinearly correlated there are correlating correlations between entrepreneurship and a long-term versus short-term orientation, an organizational cultural orientation toward decentralization and an external orientation |
| Zaman et al. (2021), Journal of Family Business Management | Pakistan | The effect of family business exposure on individuals’ entrepreneurial intentions (EIs). By applying the institutional framework at the micro level | Family business exposure on | Individuals’ entrepreneurial intentions | Emotional intelligence | Business Exposure | Vicarious learning | Family business exposure had a favorable impact on people’s emotional intelligence (EI), which is mediated by institutional pressures (coercive, normative and mimetic) that further improved people’s EI |
| Zellweger et al. (2011), Journal of Business Venturing | Multiple European countries | How intentional founders, successors and employees differ in terms of locus of control and entrepreneurial self-efficacy as well as independence and innovation motives | family business background | Career choice intentions of students with family | Internal locus of control | family business exposure, perceived vicarious experience in the family business | Vicarious learning | Students with a background in family businesses are pessimistic about having control over their entrepreneurial careers but optimistic about their ability to do so and high levels of internal locus of control result in a preference for employment, which contradicts traditional entrepreneurship research |
| Zellweger et al. (2012), Small Business Economics | Switzerland | The relation between Family firm pride, social ties and firm image and family firm performance | Family firm pride, community social ties and long-term orientation | Family firm image building which in affects family firm performance | Firm performance | Family firm pride, community social ties and long-term orientation, the unique family influences on the firm | Relational embeddedness, parental socialization styles | Family pride, neighborhood social ties, long-term orientation, organizational and industry scale and age all have an impact on family firms’ performance. Family firms’ immediate antecedent or “firm image,” also has an impact |
| Zellweger and Sieger (2012), Journal of Business Venturing | USA | The construct of family entrepreneurial orientation, as an antecedent to transgenerational value creation by families | Family entrepreneurial orientation | Transgenerational value creation by families | Transgenerational entrepreneurial orientation and risk and innovation orientation | the attitudes and mind-sets of families to engage in entrepreneurial activity | Parental socialization styles, zeitgeist | Macroenvironmental elements (industry, family life stage, community culture and family engagement) have an impact on business performance (social, financial and entrepreneurial), which in turn has an impact on the production of transgenerational value |
| Bindah (2017), Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research | NA | How specific parenting styles, organizational methods and parenting philosophies improve an entrepreneur’s capacity | Parenting skills, structure and styles | Entrepreneur’s ability to be more efficient and effective and good leader at work | Entrepreneurial capacity | Parenting styles | Parenting socialization styles | Parenting style significantly influences leadership performance and style and entrepreneur leaders |
| Hanson et al. (2019), Journal of Family Business Strategy | USA | The underlying familial relational mechanisms that result in resilience and support an entrepreneurial culture across generations | Relational ethics, fairness and justice in family relationships were used to interpret | family resiliency and ultimately transgenerational transfer of entrepreneurial culture | entrepreneurial culture and resilience across generations | relationship-building and relationship maintenance interaction | Relational embeddedness | A more balanced ledger, a relational ethics and the family ledger have an impact on entrepreneurial culture and can change over generations |
| Razzak et al. (2019), Journal of Family Business Management | Bangladesh | Identify the components of family-centric non-economic goals that motivate family commitment, such as socioemotional wealth (SEW) of family company owners | Family-centric non-economic goals (SEW) | Family Commitment | family commitment | binding social ties and identification of family members with the firm | Parenting socialization styles | A family commitment is impacted by four of the five FIBER SEW elements, except for strong social bonds |
| Group C: Conceptual | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Authors, journal | Focus | What? | How? | Aggerigate VT Mechanisim | Main findings and propositions |
| Dyer et al. (2014), Journal of Small Business Management | Explain why some racial or ethnic groups are more likely to be entrepreneurs than others and what factors influence this, with a focus on family capital | Nascent entrepreneurship Start-up rates Self-employment, Firm growth rates, Firm size, success and failure rate over time | Informal conversations over the dinner table, watching their parents at work and through summer or other employment in their parents’ businesses | Communicating, parental socialization styles, vicarious learning, educating | Family capital which includes family values influences entrepreneurial outcomes |
| Eddleston and Kidwell (2012), Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice | Parent–child relationships (PCRs) as the root cause of deviance | Stewardship and opportunism can occur within the same family firm | Showing parental altruism | Vicarious learning | In family businesses, parent-child relationships result in a leader-member exchange differentiation that subsequently molds a child’s behavior toward the firm |
| Nordstrom and Steier (2015), International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior and Research | Review the notion of social capital and its dominant dimensions and develop several suggestions of ways in which the concept could be extended | Competitive advantage of family firms | Symbolic interactionism, social structure, ties and relationships, individual’s perception of their network | Vicarious learning, Parenting socialization styles, individual learning | Symbolic interactionism could aid in understanding family businesses, social capital and competitive advantage |
| Soleimanof et al. (2019), Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice | Explain why and how family institutions matter for individual-level entrepreneurial behaviors within family firms | Favorable attitudes, beliefs and values towards entrepreneurship | interactions and relationships. embeddedness within the family, family communication patterns | Relational embeddedness, communication | Family institutions’ influence entrepreneurial behaviors by family members’ cognitions, values and abilities, as well as, family and nonfamily members’ interactions and relationships |
| Steier (2009), Family Business Review | This article positions Rodriguez et al. (2009) within the broader context of entrepreneurship and social capital research. | New venture creation | Interplay of powerful social contexts—household, social, ethnic—and their impact on the propensity to found a new venture. Incubators and opportunity platforms for venture creation | Zeistgeist, parenting socialization styles | Family social capital is valuable as a means of opportunity and incubator for the creation of new ventures |
| Aldrich and Cliff (2003), Journal of Business Venturing | To explore how family systems affect opportunity emergence and recognition, the new venture creation decision and the resource mobilization process | Entrepreneurship, opportunity identification, opportunity recognition, company start-up decisions and the resource mobilization process of the individuals | Family embeddedness | Relational embeddedness | Family structure, characteristics, dynamics and culture influence entrepreneurship, opportunity recognition, opportunity recognition, business establishment decisions and the resource mobilization process of individuals when deciding to grow or start a new one |
| Carnes and Ireland (2013), Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice | Analyzing Innovation within family firms relying on and drawing from resource-based theory | Innovation | Familiness (Stabilizing, Enriching, Pioneering) | Relational embeddedness | Familiness has a positive impact on innovation through stabilizing, enriching and pioneering elements of the resource bundling process |
| Wiedeler and Kammerlander (2021), Review of Managerial Science | Attributes related to the (next gen) family manager, the family support and the venture-family firm relationship | development of entrepreneurial capabilities | Entrepreneurial learning, family relationship and communication | Education, relational embeddedness, communicating | The future family manager, the family and the family-firm relationship are among the factors that determine the effectiveness of transgenerational entrepreneurship |
| Hammond et al. (2016), Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice | Define the concept of family legacy | Wealth expropriation, centralized ownership, risk aversion, dynastic succession employment for family, familial altruism, philanthropic giving, binding social ties, community involvement | Shared histories, deep social ties within the broader community and strong identification with certain beliefs | Relational embeddedness, parental socialization styles, communicating, Zeitgeist | Determine the three types of family legacy: social, material and biological. The family-guiding coalition can protect and transfer the family’s social legacy by incorporating the family’s values into the company’s daily operations and by sharing the family’s involvement tales |
| Liguori et al. (2018), International Entrepreneurship Managemement | explore self-efficacy as it relates to entrepreneurial intentions and entrepreneurial outcome expectations | Entrepreneurial intention | Prior work experience, prior entrepreneurship experience and prior family business exposure | Vicarious learning | Entrepreneurial self-efficacy and expectations for entrepreneurial outcomes were highly influenced by person inputs (gender, minority status and generalized self-efficacy) as well as environmental/background inputs (previous job experience, prior entrepreneurship experience and prior exposure to family businesses) |
Source(s): Authors’ own creation
Inclusion and exclusion criteria
| Criteria | Reason for inclusion |
| Family focus Family dynamics | Entrepreneurial values are driven by families, not just family businesses (Aldrich and Cliff, 2003; Randerson et al., 2021; Rogoff and Heck, 2003). Articles should explain the role, influence or contribution of entrepreneurial families in the entrepreneurship process through family activities It is the dynamics of a family which signal the presence of value transmission mechanisms (Albanese et al., 2016). Articles should show family dynamics which may include direct or indirect familial interaction, embeddedness, familiness, ties, relationships among family members or across generations as mechanisms of value transmission |
| Reason for exclusion | |
| Firm-level focus only Entrepreneurial values focus only | Articles that limited their analysis to firm-level factors as antecedents of entrepreneurial values, orientation or intention Articles that explained entrepreneurial values, without clarifying the specific family dynamics and transmission mechanisms pursued |
Source(s): Authors’ own creation
References
Abun, D., Magallanes, T., Ranay, F., Catbagan, N., Rodelyn and Calairo, J. (2021), “Entrepreneurial values, cognitive attitude toward business and business behavioural intention of ABM grade 12 and fourth-year business management students: a comparative study”, Humanities and Social Science Research, Vol. 4, 16, doi: 10.30560/hssr.v4n4p16.
Ahn, J.S. and Reeve, J. (2021), “Developmental pathways of preadolescents' intrinsic and extrinsic values: the role of basic psychological needs satisfaction”, European Journal of Personality, Vol. 35 No. 2, pp. 151-167, doi: 10.1002/per.2274.
Albanese, G., De Blasio, G. and Sestito, P. (2016), “My parents taught me. Evidence on the family transmission of values”, Journal of Population Economics, Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 571-592, doi: 10.1007/s00148-015-0574-8.
*Aldrich, H.E. and Cliff, J.E. (2003), “The pervasive effects of family on entrepreneurship: toward a family embeddedness perspective”, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 18 No. 5, pp. 573-596, doi: 10.1016/S0883-9026(03)00011-9.
Aldrich, H. and Jennings, J. (2003), “The pervasive effects of family on entrepreneurship: toward A family embeddedness perspective”, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 18 No. 5, pp. 573-596, doi: 10.1016/S0883-9026(03)00011-9.
Aldrich, H.E., Brumana, M., Campopiano, G. and Minola, T. (2021), “Embedded but not asleep: entrepreneurship and family business research in the 21st century”, Journal of Family Business Strategy, Vol. 12 No. 1, 100390, doi: 10.1016/j.jfbs.2020.100390.
Aldrich, H.E., Alvarez, S.A., Brumana, M., Campopiano, G. and Minola, T. (2023), “Entrepreneurship in family firms: what’s next? Multilevel embeddedness and individuals’ cognition”, Journal of Family Business Strategy, Vol. 14 No. 3, 100583, doi: 10.1016/j.jfbs.2023.100583.
*Alrubaishi, D., McAdam, M. and Harrison, R. (2021), “Culture, Islamic capital and the entrepreneurial behaviour of family firms in Saudi Arabia”, International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research, Vol. 27 No. 6, pp. 1476-1501, doi: 10.1108/IJEBR-09-2020-0575.
*Alsos, G.A., Carter, S. and Ljunggren, E. (2014), “Kinship and business: how entrepreneurial households facilitate business growth”, Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, Vol. 26 Nos 1-2, pp. 97-122, doi: 10.1080/08985626.2013.870235.
Altinay, L., Madanoglu, M., Daniele, R. and Lashley, C. (2012), “The influence of family tradition and psychological traits on entrepreneurial intention”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 489-499, doi: 10.1016/j.ijhm.2011.07.007.
*Anderson, A.R., Jack, S.L. and Drakopoulou Dodd, S. (2005), “The role of family members in entrepreneurial networks: beyond the boundaries of the family firm”, Family Business Review, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 135-154, doi: 10.1111/j.1741-6248.2005.00037.x.
*Arregle, J.L., Batjargal, B., Hitt, M.A., Webb, J.W., Miller, T. and Tsui, A.S. (2015), “Family ties in entrepreneurs’ social networks and new venture growth”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 39 No. 2, pp. 313-344, doi: 10.1111/etap.12044.
*Arz, C. (2019), “Bridging the micro-macro gap: a multi-layer culture framework for understanding entrepreneurial orientation in family firms”, Journal of Family Business Strategy, Vol. 10 No. 3, 100287, doi: 10.1016/j.jfbs.2019.04.006.
*Arz, C. (2021), “From family commitment to entrepreneurial orientation: exploring the role of cultural mechanisms in mature family firms”, International Studies of Management and Organization, Vol. 51 No. 4, pp. 297-327, doi: 10.1080/00208825.2021.1969137.
Au, K. and Kwan, H.K. (2009), “Start-up capital and Chinese entrepreneurs: the role of family”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 33 No. 4, pp. 889-908, doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6520.2009.00331.x.
*Au, K., Chiang, F.F.T., Birtch, T.A. and Ding, Z.J. (2013), “Incubating the next generation to venture: the case of a family business in Hong Kong”, Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Vol. 30 No. 3, pp. 749-767, doi: 10.1007/s10490-012-9331-7.
Bagherian, S.S., Soleimanof, S. and Feyzbakhsh, A. (2022), “Intergenerational transmission of entrepreneurial identity within entrepreneurial families”, Academy of Management Proceedings, Vol. 2022 No. 1, doi: 10.5465/AMBPP.2022.13081abstract.
Bandura, A., Ross, D. and Ross, S.A. (1963), “Vicarious reinforcement and imitative learning”, Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, Vol. 67 No. 6, pp. 601-607, doi: 10.1037/h0045550.
*Barbera, F., Stamm, I. and DeWitt, R.L. (2018), “The development of an entrepreneurial legacy: exploring the role of anticipated futures in transgenerational entrepreneurship”, Family Business Review, Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 352-378, doi: 10.1177/0894486518780795.
*Benavides-Salazar, C., Iturrioz-Landart, C., Aragon-Amonarriz, C. and Ibanez-Romero, A. (2022), “The role of entrepreneurial families in entrepreneurial ecosystems: the family social capital approach”, Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies, Vol. 14 No. 6, pp. 1001-1032, doi: 10.1108/jeee-11-2020-0416.
Bettinelli, C., Fayolle, A. and Randerson, K. (2014), “Family entrepreneurship: a developing field”, Foundations and Trends in Entrepreneurship, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 161-236, doi: 10.1561/0300000049.
Bettinelli, C., Sciascia, S., Randerson, K. and Fayolle, A. (2017), “Researching entrepreneurship in family firms”, Journal of Small Business Management, Vol. 55 No. 4, pp. 506-529, doi: 10.1111/jsbm.12347.
Bichler, B.F., Kallmuenzer, A., Peters, M., Petry, T. and Clauss, T. (2022), “Regional entrepreneurial ecosystems: how family firm embeddedness triggers ecosystem development”, Review of Managerial Science, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 15-44, doi: 10.1007/s11846-020-00434-9.
*Bika, Z., Rosa, P. and Karakas, F. (2019), “Multilayered socialization processes in transgenerational family firms”, Family Business Review, Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 233-258, doi: 10.1177/0894486519827435.
Bindah, E.V. (2017), “Family dynamics and intergenerational entrepreneurs’ leadership style”, Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 1-12, doi: 10.1186/s40497-017-0083-1.
Birkle, C., Pendlebury, D.A., Schnell, J. and Adams, J. (2020), “Web of Science as a data source for research on scientific and scholarly activity”, Quantitative science studies, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 363-376, doi: 10.1162/qss_a_00018.
*Bloemen-Bekx, M., Voordeckers, W., Remery, C., Schippers, J., Economie van de, W., Economics, U.L.R.U.M. and Labour, E. (2019), “Following in parental footsteps? The influence of gender and learning experiences on entrepreneurial intentions”, International Small Business Journal, Vol. 37 No. 6, pp. 642-663, doi: 10.1177/0266242619838936.
Blombäck, A. and Brunninge, O. (2016), “Identifying the role of heritage communication: a stakeholder-function framework”, International Studies of Management and Organization, Vol. 46 No. 4, pp. 256-268, doi: 10.1080/00208825.2016.1140522.
Boers, B., Ljungkvist, T., Brunninge, O. and Nordqvist, M. (2017), “Going private: a socioemotional wealth perspective on why family controlled companies decide to leave the stock-exchange”, Journal of family business strategy, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 74-86, doi: 10.1016/j.jfbs.2017.01.005.
Brenøe, A.A. and Epper, T. (2022), “Parenting values and the intergenerational transmission of time preferences”, European Economic Review, Vol. 148, 104208, doi: 10.1016/j.euroecorev.2022.104208.
Brunninge, O. and Melander, A. (2015), “Family firm longevity and resource management: financial and social-emotional wealth rationalities”, in New Ways of Studying Emotions in Organizations, Emerald Group Publishing, Vol. 11, pp. 173-213, doi: 10.1108/S1746-979120150000011008.
Calabro, A., Torchia, M., Kallmuenzer, A., Yezza, H. and Feng, C. (2018), “Transgenerational entrepreneurship in family firms: a configurational approach”, Review of Managerial Science, Vol. 17 No. 7, pp. 2535-2554, doi: 10.1007/s11846-022-00592-y.
Calabrò, A., Vecchiarini, M., Gast, J., Campopiano, G., De Massis, A. and Kraus, S. (2018), “Innovation in family firms: a systematic literature review and guidance for future research”, International Journal of Management Reviews, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 317-355, doi: 10.1111/ijmr.12192.
Capolupo, P., Ardito, L., Petruzzelli, A. and De Massis, A. (2022), “Opening up the black box of family entrepreneurship across generations: a systematic literature review”, International Small Business Journal, Vol. 41 No. 7, pp. 734-773, doi: 10.1177/02662426221127412.
Cardella, G.M., Hernández Sánchez, B. and Sanchez, J. (2020), “Entrepreneurship and family role: a systematic review of a growing research”, Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 10, doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02939.
*Carnes, C.M. and Ireland, R.D. (2013), “Familiness and innovation: resource bundling as the missing link”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 37 No. 6, pp. 1399-1419, doi: 10.1111/etap.12073.
Chang, E.P.C., Memili, E., Chrisman, J.J., Kellermanns, F.W. and Chua, J.H. (2009), “Family social capital, venture preparedness, and start-up decisions: a study of hispanic entrepreneurs in new England”, Family Business Review, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 279-292, doi: 10.1177/0894486509332327.
*Cherchem, N. (2017), “The relationship between organizational culture and entrepreneurial orientation in family firms: does generational involvement matter?”, Journal of Family Business Strategy, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 87-98, doi: 10.1016/j.jfbs.2017.04.001.
*Chereau, P. and Meschi, P.X. (2022), “Deliberate practice of entrepreneurial learning and self-efficacy: the moderating effect of entrepreneurial parental environment as role modeling”, Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 461-483, doi: 10.1108/jsbed-07-2021-0277.
*Chlosta, S., Patzelt, H., Klein, S.B. and Dormann, C. (2012), “Parental role models and the decision to become self-employed: the moderating effect of personality”, Small Business Economics, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 121-138, doi: 10.1007/s11187-010-9270-y.
*Clinton, E., McAdam, M., Gamble, J. and Brophy, M. (2021), “Entrepreneurial learning: the transmitting and embedding of entrepreneurial behaviours within the transgenerational entrepreneurial family”, Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, Vol. 33, pp. 383-404, doi: 10.1080/08985626.2020.1727088.
Clinton, E., O'Gorman, C., Faherty, C. and DeTienne, D. (2017), “Imprinting effects in family owned firms”, Academy of Management Proceedings, Vol. 2017 No. 1, 15727, doi: 10.5465/AMBPP.2017.15727abstract.
*Covin, J.G., Garrett, R.P., Kuratko, D.F. and Shepherd, D.A. (2020), “Short leash or long leash? Parenting style, initial strategic clarity, and the development of venture learning proficiency”, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 35 No. 4, 105951, doi: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2019.105951.
*Dana, L.P., Gurau, C., Light, I. and Muhammad, N. (2020), “Family, community, and ethnic capital as entrepreneurial resources: toward an integrated model”, Journal of Small Business Management, Vol. 58 No. 5, pp. 1003-1029, doi: 10.1111/jsbm.12507.
Dawson, A., Sharma, P., Irving, P.G., Marcus, J. and Chirico, F. (2015), “Predictors of later–generation family members’ commitment to family enterprises”, Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, Vol. 39 No. 3, pp. 545-569, doi: 10.1111/etap.12052.
*Discua Cruz, A., Hamilton, E. and Jack, S.L. (2012), “Understanding entrepreneurial cultures in family businesses: a study of family entrepreneurial teams in Honduras”, Journal of Family Business Strategy, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 147-161, doi: 10.1016/j.jfbs.2012.05.002.
Discua Cruz, A., Howorth, C. and Hamilton, E. (2013), “Intrafamily entrepreneurship: the formation and membership of family entrepreneurial teams”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 37 No. 1, pp. 17-46, doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6520.2012.00534.x.
*Dou, J., Su, E., Li, S. and Holt, D.T. (2021), “Transgenerational entrepreneurship in entrepreneurial families: what is explicitly learned and what is successfully transferred?”, Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, Vol. 33 Nos 5-6, pp. 427-441, doi: 10.1080/08985626.2020.1727090.
Duh, M., Belak, J. and Milfelner, B. (2010), “Core values, culture and ethical climate as constitutional elements of ethical behaviour: exploring differences between family and non-family enterprises”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 97 No. 3, pp. 473-489, doi: 10.1007/s10551-010-0519-9, available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40929466
Dyer, W.G., Nenque, E. and Hill, E.J. (2014), “Toward a theory of family capital and entrepreneurship: antecedents and outcomes”, Journal of Small Business Management, Vol. 52 No. 2, pp. 266-285, doi: 10.1111/jsbm.12097.
Eddleston, K.A. and Kidwell, R.E. (2012), “Parent-child relationships: planting the seeds of deviant behavior in the family firm”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 36 No. 2, pp. 369-386, doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00403.x.
*Edelman, L.F., Manolova, T., Shirokova, G. and Tsukanova, T. (2016), “The impact of family support on young entrepreneurs’ start-up activities”, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 428-448, doi: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2016.04.003.
*Entrialgo, M. and Iglesias, V. (2018), “Are the intentions to entrepreneurship of men and women shaped differently? The impact of entrepreneurial role-model exposure and entrepreneurship education”, Entrepreneurship Research Journal, Vol. 8 No. 1, doi: 10.1515/erj-2017-0013.
Erdogan, I., Rondi, E. and De Massis, A. (2020), “Managing the tradition and innovation paradox in family firms: a family imprinting perspective”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 44 No. 1, pp. 20-54, doi: 10.1177/1042258719839712.
*Eze, N.L., Nordqvist, M., Samara, G. and Parada, M.J. (2021), “Different strokes for different folks: the roles of religion and tradition for transgenerational entrepreneurship in family businesses”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 45 No. 4, pp. 792-837, doi: 10.1177/1042258720964428.
Fan, D., Breslin, D., Callahan, J.L. and Iszatt‐White, M. (2022), “Advancing literature review methodology through rigour, generativity, scope and transparency”, International Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 171-180, doi: 10.1111/ijmr.12291.
*García-Élvarez, E., López-Sintas, J. and Gonzalvo, P.S. (2002), “Socialization patterns of successors in first- to second-generation family businesses”, Family Business Review, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 189-203, doi: 10.1111/j.1741-6248.2002.00189.x.
Girma Aragaw, Z., Haag, K. and Baù, M. (n.d.), “Contextualizing corporate entrepreneurship: a systematic review and future research agenda”, Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, pp. 1-37, (In press), doi: 10.1080/08985626.2024.2341886.
Gomez-Mejia, L., Haynes, K., Núñez-Nickel, M., Jacobson, K.J.L. and Moyano-Fuentes, J. (2007), “Socioemotional wealth and business risks in family-controlled firms: evidence from Spanish olive oil mills”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 52 No. 1, pp. 106-137, doi: 10.2189/asqu.52.1.106.
*Greene, F.J., Han, L. and Marlow, S. (2013), “Like mother, like daughter? Analyzing maternal influences upon women’s entrepreneurial propensity”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 37 No. 4, pp. 687-711, doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6520.2011.00484.x.
*Hahn, D., Spitzley, D.I., Brumana, M., Ruzzene, A., Bechthold, L., Prugl, R. and Minola, T. (2021), “Founding or succeeding? Exploring how family embeddedness shapes the entrepreneurial intentions of the next generation”, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol. 173, 121182, doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121182.
*Hammond, N.L., Pearson, A.W. and Holt, D.T. (2016), “The quagmire of legacy in family firms: definition and implications of family and family firm legacy orientations”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 40 No. 6, pp. 1209-1231, doi: 10.1111/etap.12241.
Hanson, S.K., Hessel, H.M. and Danes, S.M. (2019), “Relational processes in family entrepreneurial culture and resilience across generations”, Journal of Family Business Strategy, Vol. 10 No. 3, 100263, doi: 10.1016/j.jfbs.2018.11.001.
Heck and Mishra (2008), “Family entrepreneurship”, Journal of Small Business Management, Vol. 46 No. 3, pp. 313-316, doi: 10.1111/j.1540-627x.2008.00245.x.
*Hillebrand, S. (2019), “Innovation in family firms – a generational perspective”, Journal of Family Business Management, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 126-148, doi: 10.1108/JFBM-04-2018-0011.
*Hoffmann, A., Junge, M. and Malchow-Møller, N. (2015), “Running in the family: parental role models in entrepreneurship”, Small Business Economics, Vol. 44 No. 1, pp. 79-104, doi: 10.1007/s11187-014-9586-0.
*Igwe, Newbery, R., Amoncar, N., White, G.R.T. and Madichie, N.O. (2018a), “Keeping it in the family: exploring Igbo ethnic entrepreneurial behaviour in Nigeria”, International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior and Research, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 34-53, doi: 10.1108/ijebr-12-2017-0492.
Igwe, P.A., Madichie, N.O. and Newbery, R. (2018b), “Determinants of livelihood choices and artisanal entrepreneurship in Nigeria”, International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior and Research, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 674-697, doi: 10.1108/ijebr-02-2018-0102.
Igwe, P.A., Newbery, R., Amoncar, N., White, G.R.T. and Madichie, N.O. (2020), “Keeping it in the family: exploring Igbo ethnic entrepreneurial behaviour in Nigeria”, International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 34-53, doi: 10.1108/IJEBR-12-2017-0492.
James, A., Hadjielias, E., Guerrero, M., Discua Cruz, A. and Basco, R. (2021), “Entrepreneurial families in business across generations, contexts and cultures”, Journal of Family Business Management, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 355-367, doi: 10.1108/jfbm-01-2020-0003.
Jaskiewicz, P. and Dyer, W.G. (2017), “Addressing the elephant in the room: disentangling family heterogeneity to advance family business research”, Family Business Review, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 111-118, doi: 10.1177/0894486517700469.
*Jaskiewicz, P., Combs, J.G. and Rau, S.B. (2015), “Entrepreneurial legacy: toward a theory of how some family firms nurture transgenerational entrepreneurship”, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 29-49, doi: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2014.07.001.
*Jayawarna, Jones, O. and Macpherson, A. (2014), “Entrepreneurial potential: the role of human and cultural capitals”, International Small Business Journal: Researching Entrepreneurship, Vol. 32 No. 8, pp. 918-943, doi: 10.1177/0266242614525795.
Jennings, J.E., Eddleston, K.A., Jennings, P.D. and Sarathy, R. (2015), Firms within Families : Enterprising in Diverse Country Contexts, Edward Elgar, Heltenham.
*Jose Parada, M. and Viladás, H. (2010), “Narratives: a powerful device for values transmission in family businesses”, Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 166-172, doi: 10.1108/09534811011031346.
*Kammerlander, N., Dessì, C., Bird, M., Floris, M. and Murru, A. (2015), “The impact of shared stories on family firm innovation: a multicase study”, Family Business Review, Vol. 28 No. 4, pp. 332-354, doi: 10.1177/0894486515607777.
*Kansikas, J., Laakkonen, A., Sarpo, V. and Kontinen, T. (2012), “Entrepreneurial leadership and familiness as resources for strategic entrepreneurship”, International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 141-158, doi: 10.1108/13552551211204193.
Kellermanns, F.W., Eddleston, K.A., Sarathy, R. and Murphy, F. (2012), “Innovativeness in family firms: a family influence perspective”, Small Business Economics, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 85-101, doi: 10.1007/s11187-010-9268-5.
Keupp, M.M., Palmié, M. and Gassmann, O. (2012), “The strategic management of innovation: a systematic review and paths for future research”, International Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 367-390, doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2370.2011.00321.x.
*Klyver, K., Schenkel, M.T. and Nielsen, M.S. (2020), “Can’t always get what I want: cultural expectations of emotional support in entrepreneurship”, International Small Business Journal, Vol. 38 No. 7, pp. 677-690, doi: 10.1177/0266242620915675.
Kraus, S., Breier, M. and Dasí-Rodríguez, S. (2020), “The art of crafting a systematic literature review in entrepreneurship research”, The International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 1023-1042, doi: 10.1007/s11365-020-00635-4.
Kupangwa, W., Farrington, S.M. and Venter, E. (2023), “Transgenerational value transmission in business-owning families: an indigenous African perspective”, Journal of Family Business Management, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 748-770, doi: 10.1108/jfbm-06-2023-0091.
*Laspita, S., Breugst, N., Heblich, S. and Patzelt, H. (2012), “Intergenerational transmission of entrepreneurial intentions”, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 414-435, doi: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2011.11.006.
*Liguori, E.W., Bendickson, J.S. and McDowell, W.C. (2018), “Revisiting entrepreneurial intentions: a social cognitive career theory approach”, The International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 67-78, doi: 10.1007/s11365-017-0462-7.
*Lindquist, M.J., Sol, J. and Van Praag, M. (2015), “Why do entrepreneurial parents have entrepreneurial children?”, Journal of Labor Economics, Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 269-296, doi: 10.1086/678493.
*Maleki, A., Moghaddam, K., Cloninger, P. and Cullen, J. (2021), “A cross-national study of youth entrepreneurship: the effect of family support”, The International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 44-57, doi: 10.1177/14657503211054284.
Mari, M., Poggesi, S. and De Vita, L. (2016), “Family embeddedness and business performance: evidences from women-owned firms”, Management Decision, Vol. 54 No. 2, pp. 476-500, doi: 10.1108/MD-07-2014-0453.
Markowska, M. and Wiklund, J. (2020), “Entrepreneurial learning under uncertainty: exploring the role of self-efficacy and perceived complexity”, Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, Vol. 32 Nos 7-8, pp. 606-628, doi: 10.1080/08985626.2020.1713222.
Marques, P., Bikfalvi, A. and Busquet, F. (2022), “A family imprinting approach to nurturing willing successors: evidence from centennial family firms”, Family Business Review, Vol. 35 No. 3, pp. 246-274, doi: 10.1177/08944865221098316.
Marquis, C. and Tilcsik, A. (2013), “Imprinting: toward a multilevel theory”, The Academy of Management Annals, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 195-245, doi: 10.5465/19416520.2013.766076.
Mayes, J.T. (2015), “Still to learn from vicarious learning”, E-learning and Digital Media, Vol. 12 Nos 3-4, pp. 361-371, doi: 10.1177/2042753015571839.
*Maziriri, E.T., Nyagadza, B., Maramura, T.C. and Mapuranga, M. (2022), “‘Like mom and dad’: using narrative analysis to understand how couplepreneurs stimulate their kids’ entrepreneurial mindset”, Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 784-811, doi: 10.1108/jeee-05-2022-0153.
*Mishkin, E. (2021), “Gender and sibling dynamics in the intergenerational transmission of entrepreneurship”, Management Science, Vol. 67 No. 10, pp. 6116-6135, doi: 10.1287/mnsc.2020.3790.
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J. and Altman, D.G. (2009), “Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement”, PLOS Medicine, Vol. 6 No. 7, e1000097.
*Monticelli, J.M., Bernardon, R. and Trez, G. (2020), “Family as an institution: the influence of institutional forces in transgenerational family businesses”, International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 54-75, doi: 10.1108/IJEBR-10-2017-0403.
*Muigai, S.W., Mungai, E. and Velamuri, R. (2023), “Intergenerational transmission of entrepreneurship: an East African perspective of SME owner’s choice of joining the family business or independent own founding”, Cogent Business and Management, Vol. 10 No. 1, 2195023, doi: 10.1080/23311975.2023.2195023.
Mungai, E. and Velamuri, S.R. (2011), “Parental entrepreneurial role model influence on male offspring: is it always positive and when does it occur?”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 35 No. 2, pp. 337-357, doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6520.2009.00363.x.
*Mzid, I., Khachlouf, N. and Soparnot, R. (2019), “How does family capital influence the resilience of family firms?”, Journal of International Entrepreneurship, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 249-277, doi: 10.1007/s10843-018-0226-7.
Ng, D., James, H.S., Jr and Klein, P.G. (2020), “Keeping it in the family: a socio-cognitive approach to the prioritization of family goals”, Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 471-487, doi: 10.1108/JSBED-07-2019-0257.
*Nicolaou, N., Shane, S., Cherkas, L., Hunkin, J. and Spector, T.D. (2008), “Is the tendency to engage in entrepreneurship genetic?”, Management Science, Vol. 54 No. 1, pp. 167-179, doi: 10.1287/mnsc.1070.0761.
Nordstrom, O.A. and Steier, L. (2015), “Social capital: a review of its dimensions and promise for future family enterprise research”, International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research, Vol. 21 No. 6, pp. 801-813, doi: 10.1108/IJEBR-07-2015-0148.
Ordanini, A., Rubera, G. and DeFillippi, R. (2008), “The many moods of inter-organizational imitation: a critical review”, International Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 375-398, doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2370.2008.00233.x.
Palmaccio, M., Dicuonzo, G. and Belyaeva, Z. (2020), “The internet of things and corporate business models: a systematic literature review”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 131, pp. 610-618, doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.09.069.
Pinkovetskaia, I., Arbeláez-Campillo, D., Rojas-Bahamón, M., Novikov, S. and Veas Iniesta, D. (2020), “Social values of entrepreneurship in modern countries”, Revista Amazonia Investiga, Vol. 9 No. 28, pp. 6-13, doi: 10.34069/AI/2020.28.04.1.
Pittino, D., Visintin, F. and Lauto, G. (2018), “Fly away from the nest? A configurational analysis of family embeddedness and individual attributes in the entrepreneurial Entry decision by next-generation members”, Family Business Review, Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 271-294, doi: 10.1177/0894486518773867.
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.-Y. and Podsakoff, N.P. (2003), “Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 88 No. 5, pp. 879-903, doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879.
Poutziouris, P., Smyrnios, K. and Klein, S. (2006), Handbook of Research on Family Business, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.
Quéniart, A. and Charpentier, M. (2013), “Initiate, bequeath, and remember: older women’s transmission role within the family”, Journal of Women and Aging, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 45-65, doi: 10.1080/08952841.2012.720181.
Randerson, K., Frank, H., Dibrell, C. and Memili, E. (2021), “From family to families: pushing family entrepreneurship forward”, Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, Vol. 33 Nos 5-6, pp. 369-382, doi: 10.1080/08985626.2020.1727091.
Rashman, L., Withers, E. and Hartley, J. (2009), “Organizational learning and knowledge in public service organizations: a systematic review of the literature”, International Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 463-494, doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2370.2009.00257.x.
Razzak, M.R., Abu Bakar, R. and Mustamil, N. (2019), “Socioemotional wealth and family commitment: moderating role of controlling generation in family firms”, Journal of Family Business Management, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 393-415, doi: 10.1108/JFBM-09-2018-0050.
Rodriguez, P., Tuggle, C.S. and Hackett, S.M. (2009), “An exploratory study of how potential ‘family and household capital’ impacts new venture start-up rates”, Family Business Review, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 259-272.
Rogoff, E.G. and Heck, R.K.Z. (2003), “Evolving research in entrepreneurship and family business: recognizing family as the oxygen that feeds the fire of entrepreneurship”, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 18 No. 5, pp. 559-566, doi: 10.1016/s0883-9026(03)00009-0.
Ruf, P.J., Graffius, M., Wolff, S., Moog, P. and Felden, B. (2020), “Back to the roots: applying the concept of individual human values to understand family firm behavior”, Family Business Review, Vol. 34 No. 1, pp. 48-70, doi: 10.1177/0894486520944282.
Schmidt-Hertha, B., Krašovec, S.J. and Formosa, M. (2014), Learning across Generations in Europe : Contemporary Issues in Older Adult Education, Sense, Rotterdam.
*Schmitt-Rodermund, E. (2004), “Pathways to successful entrepreneurship: parenting, personality, early entrepreneurial competence, and interests”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 65 No. 3, pp. 498-518, doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2003.10.007.
*Schölin, T., Broomé, P. and Ohlsson, H. (2016), “Self-employment”, International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior and Research, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 329-345, doi: 10.1108/ijebr-02-2015-0044.
Shepherd, D. and Haynie, J.M. (2009), “Family business, identity conflict, and an expedited entrepreneurial process: a process of resolving identity conflict”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 33 No. 6, pp. 1245-1264, doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6520.2009.00344.x.
Simsek, Z., Fox, B. and Heavey, C. (2015), “What’s past is prologue”, Journal of Management, Vol. 41 No. 1, pp. 288-317, doi: 10.1177/0149206314553276.
Soleimanof, S., Rutherford, M.W. and Webb, J.W. (2018), “The intersection of family firms and institutional contexts: a review and agenda for future research”, Family Business Review, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 32-53, doi: 10.1177/0894486517736446.
*Soleimanof, S., Singh, K. and Holt, D.T. (2019), “Micro-foundations of corporate entrepreneurship in family firms: an institution-based perspective”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 43 No. 2, pp. 274-281, doi: 10.1177/1042258718796076.
Sorenson, R.L. and Milbrandt, J.M. (2023), “Family social capital in family business: a faith-based values theory: JBE”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 184 No. 3, pp. 701-724, doi: 10.1007/s10551-022-05110-4.
*Staniewski, M.W. and Awruk, K. (2021), “Parental attitudes and entrepreneurial success”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 123, pp. 538-546, doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.10.039.
*Steier, L. (2009), “Where do new firms come from?: households, family capital, ethnicity, and the welfare mix”, Family Business Review, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 273-278, doi: 10.1177/0894486509336658.
Stephan, A. (2021), “Intergenerational learning in the family as an informal learning process: a review of the literature”, Journal of Intergenerational Relationships, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 441-458, doi: 10.1080/15350770.2020.1817830.
*Tao, Y., Essers, C. and Pijpers, R. (2021), “Family and identity: intersectionality in the lived experiences of second-generation entrepreneurs of Chinese origin in the Netherlands”, Journal of Small Business Management, Vol. 59 No. 6, pp. 1152-1179, doi: 10.1080/00472778.2019.1710014.
Uhlaner, L.M., Kellermanns, F.W., Eddleston, K.A. and Hoy, F. (2012), “The entrepreneuring family: a new paradigm for family business research”, Small Business Economics, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 1-11, doi: 10.1007/s11187-010-9263-x.
*Wang, D., Wang, L. and Chen, L. (2018), “Unlocking the influence of family business exposure on entrepreneurial intentions”, The International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 951-974, doi: 10.1007/s11365-017-0475-2.
*Wang, C.Z., Flamini, G., Wang, K., Pei, R. and Chen, C.Y. (2021), “Entrepreneurial decision-making and family social capital”, Management Decision, Vol. 59 No. 5, pp. 938-952, doi: 10.1108/md-10-2019-1414.
Welter, F. (2011), “Contextualizing entrepreneurship-conceptual challenges and ways forward”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 165-184, doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00427.x.
*Wiedeler, C. and Kammerlander, N. (2021), “Learning the ropes of entrepreneurship: understanding internal corporate venturing for family firms from an entrepreneurial learning perspective”, Review of Managerial Science, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 669-703, doi: 10.1007/s11846-019-00354-3.
Wielsma, A.J. and Brunninge, O. (2019), “‘Who am I? Who are we?’ Understanding the impact of family business identity on the development of individual and family identity in business families”, Journal of family business strategy, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 38-48, doi: 10.1016/j.jfbs.2019.01.006.
*Wyrwich, M. (2015), “Entrepreneurship and the intergenerational transmission of values”, Small Business Economics, Vol. 45 No. 1, pp. 191-213, doi: 10.1007/s11187-015-9649-x.
*Zahra, S.A., Hayton, J.C. and Salvato, C. (2004), “Entrepreneurship in family vs non-family firms: a resource-based analysis of the effect of organizational culture”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 28 No. 4, pp. 363-381, doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6520.2004.00051.x.
*Zaman, S., Arshad, M., Sultana, N. and Saleem, S. (2021), “The effect of family business exposure on individuals’ entrepreneurial intentions: an institutional theory perspective”, Journal of Family Business Management, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 368-385, doi: 10.1108/JFBM-01-2020-0008.
Zellweger, T. and Sieger, P. (2012), “Entrepreneurial orientation in long-lived family firms”, Small Business Economics, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 67-84, doi: 10.1007/s11187-010-9267-6.
Zellweger, T., Sieger, P. and Halter, F. (2011), “Should I stay or should I go? Career choice intentions of students with family business background”, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 26 No. 5, pp. 521-536, doi: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2010.04.001.
Zellweger, T.M., Nason, R.S. and Nordqvist, M. (2012), “From longevity of firms to transgenerational entrepreneurship of families: introducing family entrepreneurial orientation”, Family Business Review, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 136-155, doi: 10.1177/0894486511423531.
Zhou, L., Chen, Z. and Peng, M.Y.P. (2022), “The role of relational embeddedness in enhancing absorptive capacity and relational performance of internationalized SMEs: evidence from mainland China [original research]”, Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 13, 896521, doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.896521.
*Zozimo, R., Jack, S. and Hamilton, E. (2017), “Entrepreneurial learning from observing role models”, Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, Vol. 29 Nos 9-10, pp. 889-911, doi: 10.1080/08985626.2017.1376518.
*Zwack, M., Kraiczy, N.D., von Schlippe, A. and Hack, A. (2016), “Storytelling and cultural family value transmission: value perception of stories in family firms”, Management Learning, Vol. 47 No. 5, pp. 590-614, doi: 10.1177/1350507616659833.
Acknowledgements
Funding: All three authors gratefully acknowledge funding from the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA).