Search results

This study aims to reinforce the importance of taking HR beyond administrative activity leading to stronger market orientated performance and the greater use of its people. Many organizations underestimate the effects of deliberately combining market orientation with internal communication demands. As a strategic partner, HR can offer support for designing effective workplace concepts that address such a challenge.

Using in-depth interviews, the authors explore aspects of effective workplace designs in high-performing German firms. This work is taken from a wider study of commercial office solutions completed in 2017.

Workplace designs need to be carefully developed to meet firm-specific needs dedicated to a market orientation strategy.

Practical lessons are drawn for helping HR professionals to better facilitate market orientation and communication needs from inside the organization.

The purpose of this study is to test the role of familiness-related team forces induced by the CEO of family firms. In particular, we report on the effects of the transformational leadership style of CEOs on their respective top-management team (TMT) and firm performance when viewed through a familiness lens.

Survey measures were taken from a snowballed sample of 72 CEOs of German family firms as well as from 245 members of their TMTs. We tested the aggregated firm-level data with objective performance indicators of the firms they led.

Support was obtained for the three hypothesized team-force mediations and the four-path mediation model. The relationship between CEO’s transformational style and high family-firm performance is found to be serially mediated by TMT cohesion, behavioral integration and efficacy. Together, these three types of collective forces are assumed to be the familiness effect of a family-member CEO with a transformational leadership style.

With our model, we quantitatively tested familiness-type forces vis-à-vis firm performance. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.

Several studies of family firm failures have pointed to non-family members in leading positions as a reason. However, non-family members have often played a key role in family-firm longevity, while non-family executives’ involvement in family firms is increasing. These non-family executives who (co-)run family firms are thought to require an almost impossible set of behavioural qualities. The aim of this exploratory study is to find out how specific leader behaviours of effective family executives and non-family executives may differ.

Based on Dulewicz and Higgs’ (2005) broad leadership frame, the authors draw attention to a large range of behaviours of family-firm executives. In-depth interviews were conducted with successful German executives, both family and non-family ones. Their answers had to contain specific behavioural examples.

More behavioural similarities than differences are shown between family- and non-family-based executives. Yet, the self-reflective communicative behavioural qualities of the non-family executives could balance a lack of such qualities among the family-based executives. Based on the three major differences – decision-making style, communication versatility and self-awareness – specific new research propositions are distilled about effective family firm leadership.

Practical suggestions for recruiting non-family executives are offered. Future quantitative longitudinal research on how to pair specific behavioural qualities of family and non-family based executives that optimise family-firm longevity is urgently needed.