Search results

The aim of this paper is to theorize on and empirically extend the understanding of the adoption of codes of ethics within the context of family firms. The authors contend that in family firms the adoption of code of ethics is a process emerging from social interaction.

Through a multiple case study design the authors analyze family firms that have not yet adopted a code of ethics and untangle the process that could potentially lead to that choice.

The authors’ main finding suggests that the institutional context impacts on the adoption of codes of ethics. Furthermore, in first generation the adoption of codes of ethics is hindered by the presence of the founder and the existence of strong family ties. In subsequent generations as founder centrality is reduced the owning-family considers more the possibility to adopt such codes to preserve the family's reputation in the local community.

First multiple views also from external stakeholders could be added; second, an international perspective using cross-country cases could add more nuances on how cultural and institutional aspects shape the adoption of codes of ethics differently across national contexts.

The authors’ findings inform family business owners on the importance of adopting code of ethics to support the formalization of the family value system.

The authors advance the debate on codes of ethics in family firms by disentangling the process through which those codes may be adopted to institutionalize and formalize the family values, history and tradition.

This study examines the propensity to innovate in automation of family firms (FFs) based on the socio-emotional wealth (SEW) perspective.

This study’s analysis is based on three aspects. First, the authors consider three main non-economic goals and priorities of FFs: the family’s relationship with employees (read as to care for their satisfaction and well-being); the inner pride of building and maintaining the family and firm image and reputation; and the inner feeling to be socially responsible. Second, the authors consider how these goals and priorities vary among FFs according to four dimensions: family ownership, the presence of family members on the board of directors, the involvement of young successors, and the presence of founding and later generations. Finally, the consequences of automation are considered: lower firm employment, lower employees’ satisfaction and well-being, and higher firm productivity. The analysis is based on a sample of 4,150 Italian firms.

The analysis revealed that FFs are less prone to innovate in automation than non-FFs. Specifically, family ownership, the presence of family members on the board of directors, and the presence of founding generation are negatively associated with innovation in automation. Instead, the involvement of young successors and the presence of later generation are positively associated with innovation in automation.

To the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first investigation that, based on SEW, examines how FFs act on the decision to innovate in automation, thereby providing empirical evidence.

The motivations behind co-branding alliances, the differences in performance between the paired brands and the emergence of “spillover effects” have been pillars of the marketing research agenda for almost three decades. We observe an extensive number of studies on co-branding alliances, combined with multiple theoretical perspectives and empirical approaches informing extant literature. The purpose of this paper is to summarize of the state of the art of this research.

The authors offer a systematic literature review of 190 papers on co-branding alliances. The authors portray a picture of the theories informing co-branding research and build a conceptual framework that summarizes the concepts and variables used in this literature. Finally, 11 interviews with managers and consultants of European firms help to reveal potential problems in practice and needs that are not captured by previous studies.

The authors develop a map of theories used to investigate co-branding alliances and build a conceptual framework linking motivations, co-branding alliance implementation and outputs. Finally, the authors propose a structured research agenda.

The main implication relies on the structured research agenda.

Practical implications include the identification of the variables and dimensions involved in a brand alliance to exploit the strengths and moderate the weaknesses of a brand.

This paper highlights how co-branding is embedded in different contexts and dimensions regarding both firms and consumers. The two maps presented in this study underscore the interdependence among such dimensions. The authors interview marketing experts to validate the conceptual framework and to help us extract the managerial implications that stem from it.