Search results

Challenging the static view of family business governance, we propose a model of owner–manager relationships derived from the configurational analysis of managerial behavior and change in governance structure.

Stemming from social exchange theory and building on the 4C model proposed by Miller and Le Breton-Miller (2005), we consider the evolving owner–manager relationship in four main configurations. On the one hand, we account for family businesses shifting from a generalized to a restricted exchange system, and vice versa, according to whether a family manager misbehaves in a stewardship-oriented governance structure or a nonfamily manager succeeds in building a trusting relationship in an agency-oriented governance structure. On the other hand, we consider that family firms will strengthen a generalized exchange system, rather than a restricted one, according to whether a family manager contributes to the stewardship-oriented culture in the business or a nonfamily manager proves to be driven by extrinsic rewards. Four scenarios are analyzed in terms of the managerial behavior and governance structure that characterize the phases of the relationship between owners and managers.

Various factors trigger managerial behavior, making the firm deviate from or further build on what is assumed by stewardship and agency theories (i.e. proorganizational versus opportunistic behavior, respectively), which determine the governance structure over time. Workplace deviance, asymmetric altruism and patriarchy on the one hand, and proorganizational behavior, relationship building and long-term commitment on the other, are found to determine how the manager behaves and thus characterize the owner's reactions in terms of governance mechanisms. This enables us to present a dynamic view of governance structures, which adapt to the actual attitudes and behaviors of employed managers.

As time is a relevant dimension affecting individual behavior and triggering change in an organization, one must consider family business governance as being dynamic in nature. Moreover, it is not family membership that determines the most appropriate governance structure but the owner–manager relationship that evolves over time, thus contributing to the 4C model.

The proposed model integrates social exchange theory and the 4C model to predict changes in governance structure, as summarized in the final framework we propose.

The paper investigates whether a family firm's control context is directly associated with a manager's stewardship attitude or whether this relationship is mediated by the manager's perception with respect to the fairness of the control processes.

The authors have sent a survey to family businesses in Brazil. The authors tested the hypotheses with the data collected from 141 responding family and nonfamily managers with the use of structural equation modeling (SEM) analyses (SmartPLS).

The authors find that more participative and more formal controls are associated with higher procedural justice perceptions. Zooming in on the types of control, namely forward-looking action controls, like target setting (TS), and backward-looking results controls, like performance measurement (PM), the authors observe that TS is significantly positively associated with stewardship identification through a manager's procedural justice perceptions for both control characteristics (partial mediation for participative TS and full mediation for formal TS). PM on the other hand is only significantly directly related to a stewardship identification if it is of a participative character. In addition, the authors find a significant moderating effect of family affiliation, increasing the strength of the association between PM procedural justice and stewardship identification for nonfamily managers.

Prior literature focused on discussing stewardship attitudes and behaviors in family firms, but few provided empirical evidence that a stewardship attitude in a family firm is associated with contextual factors, like the design of controls in family firms in combination with a manager's individual perception of family firm's process factors.

This study investigates the influence of inclusion of nonfamily employees in family firms on their intellectual, social and affective engagement at the workplace. Furthermore, the framework proposed in the study considers the possible moderating influence of procedural justice in the above relationships.

A conceptual framework is developed with the support of the self-determination theory (SDT) and the social exchange theory. The study tests a set of hypotheses using survey data from 654 nonfamily employees working in private family firms in Malaysia.

The results reveal that inclusion has a positive and significant relationship with intellectual, social and affective engagement. While procedural justice moderates the association between inclusion and intellectual and affective engagement, it does not moderate the relationship between inclusion and social engagement.

The outcome of this study presents a nuanced understanding on how perceptions of inclusion of nonfamily employees by the dominant work group (DWG) (i.e. employees related to the firm owners) lead to positive firm-centric behavior among nonfamily employees.

The study provides clues to family firm managers for creating a work environment where nonfamily employees perceive a sense of belongingness while their uniqueness is appreciated in order to be more engaged at the workplace.

Little is known about how diversity created within family firms by inclusion of nonfamily employees impacts organizations. The outcome of this study may reinforce the positive effects of inclusiveness in any social context.

Diversity researchers have studied the influence of inclusion in areas related to sociology and psychology. However, there appears to be a dearth of studies in terms of how nonfamily employees would behave in family firms when they perceive a sense of inclusion in an organization dominated by employees who are related to the owners of the firm. Hence, this study appears to shed new light on how inclusion of nonfamily employees in family firms influences their behavior.

The purpose of this paper is to examine how family firms affect analyst forecast dispersion, accuracy and optimism and how earnings smoothness as the moderating factor, affects these relationships in an emerging market context.

This paper uses the population sample of firms listed on the Taiwan Stock Exchange from 2009 to 2010 as the research sample, which includes 963 firm-year observations.

The findings show that analysts following family firms are more likely to have more dispersed, less accurate and more optimism biased forecasts than those following nonfamily firms. Earning smoothness is mainly used by nonfamily firms as a signaling strategy to improve analyst forecast quality. In contrast, earnings smoothness is mainly used by families as a garbling strategy, stimulating forecast optimism. Only earnings smoothness in family firms with a high level of family ownership concentration is likely to be signaling-oriented to improve analyst forecast accuracy and mitigate analyst optimism biases.

Emerging markets are not only featured by prevailing principal-principal conflicts but also have multiple levels of agency conflicts among large shareholders, minority shareholders and professionally hired managers. This research reveals the multiple governance roles of family owners in affecting analyst forecast quality, including their entrenchment role in extracting private benefits of control through opaque environments and market discipline distortion role in aligning interests between managers and families without prioritizing meeting or beating analyst forecasts, both at the cost of minority shareholders. This research further disentangles the intertwined signaling oriented and garbiling oriented incentives associated with earnings smoothness under family governance.

This paper aims to investigate the financial performance of listed firms on the Australian Securities Exchange (ASX) over two sample periods (1998-2007 and 2008-2010) before and during the global financial crisis periods.

The generalized method of moments (GMM) has been used to examine the relationship between family ownership and a firm’s performance during the financial crisis period, reflecting on the higher risk exposure associated with capital markets.

Applying firm-based measures of financial performance (ROA and ROE), the empirical results show that family firms with ownership concentration performed better than nonfamily firms with dispersed ownership structures. The results also show that ownership concentration has a positive and significant impact on family- and nonfamily-owned firms during the crisis period. In addition, financial leverage had a positive and significant effect on the performance of Australian family-owned firms during both periods. However, if the impact of the crisis by sector is taking into account, the financial leverage only becomes significant for the nonmining family firms during the pre-crisis period. The results also reveal that family businesses are risk-averse business organizations. These findings are consistent with the underlying economic theories.

This paper contributes to the debate whether the ownership structure affects firms’ financial performance such as ROE and ROA during the global financial crisis by investigating family and nonfamily firms listed on the Australian capital market. It also identifies several influential drivers of financial performance in both normal and crisis periods. Given the paucity of studies in the area of family business, the empirical results of this research provide useful information for researchers, practitioners and investors, who are operating in capital markets for family and nonfamily businesses.

The study examines organization citizenship behavior (OCB) as a mediating variable between instrumental work values (IWVs) and organizational performance; and group differences between family manager and nonfamily manager for integrated models in family hotels. Data were collected from 189 hotels (n = 921) ranging from budget to three-star family hotels in Ghana using questionnaire administered conveniently. Data were analyzed using structural equation modeling. Work value positively influences OCB and organizational performance of family hotels. OCB mediates the relationship between work values and organizational performance. The study also found significant support for group differences between family and nonfamily firms for IWVs and mediating effect of OCB on the relationship between IWVs and performance.

Knowledge transfer plays a key role in the succession process. While much attention has been given to the passing of business knowledge form incumbent to successor, less is known about the use of nonfamily knowledge during this most crucial of family business events. The purpose of this paper is to look how knowledge from nonfamily employees is treated at times of succession. Importantly, it considers how the controlling family’s cultural background may influence nonfamily knowledge use, and subsequent implications for the succession process.

An exploratory comparative case study design is adopted in order to uncover the complex social and cultural dynamics around knowledge use. Four case studies are presented from family businesses of different, and contrasting, cultural origins. Data were collected using semi-structured interviews, observations and formal secondary data from the organisations, all of whom operate in the UK.

Findings reveal a complex picture, part influenced by the cultural dynamics of the family and part by business necessity. Specifically, power–distance appears as an informative cultural dimension, influencing how knowledge is used and nonfamily are perceived. While some family businesses privilege the knowledge from family, others see the need to build knowledge relationships more broadly.

This paper provides further evidence to the heterogeneity of family businesses. It moves beyond a processual explanation of succession to develop a more contextually aware understanding of the dynamics and sensitivities involved.

Although it has been implicitly or explicitly assumed that family business professionalization is indeed a multidimensional construct, there has been a tendency to confine it to the employment of nonfamily managers and delegating authority in academic research. Dekker et al. (2013) have made an impressive work in untangling the multidimensional structure of family business professionalization. This paper aims to introduce a more comprehensive multidimensional approach and a framework to understand and study family business professionalization by identifying additional dimensions.

The conceptual framework relies on insights derived from the literature on family business professionalization, occupational professionalism and organizational professionalism to reveal the broader multidimensionality of family business professionalization.

The proposed framework extends the definition of family business professionalization and offers additional dimensions which were grouped under five overarching headings: professionalization of management, professionalization of organizational structure, processes and operations, professionalization of family's relationship with business, professionalization of employees and professionalization of work environment and culture.

This paper contributes to the literature by providing a wider approach for the understanding of family business professionalization. It presents a new way of thinking about family business professionalization, underlining the importance of employees and organizational culture for the professionalization process in family firms.

This study aims to broaden the multidimensional conceptualization of family business professionalization, and to investigate how professionalization influences the financial performance of family firms, in the context of private family firms.

Taking a quantitative research approach, the study empirically examines the effect of professionalization on family firm performance, using a sample of 111 privately held Turkish family firms. The hypotheses were tested using regression analysis and the independent samples t-test.

The results indicate that the professionalization of family businesses has a positive effect on their financial performance, and the professionalization of employees is the prominent dimension of professionalization in this effect.

This study advances the understanding of how professionalization influences family firm performance by providing additional empirical evidence regarding the positive influence of multifaceted family business professionalization on financial performance.

The professionalization framework depicted in this study helps owners, managers, or consultants of family businesses assess the professionalization level of their firm and understand the performance effects of each of the family business professionalization dimensions on financial performance. It can also serve as a roadmap for family firms to professionalize and achieve better performance.

Unlike previous studies, this study incorporates employees, organizational culture and work environment, often neglected in the family business literature, into the multidimensional family business professionalization construct, thus extending previous research. The study contributes to a deeper understanding of the relationship between family businesses professionalization and firm performance.

The purpose of this paper is to shed light on the propensity of family firms to join a cross-border acquisition as acquirers.

The present study analyzes a sample of 270 acquisitions in the period 2015–2017 whose acquiring firms are represented by family and nonfamily listed European firms.

The results point out that family firms are less likely to make a cross-border acquisition than nonfamily counterparts.

Mergers and acquisitions (M&A) activity is cyclical by nature, represented by waves of concentrated intensity rather than necessarily by constant activity over time. Therefore, the main limitation is represented by the period analyzed (2015–2017), which restricts the possibility of seizing a greater number of transactions.

If careful evaluation leads to the consideration of M&A as the optimal mode of entry into a certain foreign market, family firms should broaden the pool from which managers are selected in order to access more qualified staff, who are able to face international M&As.

In recent years, a growing body of literature has focused on the effects of family ownership on the propensity of making an M&A, on the method of payment chosen by an acquired family firm, and on the reaction of the market at the announcement of a family business’ M&A. However, despite of the relevance of the entry modes of firms’ internationalization strategies, scant attention has been devoted to cross-border M&As conducted by family firms, which occur when a family firm acquires a firm located in a foreign country. In order to fill the research gap, this work investigates the likelihood of a family firm’s acquisition of a foreign target.