The Development of Family Companies: Management and Ownership Imperatives

2001 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 369-385 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Westhead ◽  
Marc Cowling ◽  
Carole Howorth

This study explores management and ownership imperatives facing 427 independent unquoted (i.e., nonpublic) companies in the United Kingdom. To detect real rather than sample differences, the study used a matched pairs methodology. Chi-square and student's T-tests confirmed several similarities among the 73 family companies and the comparable 73 nonfamily companies. The tenure periods of CEOs in both groups of firms before being appointed to the CEO position were similar. CEOs in family firms had not remained in this position for significantly longer periods than CEOs in nonfamily firms, and the majority of directors in family and nonfamily firms did not hold outside directorships in other companies. Several significant differences were also detected. CEOs from the kinship group owning the family business had been in the CEO position for much longer than “outside” CEOs in family firms. Furthermore, the proportion of total shares owned by directors in family firms was significantly more than the proportion owned by directors in nonfamily firms. A significantly larger proportion of nonfamily rather than family firms had employed a nonexecutive director. In concluding, it is highlighted that a firm's identification of itself as a family firm is important in defining family firms and that firms that do not currently perceive themselves to be family firms may in the future.

2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 2-21 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claudia Binz Astrachan ◽  
Isabel C. Botero

Purpose Evidence suggests that some stakeholders perceive family firms as more trustworthy, responsible, and customer-oriented than public companies. To capitalize on these positive perceptions, owning families can use references about their family nature in their organizational branding and marketing efforts. However, not all family firms actively communicate their family business brand. With this in mind, the purpose of this paper is to investigate why family firms decide to promote their “family business brand” in their communication efforts toward different stakeholders. Design/methodology/approach Data for this study were collected using an in-depth interview approach from 11 Swiss and German family business owners. Interviews were transcribed and coded to identify different themes that help explain the different motives and constraints that drive their decisions to promote the “family business brand.” Findings The analyses indicate that promoting family associations in branding efforts is driven by both identity-related (i.e. pride, identification) and outcome-related (e.g. reputational advantages) motives. However, there are several constraints that may negatively affect the promotion of the family business brand in corporate communication efforts. Originality/value This paper is one of the first to explore why family businesses decide to communicate their “family business brand.” Building on the findings, the authors present a conceptual framework identifying the antecedents and possible consequences of promoting a family firm brand. This framework can help researchers and practitioners better understand how the family business nature of the brand can influence decisions about the company’s branding and marketing practices.


2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 218-234 ◽  
Author(s):  
Atanas Nik Nikolov ◽  
Yuan Wen

PurposeThis paper brings together research on advertising, family business, and the resource-based view (RBV) of the firm to examine performance differences between publicly traded US family vs non-family firms. The purpose of this paper is to understand the heterogeneity of family vs non-family firm advertising after such firms become publicly traded.Design/methodology/approachThe authors draw on the RBV of the firm, as well as on extensive empirical literature in family business and advertising research to empirically examine the differences between family and non-family firms in terms of performance.FindingsUsing panel data from over 2,000 companies across ten years, this research demonstrates that family businesses have higher advertising intensity than competitors, and achieve higher performance returns on their advertising investments, relative to non-family competitors. The results suggest that the “familiness” of public family firms is an intangible resource that, when combined with their advertising investments, affords family businesses a relative advantage compared to non-family businesses.Research limitations/implicationsFamily involvement in publicly traded firms may contribute toward a richer resource endowment and result in creating synergistic effects between firm “familiness” and the public status of the firm. The paper contributes toward the RBV of the firm and the advertising literature. Limitations include the lack of qualitative data to ground the findings and potential moderating effects.Practical implicationsUnderstanding how family firms’ advertising spending influences their consequent performance provides new information to family firms’ owners and management, as well as investors. The authors suggest that the “familiness” of public family firms may provide a significant advantage over their non-family-owned competitors.Social implicationsThe implications for society include that the family firm as an organizational form does not need to be relegated to a second-class citizen status in the business world: indeed, combining family firms’ characteristics within a publicly traded platform may provide firm performance benefits which benefit the founding family and other stakeholders.Originality/valueThis study contributes by highlighting the important influence of family involvement on advertising investment in the public family firm, a topic which has received limited attention. Second, it also integrates public ownership in family firms with the family involvement–advertising–firm performance relationship. As such, it uncovers a new pathway through which the family effect is leveraged to increase firm performance. Third, this study also contributes to the advertising and resource building literatures by identifying advertising as an additional resource which magnifies the impact of the bundle of resources available to the public family firm. Fourth, the use of an extensive panel data set allows for a more complex empirical investigation of the inherently dynamic relationships in the data and thus provides a contribution to the empirical stream of research in family business.


2012 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 258-279 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pascual Berrone ◽  
Cristina Cruz ◽  
Luis R. Gomez-Mejia

This article makes the case for the socioemotional wealth (SEW) approach as the potential dominant paradigm in the family business field. The authors argue that SEW is the most important differentiator of the family firm as a unique entity and, as such, helps explain why family firms behave distinctively. In doing so, the authors review the concept of SEW, its different dimensions, and its links with other theoretical approaches. The authors also address the issue of how to measure this construct and offer various alternatives for operationalizing it. Finally, they offer a set of topics that can be pursued in future studies using the SEW approach.


1991 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 191-203 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johannes Welsch

This article analyzes, compares, and aggregates empirical findings of three individual investigations of family firms in the United Kingdom, the Federal Republic of Germany, and Spain. The purpose is not only to identify differences and commonalities between family firms and nonfamily firms in these three countries, but also to generate a European family firm research agenda for the 1990s.


2008 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 103-118 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nigel Nicholson

The article seeks to show that the ideas of evolutionary psychology have not only a unique contribution to make to the study of family business but have an overarching capacity to integrate theory, resolve empirical debates, and lead research in new directions. The article considers, first, what is different about family firms before outlining the Darwinian framework and its implications, and then moves on to an analysis of kinship dynamics as central to understanding the roots of cooperation and conflict in the family firm. The article concludes with a discussion of the scope for theoretical synthesis, practical implications, and the position this analysis leads us to about the unique performance potential and liabilities of the family firm.


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Miguel-Angel Gallo

Family firms are complex and dynamic entities that are rich with peculiar, idiosyncratic features. The objective of this paper is to provide guidance to help those involved in family businesses, businesspersons, and family members to pursue the continuity of the family firm over time. Based on the author’s experience with entrepreneurs who built successful businesses, this paper identifies four elements that are critical to achieve transgenerational continuity in family firms, namely: coexistence, unity, professionalism, and prudence. The analysis of each element provides suggestions and key considerations for both scholars and practitioners in the family business field.


2007 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 9-14 ◽  
Author(s):  
Noel D. Campbell ◽  
Kirk H. Heriot ◽  
Dianne H. B. Welsh

Using the family business succession, resourcebased view of firms, familiness, and organizational clan literatures, this article develops a model based on the ability of the family business to use familiness, a specific bundle of attributes deriving from a family’s culture, as a competitive advantage for the family firm. In particular, this resource-based framework of family business shows how familiness can distinguish between family firms that succeed beyond the second generation and those that do not. Implications for future research are discussed.


2003 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 28-64 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea Colli ◽  
Paloma Fernández Pérez ◽  
Mary B. Rose

We provide here a complement to recent work on family business, which has demonstrated the need to go beyond the generic definition of the family firm to place personal capitalism in an appropriate institutional, historical, and cultural framework. By focusing on the nineteenth‐ and twentieth‐century experiences in Britain, Spain, and Italy, we challenge the notion that in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries there was anything so simple as a Mediterranean model for family business. Rather, we demonstrate the need to consider family businesses in national and regional contexts if we are to understand their various capabilities and characteristics. We use similarities and differences in the experiences and responses of families and firms in the three countries to support this claim.


2016 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 301-326 ◽  
Author(s):  
John James Cater ◽  
Roland E. Kidwell ◽  
Kerri M. Camp

In a qualitative study of 19 family businesses, we examine the dynamics of successor teams, using insights from the family dynamics and succession literature and teams and conflict theory in family business. In-depth interviews with family firm leaders identified two major successor team performance outcomes, a positive track leading to team commitment and a negative track resulting in dissolution of the team and potentially the family firm. Our findings are encapsulated by 10 propositions and a model of successor team dynamics.


2011 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 111-125 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shruti R. Sardeshmukh ◽  
Andrew C. Corbett

The study contributes to the family business literature by examining the intersection of succession and opportunities and extends an existing line of research on entrepreneurial behavior in family firms by examining opportunity perception by 119 family business successors. The authors investigate the successors’ self-efficacy, education, and work experience, together with their perception of entrepreneurial opportunities. The results suggest that successors who perceive new opportunities balance and combine their family firm—specific human capital built through experience within the family firm with general human capital built through education and other work experience to generate new ideas leading to the entrepreneurial opportunity perception.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document