How Australia's Dennis Family Corp. Professionalized Its Family Business

2002 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 59-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
Justin Craig ◽  
Ken Moores
Keyword(s):  
Corporate Governance ◽  
Family Member ◽  
Family Business ◽  
Second Generation ◽  
Governance Structures ◽  
Depth Interview ◽  
Generation Family ◽  
Governance Changes

This paper examines a second-generation family business that recently introduced professional corporate governance structures to its organization. The paper includes an outline of the company and an in-depth interview with the second-generation family member who was responsible for the process. Advice to those who are considering corporate governance changes to their family business appears throughout the interview.

scholarly journals THE DIFFERENCE PATTERN OF SUCCESSION BETWEEN SECOND GENERATION AND THRID GENERATION FAMILY BUSINESS IN INDONESIA (A REVIEW OF THE MEDIUM-SIZE FAMILY BUSINESS)

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 133-154
Author(s):  
Christina Whidya Utami
Keyword(s):  
Family Business ◽  
Second Generation ◽  
Family System ◽  
Medium Size ◽  
Third Generation ◽  
The Third ◽  
The Family ◽  
Generation Family ◽  
Business Succession ◽  
Family Business Succession

The purpose of this study is to find out whether there are differences on pattern of succession between the second and the third generation of family business in Indonesia. Research Design/ Methodology/ Approach: A cross sectional and comparative research design were used in this study, while the data survey was conducted to 41 respondents from the second-generation group and 48 respondents from the third-generation family business; the businesses has run for 5 to 50 years and were categorized as medium size family business. The study used multiple regression test via SPSS to test the hypothesis. Findings: In family business led by the second-generation successor, only personality system affects the family business succession. On the other hand, in family business led by the third-generation, personality, ownership, family, and management system variables affect the success of the family business; meanwhile, family system does not find to affect the family business succession. Research Limitation/ Implication: This study investigates pattern of succession in family business including personality system, ownership system, family system and management system. This study can suggest a solution in the regeneration process of a family business in order to maintain the continuity of the business. limitation: There are some biases found on family’s perspective of the assessment, and the study only focus on medium-size family business. Practical Implications: A right amount of focus on pattern of succession will help the second and the third generation of the family to manifest in business succession. Exploring the second and the third-generation perspectives in regard to succession pattern is the key to maintain the continuity of the family business. Originality/ value: This study offers a pattern of succession from various perspectives, including personal, ownership, family, and management, as well as the relationship to the long-term success of the family business.

Plymouth Tube Company: How to Build Ownership Consensus

2016 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
John L. Ward
Keyword(s):  
Family Member ◽  
Family Business ◽  
Fourth Generation ◽  
Board Members ◽  
Business Decision ◽  
Fifth Generation ◽  
Good Investment ◽  
Large Expansion ◽  
The Family ◽  
Generation Family

Plymouth Tube, a family business, was a manufacturer of precision tubing and extruded shapes for aerospace, desalination, medical, mining, energy, and water industries globally. Founded in 1924, as of 2012 it employed 770 people at thirteen plants in seven U.S. states and had sales of about $240 million. The family had twenty members across three generations, including spouses. The board was composed of eight members, three from the family and five who were independent. Stacy, age 30, was the only fifth-generation family member working for the company. Her father, Van, age 64 and a fourth-generation member, had been in the business for forty years and had succeeded his father as president, CEO, and chairman. In early 2013, management presented a very large expansion project that was riskier than previous recent investments to the board, and requested the board's approval. Independent board members asked Van to obtain feedback from the family about the proposal. Van asked Stacy to direct the process for informing the family, asking for their input, and communicating it back to the board. How should Stacy conduct the process? What should be done with the information once it has been gathered? Should family members be involved in this type of business decision? Based on the information given in the case, is this a good investment?

scholarly journals Efficacy of corporate social responsibility in corporate governance structures of family owned business groups in India

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 52-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raveena Naz
Keyword(s):  
Corporate Governance ◽  
Corporate Social Responsibility ◽  
Social Responsibility ◽  
Family Business ◽  
Family Firms ◽  
Business Groups ◽  
Business Group ◽  
Governance Structures ◽  
The Family ◽  
Corporate Social

The concept of ‘Corporate Social Responsibility’ (CSR) has often relied on firms thinking beyond their economic interest despite the larger debate of shareholder versus stakeholder interest. India gave legal recognition to CSR in the Companies Act, 2013. CSR in India is believed to be different for two reasons: the dominance of family business and the history of practice of social responsibility as a form of philanthropy (mainly among the family business). This paper problematises the actual structure of business houses in India and the role of CSR in a context where the law identifies each company as a separate business entity while the economics of institutions emphasizes the ‘business group’ consisting of a plethora of firms as the institutional organization of business where capital owned or controlled by the family group is spread across the firms through the interlocked holding structures. Within this framework, the largest family firms, which are part of family owned business groups, top the CSR expenditure list. The governance structure of family firms allows family owned business group to show mandatory compliance of CSR even when they actually spend much less than what is prescribed by law. This aspect of the family firms is not addressed by the CSR legislation in particular or corporate governance legislation in general in India. The paper illustrates this with an empirical study of one of the largest family owned business group in India Reliance Industries Limited (RIL), which is well acclaimed for its CSR activities. The paper demonstrates how the business group through these series of shareholding network reduces its legally mandated CSR liability. The paper thus indicates the inadequacy of CSR legislation in India because the unit of compliance is an individual firm and it assumes that each firm is independent and only connected to each other through market dealings. The law does not recognize the inter-connections of firms (through common ownership and control) in corporate governance structures of family owned business group and hence is inadequate in its design to effect the threshold level of CSR expenditure. This is the central argument of the paper.

Attitudes and expectations of shareholders: The case of the multi-generation family business

2010 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 346-362 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jill Thomas
Keyword(s):  
Family Member ◽  
Family Business ◽  
Family Businesses ◽  
Transfer Of Knowledge ◽  
Next Generation ◽  
The Family ◽  
Generation Family ◽  
Structured Questionnaire

AbstractAs family shareholder support is essential for the ongoing viability of the business as a family business, multi-generation family businesses which allow ‘the ownership tree’ to grow need to monitor the attitudes and expectations of the expanding number of family member shareholders. This paper reports on a case study of a multi-generation family business where the shareholder group had grown to 50 individual shareholders. The study explored the shareholders' views about the business and particularly their attitudes to stewardship and whether and under what circumstances, they would hold their shareholdings, pass them to the next generation of family or possibly consider relinquishing their holdings. Data was obtained from a semi-structured questionnaire and follow-up interviews. While respondents indicated that they had immense pride in being a shareholder of the family business, they admitted that their knowledge of that business was less than optimal. Financial returns were viewed as important, but the intangible rewards relating to the heritage of forebears were more so. While they were keen to pass on their shares to their children, they were uncertain about the level of commitment the next generation members would have. Lessons from this case study are discussed for other multi-generation family businesses focusing on shareholders' responsibilities as owners and the board's need to ensure timely transfer of knowledge to the wider shareholder group.

Attitudes and expectations of shareholders: The case of the multi-generation family business

2010 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 346-362 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jill Thomas
Keyword(s):  
Family Member ◽  
Family Business ◽  
Family Businesses ◽  
Transfer Of Knowledge ◽  
Next Generation ◽  
The Family ◽  
Generation Family ◽  
Structured Questionnaire

AbstractAs family shareholder support is essential for the ongoing viability of the business as a family business, multi-generation family businesses which allow ‘the ownership tree’ to grow need to monitor the attitudes and expectations of the expanding number of family member shareholders. This paper reports on a case study of a multi-generation family business where the shareholder group had grown to 50 individual shareholders. The study explored the shareholders' views about the business and particularly their attitudes to stewardship and whether and under what circumstances, they would hold their shareholdings, pass them to the next generation of family or possibly consider relinquishing their holdings. Data was obtained from a semi-structured questionnaire and follow-up interviews. While respondents indicated that they had immense pride in being a shareholder of the family business, they admitted that their knowledge of that business was less than optimal. Financial returns were viewed as important, but the intangible rewards relating to the heritage of forebears were more so. While they were keen to pass on their shares to their children, they were uncertain about the level of commitment the next generation members would have. Lessons from this case study are discussed for other multi-generation family businesses focusing on shareholders' responsibilities as owners and the board's need to ensure timely transfer of knowledge to the wider shareholder group.

“We are a family firm”

2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 2-21 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claudia Binz Astrachan ◽  
Isabel C. Botero
Keyword(s):  
Family Business ◽  
Family Firms ◽  
Family Firm ◽  
Business Owners ◽  
Public Companies ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Brand Building ◽  
Depth Interview ◽  
The Family ◽  
Family Associations

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.

Tradeoffs in Corporate Governance: Evidence From Board Structures and Charter Provisions

2011 ◽  
Vol 01 (04) ◽  
pp. 667-705 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stuart L. Gillan ◽  
Jay C. Hartzell ◽  
Laura T. Starks
Keyword(s):  
Corporate Governance ◽  
Corporate Control ◽  
Board Independence ◽  
Governance Structures ◽  
Board Structure ◽  
System Of Equations ◽  
Costs And Benefits ◽  
Market For Corporate Control ◽  
Monitoring Mechanism ◽  
Three Stage Least Squares

We provide arguments and present evidence that corporate governance structures are composed of interrelated mechanisms, which are in turn endogenous responses to the costs and benefits firms face when they choose those mechanisms. Examining board structures and the use of corporate charter provisions in a sample of more than 2,300 firms over a four-year period, we find that firms cluster in their use of governance mechanisms. In particular, the set of charter provisions that firms use, as measured by the Gompers et al. (2003) G Index, is associated with board structure, with the laws of the state in which the firm is incorporated, and with firm and industry characteristics. We also find that some governance structures appear to serve as substitutes. Specifically, firms that have powerful boards (as measured by board independence) also have the greatest number of charter provisions, suggesting that the market for corporate control is less effective as a monitoring mechanism for these firms. In contrast, firms that have less powerful boards tend to have few charter provisions, suggesting that the market for corporate control plays a greater monitoring role at such firms. To address potential endogeneity issues, we employ three-stage least squares analysis to estimate these relationships within a system of equations. Our results from this analysis are consistent with the hypothesis that powerful boards serve as a substitute for the market for corporate control. Finally, our findings suggest that causality runs from the board to the choice of charter provisions, but not vice versa.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document