Entrepreneurial orientation in family firms: New drivers and the moderating role of the strategic involvement of the board

2018 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 128-152 ◽  
Author(s):  
Unai Arzubiaga ◽  
Amaia Maseda ◽  
Txomin Iturralde

In this study, we examine new drivers that generate a disposition toward entrepreneurial activity in family firms and how the strategic involvement of the board of directors (SIBD) moderates the relationships between these drivers (image of the firm, willingness to change, and access to financial resources) and entrepreneurial orientation (EO). Using a sample of 230 family small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), our results confirm that a good family firm image and willingness to change may be powerful tools that stimulate a firm to develop entrepreneurial activities. The negative relationship between access to financial resources and EO may relate to the false belief that financial resources help firms be more creative and to maintaining family control of the firm and the socioemotional endowment. Contrary to our expectations, we also find that the SIBD negatively influences the relationship between the above drivers and EO, pointing to the need for more open boards of directors in family SMEs in order to develop and implement entrepreneurial strategies. JEL Classification: L2, M1

Author(s):  
Donald F. Kuratko ◽  
Jeffrey G. Covin

The theoretical and empirical knowledge on corporate entrepreneurship (ce) has evolved in the research domain over the last 50 years, beginning very slowly and growing in importance in that time. Because of this evolution and expansion in CE research, the theoretical and empirical knowledge about CE and the entrepreneurial behavior on which it is based has progressed to a point where a greater understanding of the concept can be presented. Many of the elements essential to constructing a theoretically grounded understanding of the domains of CE have been identified. An examination of the field reveals that there are three research domains that have developed over the years: corporate venturing (either internal or external), strategic entrepreneurship, and entrepreneurial orientation. In examining the evolution of CE research across five decades, the focus of CE research has varied over the years. The very early research published in the 1970s focused more on how teams could establish entrepreneurial activities inside established organizations; however, this early research was sparse because CE was not widely acknowledged nor sought in existing organizations. The 1980s saw some research into entrepreneurial behavior inside established organizations that explained how such activity could simply not exist in the structure and operations of existing corporations. Opposed to that thinking, many more researchers demonstrated that the idea of corporate entrepreneurial activity could be conceived as a process of organizational renewal. In the 1990s, researchers began to develop more comprehensive examinations of CE that focused on re-energizing companies and therefore increasing its abilities to develop innovations. The first and second decades of the 21st century witnessed a more sophisticated refinement of research topics in CE. In addition to research specific to the development of the three main domains of CE (corporate venturing, entrepreneurial orientation, and strategic entrepreneurship), there has been research on more specific areas of interest in CE including the implementation of CE, management levels, the individual corporate entrepreneur, models and metrics of CE, a deeper examination of internal corporate ventures, the international domain, firm size, family firms, ethics, and corporate venture capital. These areas illustrate the developmental expansion of interest in CE across different domains. Even with the continued expansion in the research on CE, there is so much that is still not understood nor researched well enough to fully advance the theoretical and empirical knowledge on CE. With the growing climate of disruption through external antecedents such as COVID-19, the entrepreneurial behavior of individuals within organizations becomes paramount and warrants a deeper understanding. Newer research questions on CE are emerging and further theoretical exploration should be the work of ongoing scholarly efforts.


Author(s):  
Remedios Hernández-Linares ◽  
María Concepción López-Fernández ◽  
María José Naranjo-Sánchez ◽  
Laura Victoria Fielden

As a predominant form of business organization, family firms have attracted increasing attention by scholars, and especially by those researching entrepreneurial orientation with the aim of better understanding of entrepreneurial activities pursued by enterprises. However, the literature on the confluence of entrepreneurial orientation and family firms has paid scant attention to the influence of affective and emotional factors. To cover this research gap, the authors analyze the impact of affective commitment and concern for socioemotional wealth preservation on entrepreneurial orientation. To do so, they performed an empirical study using the data collected from 342 small and mid-sized family firms from Portugal, a country where family firms are under-researched even though they make up the backbone of the economy. Results show that both affective commitment and socioemotional wealth positively impact entrepreneurial orientation, pointing to the need to further research the relationships between such factors and strategic behaviors in the family business context.


2007 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-47 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucia Naldi ◽  
Mattias Nordqvist ◽  
Karin Sjöberg ◽  
Johan Wiklund

This article focuses on risk taking as one important dimension of entrepreneurial orientation and its impact in family firms. Drawing on a sample of Swedish SMEs, we find that risk taking is a distinct dimension of entrepreneurial orientation in family firms and that it is positively associated with proactiveness and innovation. We also find that even if family firms do take risks while engaged in entrepreneurial activities, they take risk to a lesser extent than nonfamily firms. Moreover, and most importantly for our understanding of entrepreneurial orientation in family firms, we find that risk taking in family firms is negatively related to performance. Both theoretical and practical implications of our findings are provided.


2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (13) ◽  
pp. 5334
Author(s):  
Jelle Schepers ◽  
Wim Voordeckers ◽  
Tensie Steijvers ◽  
Eddy Laveren

Building on the resource-based view (RBV) of the firm, this paper suggests that a family firm’s long-term orientation (LTO) can be an important resource that increases firm-level entrepreneurial orientation (EO). Nevertheless, resource orchestration suggests that managers need to orchestrate their resources in order to realize any potential advantage. Therefore, we hypothesize that a family firm’s LTO entails potential resources to engage in entrepreneurial activities, while a participative decision making (PDM) style serves as coordinating mechanism that helps the firm to manage these resources. Using data from 209 private family firms, the results show a positive association between LTO and EO. Also, PDM was found to positively moderate the LTO-EO relationship, providing empirical support for our central hypothesis.


2021 ◽  
pp. 234094442110517
Author(s):  
Carlos Fernández Méndez ◽  
Rubén Arrondo García ◽  
Shams Pathan

We study the effects of family control on CEO pay from the perspective of behavioral agency model (BAM), with particular focus on family firm’s generational stage and CEO family ties. Using a panel of Australian listed firms, we find that family firms present lower total and variable CEO pay, showing also less pay disparity between the CEO and other top executives. We also find that multi-generational family firms and those run by non-family CEOs offer higher total and variable CEO pay and present high pay disparity. The BAM and family’s aversion to socioemotional wealth loss can explain the effects of family control based on the pursuing of non-financial family goals. The decline of these goals derived from the aging of the firm and the hiring of external CEOs shape family control and should be considered in the design of executive compensation policies and by external parties when assessing their suitability. JEL CLASSIFICATION: G30; G32; G34; G38


2009 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 9-24 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeremy C. Short ◽  
G. Tyge Payne ◽  
Keith H. Brigham ◽  
G.T. Lumpkin ◽  
J. Christian Broberg

There is considerable disagreement about whether family firm characteristics hinder or support entrepreneurial activities. This article highlights the existence of an entrepreneurial orientation in family firms, and it examines differences between family and nonfamily firms on the entrepreneurial orientation dimensions of autonomy, competitive aggressiveness, innovativeness, proactiveness, and risk taking, using content analysis of shareholder letters from S&P 500 firms. As such, family firms exhibit language consistent with an entrepreneurial orientation for all dimensions but use less language than that of nonfamily firms in relation to autonomy, proactiveness, and risk taking.


2022 ◽  
pp. 794-818
Author(s):  
Remedios Hernández-Linares ◽  
María Concepción López-Fernández ◽  
María José Naranjo-Sánchez ◽  
Laura Victoria Fielden

As a predominant form of business organization, family firms have attracted increasing attention by scholars, and especially by those researching entrepreneurial orientation with the aim of better understanding of entrepreneurial activities pursued by enterprises. However, the literature on the confluence of entrepreneurial orientation and family firms has paid scant attention to the influence of affective and emotional factors. To cover this research gap, the authors analyze the impact of affective commitment and concern for socioemotional wealth preservation on entrepreneurial orientation. To do so, they performed an empirical study using the data collected from 342 small and mid-sized family firms from Portugal, a country where family firms are under-researched even though they make up the backbone of the economy. Results show that both affective commitment and socioemotional wealth positively impact entrepreneurial orientation, pointing to the need to further research the relationships between such factors and strategic behaviors in the family business context.


2021 ◽  
pp. 031289622110182
Author(s):  
Muhammad Jahangir Ali ◽  
Seema Miglani ◽  
Man Dang ◽  
Premkanth Puwanenthiren ◽  
Mazur Mieszko

We examine the impact of family control on the cost of raising external funds by family enterprises. Using a sample of Australian publicly listed firms, we find a significantly negative relation between cost of newly raised capital and family control. Moreover, we show that this relationship varies with the quality of corporate governance and the quality of firm’s information environment. Furthermore, we conduct several robustness checks and consistently find that our main results remain unchanged. Overall, our evidence suggests that family firms have easier access to external financing fostered by family involvement in the ownership and control. JEL Classification: G31; G32; M41; M42


2021 ◽  
Vol IV(1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhanna Kononenko ◽  
◽  
Oleksandra Kuzmenko ◽  
Kateryna Pylypenko ◽  
◽  
...  

The problematic aspects of the financial and credit mechanism of business activity are considered. Some factors of formation of financial interrelations at the micro level and their interaction at the macro level are investigated. The problem areas of entrepreneurship are emphasized. The systemic factors of sources of financial resources in the business sector are generalized. Attention is paid to the need to develop and improve the financial subsystem of entrepreneurial activity. Peculiarities of supporting potential innovative implementation are investigated.


2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 177-197 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joan-Lluís Capelleras ◽  
Ignacio Contin-Pilart ◽  
Lucia Garcés-Galdeano ◽  
Martin Larraza-Kintana

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to analyse how entrepreneurial orientation (EO) and the family control of the company influence the performance of underachieving firms and how they contribute to economic recovery. Design/methodology/approach The authors test the authors’ predictions on a unique and representative sample of 1,500 Spanish small firms in high and medium technology manufacturing and service industries. Given the nature of the dependent variable, the authors estimate a series of regression models to test the hypotheses. In addition, the authors consider two interaction terms where the underperforming firms’ variable is interacted with family firms and EO. Findings The results of analyses show that both EO and family ownership separately increase subsequent performance for underachieving firms. Originality/value The study contributes to expand the literature on underperforming firms analysing how strategic and structural factors affect the performance of firms that face an economic downturn. It also provides some guidance for practitioners on the decision and contexts that better serve the economic recovery of underperforming firms.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document