From Longevity of Firms to Transgenerational Entrepreneurship of Families

2011 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 136-155 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Markus Zellweger ◽  
Robert S. Nason ◽  
Mattias Nordqvist

Whereas existing research on the longevity of family firms has focused on the survival of firms, this article investigates transgenerational entrepreneurship of families. By building on the transgenerational entrepreneurship research framework, the authors argue that by shifting from firm to family level of analysis, one gains a deeper understanding of family firms’ ability to create value across generations. The authors find evidence for their argument in that such a level shift reveals extended entrepreneurial activity, which is missed when focusing exclusively on the firm level. The study introduces and empirically explores the construct of family entrepreneurial orientation, which may serve as an antecedent to transgenerational value creation by families.

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.


2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yi-Ying Chang ◽  
Yi Ping Liu ◽  
Che-Yuan Chang

Abstract We examine the relationship between unit-level entrepreneurial orientation (EO) and unit-level corporate entrepreneurship (CE), which has been typically neglected in entrepreneurship research. Building on the conservation of resource theory (COR), we argue that the relationship between unit-level EO and unit-level CE will be stronger when unit-level social capital is higher. Further, we posit that unit-level social capital becomes more effective when firm-level leaders are viewed as less (and not more) transformational by unit members. Data were collected from 186 managers, 372 employees, and 62 senior managers from 93 units of 31 firms. We find that unit-level EO is positively related to unit-level CE and this relationship strengthens when unit-level social capital is high. This moderating effect of social capital is itself moderated by firm-level transformational leadership, and strengthens as firm-level transformational leadership behaviors decrease (supporting “dark side” views of transformational leadership). Implications of our findings for organizational entrepreneurship research and practice are discussed.


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.


Author(s):  
Stefano Amato ◽  
Rodrigo Basco ◽  
Nicola Lattanzi

AbstractThe empirical evidence of family business phenomenon in terms of employment outcomes is contradictory highlighting the micro–macro gap in the existing research. To address this contradiction, our study disentangles the role of context in family firms’ employment outcomes. To do so, we conduct a systematic literature review of 67 articles focusing on three employment-related outcomes—namely, growth, downsizing, and quality of labour—published in peer-reviewed journals from 1980 to 2020. Based on a two-by-two framework to classify this extant research, we unpack what we know about family firms and employment outcomes and where we can go from here. We highlight three main findings. First, current research is context-less since has mainly focused on the firm level in one context (i.e., region or country) and there is a lack of studies comparing family firms’ employment outcomes in different contexts and explicitly measuring the effects of contextual dimensions on family firms’ employment outcomes. This context-less approach could explain the conflicting results and lack of theoretical predictability about the family effect on employment across contexts. Second, the lack of understanding of the context in which family firms dwell highlights the need for future research to focus on context by theorizing about employment outcomes—that is, measuring context and its interactions with family- and job-related variables. Third, there is a need to further explore, analyse, and theorize on the aggregate effect of family firms on employment outcomes at different level of analysis (e.g., local, regional, and national).


2021 ◽  
pp. 104225872110064
Author(s):  
Frederik J. Riar ◽  
Conrad Wiedeler ◽  
Nadine Kammerlander ◽  
Franz W. Kellermanns

Current research suggests that entrepreneurship in the family business context is mainly induced by top-down firm-level activity. We propose that entrepreneurial activity is also initiated autonomously as a bottom-up process by individual members or a group of individual members of an entrepreneurial family (EF). Building on 63 interviews with EF members involved in 39 venturing cases, we reveal a set of unique motives driving the venturing activity and show how these motives are intertwined with six heterogeneous family venture types. We also emphasize how positioning (i.e., inside or outside of family firms’ boundaries), family support, emotional attachment, and transgenerational intention vary among the different venture types.


2022 ◽  
pp. 819-841
Author(s):  
José Manuel Saiz-Alvarez ◽  
Verónica Ilián Baños-Monroy ◽  
Edgar Rogelio Ramírez-Solís

Research on entrepreneurial orientation and its relation with family SMEs has been primarily focused on value creation, and not how this value can be generated on the succession process. At this respect, paternalism plays a crucial role in reinforcing family inertia, as Mexican firms are traditional and generally closed to changes. In this chapter, four Mexican family SMEs are analyzed to study how the entrepreneurial orientation of Mexican family firms has effects on both the entrepreneurial performance and the succession process.


Author(s):  
José Manuel Saiz-Alvarez ◽  
Verónica Ilián Baños-Monroy ◽  
Edgar Rogelio Ramírez-Solís

Research on entrepreneurial orientation and its relation with family SMEs has been primarily focused on value creation, and not how this value can be generated on the succession process. At this respect, paternalism plays a crucial role in reinforcing family inertia, as Mexican firms are traditional and generally closed to changes. In this chapter, four Mexican family SMEs are analyzed to study how the entrepreneurial orientation of Mexican family firms has effects on both the entrepreneurial performance and the succession process.


2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin C. Cox ◽  
Jason Lortie ◽  
Ratan J.S. Dheer

PurposeThe purpose of this study is to investigate the influence that national levels of social capital have on entrepreneurial activity. Specifically, we argue that national and regional level social capital positively influences the ability of entrepreneurs to mobilize and access important resources thereby positively impacting the rate of entrepreneurship within nations and regions.Design/methodology/approachWe advance a multilevel and multidimensional conceptualization of social capital. Then based on a dataset of 68 nations and 665 within-nation regions, we empirically evaluate the effects of social capital at the national and regional level in explaining differences in entrepreneurial activity across nations and regions using a combination of regression analysis and multilevel hierarchical linear modeling (HLM).FindingsOur findings emphasize the importance of formulating a multilevel conceptualization of social capital for entrepreneurship research. We discuss the results, provide implications for public policy and suggest avenues for future research.Originality/valueThe overwhelming majority of entrepreneurship research focused on investigating the implications of social capital reside at the individual level of analysis. Our unique inquiry is an inaugural effort to consider this important implications at the macro and meso-level of analysis by examining both regional and national-level effects.


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


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document