Skip to main content
Disciplines
Automotive Business IT + Informatics Construction + Real Estate Electrical Engineering + Electronics Energy + Sustainability Insurance + Risk Finance + Banking Management + Leadership Marketing + Sales Mechanical Engineering + Materials
Events
DE
EN
Books
Journals
Topic Page
Marketing
Start single access now
Access for companies
EXTENDED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Small Business Economics
Published in: Small Business Economics 1/2015

01-01-2015

Board ownership and processes in family firms

Author: Fabio Zona

Published in: Small Business Economics | Issue 1/2015

Log in

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

This study examines how board ownership shapes board processes in family firms. The extant family firm research has extensively adopted an input–output approach to the study of boards, but results have been inconclusive, calling for further research on intervening processes. By examining board ownership, this study shows that board processes are shaped by the life cycles of family firms across generations, as reflected in ownership dispersion among family directors: Cognitive conflict is the highest and the use of knowledge and skills is the lowest when the levels of balance in a board’s voting power are moderate, which occurs when the board mostly mirrors a sibling partnership. A discussion of this study’s findings contributes to the literature on family firm boards, work groups, and corporate governance.
previous article Running in the family: parental role models in entrepreneurship
next article High-growth firms and productivity: evidence from the United Kingdom

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now
Footnotes
1
For instance, when family members of second generation (descendants of the founder) are in charge, a family firm may be classified in a second-generation stage. Yet, behaviors likely resemble those of a first-generation firms if ownership is still strongly concentrated in the hands of one family member (e.g., when the founder has one single descendant).
 
2
For example, the aging of the controlling owner may lead to mismanagement and misconduct with regard to the firm’s choices. Or a controlling owner may wish to continue investing in the business she/he founded and avoid learning new skills when environmental and competitive conditions would rather suggest a radical change in the firm’s strategic posture.
 
3
Westphal (1999, p. 16, correlation table) argues that for a given board configuration, boards’ performances in the service and control tasks may be negatively related.
 
4
For example, Bettinelli (2011) examines the effect of outsider ratio on board processes, but she does not examine whether this effect holds for the service versus the control tasks separately; she provides evidence in support of hypothesized effects on board processes for board activity as a whole
 
5
The survey distinguished items for the service and the control tasks; each section was introduced by a sentence asking respondents to rate the items when discussing strategy versus control issues
 
6
The index is calculated as the sum of the squares of equity stakes. This index is used to describe a distribution of market shares among industry actors: The closer the index is to zero, the more minority owners hold fractional shares.
 
7
Our study differs in some significant respects. (1) Bammens et al. (2008) measure generational stage asking respondents to indicate the generation that currently has the decision power in the firm (2008: 169); we adopt an alternative, complementary approach used by Schulze et al. (2003b) and based on work by Gerlisick et al. (1997), and directly capture the influence of generation through ownership dispersion on boards. (2) Their study examines the direct impact of generational stage on the board’s advice needs, while our study inquires into the actual board processes.
 
Literature
Amason, A. (1996). Distinguishing the effects of functional and dysfunctional conflict on strategic decision making: Resolving a paradox for top management teams. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 123–148.CrossRef
Amason, A. C., & Sapienza, H. J. (1997). The effect of top management team size and interaction norms on cognitive and affective conflict. Journal of Management, 23(4), 416–495.CrossRef
Anderson, R. C., & Reeb, D. M. (2003). Founding-family ownership and firm performance: Evidence from the S&P 500. Journal of Finance, 58(3), 1301–1327.CrossRef
Aronoff, C., & Ward, J. (1994). Defining your family business. Nation’s Business, 82(5), 74–75.
Astrachan, J., Klein, S., & Smyrnios, K. (2002). The F-PEC scale of family influence: A proposal for solving the family business definition problem. Family Business Review, 15, 45–48.CrossRef
Bammens, Y., Voordeckers, W., & van Gils, A. (2008). Boards of directors in family firms: A generational perspective. Small Business Economics, 31, 163–180.CrossRef
Bammens, Y., Voordeckers, W., & van Gils, A. (2011). Boards of directors in family businesses: A literature review and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 13(2), 134–152.CrossRef
Barbera, F., & Moores, K. (2013). Firm ownership and productivity: A study of family and non-family SMEs. Small Business Economics, 40, 953–976.CrossRef
Barth, E., Gulbrandsen, T., & Schøne, P. (2005). Family ownership and productivity: The role of owner-management. Journal of Corporate Finance, 11, 107–127.CrossRef
Beckhard, R., & Dyer, W. G. (1983). Managing continuity in the family owned business. Organizational Dynamics, 5(1), 5–12.CrossRef
Benavides-Velasco, C. A., Quintana-García, C., & Guzmán-Parra, V. F. (2013). Trends in family business research. Small Business Economics, 40(1), 41–57.CrossRef
Bennedsen, M., & Wolfenzon, D. C. (2000). The balance of power in closely held corporations. Journal of Financial Economics, 58, 113–139.CrossRef
Berent-Braum, M. M., & Uhlaner, L. M. (2012). Family governance practices and teambuilding: Paradox of the enterprising family. Small Business Economics, 38(1), 103–119.CrossRef
Bettinelli, C. (2011). Boards of directors in family firms: An exploratory study of structure and group processes. Family Business Review, 24(2), 151–169.CrossRef
Boyd, B. K., Haynes, T. K., & Zona, F. (2010). Dimensions of CEO–board relations. Journal of Management Studies, 48, 1892–1923.CrossRef
Buchanan, J. M. (1975). The Samaritan’s Dilemma. In E. S. Phelps (Ed.), Altruism, morality and economic theory. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Chu, W. (2009). The influence of family ownership on SME performance: Evidence form public firms in Taiwan. Small Business Economics, 33, 353–373.CrossRef
Chua, J. H., Chrisman, J. J., & Sharma, P. (1999). Defining the family business by behavior. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 23(4), 19–39.
Cohen, S., & Bailey, D. (1997). What makes teams work: Group effectiveness research from the shop floor to the executive suite. Journal of Management, 23, 239–290.CrossRef
Corbetta, G., & Salvato, C. (2004). Self-serving or self-actualizing? Models of man and agency costs in different types of family firms: A commentary on comparing the agency costs of family and non family firms—conceptual issues and exploratory evidence. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 28, 355–362.CrossRef
Crane, M. (1985). How to keep families from feuding. In P. C. Rosenblatt, L. deMik, R. M. Anderson, & P. A. Johnson (Eds.), The family in business (pp. 458–463). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Davis, P. S., & Harveston, P. D. (1999). In the founder’s shadow: Conflict in the family firm. Family Business Review, 12(4), 1999.CrossRef
De Jong, H. W. (1997). The governance structure and performance of large European corporations. Journal of Management and Governance, 1, 5–27.CrossRef
Eddleston, K. A., Otondo, R. F., & Kellermanns, W. F. (2008). Conflict, participative decision-making, and generational ownership dispersion: A multilevel analysis. Journal of Small Business Management, 46(3), 456–484.CrossRef
Ensley, M. D., & Pearson, A. W. (2005). An Exploratory comparison of the behavioral dynamics of top management teams in family and nonfamily new ventures: Cohesion, conflict, potency and consensus (pp. 267–284). Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice.
Erez, M., & Somech, A. (1996). Is group productivity loss the rule of the exception? Effects of culture and group-based motivation. Academy of Management Journal, 39(6), 1513–1537.CrossRef
Forbes, D. P., & Milliken, F. J. (1999). Cognition and corporate governance. Academy of Management Review, 24, 489–505.
George, J. M. (1992). Extrinsic and intrinsic origins of perceived social loafing in organization. Academy of Management Journal, 35, 191–202.CrossRef
Gersick, K., Davis, J., Hampton, M., & Lansberg, I. (1997). Generation to generation: Life cycles of the family business. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Gladstein, D. L. (1984). Groups in context: A model of task group effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29, 499–517.CrossRef
Gomez-Mejia, L. R., Haynes, K. T., Núñez-Nickel, M., Jacobson, K. J. L., & Moyano-Fuentes, J. (2007). Socioemotional wealth and business risks in family-controlled firms: Evidence from Spanish olive oil mills. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52(1), 106–137.
Gomez-Mejia, L. R., Nuñez-Nickel, M., & Gutierrez, J. (2001). The role of family ties in agency contracts. Academy of Management Journal, 44(1), 81–95.CrossRef
Hamelin, A. (2013). Influence of family ownership on small business growth. Evidence from French SMEs. Small Business Economics, 41, 463–579.CrossRef
Harkins, S. G., & Szymanski, K. (1989). Social loafing and group evaluation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 934–941.CrossRef
Harvey, M. & Evans, R. (1994). The family business and multiple levels of conflict. Family Business Review. 7(4), 331–348.
Huse, M. (2009). The value creating board. Corporate governance and organizational behaviour. London: Routledge.CrossRef
Jehn, K. (1995). A multimethod examination of the benefits and detriments of intragroup conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 256–282.CrossRef
Jehn, K. A., & Mannix, A. E. (2001). The dynamic nature of conflict: A longitudinal study of intragroup conflict and group performance. Academy of Management Journal, 44(2), 238–251.CrossRef
Kanter, R. M. (1989). Work and family in the United States: A critical review and agenda for research and policy. Family Business Review, 2, 77–114.CrossRef
Kellermanns, F. W., & Eddleston, K. A. (2004). Feuding families: When conflict does a family firm good. Entrepreneurship theory and Practice, 28(3), 209–228.
Kellermanns, F. W., & Eddleston, K. A. (2007). A family perspective on when conflict benefits family firm performance. Journal of Business Research, 60(10), 1048–1057.
Kellermanns, F. W., Eddleston, K. A., Sarathy, R., & Murphy, F. (2012). Innovativeness in family firms: A family influence perspective. Small Business Economics, 38, 85–101.CrossRef
Kets de Vries, M. (1993). The dynamics of family controlled firms: The good and the bad news. Organizational Dynamics, 21(3), 59–71.CrossRef
Le Breton-Miller, I., Miller, D., & Lester, R. H. (2011). Stewardship or agency? A social embeddedness reconciliation of conduct and performance in public family businesses organization science, 22, 704–721.
Levine, J. M., Resnick, L. B., & Higgins, E. T. (1993). Social foundation of cognition. In M. R. Rosenzweig & L. W. Porter (Eds.) Annual review of psychology (vol. 44, pp. 585–612). Palo Alto, California: Annual Reviews Inc.
Mason, R. O., & Mitroff, I. I. (1981). Challenging strategic planning assumptions. New York: Wiley.
Mathieu, J., Maynard, M. T., Rapp, T., & Gilson, L. (2008). Team effectiveness 1997–2007: A review of recent advancements and a glimpse into the future. Journal of Management, 34, 410–476.CrossRef
McGrath, J. E. (1964). Social psychology: A brief introduction. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
Miller, D. (1993). The architecture of simplicity. Academy of Management Review, 18(1), 116–139.
Minichilli, A., Zattoni, A., Nielsen, S., & Huse, M. (2012). Board task performance: An exploration of micro- and macro-level determinants of board effectiveness. Journal of Organizational Bevahior, 33, 193–215.CrossRef
Minichilli, A., Zattoni, A., & Zona, F. (2009). Making boards effective: An empirical examination of board task performance. British Journal of Management, 20(1), 55–74.CrossRef
Mintzberg, H. (1994). The rise and fall of strategic planning. New York: The Free Press.
Pettigrew, A. (1992). On studying managerial elites. Strategic Management Journal, 13, 163–182.CrossRef
Ronstadt, R. (1984). Entrepreneurship. Dover, MA: Lord Publishing.
Rueckert, R., & Orville, W. C. (1987). Marketing’s interaction with other functional units: A conceptual framework and empirical evidence. Journal of Marketing, 51, 1–19.CrossRef
Schulze, W. S., Lubatkin, M. H., & Dino, R. (2003a). Toward a theory of agency and altruism in family firms. Journal of Business Venturing, 18, 450–473.CrossRef
Schulze, W. S., Lubatkin, M. H., & Dino, R. N. (2003b). Exploring the agency consequences of ownership dispersion among the directors of private family firms. Academy of Management Journal, 46(2), 179–194.CrossRef
Schulze, W. S., Lubatkin, M. L., Dino, R. N., & Buchholtz, A. K. (2001). Agency relationships in family firms: Theory and evidence. Organization Science, 12(2), 99–116.CrossRef
Schweiger, D., & Sandberg, W. (1989). The utilization of individual capabilities in group approaches to strategic decision making. Strategic Management Journal, 10, 31–43.CrossRef
Schwenk, C. R. (1990). Conflict in organizational decision making: An exploratory study of its effects in for-profit and not-for-profit organizations. Management Science, 36, 436–448.CrossRef
Sciascia, S., Mazzola, P., Astrachan, J. H., & Pieper, T. M. (2012). The role of family ownership in international entrepreneurship: Exploring nonlinear effects. Small Business Economics, 38, 15–31.CrossRef
Shepperd, J. A. (1993). Productivity loss in performance groups: A motivation analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 113, 67–81.CrossRef
Sniezek, J. A., & Buckley, T. (1995). Cueing and cognitive conflict in judge–adviser decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 62(2), 159–174.CrossRef
Tagiuri, R., & Davis, J. A. (1992). On the goals of successful family companies. Family Business Review, 5(1), 43–62.CrossRef
Troy, C., Smith, K. G., & Domino, M. A. (2011). CEO demographics and accounting fraud: Who is more likely to rationalize illegal acts? Strategic Organization, 9(4), 259–282.CrossRef
Uhlaner, L. M., Kellermanns, F. W., Eddleston, K. A., & Hoy, F. (2012). The Entrepreneuring family: A new paradigm for family business research. Small Business Economics, 38, 1–11.CrossRef
Wageman, R. (1995). Interdependence and group effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 145–180.CrossRef
Wagner, J. A, I. I. I. (1995). Studies of individualism–collectivism: Effects on cooperation in groups. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 152–172.CrossRef
Ward, J., & Dolan, C. (1998). Defining and describing family business ownership configurations. Family Business Review, 11(4), 305–310.CrossRef
Weick, K., & Roberts, K. (1993). Collective mind in organizations: Heedful interrelating on flight decks. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38, 357–381.CrossRef
Weldon, E., & Gargano, G. (1985). Cognitive effort in additive task groups: The effects of shared responsibility on the quality of multi attribute judgments. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 36, 348–361.CrossRef
Weldon, E., & Weingart, L. R. (1993). Group goals and group performance. British Journal of Social Psychology, 32, 307–334.CrossRef
Westphal, J. D. (1999). Collaboration in the boardroom: Behavioral and performance consequences of CEO–board social ties. Academy of Management Journal, 42(1), 7–24.CrossRef
Wincent, J., Örtqvist, D., & Eriksson, J. (2010). The more the merrier?: the effect of group size on effectiveness in SME funding campaigns. Strategic Organization, 8(1), 43–68.
Zahra, S. A. (2005). Entrepreneurial risk-taking in family firms. Family Business Review, 18(1), 23–40.CrossRef
Zahra, S. A. (2012). Organizational learning and entrepreneurship in family firms: Exploring the moderating effect of ownership and cohesion. Small Business Economics, 38, 51–65.CrossRef
Zattoni, A., Gnan, L., & Huse, M. (2013). Does family involvement influence firm performance? Exploring the mediating effects of board processes and tasks. Journal of Management.
Zona, F., & Zattoni, A. (2007). Beyond the black box of demography: Board processes and task effectiveness within Italian firms. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 15(5), 852–864.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Board ownership and processes in family firms
Author
Fabio Zona
Publication date
01-01-2015
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Small Business Economics / Issue 1/2015
Print ISSN: 0921-898X
Electronic ISSN: 1573-0913
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-014-9587-z

Other articles of this Issue 1/2015

Small Business Economics 1/2015 Go to the issue

OriginalPaper

The constructivist view of entrepreneurial opportunities: a critical analysis

OriginalPaper

Firms size and directed technological change

OriginalPaper

High-growth firms and productivity: evidence from the United Kingdom

OriginalPaper

Self-employment and the local business cycle

OriginalPaper

Necessity entrepreneurship and competitive strategy

OriginalPaper

Spatial patterns in new firm formation: are cooperatives different?

Premium Partner

    Image Credits