Skip to main content
Fachgebiete
Automobil + Motoren Bauwesen + Immobilien Business IT + Informatik Elektrotechnik + Elektronik Energie + Nachhaltigkeit Finance + Banking Management + Führung Marketing + Vertrieb Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe Versicherung + Risiko
DE
EN
Bücher
Zeitschriften
Themenseiten
Organisationspsychologie Projektmanagement Marketing Smart Manufacturing
Weitere Formate
Podcasts Webinare Technik Webinare Wirtschaft Kongresse Veranstaltungskalender Awards
Jetzt Einzelzugang starten
Zugang für Unternehmen
Referenzkunden
SLX-Digitalkonferenz: Zukunftswerkstatt 2024

Mehr Umsatz mit Top-Kontakten

Am 7. Mai erfahren Sie, wie Vertriebsteams Leadgenerierung, Leadnurturing und Leadstrategien effizient steuern können.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Small Business Economics
Erschienen in: Small Business Economics 3/2014

01.03.2014

Innovation in family and non-family SMEs: an exploratory analysis

verfasst von: Nicolas Classen, Martin Carree, Anita Van Gils, Bettina Peters

Erschienen in: Small Business Economics | Ausgabe 3/2014

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

This study provides an exploratory analysis of differences between family and non-family firms in innovation investment, product and process innovation outcomes, and labor productivity. Using data from the Community Innovation Survey on 2,087 German small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), we observe significant disparities at each stage of the innovation process. Whereas family SMEs have a higher propensity to invest in innovation at all, conditional on investing in innovation, these companies do so less intensively than their non-family counterparts. Family SMEs further tend to outperform non-family SMEs in terms of process innovation outcomes when controlling for innovation investment. Given the level of product and process innovation, however, family SMEs underperform regarding labor productivity in comparison to non-family SMEs. These findings complement previous empirical research by illustrating how the presence of a dominant family relates to innovation inputs and outputs of SMEs in Europe’s largest economy and its innovative SME sector.
Vorheriger Artikel Ageing and entrepreneurial preferences
Nächster Artikel Can franchising be an economic development strategy? An empirical investigation

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

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!

Jetzt informieren

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!

Jetzt informieren
Fußnoten
1
According to the Stiftung Familienunternehmen (2011), the share of family firms in Germany (based on the definition that a family owns the majority of shares or votes in a firm) varies as follows across different size classes (number of employees): 0–9: 94 %, 10–49: 85 %, 50–249: 58 %, 250–499: 36 %, and >500: 27 %.
 
2
See Mairesse and Mohnen (2010) for an overview of recent studies using the CDM model.
 
3
In accordance with the CIS, we define innovation expenditures as money spent on internal and external R&D or the acquisition of external resources to realize innovation projects.
 
4
To check the robustness of our results, we reran the entire model adopting the definition of SMEs used in the US (10–500 employees). The sample size increases from 2,087 to 2,323 firms but there is no qualitative difference in the results; all family SME effects are confirmed.
 
5
Specifically, this encompasses all internal and external R&D expenditures, acquisition of advanced machinery, facilities, software and external knowledge to realize innovation projects, product design, construction, design of services and other preparations for the production/sale and distribution of innovations, internal or external training specifically for innovation projects, and launch of innovations onto the market (marketing campaigns directly linked to product innovations). Organizational innovation is not included.
 
6
Without any loss of generality, we assume that the threshold is zero.
 
7
Using the same set of regressors in the selection and the outcome equation of the Heckman model requires the selection equation to be non-linear (Cameron and Trivedi 2010). Testing for this we found clear evidence for non-linearity indicating that the identification of our model need not rely on exclusion restrictions.
 
8
Even 20 years after reunification, structural economic differences still persist between the formerly separate entities of East and West Germany. Hence, we control for these regional differences within our analysis.
 
9
In addition to the variables discussed in the text, we have included dummy variables for several control variables that indicate missing values. In all cases, when the missing values indicator has a value of one, the corresponding variable is coded zero.
 
Literatur
Ang, J. S., Cole, R. A., & Lin, J. W. (2000). Agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Finance, 55(1), 81–106.CrossRef
Astrachan, J. H., & Shanker, M. C. (1996). Myths and realities: Family businesses’ contribution to the US economy—A framework for assessing family business statistics. Family Business Review, 9(2), 107–119.CrossRef
Atuahene-Gima, K. (1996). Market orientation and innovation. Journal of Business Research, 35(2), 93–103.CrossRef
Audretsch, D. B. (2002). The dynamic role of small firms: Evidence from the U.S. Small Business Economics, 18(1–3), 13–40.CrossRef
Ayyagari, M., Demirgüç-Kunt, A., & Vojislav, M. (2011). Firm innovation in emerging markets: The role of finance, governance, and competition. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 46(6), 1545–1580.CrossRef
Barbera, F., & Moores, K. (2013). Firm ownership and productivity: A study of family and non-family SMEs. Small Business Economics, 40(4), 953–976.
Barth, E., Gulbrandsen, T., & Schone, P. (2005). Family ownership and productivity: The role of owner-management. Journal of Corporate Finance, 11(1–2), 107–127.CrossRef
Beehr, T. A., Drexler, J. A., Jr, & Faulkner, S. (1997). Working in small family businesses: Empirical comparisons to non-family businesses. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18(3), 297–312.CrossRef
Benavides-Velasco, C., Quintana-García, C., & Guzmán-Parra, V. (2013). Trends in family business research. Small Business Economics, 40(1), 41–57.CrossRef
Bennedsen, M., Nielson, K. M., Pérez-González, F., & Wolfenzon, D. (2007). Inside the family firm: The role of families in succession decisions and performance. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 122(2), 647–691.CrossRef
Block, J. H. (2010). Family management, family ownership, and downsizing: Evidence from S&P 500 firms. Family Business Review, 23(2), 109–130.CrossRef
Block, J. H. (2012). R&D investments in family and founder firms: An agency perspective. Journal of Business Venturing, 27(2), 248–265.CrossRef
Block, J., Miller, D., Jaskiewicz, P., & Spiegel, F. (2013). Economic and technological importance of innovations in large family and founder firms: An analysis of patent data. Family Business Review, 26(2), 180–199.
Cameron, A. C., & Trivedi, P. K. (2010). Microeconometrics using stata (2nd ed.). College Station: Stata Press.
Carroll, G. R., & Hannan, M. T. (2000). The demography of corporations and industries. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Cefis, E., & Marsili, O. (2006). Survivor: The role of innovation in firms’ survival. Research Policy, 35(5), 626–641.CrossRef
Chen, H. L., & Hsu, W. T. (2009). Family ownership, board independence and R&D investment. Family Business Review, 22(4), 347–362.CrossRef
Chin, C. L., Chen, Y. J., Kleinman, G., & Lee, P. (2009). Corporate ownership structure and innovation: Evidence from Taiwan’s electronics industry. Journal of Accounting Auditing Finance, 24(1), 145–175.
Chrisman, J. J., Chua, J. H., Pearson, A. W., & Barnett, T. (2012). Family involvement, family influence, and family-centered non-economic goals in small firms. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 36(2), 267–293.CrossRef
Chrisman, J. J., Chua, J. H., & Sharma, P. (2005). Trends and directions in the development of a strategic management theory of the family firm. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(5), 555–576.CrossRef
Chrisman, J. J., & Patel, P. J. (2012). Variations in R&D investments of family and non-family firms: Behavioral agency and myopic loss aversion perspectives. Academy of Management Journal, 55(4), 976–997.CrossRef
Chu, W. (2009). The influence of family ownership on SME performance: Evidence from public firms in Taiwan. Small Business Economics, 33(3), 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.
Classen, N., Van Gils, A., Bammens, Y., & Carree, M. (2012). Accessing resources from innovation partners: The search breadth of family SMEs. Journal of Small Business Management, 50(2), 191–215.CrossRef
Craig, J. B. L., & Dibrell, C. (2006). The natural environment, innovation, and firm performance: A comparative study. Family Business Review, 19(4), 275–288.CrossRef
Crépon, B., Duguet, E., & Mairesse, J. (1998). Research and development, innovation and productivity: An econometric analysis at the firm level. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 7(2), 115–158.CrossRef
Cruz, C., Justo, R., & De Castro, J. (2012). Does family employment enhance MSEs performance? Integrating socioemotional wealth and family embeddedness perspectives. Journal of Business Venturing, 27(1), 62–76.CrossRef
Czarnitzki, D., & Kraft, K. (2009). Capital control, debt financing and innovative activity. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 71(2), 372–383.CrossRef
De Massis, A., Frattini, F., & Lichtenthaler, U. (2013a). Research on technological innovation in family firms: Present debates and future directions. Family Business Review, 26(1), 10–31.CrossRef
De Massis, A., Frattini, F., Pizzurno, E., & Cassia, L. (2013b). Product innovation in family vs. non-family firms: An exploratory analysis. Journal of Small Business Management, 51(4).
De Massis, A., Sharma, P. A., Chua, J. H., & Chrisman, J. J. (2012). Family business studies: An annotated bibliography. Northhampton, MA: Edward Elgar.CrossRef
Eddleston, K. A., & Kellermanns, F. W. (2006). Destructive and productive family relationships: A stewardship theory perspective. Journal of Business Venturing, 22(4), 545–565.CrossRef
Eddleston, K. A., Kellermanns, F. W., & Sarathy, R. (2008). Resource configuration in family firms: Linking resources, strategic planning and technological opportunities to performance. Journal of Management Studies, 45(1), 26–50.
Esteve-Pérez, S., & Mañez-Castillejo, J. A. (2008). The resource-based theory of the firm and firm survival. Small Business Economics, 30(3), 231–249.CrossRef
Gómez-Mejía, L. R., Cruz, C., Berrone, P., & De Castro, J. (2011). The bind that ties: Socioemotional wealth preservation in family firms. The Academy of Management Annals, 5(1), 653–707.CrossRef
Gómez-Mejía, L. R., Hynes, K. T., Núñez-Nickel, M., Jacobson, K. J. L., & Moyano-Fuentes, H. (2007). Socioemotional wealth and business risk in family-controlled firms: Evidence from Spanish olive oil mills. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52(1), 106–137.
Griffith, R., Huergo, E., Mairesse, J., & Peters, B. (2006). Innovation and productivity across four European countries. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 22(4), 483–498.CrossRef
Gudmundson, D., Tower, C. B., & Hartman, E. A. (2003). Innovation in small businesses: Culture and ownership structure do matter. Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship, 8(1), 1–18.
Habbershon, T., Williams, M., & MacMillan, I. (2003). A unified systems perspective of family firm performance. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(4), 451–465.CrossRef
Hall, B. H., Lotti, F., & Mairesse, J. (2009). Innovation and productivity in SMEs: Empirical evidence for Italy. Small Business Economics, 33(1), 13–33.CrossRef
Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. (1984). Structural inertia and organizational change. American Sociological Review, 49(2), 149–164.CrossRef
Heckman, J. (1979). Sample selection bias as a specification error. Econometrica, 47(1), 153–161.CrossRef
Holderness, C. G., & Sheehan, D. P. (1988). The role of majority shareholders in publicly held corporations: An exploratory analysis. Journal of Financial Economics, 20(1–2), 317–346.CrossRef
Kellermanns, F., Eddleston, K., Sarathy, R., & Murphy, F. (2012). Innovativeness in family firms: A family influence perspective. Small Business Economics, 38(1), 85–101.CrossRef
Klein, S. B. (2000). Family businesses in Germany: Significance and structure. Family Business Review, 13(3), 157–181.CrossRef
König, A., Kammerlander, N., & Enders, A. (forthcoming). The family innovator’s dilemma: How family influence affects the adoption of discontinuous technologies by incumbent firms. Academy of Management Review. doi:10.​5465/​amr.​2011.​0162.
Latham, S. F., & Braun, M. (2009). Managerial risk, innovation and organizational decline. Journal of Management, 35(2), 258–281.CrossRef
Lööf, H., & Heshmati, A. (2002). Knowledge capital and performance heterogeneity: A firm level innovation study. International Journal of Production Economics, 76(1), 61–85.CrossRef
Lööf, H., & Heshmati, A. (2006). On the relationship between innovation and performance: A sensitivity analysis. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 15(4–5), 317–345.CrossRef
Mairesse, J., & Mohnen, P. (2010). Using innovation surveys for econometric analysis. In B. H. Hall & N. Rosenberg (Eds.), Handbook of the economics of innovation (pp. 1130–1155). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Martikainen, M., Nikkinen, J., & Vähämaa, S. (2009). Production functions and productivity of family firms: Evidence from the S&P 500. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 49(2), 295–307.CrossRef
Maury, B. (2006). Family ownership and firm performance: Empirical evidence from Western European corporations. Journal of Corporate Finance, 12(2), 321–341.CrossRef
McConaughy, D. L., Walker, M. C., Henderson, G. V., & Mishra, C. S. (1998). Founding family controlled firms: Efficiency and value. Review of Financial Economics, 7(1), 1–19.CrossRef
Miller, D., Le Breton-Miller, I., & Lester, R. (2011). Family and lone-founder ownership and strategic behavior: Social context, identity and institutional logics. Journal of Management Studies, 48(1), 1–25.CrossRef
Miller, D., Le Breton-Miller, I., & Lester, R. (2013). Family firm governance, strategic conformity, and performance: Institutional vs. strategic perspectives. Organization Science, 24(1), 189–209.CrossRef
Monopolkommission. (2008). Weniger Staat, mehr Wettbewerb: Gesundheitsmärkte und staatliche Beihilfen. Hauptgutachten XVII (2006/2007), Nomos, Baden–Baden.
Morck, R., & Yeung, B. (2003). Agency problems in large family business groups. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 27(4), 367–382.CrossRef
Munari, F., Oriani, R., & Sobrero, M. (2010). The effects of owner identity and external governance systems on R&D investments: A study of Western European firms. Research Policy, 39(8), 1093–1104.CrossRef
Muñoz-Bullón, F., & Sanchez-Bueno, M. J. (2011). The impact of family involvement on the R&D intensity of publicly traded firms. Family Business Review, 24(1), 62–70.CrossRef
Naldi, L., Nordqvist, M., Sjöberg, K., & Wiklund, J. (2007). Entrepreneurial orientation, risk taking, and performance in family firms. Family Business Review, 20(1), 33–47.CrossRef
OECD, & Eurostat. (2005). Oslo manual: Guidelines for collecting and interpreting innovation data (3rd ed.). Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Statistical Office of the European Communities.
Patel, P. C., & Chrisman, J. J. (forthcoming). Risk abatement as a strategy for R&D investments in family firms. Strategic Management Journal. doi:10.​1002/​smj.​2119.
Peters, B. (2008). Innovation and firm performance: An empirical investigation for German firms. ZEW Economic Studies, 38, Physica Heidelberg, New York.
Roper, S. (1997). Product innovation and small Business growth: A comparison of the strategies of German, U.K. and Irish companies. Small Business Economics, 9(6), 523–537.CrossRef
Rosenbusch, N., Brinckmann, J., & Bausch, A. (2011). Is innovation always beneficial? A meta-analysis of the relationship between innovation and performance in SMEs. Journal of Business Venturing, 26(4), 441–457.CrossRef
Shi, C. (2003). On the trade-off between the future benefits and riskiness of R&D: A bondholders’ perspective. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 35(2), 227–254.CrossRef
Shipton, H., West, M., Dawson, J., Birdi, K., & Patterson, M. (2006). HRM as a predictor of innovation. Human Resource Management Journal, 16(1), 3–27.CrossRef
Simon, H. (2009). Hidden champions of the 21st century: Success strategies of unknown world market leaders. London: Springer.CrossRef
Sirmon, D. G., & Hitt, M. A. (2003). Managing resources: Linking unique resources, management and wealth creation in family firms. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 27(4), 339–358.CrossRef
Sraer, D., & Thesmar, D. (2007). Performance and behavior of family firms: Evidence from the French stock market. Journal of the European Economic Association, 5(4), 709–751.CrossRef
Terziovski, M. (2010). Innovation practice and its performance implications in small and medium enterprises (SMES) in the manufacturing sector: A resource-based view. Strategic Management Journal, 31(8), 892–902.
Villalonga, B., & Amit, R. (2006). How do family ownership, control, and management affect firm value? Journal of Financial Economics, 80(2), 385–417.CrossRef
Westhead, P. (1997). Ambitions, external environment and strategic factor differences between family and non-family companies. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 9(2), 127–158.CrossRef
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(1), 51–65.CrossRef
Zellweger, T. M. (2007). Time horizon, costs of equity capital, and generic investment strategies of firms. Family Business Review, 20(1), 1–15.CrossRef
Zellweger, T. M., Nason, R. S., Nordqvist, M., & Brush, C. G. (2011). Why do family firms strive for nonfinancial goals? An organizational identity perspective. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 37(2), 229–248.CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Innovation in family and non-family SMEs: an exploratory analysis
verfasst von
Nicolas Classen
Martin Carree
Anita Van Gils
Bettina Peters
Publikationsdatum
01.03.2014
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Small Business Economics / Ausgabe 3/2014
Print ISSN: 0921-898X
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-0913
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-013-9490-z

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2014

Small Business Economics 3/2014 Zur Ausgabe

OriginalPaper

Do cooperative enterprises create social trust?

OriginalPaper

Trade credit and SME profitability

OriginalPaper

“Surfeiting, the appetite may sicken”: entrepreneurship and happiness

Original Research

Ageing and entrepreneurial preferences

OriginalPaper

Stigma and business failure: implications for entrepreneurs’ career choices

OriginalPaper

Size, R&D productivity and Decision Styles

Premium Partner

    Bildnachweise