PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to explore differences between non-family employees of family and non-family firms regarding the perceptions of organizational justice and levels of organizational commitment. Moreover, focusing on non-family employees of family firms, the study assesses the relation between the perceptions of organizational justice and levels of organizational commitment. Finally, the study seeks to understand which dimension of organizational commitment (i.e. affective, continuance, or normative) is more associated with the perceptions of organizational justice of non-family employees working in family firms.Design/methodology/approachThe empirical evidence is provided by a sample of 205 Portuguese employees, 98 non-family employees of family firms, and 107 non-family firms' employees, who responded to a questionnaire that included organizational justice and commitment measures. All firms included in the sample are small-sized privately owned companies.FindingsResults show that there are no differences between non-family employees of family and non-family firms regarding the perceptions of organizational justice. However, results reveal that there are significant differences regarding the levels of organizational commitment. Furthermore, it was found that, in family firms, non-family employees' perceptions of organizational justice are positively related to the levels of commitment, especially regarding the affective dimension.Originality/valueThis paper aims to contribute to the literature by addressing two classical organizational aspects, which are yet under-researched in the comparison between family and non-family firms, while pursuing to shed some light on the relationship between the perceptions of organizational justice and levels of organizational commitment of non-family employees working in family firms.

This study addresses a current debate in the family business literature involving the extent to which the family business context hinders or promotes entrepreneurial behavior. The empirical evidence is provided by 155 small-sized firms, 82 family-controlled and 73 nonfamily-controlled, operating in an outermost region, the Autonomous Region of the Azores. This study analyzes the differences between family and nonfamily firms in regard to entrepreneurial orientation and how it is influenced by family participation. Results show that there are differences in entrepreneurship orientation and in two of its three dimensions, while revealing that family participation is negatively associated with entrepreneurial orientation and its three dimensions.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore differences in the decision-making styles between family and nonfamily firms, while assessing how family participation relates to the use of decision-making styles within family firms. Design/methodology/approach The empirical evidence is provided by a sample of 155 firms, located in the Azores, Portugal, 82 family controlled and 73 nonfamily controlled firms. All firms included in the sample are small-sized privately owned enterprises. Business owners and managers responded to a decision-making styles questionnaire, followed, in the case of family firms, by the report of the number of family members actively involved in the business. Findings Results show that there are no differences in the use of rational decision making between family and nonfamily firms. However, nonfamily firms show higher levels of experiential decision making than family firms. Results also show that family participation plays a key role in guiding the decisional process, by promoting the use experiential decisions and inhibiting the adoption of a rational decision-making styles in family firms. Research limitations/implications From a theoretical perspective, this study opens the door to new research on an under investigated topic in the family business literature. It contributes with initial notions that may help profile the decisional style within small family firms, while revealing how family participation affects it. Thus, creating a fertile ground of discussion that can be an impulse for more research in this area. Practical implications From an applied perspective, assessing the influence of family participation in the adoption of a decisional style is potentially valuable for practitioners as well as for owners and managers. Providing them with clues that may help them better understand the basis of their decisions which can benefit their relations with other family members, as with customers, partners and suppliers that play a key role in the firm’s growth, profitability and adaptability. Social implications From a social point of view, showing that family firms tend to be rational in their decisions may help create a more reputable and credible image surrounding these firms that are sometimes perceived as less professional than nonfamily firms. Thus, a more solid reputability can help improve their relationship with important partner institutions (e.g. financial, governmental), becoming more attractive to private and public investment, which can translate into win-win situations. Originality/value This study responds to a gap in the literature, by exploring the use of experiential vs rational decision-making styles in small family and nonfamily firms. This study also contributes to the understanding of the decision making within family firms, by assessing the role of family participation in the adoption of a decisional style.

A escolha intertemporal tem estreita ligação com fenómenos que estão na ordem do dia, tais como comportamentos de poupança, consumo e investimento. Este estudo constituir-se-á como um avanço na compreensão da escolha intertemporal, na medida em que contempla contextos de escolha triádica (três opções) e não apenas de escolha diádica (duas opções), à qual se limitam a maior parte de estudos empíricos. Pela primeira vez, este estudo vem tentar compreender como a preferência entre opções é influenciada por outras opções no contexto de escolha. Os actuais modelos de escolha intertemporal, chamados modelos de desconto, não contemplam tais influências, uma vez que cada opção é avaliada independentemente das outras. Focamo-nos em efeitos de polarização, induzidos pela introdução de uma terceira opção ao leque de escolha e o enquadramento da terceira opção como a opção default. Os resultados confirmaram estes efeitos. Discutimos ainda como os modelos de desconto devem ser substituídos por outros modelos, em que as pessoas fazem comparações directas entre as opções. Os resultados também confirmaram fenómenos que até hoje têm sido acomodados pelos modelos de desconto: Os efeitos de diferimento, de magnitude e de sinal. Palavras-chave:Escolha diádica, Escolha intertemporal, Escolha triádica, Polarização. INTRODUÇÃOEscolhas intertemporais definem-se como escolhas que envolvem trocas entre custos e benefícios que ocorrem em diferentes pontos temporais (Loewenstein, Read, & Baumeister, 2003). A investigação sobre a escolha intertemporal apresenta-se em franco crescimento nas últimas décadas. Cada vez mais é reconhecido o seu contributo e devida importância na vida económica, pois a grande maioria das decisões tomadas em contexto económico abrange vários períodos de tempo, o que faz com que seja indispensável o recurso a análises intertemporais (e.g., comportamentos de poupança, de consumo, de investimento).Nos estudos psicológicos sobre a escolha intertemporal, os participantes são normalmente confrontados com escolhas diádicas entre resultados menores mais cedo e resultados maiores mais tarde. Exemplos do terreno são consumir agora ou poupar para o futuro, e fumar agora ou viver em melhor saúde no futuro. Um exemplo de estudos laboratoriais é a escolha entre receber €100 agora ou €150 daqui a 1 ano. Neste trabalho, pretende-se contribuir para o estudo da escolha intertemporal, analisando as preferências dos indivíduos quando confrontados com escolhas triádicas. Exemplos do terreno são investir poupanças em aplicações de curto, médio ou longo 269A correspondência relativa a este artigo deverá ser enviada para: Marc Scholten.

No abstract

This study compares the perceptions of employer branding and psychological contract levels of employees of family and non-family firms. Specifically, to better understand the dynamics of family businesses, we assess the extent to which employer branding perceptions have an impact on the employees' psychological contract levels. The empirical evidence is provided by a sample of 165 Portuguese employees (76 from family businesses and 89 from non-family businesses), working in small and medium-sized privately-owned companies. The results confirmed the research hypotheses, suggesting that employees of family companies have higher perceptions of employer branding and psychological contract levels than those of employees of non-family companies, also revealing that employer branding has a positive impact on the psychological contract levels of family firm’s employees.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the differences between employees working in family and non-family firms regarding their emotion regulation and job satisfaction levels. Moreover, focusing on family firms, we assess the relationship between the employees’ emotion regulation and job satisfaction levels. The empirical evidence is provided by a sample of 178 Portuguese employees, 80 employees of family firms, and 98 non-family firms’ employees, who responded to a questionnaire that included emotion regulation and job satisfaction measures. All respondents work in small- and medium-sized private companies. Although the results do not confirm the first hypothesis, suggesting that employees working on family firms show higher levels of emotion regulation than those of non-family companies, the idea that employees of family companies show higher levels of job satisfaction than employees of non-family companies is confirmed (i.e., Hypothesis 2). Moreover, the results also support the third hypothesis, confirming that emotion regulation levels have a significant and positive relationship with the job satisfaction levels of employees working in family firms. This paper makes several contributions to the research literature by addressing two organizational aspects still under-addressed in the comparison between family and non-family firms, while pursuing to offer insights on the relationship between the emotion regulation and job satisfaction levels of employees working in family firms.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to assess differences between employees of family and non-family firms regarding their perceptions of employer branding and psychological contract levels. Moreover, focusing on family firms, the authors assess the relation between the employees’ perceptions of employer branding and the psychological contract levels. Design/methodology/approach The empirical evidence is provided by a sample of 165 Portuguese employees, 76 employees of family firms and 89 non-family firms’ employees, who responded to a questionnaire that included employer branding and psychological contract measures. All respondents study in small and medium-sized private companies. Findings The results confirmed the research hypotheses, suggesting that employees of family companies show higher perceptions of employer branding and psychological contract levels than employees of non-family companies. Results also reveal that the perceptions of employer branding are positively related to the psychological contract levels of the family firm’s employees. Originality/value This paper aims to contribute to the literature by addressing two contemporary organizational aspects yet under-addressed in the comparison between family and non-family firms while pursuing to offer insights on the relationship between the perceptions of employer branding and levels of the psychological contract of employees working in family firms.