This article examines the effect of organizational characteristics (firm innovativeness, firm internationalization, firm size) on the appointment of nonfamily managers in private family firms while taking into account the moderating role of socioemotional wealth (SEW). While these organizational characteristics increase the need for expertise, family firms cope with a limited pool of family managers. Therefore, new creative knowledge from nonfamily managers is needed. However, results from a sample of 145 Belgian family firms indicate that the positive effect of organizational characteristics on the integration of nonfamily managers decreases when family-related objectives reflected by SEW become more important for the firm.

Socio-emotional wealth (SEW), defined as the firm's non-financial aspects meeting the family's affective needs, has become the dominant paradigm in family firm research. Recent debate acknowledges potential SEW heterogeneity within family firms. This study considers the effect of polarizing opinions on SEW preservation among TMT members as a source of separation in the TMT. More concretely, we study the effect of SEW separation on TMT decision-making quality, while taking into consideration behavioural integration as a team process and psychological safety as a team context. Based on a unique multiple respondent sample of 300 managers from 55 Belgian private family firms, we find that behavioural integration mediates the negative effect of SEW separation on TMT decisionmaking quality. In addition, we find that the negative effect of SEW separation on behavioural integration is mitigated by psychological safety and even turns into a positive effect at high levels of psychological safety.

No abstract

This study explores how the COVID-19 pandemic has forced Flemish growth-oriented entrepreneurs to build entrepreneurial resilience. We rely on a research framework that consists of a “challenge-reaction-learning loop” to empirically investigate how entrepreneurial resilience is built in times of the COVID-19 crisis. To investigate this complex entrepreneurial learning process, we use data that have been collected during the first and second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. By using several datapoints, we could identify (1) the specific challenges growth-oriented firms are facing as a result of the COVID-19 crisis; (2) how these entrepreneurs reacted to these challenges; and (3) what they learned during the first and second wave of the pandemic and how they perceive the future. By making this entrepreneurial learning process explicit and dividing it into an iterative “challenge-reaction-learning loop”, this study is relevant for all entrepreneurs, as it contains several interesting lessons learned. We also contribute to academic literature as we provide future researchers a tangible framework to further elucidate how entrepreneurial resilience is built in times of crisis.

PurposeThis paper aims to analyze the effect of industry growth rates on the characteristics of high-growth firms (HGFs) that are active in a particular industry. By making a distinction between HGFs active in stable and declining industries and HGFs active in growing and high-growing industries, it is analyzed if the main dimensions of firm performance are significantly different for HGFs active in one of these different industry types. Gaining more insight into this industry aspect of high firm growth is important as governmental measures towards HGFs may be more effective if they have a specific sectoral focus.Design/methodology/approachA subset of 740 Belgian HGFs was analyzed. Data were gathered from the Belfirst database. HGFs were classified within their corresponding industry type: a declining industry (negative growth), a stable industry (0 −5% growth), a growing industry (5 −10% growth) and a high-growth industry (>10% growth). Four dimensions of structural firm performance that are expected to correlate with high growth were taken into consideration: productivity (value added per FTE), profitability (ROA), innovativeness (intangible assets) and financial health (solvency and liquidity).Tukey's range tests in conjunction with post-hoc analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests were carried out to test for significant differences in all the mentioned variables for the HGFs in the four different industry types.FindingsResults show that HGFs active in a stable industry are not significantly more profitable or innovative than HGFs active in a growth industry. However, significant differences could be encountered when it comes to the other two dimensions of structural firm performance: productivity and financial health. It is shown that HGFs active in declining and stable industries are significantly more productive than HGFs active in growth industries and high-growth industries. Also, HGFs active in declining and stable industries have significantly higher liquidity ratios than firms active in growth industries, pointing towards a better financial health for HGFs in nongrowing industries.Research limitations/implicationsThe results confirm the conceptual logic that the differences between resource-based view (RBV) and industrial organization (IO) propositions will have an impact on the drivers of firm performance and high business growth. Every future study that focuses on the growth determinants of HGFs should be aware that considering the subset of HGFs as one homogenous group may be suboptimal. It is likely that the growth determinants of both HGF types will indeed be fundamentally different.Originality/valueUntil now, all studies on HGFs have considered the subset of HGFs as a whole. This paper tried to disentangle the subset based on the growth rate of the industry in which HGFs are mainly active. In this proposition, a reason for the lack of knowledge about characteristics of HGFs may – at least partially – be found in the fact that industry membership plays an important role in determining the characteristics of a high-growth firm. Future studies focusing on high-growth determinants may benefit from systematically taking the industry growth rates into account, with the knowledge that the propositions of two different theories – IO and RBV – may be the fundamental drivers of a firm's high-growth rates.