This analysis provides a review of family business literature concerning the application of socioemotional wealth (SEW) and its extension through the FIBER framework. Specifically, we answer Brigham and Payne’s call by assessing the multidimensionality of the SEW construct, the interrelatedness of the dimensions, and its specificity to family firms. We contribute to the literature by conducting a systematic review of the SEW literature and examining the applications of the FIBER dimensions, noting the evolution of specific research themes. Last, using necessary condition analysis, we provide four conceptual inferences regarding the assumptions of SEW to provide a way forward.

No abstract

Summary Competition between individuals permeates people's lives as they strive for limited resources, services, and status. However, research on competition and competitiveness in organizations is limited despite its relevance to relational dynamics (e.g., rivalry), individual differences (e.g., traits and gender), social factors (e.g., competitive climate), and organizational outcomes (e.g., work performance and unethical behavior). In this article, we propose a multilevel model of competition and competitiveness that includes the individual, the group, and the situation. By providing a holistic overview of research across a broad array of disciplines, we organize the field and create a usable framework to advance knowledge of competition and competitiveness. In doing so, we identify what we know, what we still need to discover, and provide direction for future research. The article closes with an assessment of methods and measures used in studying competition. In conclusion, this review establishes a multilevel and integrative structure that incorporates individual and team competitiveness with competitive situations that prompt competitive processes and important organizational outcomes.

Stereotype threat theory (STT), which seeks to understand intergroup differences in socioeconomic outcomes, has attracted considerable attention since its inception. With the goal of advancing conversation about the usefulness of STT in organizational settings, and to extend discussions on theory assessment, we evaluate STT as a “good” theory for organizational research using a three-pronged (i.e., 3E) theory assessment framework: experience, explain, and establish. Our critical analysis reveals areas where STT has made progress and where gaps remain to be addressed. The systematic approach we pursue allows for a rigorous articulation of the 3E framework for future theory assessment work as well as helps to suggest ways for improving upon and extending STT research in new directions.

No abstract