No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

The objective of this case-based study is to provide insights into the advisory role of non-family board members in a family firm attempting strategic renewal. By studying the non-family board members of a family firm in a Nordic country, we suggest that non-family board members' advisory role evolves in a dynamic way. We show at the micro-level how the role, content, intensity, and locus of advice change and how it can be both inertia-and stress-inducing. This facilitates the renewal and hence a firm's capacity to improve its alignment with changing external demands. We highlight the collaborative nature of the advisory role and the importance of the non-family member chair in ensuring effective board processes. Through our research we contribute to the understanding on the contextual nature of the board roles and tasks and on family firm renewals. We provide insights into how the family firm owners and the chair of the board can enhance the prospects that the non-family board members create value through their advisory role.

By focusing on family owners’ perceptions and dynamics the aim of this paper is to understand the specific goals associated to their ownership status and whether and to what extend they impact on family firms’ growth and continuity. We use survey data on Finnish family firms and identify a set of differentiated family owners’ goals. Our findings contribute to the debate on differentiating socioemotional wealth by untangling the existence of variations in family principals’ goal setting and the importance to also consider that financial motives could determine family owners’ goals.

No abstract

No abstract

The objective of this case-based study is to understand how the dyadic interaction between the key governance actors can influence the decision-making aimed at directing and controlling a family firm. The study provides evidence that dyadic interaction at the back stage of the formal governance process can offer a privileged position for the family firm owners who serve on the board, and the non-family member Chair of the Board, to influence decision-making before, after and between board meetings. The cases studied suggest that dyadic interactions can serve as preparation for formal board processes and complement and clarify them, yet they also have the potential to conflict with them. Dyadic interaction is also shown to offer important relational and emotional benefits that may not necessarily be achieved through larger group interaction. The findings suggest that although the actors can self-regulate their behaviour through informal rules, the rules may imperfectly address one risk of dyadic interaction—the reduced cognitive conflict among the board.