2012
DOI: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2012.07.001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effects of kin density within family-owned businesses

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
22
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 35 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 46 publications
1
22
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Of the 398 participants, 279 (70%) were nonfamily managers and 119 (30%) were family managers. These proportions, and those for the other individual-level characteristics reported in Table 1, are similar to those reported in prior surveys of employees working within U.S.-based family firms (e.g., Carmon, Miller, Raile, & Roers, 2010; Khanin, Turel, & Mahto, 2012; Spranger, Colarelli, Dimotakis, Jacob, & Avery, 2012). Likewise, the organizational-level characteristics are comparable with the descriptive data reported in these and other survey-based studies of small- and medium-sized family businesses in the United States (e.g., Eddleston, Kellermanns, & Sarathy, 2008; Jennings, Jennings, & Joo, 2015).…”
Section: Methodssupporting
confidence: 81%
“…Of the 398 participants, 279 (70%) were nonfamily managers and 119 (30%) were family managers. These proportions, and those for the other individual-level characteristics reported in Table 1, are similar to those reported in prior surveys of employees working within U.S.-based family firms (e.g., Carmon, Miller, Raile, & Roers, 2010; Khanin, Turel, & Mahto, 2012; Spranger, Colarelli, Dimotakis, Jacob, & Avery, 2012). Likewise, the organizational-level characteristics are comparable with the descriptive data reported in these and other survey-based studies of small- and medium-sized family businesses in the United States (e.g., Eddleston, Kellermanns, & Sarathy, 2008; Jennings, Jennings, & Joo, 2015).…”
Section: Methodssupporting
confidence: 81%
“…Yet the presence and favoring of kin in modern organizations is problematic to achieving the modern ethos of merit and universalism (Nicholson, 2015) and may have implications for greater employee theft (O’Brien, Minjock, Colarelli, & Yang, 2017). In family-owned businesses, tensions exist between family-member and non–family-member employees, with the latter feeling greater injustice, particularly when family-member density is high (Spranger et al, 2012). Accordingly, many organizations have implemented antinepotism policies.…”
Section: The Role Of Mismatch In Psychologymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although mismatch concepts have been raised in biology (e.g., Schlaepfer, Runge, & Sherman, 2002), economics (Burnham, 2016; Kanazawa, 2004), health (Buss, 2000), medicine (Nesse & Williams, 1994), and social (Maner & Kenrick, 2010), cognitive (Tooby & Cosmides, 1990), and organizational (Spranger, Colarelli, Dimotakis, Jacob, & Arvey, 2012; van Vugt & Ronay, 2014) psychology, there has been little or no systematic organization of core principles, evidence, and implications for psychology. The purpose of this article is to fill that gap.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…From the organizational perspective, the social dilemmas of SCPs have an analogy in the fundamental need for sleep. Like the preference for kin (Spranger, Colarelli, Dimotakis, Jacob, & Arvey, 2012), sleep is a powerful motivator. Numerous studies have shown that variables associated with sleep can have effects on work performance (Driskell & Mullen, 2005; Wyatt & Bootzin, 1994).…”
Section: Naps and Nepotismmentioning
confidence: 99%