Family orientation in family firms: a model and some empirical evidence

Abstract

Attention has been drawn recently to the differences which exist between family and non‐family firms, but Ward indicates that there are different types of family firms. More specifically, as Dunn puts it, “in some families it is evident that the business serves the family, as opposed to the family serves the business”. For some families in business, economic rationality dominates decision making, yet for others a “family first” ethos is to the fore, while a third group recognises the need to respond to economic and family considerations. In this paper firms which pay attention to both family and business are not investigated. However, Ward’s model of the characteristics of family firms is discussed and data based on a Scottish and Irish sample of 234 firms which put family first when business and family objectives clash, and 830 firms which focus on business objectives, are presented. Results suggest that the former exhibit several of the characteristics defined by Ward. This suggests that a considerable number of family firms may be lifestyle – as opposed to growth‐oriented businesses. These results have major implications for policy makers. If a substantial number of family firms differ from rational economic ventures by their methods of operation, then policy makers should be flexible with regard to the methods of intervention required to support this important section of the SME community. Policy issues in connection with family firms in Britain are considered in the light of our findings.

The Alignment Between Information and Communication Technology Strategy and Business Strategy of Professional Conference Organizers

“…This is similar to that of Jay and Schaper (2003), who recognized that response rates of less than 10% were usually the norm for micro businesses. The response rate is similar to those received by other researchers in the small to microbusiness field (Dawson, Breen, & Satyen, 2002;Reid, Dunn, Cromie, & Adams, 1999). Moreover, PCO senior directors reported that low response rates were experienced in other event industry surveys in Australia and Europe and also that databases are often not current.…”

Succession in family versus nonfamily SMEs: What influence does it have on performance?

“…In fact, in such situations the decisions made by family members tend to be oriented toward family objectives rather than those of the organization (Ensley & Pearson, 2005). As a result, succession is likely to alter the entrepreneurial direction of the firm, since it is less guided by objectives related to the company (Reid, Dunn, Cromie, & Adams, 1999). While the entrepreneurial inclination of the firm is known as a vector of performance (Rauch, Wiklund, Lumpkin, & Frese, 2009), the small amount of attention paid to the entrepreneurial direction of family companies that have undergone succession may consequently damage the creation of value.…”

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS AND SMEs IN SOUTH-EAST ASIA: INNOVATION POLICY AND INNOVATION PRACTICE

“…SMEs, it would seem, have no business being small. Of course, many managers of SMEs have no ambitions at all to manage large companies [Reid, Dunn, Cromie and Adams (1999)], and modern economies are dependent on the part that SMEs play -as SMEs [Rothwell (1989)]. …”