Measuring socioemotional wealth in family-owned and -managed firms: A validation and short form of the FIBER Scale

Psychological ownership, knowledge sharing and entrepreneurial orientation in family firms: The moderating role of governance heterogeneity

“…Although the socioemotional wealth perspective has been widely employed as a psychological and cognitive framework to explain how affective endowments influence family firms' decisions related to entrepreneurship and innovation (e.g., Chrisman & Patel, 2012;Gomez-Mejia, Cruz, Berrone, & de Castro, 2011), we believe that our focus on PO and its subsequent stewardship attitudes can provide a distinctive contribution to further understand the antecedents of family business behavior. Indeed, PO attitudes involve cognitive mechanisms that are at the core of the socioemotional wealth endowment (e.g., Goel, Voordeckers, Van Gils, & van den Heuvel, 2013), and most research on socioemotional wealth does not provide direct assessments of the cognitive processes at the level of family business actors (e.g., Hauck, Suess-Reyes, Beck, Prügl, & Frank, 2016). By focusing on PO as a primary driver of entrepreneurial posture, we contribute to filling this gap and add to the research on PO in family firms (e.g., Bernhard & O´Driscoll, 2011;Henssen, Voordeckers, Lambrechts, & Koiranen, 2014;Rantanen & Jussila, 2011).…”

Going private: A socioemotional wealth perspective on why family controlled companies decide to leave the stock-exchange

“…The independency towards minority shareholders was reclaimed and the external influence (control and pressure) transformed to higher internal control: the control instruments that were developed as a listed firm, i.e., routines for reporting and board work, were kept, but now only serving the owning family. Interestingly, a recent study could not validate this dimension of SEW (Hauck et al, 2016). Therefore, we suggest finding an alternative way to reintegrate this dimension into the model suggested by Berrone et al (2012), as Hauck et al argue "the exercise of control and influence over the firm may hold affective value for the owner family" (2016, p. 142).…”

“…In a similar vein, Miller and Le Breton-Miller (2014) criticize existing quantitative SEW research for making assumptions based on indirect measures without actually observing it. This is also critiqued in a recent study by Hauck, Suess-Reyes, Beck, Prügl, and Frank (2016) who note that SEW dimensions are often measured indirectly through proxies such as family ownership and involvement. Following the practice of using an established figure, e.g., 5% ownership as a measure for defining family ownership, is considered a convention, which mostly works for publicly listed firms and under certain conditions (La Porta, Lopez-De-Silanes, & Shleifer, 1999).…”

“…Following the practice of using an established figure, e.g., 5% ownership as a measure for defining family ownership, is considered a convention, which mostly works for publicly listed firms and under certain conditions (La Porta, Lopez-De-Silanes, & Shleifer, 1999). However, these indirect measures do not inform us about the underlying reasons and motives for decisions taken, and thereby we can question the results and their implications (Hauck et al, 2016;Miller & Le Breton-Miller, 2014;Schulze & Kellermanns, 2015). Additionally, qualitative studies can help us better capture SEW and its impact on strategic choices because it allows us to study underlying motives in-depth.…”

Fontos, hogy mi családi cég vagyunk?” – családi vállalkozási identitás és teljesítmény

“…Az első, rövidebb kérdőív a családi vállalkozások hagyományos, "fekete doboz" modelljét alkalmazta -vagyis a családi hatás bemenetét kötötte össze az üzleti teljesítmény kimenetével (Stanley et al, 2017;Anderson & Reeb, 2004). A második, hosszabb kérdőív a "fekete doboz" belső folyamataira összpontosított (Holt et al, 2017), olyan témákra koncentrálva, mint a nem-pénzügyi jellegű családi célok (Hauck, Suess-Reyes, Beck, Prügl, & Frank, 2016), az utódlási folyamatok (Decker, Heinrichs, Jaskiewicz, & Rau 2017), a családi és a vállalatirányítás (Gersick & Feliu, 2014), illetve kisebb mértékben a professzionalizálódás (Dekker, Lybaert, Steijvers, & Depaire, 2015). A kutatás alanyai olyan magyar családi vállalkozások voltak, amelyek 2016-os éves árbevétele 80 millió és 150 milliárd forint között mozgott, kizárva a pénzügyi szolgáltatókat és egyéni vállalkozókat.…”