Strategic innovation and new product development in family firms

Abstract

Purpose -This study aims to investigate the relationship between the presence of the family variable within a business enterprise and the managerial factors affecting the success of new product development (NPD). This can be structured into three research questions: What is the relationship between the presence of the family variable within a business enterprise and the managerial factors affecting the success of NPD activities? How the managerial factors affecting the NPD process are faced in family firms? Which are the main differences (e.g. strengths and/or weaknesses) in dealing with the managerial factors affecting the NPD process between family and non-family firms? Design/methodology/approach -The study employs a grounded-theory and case-study approach to investigate the relationship between the presence of the family variable within a business enterprise and the managerial factors affecting the success of NPD. The starting point is an in-depth literature review on the managerial factors differentiating family from non-family firms, and the managerial factors affecting NPD success. Then, a multiple case-study on five Italian family firms and five Italian non-family enterprises is conducted. The case-studies lead to the development of an empirically grounded theoretical framework that outlines how the distinctive characteristics of family businesses are related to the managerial factors affecting NPD success. Findings -Family firms clearly emerge as more long-term oriented than non-family enterprises. The long-term orientation of family businesses vs non-family companies seems to play a pivotal role in originating NPD projects with long-term thrust. If a company is long-term oriented it is reasonable to expect that it will put its long-term vision in NPD programs, thus reaching a NPD long-term thrust.Research limitations/ implications -The study advances research on strategic innovation and NPD in family vs non-family firms. It develops new theory at the important intersection of family business and innovation/NPD research, filling a gap in the literature and providing justification and guidance for the design of more comprehensive studies. Future research could investigate and test the theoretical framework on a wider empirical base, using either qualitative or quantitative methods. Originality/ value -The paper addresses the failure of innovation management research to recognize, embrace, and deliberately incorporate family firms. It therefore fills a gap in the literature and extends prior research by introducing specific propositions that are supported by the case data and originally integrating them in the general research stream on NPD and family-firm characteristics. The originality of the study lies also in the fact that it appears to be the first comparative analysis on this specific topic involving both family and non-family enterprises.

Intergenerational strategy involvement and family firms’ innovation pursuits: The critical roles of conflict management and social capital

“…Family members from different generations may resist openly sharing knowledge with one another if strong conflicts mark their relationships (Cassia et al, 2012;Sonfield & Lussier, 2004). Conflict in family firms arises in different forms, such as disagreements about content-related or decision-making issues or personal, emotion-based disputes (Hoelscher, 2014;Kellermanns & Eddleston, 2004).…”

Socioemotional Wealth and Innovativeness in Small- and Medium-Sized Family Enterprises: A Configuration Approach

“…Family‐owned SMEs are typically guided by unique norms, cultures, and processes that rarely exist in non‐family counterparts (Kellermanns et al ) and determine family SMEs' decision‐making processes, including innovation. In addition to factors such as nepotism, rigidity, and conflict potential, which are all said to limit these firms' tendency to innovate (Roessl, Fink, and Kraus ), risk aversion tends to play a crucial role (e.g., Cassia, De Massis, and Pizzurno ). These characteristics generally originate from: (1) blurred boundaries between family and firm equity, since owning families typically invest most of their wealth in their firms (Carney ) to avoid external sources of financial capital (Chrisman and Patel ); (2) an overly strong emphasis on personal interests of the different involved family members; or (3) the desire to carry the firm on to the next generation (Koiranen ).…”

Empirical research on Innovation in Family Business: literature review and proposal of an integrative framework

“…Based on the described existing evidence, we will explain below the main research lines on the topic that has been identified and proposed. (Cassia et al, 2012;Donckels & Fröhlich, 1991); survival or long-term corporate orientation (Bergfeld & Weber, 2011;Cassia et al, 2011;Cassia et al, 2012;Westhead, 1997); reputation (Westhead, 1997); transgenerational value (Cassia et al, 2011;Chirico & Nordqvist, 2010;; paternalism (Chirico & Nordqvist, 2010); corporate social responsibility (Wagner, 2010); willingness to change Weismeier-Sammer, 2011) -Service-dominant focus (Dibrell & Moeller, 2011) -Stewardship culture (Dibrell & Moeller, 2011) Resource allocation -Debt in RandD financing (Czarnitzki & Kraft, 2009) -External financing Long-term financial orientation (Westhead, 1997) -Financial slack (Grundström et al, 2012;Kim et al, 2008 (Niehm et al, 2010) -Management control systems (Duréndez et al, 2011;Kraus et al, 2012) -Management structures (Kraus et al, 2012) -Size effect (Craig & Dibrell, 2006;Czarnitzki & Kraft, 2004;Duréndez et al, 2011;Galve-Górriz & Salas-Fumás, 2011) -Types of customers (Gudmundson et al, 2003) (Duréndez et al, 2011) -Innovativeness (Casillas & Moreno, 2010;Cassia et al, 2012;Duréndez et al, 2011;Naldi et al, 2007;Short et al, 2009;Zellweger &am...…”