Too close and too rigid: Applying the Circumplex Model of Family Systems to First‐Generation Family Firms

Abstract

Despite growing research interest in family businesses, little is known about the characteristics of the families engaging in them. The present paper uses Olson's (Journal of Psychotherapy & the Family, 1988, 4(12), 7-49; Journal of Family Therapy, 2000, 22, 144-167) Circumplex Model of Marital and Family Systems to look at first-generation family firms. We describe existing typologies of family businesses and discuss similarities between the characteristics of first-generation family firms and the rigidly enmeshed family type described in the Circumplex Model. The Steinberg family business (Gibbon & Hadekel (1990) Steinberg: The breakup of a family empire. ON, Canada: MacMillan) serves to illustrate the difficulties of rigidly enmeshed first-generation family firms. Implications for understanding troubled family businesses are discussed together with guidelines for the assessment of a family business in crisis and for intervention: enhancing open communication; allowing for more flexible leadership style, roles, and rules; and maintaining a balance between togetherness and separateness.

Exploring the Emotional Nexus in Cogent Family Business Archetypes

“…Anecdotal evidence along with family business literature suggests that family businesses tend to have diffuse boundaries between the two systems, with a great deal of tangible and intangible resources moving across the family system boundary (Distelberg and Blow 2011;Zody et al 2006). The characteristics of a rigidly enmeshed family resemble those of first generation family businesses (Distelberg and Sorenson 2009;Michael-Tsabari and Lavee 2012), as described by Distelberg and Sorenson (2009) while also referring to Ward (1987):…”

“…The archetype of EFB correlates with Sundaramurthy and Kreiner's (2008) "Integrated Identities", with the rigidly enmeshed family type according to Zody et al's (2006) and Michael-Tsabari and Lavee's (2012) references to the Circumplex types, to the undifferentiated family business described by Sorenson (2009) using Bowen's (1978) differentiation construct, and to the family business with a diffuse family boundary as identified by Distelberg and Blow (2011) based on The General Systems Theory.…”

“…Sam Steinberg who built and controlled the business, worked together with his siblings, his four daughters and his sons-in-law who were all employed in managerial positions at one time or another. Descriptive accounts of the family being overly enmeshed in the first generation were recently analyzed in the literature (Michael-Tsabari & Lavee, 2012). The family was characterized by extreme closeness.…”

Do the Constructs of the FACES IV Change Based on Definitions of “Family?” A Measurement Invariance Test

“…FACES and the Circumplex Model, has been used in thousands of published articles and dissertations to study the impact of family functioning on a variety of issues (Kouneski, ; Olson, ). Recently, FACES has been used to examine binge drinking in adolescents (Laghi, Baiocco, Lonigro, Capacchione, & Baumgartner, ), risk factors of poor attendance in family based interventions for pediatric obesity (Williams et al., ), first generation family businesses (Michael‐Tsabari & Lavee, ), and resilience in the context of adverse childhood experiences (Oshri et al., ). The FACES has also been used with diverse populations, including adolescents in Rome (Baiocco, Cacioppo, Laghi, & Tafà, ), African Americans in the United States (Pollock, Kazman, & Deuster, ), and military families (Oshri et al., ).…”

Family Businesses: A Diagnosis and Self Therapy Model

“…The dynamics and characteristics of the family, that owns the business, have been investigated only marginally (Michael-Tsabari and Lavee (2012). Family members may have competing goals and values, which may spring from complex conflicts and family dynamics that arise from a psychosocial history of the family (Dyer, 2006).…”