Socioemotional Wealth as a Mixed Gamble: Revisiting Family Firm R&D Investments With the Behavioral Agency Model

2013 ◽  
pp. n/a-n/a ◽  
Author(s):  
Luis R. Gomez-Mejia ◽  
Joanna Tochman Campbell ◽  
Geoffrey Martin ◽  
Robert E. Hoskisson ◽  
Marianna Makri ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Family Firm ◽  
Socioemotional Wealth ◽  
Agency Model ◽  
Behavioral Agency

Relationship Conflict, Family Name Congruence, and Socioemotional Wealth in Family Firms

2018 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 397-416 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary Beth Rousseau ◽  
Franz Kellermanns ◽  
Thomas Zellweger ◽  
Tammy E. Beck
Keyword(s):  
Agency Theory ◽  
Direct Effect ◽  
Family Firms ◽  
Family Relationship ◽  
Family Firm ◽  
Firm Valuation ◽  
Relationship Conflict ◽  
Socioemotional Wealth ◽  
The Family ◽  
Behavioral Agency

We investigate how family relationship conflict and family and firm name congruence influence subjective firm valuations by family firm owner-managers. Drawing on the socioemotional wealth perspective, behavioral agency theory and mixed gamble reasonings, we hypothesize and find a U-shaped association between relationship conflict inside the family firm and subjective firm valuation. While we do not find a direct effect between name congruence and subjective firm valuation, we show that name congruence interacts with relationship conflict to affect valuations in a complex fashion. Implications and contributions of our findings are discussed.

scholarly journals Rate of substitution between economic and socioemotional wealth in family firm IPO underpricing

2015 ◽  
Vol 2015 (1) ◽  
pp. 12090
Author(s):  
Andrea Signori ◽  
Josip Kotlar ◽  
Alfredo De Massis ◽  
Silvio Vismara
Keyword(s):  
Family Firm ◽  
Socioemotional Wealth ◽  
Ipo Underpricing ◽  
Rate Of Substitution

scholarly journals To Merge, Sell, or Liquidate? Socioemotional Wealth, Family Control, and the Choice of Business Exit

2019 ◽  
Vol 46 (8) ◽  
pp. 1342-1379 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesco Chirico ◽  
Luis R. Gómez-Mejia ◽  
Karin Hellerstedt ◽  
Michael Withers ◽  
Mattias Nordqvist
Keyword(s):  
Agency Theory ◽  
Financial Distress ◽  
Family Firms ◽  
Matched Sample ◽  
Financial Returns ◽  
Socioemotional Wealth ◽  
Family Control ◽  
Privately Held Firms ◽  
Exit Options ◽  
Behavioral Agency

We take the perspective that considering the affective motives of dominant owners is essential to understanding business exit. Drawing on a refinement of behavioral agency theory, we argue that family-controlled firms are less likely than non-family-controlled firms to exit and tend to endure increased financial distress to avoid losses to the family’s socioemotional wealth (SEW) embodied in the firm. Yet, when confronted with different exit options and when performance heuristics suggest that exit is unavoidable, family firms are more likely to exit via merger, which we argue saves some SEW, although it is less satisfactory financially. In contrast, nonfamily firms are more likely to exit via sale or dissolution, options that are more prone to offer higher financial returns than mergers. Family and nonfamily firms thus show different orders of exit options. We find support for these arguments in a longitudinal matched sample of privately held firms.

The Effect of Transgenerational Control Intention on Family-Firm Performance: It Depends Who Pursues It

2017 ◽  
Vol 43 (3) ◽  
pp. 629-646 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Hoffmann ◽  
Peter Jaskiewicz ◽  
Torsten Wulf ◽  
James G. Combs
Keyword(s):  
Firm Performance ◽  
Family Firms ◽  
Empirical Investigation ◽  
Cognitive Biases ◽  
Family Firm ◽  
Socioemotional Wealth ◽  
German Family

Transgenerational control intention (TCI) is a pivotal characteristic of many family firms. Yet, it remains unclear whether TCI benefits family-firm performance by instilling a long-term view, or hurts performance by fueling harmful socioemotional wealth (SEW) goals. We posit that it depends who pursues it. When faced with TCI, family managers are known to suffer from cognitive biases that, we submit, do not similarly apply to nonfamily managers. Thus, only family managers harm performance when pursuing TCI. An empirical investigation of 107 private German family firms supports our theory; the effect of TCI on firm performance depends on who pursues it.

Socioemotional wealth and family commitment

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 393-415 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammad Rezaur Razzak ◽  
Raida Abu Bakar ◽  
Norizah Mustamil
Keyword(s):  
Social Ties ◽  
Family Members ◽  
Family Firm ◽  
Subsequent Generation ◽  
Socioemotional Wealth ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Family Commitment ◽  
The Family ◽  
Fiber Dimensions ◽  
Conceptual Link

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to determine the elements of family-centric non-economic goals, such as socioemotional wealth (SEW) of family business owners, that drive family commitment. The empirical study further tests whether such relationships are impacted by the aspect of ownership, that is, who controls the firm: founder generation or subsequent generation of owner managers. Design/methodology/approach Deploying the SEW and stakeholder theories, this study proposes a conceptual link between soecioemotional wealth dimensions and family commitment. The study is based on a survey of 357 private family firms in Bangladesh involved in manufacturing ready-made garments. The respondents are all in senior-level management positions in their respective firms and are members of the dominant owning family. Findings Prior to considering the moderating effect of controlling generation, the results indicate that four out of five FIBER dimensions of SEW affect family commitment, except for binding social ties. The study also finds that when a comparison is made between the founder generation and the subsequent generation of family firm managers, it is the latter that manifests significantly higher levels of family commitment when the focus is on the two FIBER dimensions of SEW: binding social ties and identification of family members with the firm. Research limitations/implications Although the cross-sectional nature of the study exposes the study to the specter of common method bias, procedural remedies were initiated to minimize the likelihood. Furthermore, data were collected from a single key informant in each organization. Therefore, both a longitudinal study and corroborating data from more than one individual in each firm would possibly provide a more robust picture. Practical implications Key decision makers from within the family who wish to see their subsequent generation remain engaged and committed to the family firm may find cues from the fact that focusing on binding social ties and identification of family members with the firm play an important role in ensuring continued commitment to the business by their successors. Social implications Family businesses are recognized to be vital contributors to most societies around the globe, both as employment generators as well as catalysts of economic activities. Hence, policy makers may derive pertinent information from the study in adopting policies to nurture and ensure survival and continuity of family-owned businesses, by understanding how family-centric non-economic goals impact family’s desire to commit resources, time and effort to the enterprise from generation to generation. Originality/value Determining the factors that drive continued engagement and commitment of family members to the business enterprise is a phenomenon that needs to be better understood in order to ensure continuity and survival of family enterprises across generations. This study attempts to provide a more nuanced understanding of how different components of family-centric goals, such as SEW, impact family commitment. The study contributes to theory building by providing a conceptual link that demonstrates the components of SEW that are most pertinent in terms of ensuring higher levels of family commitment to the family-owned business.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document