Knowledge that Transforms

Traditionally, family firm studies have assumed there is a single family behind the firm. We challenge this assumption and argue that the distinction between multi-founding family firms and single-founding family firms matters. We theorize that multi-founding family firms, based on mutual monitoring among families, have corporate governance advantages (less principal–agent and principal–principal problems) in terms of reduced founder CEO entrenchment and a lower probability of descendent leadership. Furthermore, we argue that multi-founding family firms exhibit higher levels of innovation and performance. Based on U.S. firms during 2001 to 2010, we find robust support for our arguments.

Entrepreneurship scholars have much to gain from including time perspective in developing theory about entrepreneurs’ alertness. In this study, interviews with 22 French entrepreneurs revealed associations between their alertness and past-positive, present-hedonistic, and future time perspectives. Complementarily, a sample of 376 U.S. entrepreneurs provided evidence that their present-hedonistic and future time perspectives impacted their alertness; we found mixed support for the relationship between past-positive time perspective and entrepreneurial alertness. A replication analysis with 764 U.K. entrepreneurs corroborated support for our hypotheses.

This article explores the counterintuitive notion that congruence in the importance family firm supervisors and their employees place on socioemotional wealth is negatively associated with employee citizenship and proactive behaviors, while incongruence has positive effects. Results from polynomial regression analysis of data collected from 159 family firm supervisor–employee dyads support our complacency theory-based model, suggesting that congruence creates attentional lethargy and complacency toward organizational citizenship and proactivity while incongruence makes the need to engage in beneficial behaviors more salient. The negative effects of congruence are alleviated by higher levels of leader–member exchange. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

We investigate how entrepreneurs communicate with crowdfunding backers during the onset of a societal crisis via a content analysis of campaigns active during the COVID-19 pandemic and a vignette experiment. While effective communication with stakeholders is critical for acquiring resources during societal crises, little is known about what communication strategies entrepreneurs use during these crises or their influence on fundraising. Notably, we find that entrepreneurs’ crisis communication strategies differ along three key dimensions: timing (proactive vs. reactive), target (entrepreneur vs. other), and nature (utilitarian vs. personal), and that proactively addressing other stakeholders’ personal concerns attracts more funding than alternative approaches.

Digital product innovation (DPI) is critical for the survival of firms, especially those operating in traditional industrial-age industries. While research has started to investigate digital innovation in family firms (FFs) considering them as a monolithic group, we still lack a more nuanced perspective that considers heterogeneity among FFs with respect to DPI and what drives such variance. Drawing on construal level theory to explain the risk behavior and goal time horizon of FF owner-managers, we propose and find that the presence of later family generations in control positively influences DPI in FFs, while the presence of a family CEO is detrimental to DPI. Furthermore, we propose that these relationships are moderated by the size of the top management team (TMT), finding that a larger TMT weakens the positive relationship between later generations in control and DPI. We base our analysis on a longitudinal sample of 103 FFs in the automotive, industrial engineering, and pharmaceutical sectors observed from 2013 to 2020. This first empirical study applying construal level theory to the family business literature has important implications for the FF digital innovation literature and for FF owner-managers interested in achieving DPI.

Many family firms trace the origin of their property rights to the privatization of state-owned enterprises, particularly in emerging economies. The benefits of such ownership origins have been amply researched; however, there are also disadvantages. By developing the concept of the liability of ownership origin, we theorize that this liability creates legitimacy challenges for privatized family firms, leading their owners to exhibit a lower desire for both family and transgenerational control compared to de novo family firms. However, corporate philanthropy can mitigate these negative effects. Empirical analyses using a national survey of Chinese family-owned firms support our arguments.

Our meta-analysis investigates the environmental sustainability performance of family firms (FFs) distinguishing between environmental hand- and footprint and accounting for FF heterogeneity. Based on a sample of 87 primary studies comprising 118,538 firms, we find no significant difference between FFs and non-FFs regarding their overall environmental sustainability performance. Yet, distinguishing between environmental hand- and footprint, we show that FFs have a lower footprint than non-FFs but do not differ regarding their handprint. Firm size, being a public firm, and type of family involvement moderate the effects of FF status on environmental sustainability performance. Our research note extends prior meta-analytical evidence and contributes to a more fine-grained and nuanced understanding of the environmental sustainability performance of FFs. Theoretical and managerial implications are discussed.

Studying temporal change using Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) allows researchers to examine complex and dynamic causal pathways between configurations of time-based conditions and a desired outcome. No comprehensive QCA technique currently addresses complex temporal changes in a unified manner. To remedy these shortcomings, we introduce Growth Pattern QCA—a mixed-method technique for studying complex growth dynamics. We integrate a quantitative computational toolkit for calculating growth slopes with QCA and demonstrate it using an illustrative multiyear panel. We offer practical guidance for researchers to apply these mixed methods for analyzing and forecasting complex growth patterns in various entrepreneurship research settings. We also review existing techniques and provide a decision roadmap of time-related QCA methods for researchers to use the best option for their research objectives.

Across two studies, we apply self-regulation theory to test nonlinear relationships between founder Machiavellianism, narcissism, and psychopathy and new venture performance. Our hypotheses are supported for Machiavellianism and psychopathy, but contrary to our theorizing, we find a positive relationship between narcissism and performance. Furthermore, we identify an important explanatory mechanism in knowledge sharing, which mediates the curvilinear relationships at moderate and high levels. Our research has implications for how we understand the influence of problematic founder personality traits and how behavioral differences at varying levels of these traits can explain relationships with performance, and it presents a nuanced perspective to trait-based explanations for destructive entrepreneurial actions.

Entrepreneurial orientation (EO) is an important construct in the fields of management and entrepreneurship research. Interest in EO knowledge continues to thrive with a burgeoning research agenda in multiple contexts and with diverse implications. However, a subset of this research, which endeavors to apply the EO construct to explain or predict individuals’ entrepreneurial beliefs and behaviors, has met with resistance. This paper examines the case for EO at the individual level (Ind.EO). We consider the EO legacy concerns, and the various theoretical implications and benefits of doing so. Drawing upon an “EO as a family of constructs” framework, we propose paths forward for studying Ind.EO credibly, consistent with, but distinct from, traditional firm-level EO. Finally, we outline a research agenda and discuss the contributions and potential implications for Ind.EO research across the wider entrepreneurship discipline.