Ownership Structure, Board Composition and Entrepreneurship : Evidence from Family Firms and Venture-Capital Backed Firms

The purpose of this article is to investigate how ownership structure, especially family and/or venture-capital involvement, as well as entrepreneurial activities, defined as strategic change and renewal, help explain the involvement of independent members on boards of directors. The CEOs of 2,455 small and medium-sized, private enterprises from practically all industries were contacted in a telephone survey, resulting in an exceptionally high response rate. The findings reveal that family firms are more reluctant to involve independent directors on their boards than non-family firms that presence of venture capitalists increases the frequency of independent board members and that ownership has an impact on board roles. The results do not support the hypothesised relationship that independent directors enhance entrepreneurial activities. One implication of our study is that the often-argued-for strategic contribution of outsiders to the boards in family firms may be overemphasised. Another implication is that family firms that choose to acquire additional capital should be aware that this could result in a change in the board composition and the loss of control of the business. However, new and external owners’ inclusion on the board seems to be negotiable since there are also venture capitalists that do not insist on board representation.

If we can't have it, then no one should : Shutting down versus selling in family business portfolios

How does a business family manage its business portfolio in times of declining performance to sustain the portfolio's long-term endurance? Drawing on social identity theory and six family business portfolios from Pakistan, we find that business families may prefer to shut down a satellite business rather than sell it, which is primarily driven by identity considerations. In addition, the family's goal to recycle the assets, the aim to restart the business later, and the increasing decline in performance are important contingency factors. This study contributes to the literature on portfolio entrepreneurship, business exit, and the enduring entrepreneurship of family firms.

Agency theory and the family business

The conceptual domain of agency theory is one of the dominant organisational theory perspectives applied in current family business research (Chrisman et al., 2010). According to agency theory (Jensen and Meckling, 1976), agency costs generally arise due to individuals’ selfinterest and decision making based on rational thinking and oriented toward own preferences. With more people involved in decision making, such as through the separation of ownership and management, agency costs occur due to different preferences and information asymmetries between the owner (principal) and the employed management (agent) (Jensen and Meckling, 1976). In other words, agents take decisions based on their individual preferences (for example, short term, financial gains) instead of the owners’ preferences (for example, long term, sustainable development).

Behavioural agency theory and the family business

The behavioural agency theory was developed to provide a more comprehensive explanation and prediction of managerial risk taking, in response to some shortcomings of agency theory. In general, the theory offers explanations of why decision makers prefer some strategic choices to others. The use of behavioural agency theory in family business research has, however, been very limited. Family business scholars recently adapted this theory to construct the family business variant, the ‘socioemotional wealth’ construct, which offers better explanations for the risk taking and decision making behaviours of family firms. This chapter provides an overview of behavioural agency theory and the socioemotional wealth construct, explores how they have been used in family business research, and offers suggestions for how this theory can be used in further research to contribute to both the family business and the general management literature. Keywords: family business, behavioural agency theory, socioemotional wealth, family firm heterogeneity.

Behavioural theory and the family business

Fifty years have passed since Cyert and March’s 1963 A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. During this time, BTOF has been adopted across different research domains to investigate how organizations set goals, how they determine aspirations and how they finally react to performance aspiration discrepancies. Cyert and March’s framework has also recently emerged as one of the dominant paradigms to understand the ways in which family business organizations make decisions. In this chapter, I review the theoretical development and empirical results of BTOF and its application in the family business field of study in order to identify theoretical and empirical gaps and propose suggestions for future research. The conclusions suggest that BTOF is both a theoretically and empirically valid perspective in family business research, particularly when combined with other theoretical frameworks. The principal recommendation is to apply behavioral theory to enhance scholarly understanding of  how family organisations define their aspiration levels and respond to organizational problems. 

Critical pedagogy theory and the family business

In contemporary times family business research has been dominated by three theoretical perspectives; principal-agent theory, stewardship theory, and resource-based view theory (Siebels 2012) but at the same time scholars argue that what still needs further attention is how underlying processes and phenomena can be explained (Melin, Nordqvist & Sharma  2014). In order to understand themes such as repression or relations of asymmetry the suggestion in this chapter is to move towards a critical stance of thinking which involves problematizing the obvious issues in family firms (Alvesson & Deetz 2000) and moreover allowing the critical perspective to destabilize assumptions made within earlier research (Freire, 1974). By discussing critical theory in general but foremost the Freirean  (1970, 1974) critical pedagogy specifically, the arguments in the chapter revolves around how critical pedagogy can open up for a more novel view on family business. The purpose is via critical pedagogy discuss family business from a limited situation perspective, and to argue for a Freirean (1970) dialogue as means of developing a critical consciousness for family members in the family business context. The chapter concludes with some recommendations on platforms or common grounds in which dialogue and raising of consciousness can occur in which the concept can open up possibilities for interesting learning transfer and bring multidimensional knowledge into the family firm.

Introducing theoretical perspectives on family business

As the field of family business has grown immensely over the last couple of decades, a multitude of theories from different fields has been introduced. However, there are surprisingly few attempts to provide an overview of theories that may be of particular interest for the family business scholar. Thus, this introduction chapter gives a critical overview of theoretical perspectives, before taking a closer look at the use of theories in family business studies. Regarding the current state of the family business field, the authors argue for putting more effort in building theory from family business research as well as a stronger emphasis on ‘giving back’ to theories borrowed from other fields. Lastly, the chapter describes the development of the book and introduces the 13 chapters and their contributions.