Minuus tavarana

Kirjallisuusarvostelu

Family ownership – a source of sustainable success in listed companies

Extant research on exchange-listed firms has acknowledged that the concentration of ownership and the identity of owners make a difference. In addition, studies indicate that firms with a dominant owner outperform firms with dispersed ownership. During the last few years, scholars have identified one group of owners, in particular, whose ownership stake in publicly listed firm is positively related to performance: the business family. While acknowledging that family firms represent a unique organizational form, scholars have identified various concepts and theories in order to understand how the family influences organizational processes and firm performance. Despite multitude of research, scholars have not been able to present clear results on how firm performance is actually impacted by the family. In other words, studies comparing the performance of listed family and other types of firms have remained descriptive in nature since they lack empirical data and confirmation from the family business representatives. What seems to be missing is a convincing theory that links the involvement and behavioral consequences. Accordingly, scholars have not yet come to a mutual understanding of what precisely constitutes a family business. The variety of different definitions and theories has made comparability of different results difficult for instance. These two issues have hampered the development of a rigorous theory of family business. The overall objective of this study is to describe and understand how the family as a dominant owner can enhance firm performance, and can act a source of sustainable success in listed companies. In more detail, in order to develop understanding of the unique factors that can act as competitive advantages for listed family firms, this study is based on a qualitative approach and aims at theory development, not theory verification. The data in this study consist of 16 thematic interviews with CEOs, members of the board, supervisory board chairs, and founders of Finnish listed-family firms. The study consists of two parts. The first part introduces the research topic, research paradigm, methods, and publications, and also discusses the overall outcomes and contributions of the publications. The second part consists of four publications that address the research questions from different viewpoints. The analyses of this study indicate that family ownership in listed companies represents a structure that differs from the traditional views of agency and stewardship, as well as from resource-based and stakeholder views. As opposed to these theories and shareholder capitalism which consider humans as individualistic, opportunistic, and self-serving, and assume that the behaviors of an investor are based on the incentives and motivations to maximize private profits, the family owners form a collective social unit that is motivated to act together toward their mutual purpose or benefit. In addition, socio-emotional and psychological elements of ownership define the family members as owners, rather than the legal and financial dimensions of ownership. That is, collective psychological ownership of family over the business (F-CPO) can be seen as a construct that comprehensively captures the fusion between the family and the business. Moreover, it captures the realized, rather than merely potential, family influence on and interaction with the business, and thereby brings more theoretical clarity of the nature of the fusion between the family and the business, and offers a solution to the problem of family business definition. This doctoral dissertation provides academics, policy-makers, family business practitioners, and the society at large with many implications considering family and business relationships.

Affektitehdas. Työn rationalisoinnin historiallisia jatkumoita

Affektit, kapitalismi ja työn rationalisointi yhdistyvät toisiinsa erottamattomasti. Nykykeskusteluissa työstä ja työelämästä rationalisointi jaetaan usein tekniseen fordistiseen rationalisointiin ja sitä tunteellisempaan postfordistiseen rationalisointiin. Tämä tutkimus osoittaa, affektiivisen rationalisoinnin käsitteen kautta, että työn vanhat ja uudet tieteet asettuvat jatkumoon. Työn tieteissä tietoa työläisestä tuotetaan asettamalla ominaisuuksia aina uudelleen määriteltävään työläisen luokittuneeseen ja sukupuolittuneeseen affektiiviseen figuuriin. Tiedon tuottamisen näkökulmasta muun muassa tayloristiset työn tehostamisen fantasiat, ihmissuhdekoulukunnan ideologiat sekä uuden työn autonomiset järjestykset sisältävät yhtenäisiä piirteitä. Tutkimuksen pääkysymys on: miten affekteja rationalisoidaan työssä, työn tieteissä ja niiden kerrostumissa. Tutkimuksessa kysytään myös, miten affekti kiinnittää luokittuneet ja sukupuolittuneet subjektit työn rationalisoinnin aatteeseen ja millaisia mahdollisuuksia työläiseksi tulemiseen niissä tarjotaan. Kysymystä lähestytään monipuolisen aineiston ja lukuisten teemojen kautta. Aineistoina toimivat muun muassa rationalisoinnin klassikko-teokset, operaismo-vaikutteisen prekariaattiliikkeen pamfletit, ajatushautomoiden uuden työn visiot, self-help-teokset uranaisille sekä Helsingin Sanomien työelämäkeskustelut. Tutkimuksen monipuolista aineistoa lähiluetaan ja tulkitaan siihen luodun erityisen metodologian kautta, joka koostuu kolmesta osa-alueesta: historiallistaminen, paikantuminen ja figuurit. Kaksi ensimmäistä korostavat kontekstien ja position merkitystä tiedon tuotannossa, kolmas osoittaa tiedon tuottamisen valtasuhteita. Työn tieteiden visiot ideaalityöläisestä materialisoituvat figuurien kautta negaatioina kuvaten sitä, millainen ideaalityöläinen ei ole. Väitöskirja aineistoineen paikantuu Suomeen, mutta se osoittaa työn tieteiden ja affektiivisen rationalisoinnin globaaliutta sekä sidonnaisuutta Yhdysvaltoihin, sen yrityskulttuuriin ja esimerkiksi työtehotutkimuksiin Hawthornen elektroniikkatehtaalla vuosina 1924–1933. Väitöskirja tuo uusia näkökulmia nykykeskusteluun työstä, työläisistä, kapitalismista ja affekteista. Se osoittaa, että itsen tuntemisen ja kertomisen tieteitä, kuten psykologiaa, tarjotaan usein ratkaisuksi kapitalistisen tuotannon aiheuttamiin suuriin ja pieniin kurjuuksiin, vaikka terapeuttinen tunnekulttuuri itsessään on muodostunut osana rationalisoinnin ja kapitalismin ambivalentteja kehiä. Tutkimus myös muistuttaa, että työn järjestyksien keskiössä säilyy työläisen ja affektitehtaan konflikti silloinkin, kun fordistinen imperatiivi ”älä!” vaihtuu postfordistiseen kehotukseen ”tunne”.

Aktör eller handelsvara?

Kirjallisuusarvostelu

Quest/ion of Identities in African American Feminist Postmodern Drama: A Study of Selected Plays by Suzan-Lori Parks

Innovative and unconventional, Pulitzer Prize-winning playwright Suzan-Lori Parks belongs to the continuum of African American playwrights who have contributed to the quest/ion – the quest for and question – of identities for African Americans. Her plays are sites in which the quest/ion of identities for African Americans is pursued, raised and enacted. She makes use of both page and stage to emphasize the exigency of reshaping African Americans’ identities through questioning the dominant ideologies and metanarratives, delegitimizing some of the prevailing stereotypes imposed on them, drawing out the complicity of the media in perpetuating racism, evoking slavery, lynching and their aftereffects, rehistoricizing African American history, catalyzing reflections on the various intersections of sex, race, class and gender orientations, and proffering alternative perspectives to help readers think more critically about issues facing African Americans. In my dissertation, I approach three plays by Parks – The Death of the Last Black Man in the Whole Entire World (1990), Venus (1996) and Fucking A (2000) – from the standpoints of postmodern drama and African American feminism with a focus on the terrains that reflect the quest/ion of identities for African Americans, especially African American women. I argue that postmodern drama and African American feminism provide the ground for Parks to promote the development of a political agenda in order to call into question a number of dominant ideologies and metanarratives with regard to African Americans and draw upon the roles of those metanarratives as a powerful apparatus of racial and sexual oppressions. I also explore how Parks engages with postmodern drama and African American feminism to incorporate her own mininarratives in the dominant discourses. I argue that Parks in these plays uses postmodern drama and African American feminism to encourage reflections on intersectionality in order to reveal the concerns of African Americans, particularly African American women. Her plays challenge the dominant order of hierarchy and patriarchy, while in some cases urging unity and solidarity between African American men and women by showing how unity and solidarity can help them confront race, class and gender oppressions. Furthermore, I discuss how the utilization of postmodern techniques and devices helps Parks to transform the conventional features of playwriting, to create incredulity toward the dominant systems of oppression and to incorporate her mininarratives within the context of dominant discourses.