What Makes a Family Firm Innovative? CEO Risk-Taking Propensity and the Organizational Context of Family Firms

Investigating the new product portfolio innovativeness of family firms connects two important topics that have recently received considerable attention in innovation and family firm research. First, new product portfolio innovativeness has been identified as a critical determinant of firm performance. Second, research on family firms has focused on the questions of if and why family firms are more or less innovative than other organizational forms. Research investigating the innovativeness of family firms has often applied a risk-oriented perspective by identifying socioemotional wealth (SEW) as the main reference that determines firm behavior. Thus, prior research has mainly focused on the organizational context to predict innovation-related family firm behavior and neglected the impact of preferences and the behavior of the chief executive officer (CEO), which have both been shown to affect firm outcomes. Hence, this study aims to extend the previous research by introducing the CEO's disposition to organizational context variables to explain the new product portfolio innovativeness of small and medium-sized family firms. Specifically, this study explores how the organizational context (i.e., ownership by top management team [TMT] family members and generation in charge of the family firm) of family firms interacts with CEO risk-taking propensity to affect new product portfolio innovativeness. Using a sample of 114 German CEOs of small and medium-sized family firms operating in manufacturing industries, the results show that CEO risk-taking propensity has a positive effect on new product portfolio innovativeness. Moreover, the analyses show that the organizational context of family firms impacts the relationship between CEO risk-taking propensity and new product portfolio innovativeness. Specifically, the relationship between CEO risk-taking propensity and new product portfolio innovativeness is weaker if levels of ownership by TMT family members are high (high SEW). Additionally, the effect of CEO risk-taking propensity on new product portfolio innovativeness is stronger in family firms at earlier generational stages (high SEW). This result suggests that if SEW is a strong reference, family firm-specific characteristics can affect individual dispositions and, in turn, the behaviors of executives. Therefore, this study helps extend the knowledge on the determinants of new product portfolio innovativeness of family firms by considering an individual CEO preference and the organizational context variables of family firms simultaneously.

The relationship between top management team innovation orientation and firm growth: The mediating role of firm innovativeness

Upper echelon theory and research on innovation have considered top management teams and their behaviour and characteristics as important factors that positively influence innovativeness and organizational outcomes. Yet, innovation research has mostly focused on individual new product projects, and their performance and impact on firm performance. Recent research has started to apply a more holistic view in terms of innovation, by considering firm-wide innovation instead of single new products. Upper echelon research has concentrated on direct relationships between top management team characteristics and organizational outcomes. But recent research calls for mediating effects of the relationship between top management team characteristics and organizational outcomes. Hence, this study introduces firm innovativeness as a mediator between top management team innovation orientation and firm growth. Focusing on small and medium-sized firms, which often represent highly innovative firms, results show that firm innovativeness fully mediates the relationship between top management team innovation orientation and firm growth. Implications and future research are discussed.

Firm-level strategic orientation and performance: a synthesis and extension of the knowledge base on entrepreneurial, market and learning orientation

Should a firm stay focused or should it rather adopt a broader strategic perspective? This dissertation summarizes and extends the existing knowledge base on entrepreneurial, market, and learning orientation. Building on multiple theoretical perspectives, empirical evidence from prior studies, as well as on survey and archival data collected in two economic contexts, performance effects from individual orientations, their dimensions and combinations are explored. Results reveal that the three strategic orientations are highly interrelated and that their relationship to firm performance is more complex than previously assumed.

Three Essays on Age and Firm Performance

Old captains at the helm: Chairman age and firm performance Urs Waelchli and Jonas Zeller December, 2012 This paper examines whether the chairmen of the board (COBs) impose their life-cycles on the firms over which they preside. Using a large sample of unlisted firms we find a robust negative relation between COB age and firm performance. COBs age much like ‘ordinary’ people. Their cognitive abilities deteriorate and they experience significant shifts in motivation. Deteriorating cognitive abilities are the main driver of the performance effect that we observe. The results imply that succession planning problems in unlisted firms are real. Mandatory retirement age clauses cannot solve these problems. Corporate Aging around the World Jonas Zeller January, 2014 This paper examines whether firms internationally age as US firms do (Loderer, Stulz, and Wälchli, 2013). Using a large panel, I find that Tobin’s Q monotonically falls with firm Age across all nineteen countries in the sample. The decrease varies across countries but is generally extremely robust and economically significant. ROA, sales growth, and market share decrease over a firm’s lifetime in most countries as well. Furthermore, older firms reduce their capital expenditures and R&D outlays. Instead, they distribute more cash to their shareholders. Overall, the results suggest that corporate aging is not confined to the US but is a genuine phenomenon that affects listed firms worldwide. This evidence supports the hypothesis that corporate aging is driven by managers who optimally focus on managing their assets in place and neglect the development of growth opportunities. I finally ask whether the managers’ choice and with it the magnitude of the decline in Tobin’s Q is a function of country-level institutional settings. I find that most notably firms age faster in countries where employees are relatively well protected by labor regulation. Is employment protection the fountain of corporate youth? Claudio Loderer, Urs Wälchli, Jonas Zeller* September 2014 Acharya, Baghai, and Subramanian (2012, 2013) find that employment protection legislation (EPL) encourages innovation. We argue that this effect should be particularly strong in mature firms. We would therefore also expect EPL to boost growth opportunities. Using the natural Experiment created by the staggered passage of changes in EPL across seventeen countries, we find evidence that employment protection legislation does indeed stimulate Innovation efforts, especially in mature firms. The effect is stronger in countries in which patents are owned by the firm and in the context of regular contracts. Consistent with that, EPL encourages risk taking. Overall, however, there is Little evidence that the effect of EPL on innovation effort translates into higher firm value, not even in mature firms. EPL does motivate employees in those firms to put in a greater effort, as evidenced by stronger sales growth. Yet it also increases costs, reduces profitability, and depresses Tobin’s Q ratios in all firms, especially the mature ones, possibly because of the rigidities that characterize these firms [Loderer, Stulz, and Waelchli (2014)].

How specific is apprenticeship training? Evidence from inter-firm and occupational mobility after graduation

Do apprenticeships convey mainly general or also firm- and occupation-specific human capital? Specific human capital may allow for specialization gains, but may also lead to allocative inefficiency due to mobility barriers. We analyse the case of Switzerland, which combines a comprehensive, high-quality apprenticeship system with a lightly regulated labour market. To assess human capital transferability after standardized firm-based apprenticeship training, we analyse inter-firm and occupational mobility and their effects on post-training wages. Using a longitudinal data set based on the PISA 2000 survey, we find high inter-firm and low occupational mobility within one year after graduation. Accounting for endogenous changes, we find a negative effect of occupation changes on wages, but no significant wage effect for firm changes. This indicates that occupation-specific human capital is an important component of apprenticeship training and that skills are highly transferable within an occupational field.

How Much am I Expected to Pay for my Parents‘ Firm? An Institutional Logics Perspective on Family Discounts

Recent evidence suggests that successors do not simply inherit their parents’ firm, but have to pay a certain price. Building on institutional logics literature, we explore successors’ family discount expectations, defined as the rebate expected from parents in comparison to nonfamily buyers when assuming control of the firm. We find that family cohesion increases discount expectations, while successors’ fear of failure and family equity stake in the firm decrease discount expectations. Higher education in business or economics weakens These effects. On average, in our study comprised of 16 countries, successors expect a 57% family discount.

Crisis Coming Home? Firm Performance During the Economic Crisis and Managers‘ Work-Family Conflict

The economic crisis over the past years has challenged managers in many ways. In our longitudinal study during the global recession, we examine how perceived firm performance interacts with sources of supervisor support and stress to affect managers’ work-family conflict. First, we draw from Conservation of Resources theory to analyze how sources of supervisor support and stress relate to managers’ work-family conflict. Second, we explore how perceived firm performance modifies the relationships between these factors and work-family conflict. Our surveys of 182 managers before and during the crisis reveal that perceived firm performance significantly alters the effectiveness of sources of supervisor support in relieving work-family conflict. Additionally, perceived poor firm performance was found to intensify the negative effect of stressors on work-family conflict. Our results highlight the need to consider an organization’s perceived health when studying managers’ attitudes and career outcomes.

Socioemotional Wealth, Ambidexterity, and Family Firm Performance: An Empirical Study

While family business literature agrees that family firms are driven by both non-economic and financial motives, it is unclear how the prioritization of socioemotional wealth (SEW) over financial considerations affects family firms' financial performance. Based on a sample of 343 family firm owners from German-speaking Europe, this study reveals a significant and positive relationship between the firm owners' SEW considerations and their family businesses' financial performance. This relationship, in turn, is found to be mediated by organizational ambidexterity. A fine-grained analysis of the different SEW dimensions indicates that this pattern may be driven by two elements of socioemotional wealth only (family members' identification with the firm and emotional attachment). Our findings demonstrate that business families do not necessarily face a trade-off when prioritizing the preservation of their SEW over stabilizing or improving the financial performance of their business. The study enriches several streams of literature and opens up numerous avenues for future research.