Succession in the Family Business: Need to Transfer the ‘Socio-Emotional Wealth’ (SEW)

Rather often we have to confront with the pessimistic views on the future of the family business. Contrary to these prognosis, the FB is not only present but also improving its position in the global economy and playing a key role in the European economy too. They represent 60 % of employment and more than 60 million jobs in the private sector. Among many internal challenges of FB in the five years’ time, the importance of the ‘company succession’ is increasing together with the renewing technology and ‘attracting the right sills/ talents’ (Global Family Survey, 2015). This article is focusing on the transfer of socio-economic wealth (SEW) as a key intangible asset within the intergenerational changes in the FB. The paper outlines the various concepts (narrow vs. broad) of the SEW and special attention is paid to the risk prone [taken] and risk adverse entrepreneurial attitudes. In this relation, the authors made distinction between the ‘opportunity’ and ‘necessity entrepreneurs’. Using empirical experiences based on multi-site company case studies in the three INSIST project countries, the various sub-sections are focusing on the transfer of the following key components of the SEW to the next generation: trust-based social-system, generic human values (i.e. openness, mutual respect, correctness, reliability, responsibility etc.) and ‘practice based – embedded collective knowledge’. Key lesson of this analysis is the following: transferring physical assets in the succession process seems to us less important than the transfer of the intangible one embedded in the company’s culture community. Further systematic national and international investigations – combining quantitative and qualitative research tools – are necessary to acquire more accurate picture on the impacts of transferring both intangible and tangible assets in the succession process in the FB.

Comparison of different space indexing methods for ecological evaluation of urban openspaces

Nowadays we meet many different evaluation methods regarding the ecological performance of green surfaces and parks. All these methods are extremely valuable in determining how well a green surface performs from ecological aspect and to what extent the environment were damaged if these sites would be built or would be developed any other way causing reduction of green surfaces. The goal of the article is to clarify the differences between two evaluation methods (GSI – Green Space Intensity, BARC – Biological Activity Rate Calculation) suitable for urban green infrastructure analysis and to see if any significant difference can be observed evaluating the same site by these methods. Our research sites are in Budapest and their sizes vary between 2,5-8 acres. The most important aspects of site analysis are the following: size and boundaries of the park, existence or lack of water features, the characteristics of their surfaces and the complexity of vegetation. We summarize the data of the site analysis in tables, make a summarizing diagram for visual representation and draw conclusions from the results. As a final step, we evaluate how these two evaluation systems relate to urban open space developments.