list of appendices - springer978-3-8349-7167-8/1.pdf · what type of document? ... strategy...
TRANSCRIPT
List of Appendices Appendix 1: Screening Code for Literature Review .............................................................. 185
Appendix 2: Codebook for Coding the Underlying Theory .................................................. 186
Appendix 3: Codebook for Coding the Type of Definition ................................................... 186
Appendix 4: Codebook for Coding the Type of Comparison ................................................ 186
Appendix 5: Codebook for Coding Family Predictors ........................................................... 187
Appendix 6: Codebook for Coding the Type of Predictor ..................................................... 188
Appendix 7: Codebook for Coding the Performance Variables ............................................ 188
Appendix 8: Overview Reviewed Family Firm Performance Studies ................................... 189
Appendix 9: Overview of Questionnaire (translated from German, shortened) .................... 201
Appendix 10: Comparison of Sample Industry Distribution ................................................. 206
Appendix 11: Sample by Federal State – Comparison with Top 500 Family Firms ............. 207
Appendix 12: Missing Data Analysis - Univariate Statistics ................................................. 208
Appendix 13: Missing Data Analysis - EM-Correlations ...................................................... 209
Appendix 14: Test of Nonresponse Bias ................................................................................ 211
Appendix 15: Test of Common Method Variance - Total Variance Explained ..................... 213
Appendix 16: Test of Common Method Variance - Components Matrix .............................. 214
Appendix 17: Centralization Scale Reliability Analysis ........................................................ 215
Appendix 18: Cluster Analysis / One-way ANOVA Two Cluster Solution .......................... 216
Appendix 19: Cluster Analysis / One-way ANOVA Three Cluster Solution ........................ 216
Appendix 20: Cluster Analysis / One-way ANOVA Four Cluster Solution.......................... 217
Appendix 21: Cluster Analysis / One-way ANOVA Five Cluster Solution .......................... 218
Appendix 22: Cluster Analysis / One-way ANOVA Seven Cluster Solution ....................... 219
C. M. Lindow, A Strategic Fit Perspective on Family Firm Performance,DOI 10.1007/978-3-8349-7167-8, © Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden 2013
184
Appendix 23: Games-Howell Test Post-Hoc Test F-Power Clusters / Firm Size ................. 220
Appendix 24: Games-Howell Test Post-Hoc Test F-Experience Clusters / Firm Size .......... 220
Appendix 25: Games-Howell Test Post-Hoc Test F-Culture Clusters / Firm Size ................ 221
Appendix 26: Regression of Strategic Fit on Average Sales ................................................. 223
Appendix 27: Regression of Strategic Fit on Average ROA ................................................. 224
Appendix 28: Regression of Strategic Fit on Average ROE .................................................. 225
Appendix 29: One-Way ANOVA, Games Howell Post-Hoc Test and Eta-Squared for
Association between Strategy and Firm Performance
(Average Sales, ROA, and ROE) .......................................................................... 226
Appendix 30: Regression of Organizational Structure on Firm Performance
(Average Sales, ROA, ROE) ................................................................................. 227
Appendices
Appendix 1: Screening Code for Literature Review
Initial Screening Coding Guide
To be included in the review, a study had to meet each of the following criteria:
1. What type of document? 1 = Journal article
2 = Book / Book chapter 4 = Thesis 5 = Working paper 6 = Conference proceeding 7 = Other
2. When published? 1 = between 1980 and September 2010
2 = before 1980 and/or after September 2010 3. Which language? 1 = English or German 2 = Other
4. Did the study identify family firms as primary research object?
1 = yes 2 = no
5. Did the study primarily consider the organizational level of analysis?
1 = yes 2 = no
6. What type of research is contained in this document? 1 = empirical 2 = theoretical 3 = conceptual 4 = literature review
7. If empirical, what type of empirical research design does this document contain?
1 = quantitative 2 = qualitative 3 = mixed
8. Is the effect on performance dependent variable analyzed?
1 = yes 2 = no
Note: Selection in bold. Source: Author.
186 Appendices
Appendix 2: Codebook for Coding the Underlying Theory
Code Analyzed aspects
Agency theory
(AT)
Private benefits of control (minority shareholders), managerial
entrenchment/nepotism, asymmetric altruism, monitoring/ interest-
convergence/alignment
Stewardship theory
(ST) Stewardship behavior, reciprocal altruism
Resource-based theory
(RBT) Familiness, resources, EO, family identity, culture, leadership
Contingency theory
(CT) Contingency theory, fit
Other
Upper echelons theory, behavioral theory, family embeddedness
perspective, Monsen Downs-Williamson theory, sustainability of the
family business (SFB model), financial theory, management theory
Source: Author
Appendix 3: Codebook for Coding the Type of Definition
Code Analyzed aspects
B Bivariate/categorical (single cut-off point)
B* Bivariate/categorical (alternative cut-off points)
C Continuous
both Bivariate/categorical (single or alternative cut-off point(s)) and
continuous
Source: Author.
Appendix 4: Codebook for Coding the Type of Comparison
Code Analyzed aspects
F/N Family versus non-family firms
F/F Family versus family firms
both Family versus family and non-family firms
Appendices 187
Appendix 5: Codebook for Coding Family Predictors
Code938 Analyzed aspects Analyzed aspects subcategories
Firm type Family firm
F-Power
Family influence
in ownership
(FIO)
Ownership structure/
concentration
Owner type
Ownership and control
Family ownership,
Family inside ownership,
Family block ownership,
Type of largest owner,
Controlling ownership, voting vs. cash-
flow rights, single vs. dual share classes,
excess ownership
Family influence
in management
(FIM)
CEO type
Management structure
Internal vs. external CEO/ chief financial
officer (CFO), family vs. professional
directors, family management
Family influence
in supervision/
Board (FIS)
Board size
Board structure
Board independency
Chairman of the board
CEO duality
Number of family board members,
independent/affiliated/family directors,
inside vs. outside board, board
independence, family versus non-family
chairman
F-
Experience
Generation
First versus later generations, founder
versus heir, founder versus descendants,
number of generations, succession,
founder dead/alive
Family members
Number of family members, family
labor, lone family member versus
multiple family members
F-Culture Culture
Family member reciprocity, family
(brand) identity, familiness, family
name, family support, harmony,
democracy in decision-making, risk
taking, family collaborative dialogue
Source: Author.
938 In case studies assessed the ownership in management or the one-tier board system, the codings “FIO/FIM”
and “FIM/FIS” were used.
188 Appendices
Appendix 6: Codebook for Coding the Type of Predictor Code Analyzed aspect
Family firm characteristics (see Appendix 5)
Firm type, FIO, FIM, FIS, generation
Strategy Strategic planning, human resource management, international strategy
Organizational structure Organization, institutionalization
Other Firm size, firm age, environment, investor, resources, top management
team (TMT), entrepreneurial orientation (EO)
Source: Author.
Appendix 7: Codebook for Coding the Performance Variables
Performance Category Analyzed Performance Measures
Market value Tobin's q, proxy Q, stock index, market-to-book value
Market return Buy-and-hold abnormal returns, cumulative abnormal returns , price
earnings ratio, price to sales ratio
Productivity Sales per employee, cash flow per employee, value added
Profitability Return on equity, return on assets, return on invested capital, return on
sales , return on capital employed, gross/net margin, etc.
Growth Sales/revenue growth, employment growth, income growth
Efficiency Total asset turnover, utilization ratios
Size Gross/net sales, net income, employment, export sales
Subjective performance
Perceived success, relative performance versus competitors,
satisfaction with performance, subjective performance indices, target
achievement
Note: Multiple classifications of articles / allocation across multiple keywords possible. Source: Author.
App
endi
x 8:
Ove
rvie
w R
evie
wed
Fam
ily F
irm P
erfo
rman
ce S
tudi
es
Aut
hor(
s) (y
ear)
Th
eory
D
efin
ition
C
ompa
rison
Pr
edic
tor(
s)
Mod
erat
or
Med
iato
r Pe
rfor
man
ce
mea
sure
(s)
Mai
n fin
ding
(s)
Jacq
uem
in/
D
e G
helli
nck
(198
0)
Oth
er
B
F/N
Fi
rm ty
pe
Firm
size
Prof
itabi
lity
Firm
type
(o)
Firm
type
x fi
rm si
ze (+
)
Kirc
hhof
f/
Kirc
hhof
f (19
87)
N.N
. B
F/
F Fa
mily
mem
bers
Pr
oduc
tivity
Pr
ofita
bilit
y
Fam
ily m
embe
rs e
mpl
oyed
/pai
d (+
/-)
Fam
ily m
embe
rs e
mpl
oyed
/unp
aid
(+/+
*)
Mor
ck e
t al.
(198
8)
AT
B
F/N
FI
M
Firm
age
Mar
ket v
alue
Fa
mily
man
agem
ent x
you
nger
firm
s (+)
Fa
mily
man
agem
ent x
old
er fi
rms (
-)
Dai
ly/D
ollin
ger (
1992
) A
T B
F/
N
Firm
type
G
row
th
Subj
ectiv
e pe
rfor
man
ce Fi
rm ty
pe (+
/+)
Dai
ly/T
hom
pson
(199
4)
N.N
. B
F/
N
Firm
type
FI
O/F
IM
Gro
wth
Fi
rm ty
pe (-
)
Kle
inso
rge
(199
4)
N.N
. B
F/
N
Firm
type
Ef
ficie
ncy
Firm
type
(-)
Ellin
gton
et a
l. (1
996)
R
BT
B
both
Fi
rm ty
pe
Res
ourc
es
Pr
ofita
bilit
y Fi
rm ty
pe x
TQ
M (+
)
Gór
riz/F
umás
(199
6)
AT
B
F/N
Fi
rm ty
pe
Prof
itabi
lity
Prod
uctiv
ity
Firm
type
(o/-)
McC
onau
ghy
et a
l. (1
996)
A
T B
F/
N
Firm
type
M
arke
t val
ue
Firm
type
(+)
Wes
thea
d/C
owlin
g (1
997)
N
.N.
B
F/N
Fi
rm ty
pe
Size
G
row
th
Prof
itabi
lity
Prod
uctiv
ity
Firm
type
(o/o
/o/o
)
Appendices 189
McC
onau
ghy
et a
l. (1
998)
A
T B
bo
th
FIO
G
ener
atio
n
Mar
ket v
alue
M
arke
t ret
urn
Gro
wth
Pr
ofita
bilit
y
Fam
ily fi
rm v
s. no
n-fa
mily
firm
(+/+
/+/+
) Fo
unde
r fam
ily v
s. no
n-fa
mily
firm
(+/+
/+/+
) D
esce
ndan
t fam
ily fi
rm v
s. no
n-fa
mily
firm
(+/o
/+/+
)
Wal
l (19
98)
AT
B
F/N
Fi
rm ty
pe
Size
Fi
rm ty
pe (-
)
Laut
erba
ch/
V
anin
sky
(199
9)
AT
B
F/N
Fi
rm ty
pe
Size
Fi
rm ty
pe (-
)
McC
onau
ghy/
Ph
illip
s (19
99)
AT
B
F/F
Firm
type
G
ener
atio
n
Mar
ket v
alue
M
arke
t ret
urn
Prof
itabi
lity
Effic
ienc
y Pr
oduc
tivity
Foun
der v
s. de
scen
dant
(+*/
-/-/+
/-)
Smith
/
Am
oako
-Adu
(199
9)
AT
B
F/N
FI
M
Gen
erat
ion
Mar
ket r
etur
n [lo
ng-
term
] Pr
ofita
bilit
y
Fam
ily C
EO su
cces
sion
(+)
Non
-fam
ily in
side
CEO
succ
essi
on (o
) N
on-f
amily
out
side
CEO
succ
essi
on (o
)
Thom
sen/
Pede
rsen
(200
0)
AT
B
F/N
Fi
rm ty
pe
FIO
M
arke
t val
ue
Gro
wth
Pr
ofita
bilit
y
Firm
type
(-/+
/o)
Fam
ily o
wne
rshi
p (I
U/o
/IU)
Góm
ez-M
ejía
/Nun
ez-
Nic
kel/G
utie
rrez
(200
1)
AT
B
F/N
FI
M
Gen
erat
ion
Firm
surv
ival
Fa
mily
CEO
succ
essi
on (-
)
McC
onau
ghy
et a
l. (2
001)
A
T B
F/
N
FIO
Mar
ket v
alue
G
row
th
Prof
itabi
lity
Effic
ienc
y Pr
oduc
tivity
Fam
ily o
wne
rshi
p (+
/+/+
/o)
Mis
hra
et a
l. (2
001)
A
T B
F/
N
Firm
type
FI
O
M
arke
t val
ue
Firm
type
(+)
Firm
type
x m
ultip
le sh
are
clas
ses (
o)
Firm
type
x si
ngle
cla
ss o
f sha
res (
+)
Schu
lze
et a
l. (2
001)
A
T B
F/
N
FIO
FI
M
Stra
tegy
Gro
wth
Fa
mily
ow
ners
hip
(o)
Fam
ily o
wne
rshi
p x
stra
tegi
c pl
anni
ng (+
)
Yeh
et a
l. (2
001)
A
T B
* F/
N
FIO
/FIM
M
arke
t val
ue
Prof
itabi
lity
Fam
ily o
wne
rshi
p/C
EO v
s. w
idel
y he
ld (o
/o)
Hig
h vs
. low
fam
ily o
wne
rshi
p/C
EO (o
/+)
Wid
ely
held
vs.
low
fam
ily o
wne
rshi
p/C
EO (o
/+)
190 Appendices
Cla
esse
ns e
t al.
(200
2)
AT
B
F/N
FI
O
Mar
ket v
alue
Fam
ily o
wne
rshi
p (+
) Fa
mily
exc
ess c
ontro
l (-)
And
erso
n/R
eeb
(200
3a)
AT
B
F/N
FI
O
FIM
G
ener
atio
n
M
arke
t val
ue
Prof
itabi
lity
Fam
ily o
wne
rshi
p (I
U/IU
) Fa
mily
CEO
Fou
nder
(+/+
) Fa
mily
CEO
Des
cend
ant (
+/+)
Cro
nqvi
st/N
ilsso
n (2
003)
A
T B
F/
N
FIO
M
arke
t val
ue
Prof
itabi
lity
Fam
ily v
ote
owne
rshi
p (-
/o)
Dur
and/
Var
gas (
2003
) A
T B
bo
th
FIO
St
ruct
ure
Ef
ficie
ncy
Fam
ily o
wne
rshi
p (+
*)
Org
aniz
atio
n (o
) Fa
mily
ow
ners
hip
x or
gani
zatio
n (+
)
Ehrh
ardt
/Now
ak (2
003)
A
T B
* F/
F FI
O
Mar
ket r
etur
n Fa
mily
vot
ing
right
s con
cent
ratio
n 7
5% (o
) Fa
mily
vot
ing
right
s con
cent
ratio
n >
75%
(-)
Ols
on e
t al.
(200
3)
Oth
er
B
F/F
FIM
Fa
mily
mem
bers
G
ener
atio
n
Si
ze
Subj
ectiv
e pe
rfor
man
ce Fa
mily
man
agem
ent (
o/o)
Si
ngle
gen
erat
ion
(-/o
) Fa
mily
em
ploy
ees (
+/-)
Ran
doy/
Goe
l (20
03)
AT
B
F/N
FI
M
FIS
Gen
erat
ion
FIO
Mar
ket v
alue
Pr
ofita
bilit
y
Foun
der C
EO o
r Cha
ir (o
/o)
Insi
de o
wne
rshi
p (o
/-)
Blo
ck o
wne
rshi
p (o
/+)
Foun
der C
EO o
r Cha
ir x
insi
de o
wne
rshi
p (+
*/+)
Fo
unde
r CEO
or C
hair
x bl
ock
owne
rshi
p (-
*/o)
Upt
on e
t al.
(200
3)
N.N
. B
* bo
th
FIO
G
row
th
Prod
uctiv
ity
Fam
ily v
s. no
fam
ily o
wne
rshi
p (o
/o)
Hig
h vs
. low
fam
ily o
wne
rshi
p (-
/-)
And
erso
n/R
eeb
(200
4)
AT
ST
B
F/N
FI
O
FIM
FI
S
M
arke
t val
ue
Fam
ily d
irect
ors >
inde
pend
ent d
irect
ors (
-)
Boa
rd in
depe
nden
ce (+
) In
side
ow
ners
hip
(-)
Chr
ism
an e
t al.
(200
4)
AT
B
F/N
Fi
rm ty
pe
Stra
tegy
Gro
wth
Fi
rm ty
pe (o
) St
rate
gic
plan
ning
(+)
Fam
ily x
stra
tegi
c pl
anni
ng (-
)
Lee
(200
4)
AT
B
F/N
Fi
rm ty
pe
Prof
itabi
lity
Gro
wth
Ef
ficie
ncy
Firm
type
(+o
/+o)
Appendices 191
Gal
lo e
t al.
(200
4)
N.N
. B
F/
N
Firm
type
Pr
ofita
bilit
y Ef
ficie
ncy
Firm
type
(o/+
)
Yam
mee
sri/L
odh
(200
4)
AT
B
F/N
Fi
rm ty
pe
FIO
M
arke
t ret
urn
Prof
itabi
lity
Firm
type
(o/+
) In
side
ow
ners
hip
(o/o
)
Bar
th e
t al.
(200
5)
AT
B
F/N
Fi
rm ty
pe
Prod
uctiv
ity
Firm
type
(-)
Fam
ily m
anag
emen
t (-)
Che
n/C
heun
g/St
oura
itis/
Won
g (2
005)
A
T B
* F/
F FI
O
FIM
FI
S
M
arke
t val
ue
Prof
itabi
lity
Fam
ily o
wne
rshi
p 0-
10%
(-
/o)
Fam
ily o
wne
rshi
p 10
-35%
(o/
o)
Fam
ily o
wne
rshi
p 35
-100
% (o
/o)
CEO
dua
lity
(-/o
) B
oard
inde
pend
ence
(o/o
)
Fila
totc
hev
et a
l. (2
005)
A
T B
F/
N
FIO
FI
M
FIS
Mar
ket v
alue
M
arke
t ret
urn
Prof
itabi
lity
Fam
ily o
wne
rshi
p (o
/o/o
) Fa
mily
man
agem
ent p
artic
ipat
ion
(-/-/
o)
Fam
ily b
oard
par
ticip
atio
n (o
/o/o
)
Jask
iew
icz
et a
l. (2
005)
A
T B
* F/
N
Firm
type
FI
O
F-Po
wer
M
arke
t ret
urn
Firm
type
(o)
Fam
ily o
wne
rshi
p (o
) F-
Pow
er (o
) F-
Pow
er w
eak
(o)
F-Po
wer
stro
ng (+
)
Joris
sen
et a
l. (2
005)
A
T B
F/
N
Firm
type
Pr
ofita
bilit
y G
row
th
Firm
type
(-/o
)
Kle
in e
t al.
(200
5a)
AT
B
F/N
FI
O
FIS
Mar
ket v
alue
Si
ngle
vs.
dual
shar
e cl
asse
s (+)
B
oard
inde
pend
ence
(-)
Kot
ey (2
005b
) N
.N.
B
F/N
Fi
rm ty
pe
Firm
size
Prof
itabi
lity
Effic
ienc
y Fi
rm ty
pe x
smal
l siz
e (-
,o/o
) Fi
rm ty
pe x
med
ium
size
(+,o
/+)
Kot
ey (2
005a
) A
T B
F/
N
Firm
type
F
irm si
ze
Pr
ofita
bilit
y G
row
th
Firm
type
x v
ery
smal
l siz
e (o
/o)
Firm
type
x sm
all s
ize
(+,o
/o)
Firm
type
x sm
all t
o m
ediu
m si
ze (+
,o/o
) Fi
rm ty
pe x
med
ium
size
(o/o
)
Ng
(200
5)
AT
C
F/F
FIO
M
arke
t val
ue
Prof
itabi
lity
Fam
ily o
wne
rshi
p (S
/S)
192 Appendices
Yeh
(200
5)
AT
B
F/N
FI
O
FIM
M
arke
t val
ue
Fam
ily o
wne
rshi
p (+
) Fa
mily
ow
ners
hip/
cont
rol (
+)
Fam
ily e
xces
s ow
ners
hip
(-)
Low
ow
ners
hip
(-)
Fam
ily C
EO o
r Cha
irman
Fa
mily
dom
inat
ed m
anag
emen
t boa
rd (-
)
Yeh
/Woi
dtke
(200
5)
AT
B
F/N
FI
O
FIM
FI
S
M
arke
t val
ue
Prof
itabi
lity
Fam
ily c
ontro
lling
ow
ners
hip
(o/o
) Fa
mily
ow
ners
hip
x af
filia
ted
dire
ctor
s (S/
S)
Fam
ily o
wne
rshi
p x
affil
iate
d su
perv
isor
s (S/
S)
Cas
tillo
/Wak
efie
ld (2
006)
O
ther
B
F/
F
FIO
FI
M
Fam
ily m
embe
rs
Cul
ture
Subj
ectiv
e pe
rfor
man
ce Fa
mily
ow
ners
hip
(o)
Non
-fam
ily b
oard
mem
bers
(o)
Num
ber o
f fam
ily m
embe
rs (o
) Fa
mily
supp
ort f
or th
e bu
sine
ss (o
)
Ben
-Am
ar/A
ndré
(200
6)
AT
B
F/N
Fi
rm ty
pe
FIO
FI
M
Mar
ket r
etur
n
Firm
type
(+)
Insi
de o
wne
rshi
p (I
U)
Out
side
blo
ck (+
) Fa
mily
CEO
(+)
Boa
rd in
depe
nden
cy (+
) B
oard
size
(-)
Bar
ontin
i/Cap
rio (2
006)
A
T B
F/
N
Firm
type
FI
O
FIM
G
ener
atio
n
Prof
itabi
lity
Mar
ket v
alue
Firm
type
(+/+
) Fo
unde
r firm
(+/+
) D
esce
ndan
t firm
(+/+
) N
on-f
amily
exe
cutiv
es (+
/+)
Fam
ily C
EO (+
*/+*
) Fa
mily
not
on
boar
d (o
/o)
Foun
der n
on-e
xecu
tive
(+/+
) Fo
unde
r CEO
(+/+
) D
esce
ndan
t non
-exe
cutiv
e (+
/+)
Des
cend
ant C
EO (o
/o)
Lee
(200
6)
AT
B
F/N
Fi
rm ty
pe
FIO
Si
ze
Prof
itabi
lity
Gro
wth
Firm
type
(+/+
/+o)
In
side
ow
ners
hip
(o/o
/o)
Fam
ily m
anag
ers (
+/+/
+)
Mau
ry (2
006)
A
T B
F/
N
Firm
type
FI
O
FIM
Pr
ofita
bilit
y M
arke
t val
ue
Firm
type
(+/+
) Fa
mily
ow
ners
hip
(o/o
) Fa
mily
vot
es (S
) Fa
mily
exc
ess c
ontro
l (o/
-)
Fam
ily C
EO (+
/+)
Pére
z-G
onzá
lez
(200
6)
AT
B
F/F
FIM
M
arke
t ret
urn
Fam
ily v
s. un
rela
ted
CEO
succ
essi
on (-
) Fa
mily
vs.
unre
late
d C
EO su
cces
sion
with
low
edu
catio
n (-
)
Appendices 193
Vill
alon
ga/A
mit
(200
6)
AT
B
F/N
FI
O
FIM
G
ener
atio
n
M
arke
t val
ue
Fam
ily o
wne
rshi
p (D
V) (
+)
Fam
ily o
wne
rshi
p (%
) (+)
Fa
mily
exc
ess c
ontro
l (-)
Fa
mily
CEO
(o/+
) Fo
unde
r CEO
, CEO
or C
hairm
an (+
) Se
cond
CEO
, CEO
or C
hairm
an (-
) Th
ird &
late
r CEO
, CEO
or C
hairm
an (o
)
Wes
thea
d/
H
owor
th (2
006)
A
T ST
B
F/
F
FIO
FI
M
FIS
Gen
erat
ion
Gro
wth
Si
ze
Fam
ily o
wne
rshi
p (o
/o)
Fam
ily C
EO (o
/-)
Fam
ily m
anag
ers (
o/o)
Fa
mily
boa
rd d
irect
ors (
o/o)
B
oard
size
(+/o
) M
ulti
vs. f
irst g
ener
atio
n (o
/o)
Ben
neds
en/N
iels
en/
Pére
z-G
onzá
lez/
W
olfe
nzon
(200
7)
AT
B
F/F
FIM
G
ener
atio
n
Pr
ofita
bilit
y Fa
mily
CEO
succ
essi
on (-
)
Bra
un/S
harm
a (2
007)
A
T ST
B
F/
F FI
M
FIS
FIO
Mar
ket r
etur
n Fa
mily
CEO
dua
lity
(o)
Fam
ily C
EO d
ualit
y x
fam
ily o
wne
rshi
p (+
)
Cha
hine
(200
7)
AT
B
F/N
FI
O
Mar
ket r
etur
n Fa
mily
blo
ck o
wne
rshi
p (-
) Fa
mily
ow
ners
hip
(S)
Cha
ng/S
hin
(200
7)
AT
C
F/F
FIO
M
arke
t val
ue
Fam
ily o
wne
rshi
p (o
) Fa
mily
cas
h-flo
w ri
ghts
(o)
Drif
field
et a
l. (2
007)
A
T B
* F/
N
FIO
M
arke
t val
ue
Fam
ily o
wne
rshi
p (+
, o)
Fam
ily o
wne
rshi
p >
50%
(o)
Con
trol >
cas
h (+
, o)
Con
trol >
cas
h hi
gh (o
, -)
Góm
ez-M
ejía
et a
l. (2
007)
A
T
Oth
er
B
F/N
Fi
rm ty
pe
FIO
/FIM
Su
bjec
tive
perf
orm
ance
Firm
type
(-)
Lin/
Hu
(200
7)
AT
B
F/F
FIM
En
viro
nmen
t
Prof
itabi
lity
Mar
ket v
alue
Hig
h-sk
ill fi
rms:
Fa
mily
CEO
(-/-)
Pr
ofes
sion
al C
EO a
nd lo
w c
ash-
flow
righ
ts (+
*/+)
Pr
ofes
sion
al C
EO a
nd lo
w v
otin
g rig
hts (
+/o)
H
igh-
expr
opria
tion
firm
s:
Fam
ily C
EO (o
/o)
Fam
ily C
EO a
nd lo
w c
ash-
flow
righ
ts (+
/o)
Fam
ily C
EO a
nd lo
w v
otin
g rig
hts (
o/o)
194 Appendices
Mar
tinez
/Stö
hr/
Q
uiro
ga (2
007)
A
T B
F/
N
Firm
type
Pr
ofita
bilit
y
Firm
type
(+)
Mill
er e
t al.
(200
7)
AT
B
F/F
FIO
Fa
mily
mem
bers
M
arke
t val
ue
Lone
foun
der a
nd fa
mily
ow
ners
hip
(IU
) Lo
ne fo
unde
r ow
ners
hip
(IU
) Fa
mily
ow
ners
hip
(o)
Lone
foun
der a
nd fa
mily
larg
est o
wne
r (+)
Lo
ne fo
unde
r lar
gest
ow
ner (
+)
Fam
ily la
rges
t ow
ner (
o)
Lone
foun
der a
nd fa
mily
firm
(o)
Lone
foun
der f
irm (+
) Fa
mily
(o) [
first
(o) s
econ
d ge
nera
tion
(o)]
Nal
di e
t al.
(200
7)
AT
RB
T B
F/
F C
ultu
re
Subj
ectiv
e pe
rfor
man
ce R
isk
taki
ng in
fam
ily fi
rms (
-)
Pies
se/F
ilato
tche
v/
Li
en (2
007)
A
T B
F/
N
FIO
FI
M
FIS
Prof
itabi
lity
Mar
ket v
alue
Ef
ficie
ncy
Fam
ily o
wne
rshi
p (o
) Fa
mily
man
agem
ent (
-,o/o
/-)
Fam
ily su
perv
isio
n (+
/o/+
)
Srae
r/The
smar
(200
7)
AT
B
F/N
FI
M
Gen
erat
ion
Prof
itabi
lity
Mar
ket v
alue
Fam
ily fi
rm (+
/+)
Foun
der C
EO (+
/+)
Hei
r CEO
(+/o
) Pr
ofes
sion
al C
EO (+
/o)
Wan
g/A
hmed
/
Farq
uhar
(200
7)
AT
B
F/F
Firm
type
G
ener
atio
n
Prof
itabi
lity
Gro
wth
Ef
ficie
ncy
Prod
uctiv
ity
Foun
der v
s. de
scen
dant
con
trolle
d fa
mily
firm
s (o/
+,o/
o/o)
Zel
lweg
er (2
007a
) A
T B
F/
F FI
O
FIM
FI
S
Pr
ofita
bilit
y Fa
mily
ow
ners
hip
(-)
Fam
ily m
anag
emen
t onl
y (D
V) (
+)
Fam
ily b
oard
seat
s (o)
Zellw
eger
/Mei
ster
/ Fu
eglis
talle
r (20
07)
AT
B
F/N
Fi
rm ty
pe
Mar
ket r
etur
n Fi
rm ty
pe (+
)
Allo
uche
et a
l. (2
008)
A
T R
BT
B*
both
Fi
rm ty
pe
Prof
itabi
lity
Effic
ienc
y Fi
rm ty
pe (+
) St
rong
vs.
wea
k fa
mily
con
trol (
+/N
.N.)
Alp
ay e
t al.
(200
8)
Oth
er
B
F/F
Fam
ily c
ultu
re
St
ruct
ure
Subj
ectiv
e pe
rfor
man
ce H
arm
ony
-->
Inst
itutio
naliz
atio
n (+
) D
emoc
racy
in d
ecis
ion-
mak
ing
-->
Ada
ptab
ility
(+)
Appendices 195
And
res (
2008
) A
T B
F/
N
Firm
type
FI
O
FIM
G
ener
atio
n
Prof
itabi
lity
M
arke
t val
ue
Firm
type
(+/+
) Fa
mily
ow
ners
hip
(+/IU
) Fo
unde
r CEO
(+) >
Pro
fess
iona
l > D
esce
ndan
t CEO
(+/o
)
Boz
ec/L
aurin
(200
8)
AT
B
F/N
Fi
rm ty
pe
Mar
ket v
alue
Pr
ofita
bilit
y Fi
rm ty
pe (o
/+)
Ber
trand
/Joh
nson
/Sam
pha
ntha
rak/
Scho
ar (2
008)
N
.N.
B
F/F
FIO
G
ener
atio
n
Pr
ofita
bilit
y
Fam
ily o
wne
rshi
p (-
) Fa
mily
ow
ners
hip
whe
n fo
unde
r dea
d (-
) Fa
mily
ow
ners
hip
whe
n fo
unde
r aliv
e (o
) Fa
mily
exc
ess c
ontro
l (o)
Cas
elli/
Di G
iuli/
Gat
ti (2
008)
A
T B
F/
F FI
O
Gen
erat
ion
Mar
ket v
alue
Pr
ofita
bilit
y
Boa
rd a
nd in
side
ow
ners
hip
(o/-)
Fo
unde
r/Non
-fou
nder
(o/o
) Fo
unde
r x B
oard
and
insi
de o
wne
rshi
p (+
*/+)
N
on-f
ound
er x
Boa
rd in
side
ow
ners
hip
(-*/
-)
Cra
ig e
t al.
(200
8)
RB
T O
ther
B
F/
F C
ultu
re
St
rate
gy
Subj
ectiv
e pe
rfor
man
ce Fa
mily
bra
nd id
entit
y (o
) Fa
mily
bra
nd id
entit
y c
usto
mer
orie
ntat
ion
(+)
Fam
ily b
rand
iden
tity
pro
duct
orie
ntat
ion
(o)
Eddl
esto
n et
al.
(200
8)
ST
RB
T B
F/
F C
ultu
re
Stra
tegy
En
viro
nmen
t
Subj
ectiv
e pe
rfor
man
ce Fa
mily
inno
vativ
e ca
paci
ty (+
) Fa
mily
reci
proc
al a
ltrui
sm (+
) St
rate
gic
plan
ning
(+*)
St
rate
gic
plan
ning
x in
nova
tive
capa
city
(-)
Stra
tegi
c pl
anni
ng x
reci
proc
al a
ltrui
sm (o
)
Jara
-Ber
tin/L
ópez
-Itu
rria
ga/L
ópez
-de-
Foro
nda
(200
8)
AT
B
F/N
FI
O
Mar
ket v
alue
R
elat
ive
owne
rshi
p 2nd
/3rd
larg
est o
wne
r to
fam
ily
owne
rshi
p (+
) Fa
mily
is 2
nd/3
rd la
rges
t sha
reho
lder
(-)
Kin
g/Sa
ntor
(200
8)
AT
B
F/N
Fi
rm ty
pe
FIO
M
arke
t val
ue
Prof
itabi
lity
Leve
rage
Firm
type
(-/+
/+)
Fam
ily d
ual c
lass
shar
es (-
/o/o
) Fa
mily
sing
le c
lass
shar
es (o
/+/+
)
Rut
herf
ord/
K
urat
ko (2
008)
R
BT
Oth
er
C
F/F
F-PE
C
Size
G
row
th
Subj
ectiv
e pe
rfor
man
ce F-
Pow
er (o
/o/o
) F-
Expe
rienc
e (+
/o/-)
F-
Cul
ture
(o/o
/+)
Saito
(200
8)
AT
B
F/N
Firm
type
FI
O
FIM
G
ener
atio
n
M
arke
t val
ue
Firm
type
(+)
Fam
ily o
wne
rshi
p (%
) (+)
Fa
mily
man
agem
ent (
o)
Foun
der (
+) d
esce
ndan
t (-)
man
agem
ent
Scia
scia
/Maz
zola
(200
8)
AT
ST
C
F/F
FIO
FI
M
Subj
ectiv
e pe
rfor
man
ce Fa
mily
ow
ners
hip
(o)
Fam
ily m
anag
emen
t (IU
) Fa
mily
ow
ners
hip
x m
anag
emen
t (o)
196 Appendices
Sirm
on e
t al.
(200
8)
RB
T B
F/
N
Res
ourc
es
Firm
type
St
rate
gy
Prod
uctiv
ity
Imita
bilit
y (-
) Fi
rm ty
pe (o
) Im
itabi
lity
-->
Inno
vatio
n (+
) Im
itabi
lity
-->
Inte
rnat
iona
lizat
ion
(+)
Imita
bilit
y x
Firm
type
(+) o
n in
nova
tion
Imita
bilit
y x
Firm
type
(+) o
n in
tern
atio
naliz
atio
n
Viv
iani
/Gio
rgin
o/
Ster
i (20
08)
AT
B
F/N
Fi
rm ty
pe
Inve
stor
Mar
ket r
etur
n Fi
rm ty
pe (o
) Fi
rm ty
pe x
PE
back
up (o
)
Yua
n/H
ua/J
unxi
(200
8)
AT
B
F/N
Fi
rm ty
pe
Prof
itabi
lity
Mar
ket v
alue
Ef
ficie
ncy
Prod
uctiv
ity
Firm
type
(+/+
/+/+
)
Ach
mad
/Nei
lson
/
To
wer
(200
9)
AT
B
F/N
FI
O
Pr
ofita
bilit
y Fa
mily
ow
ners
hip
(o)
Fam
ily c
ontro
l (-)
Am
ran/
Ahm
ad (2
009)
A
T ST
B
F/
N
FIM
/FIS
M
arke
t val
ue
CEO
dua
lity
(-)
Ave
ndan
o-A
lcar
az e
t al.
(200
9)
Oth
er
C
F/F
F-PE
C
Fam
ilial
inde
x
Su
bjec
tive
perf
orm
ance
F-Po
wer
(+)
F-Ex
perie
nce
(o)
F-C
ultu
re (+
) Fa
mili
al in
dex
(+)
Bas
u/D
imitr
ova/
Paeg
lis (2
009)
A
T B
F/
N
FIO
M
arke
t val
ue
Fam
ily o
wne
rshi
p (U
) for
cas
h fin
ance
d ac
quis
ition
Fa
mily
ow
ners
hip
(IU
) for
stoc
k fin
ance
d ac
quis
ition
Car
r/Bat
eman
(200
9)
Oth
er
B
F/N
Fi
rm ty
pe
Stra
tegy
Prof
itabi
lity
Firm
type
(+)
Fam
ily fi
rms i
nter
natio
nal s
trate
gies
(+)
Chr
ism
an e
t al.
(200
9)
RB
T B
F/
N
Firm
type
R
esou
rces
Gro
wth
Fi
rm ty
pe (o
) Fi
rm ty
pe x
reso
urce
s (+,
-,o)
Chu
(200
9b)
AT
RB
T B
* F/
N
FIO
/FIM
Pr
ofita
bilit
y M
arke
t val
ue
Fam
ily o
wne
rshi
p >
5% a
nd fa
mily
boa
rd m
embe
rs
1 (+
) Fa
mily
ow
ners
hip
> 5%
and
fam
ily b
oard
mem
bers
2
(+)
Chu
(200
9a)
AT
ST
B
F/N
FI
O
FIM
FI
S
Prof
itabi
lity
Fam
ily o
wne
rshi
p (+
) Fa
mily
ow
ners
hip
x Fa
mily
CEO
(+)
Fam
ily o
wne
rshi
p x
fam
ily m
anag
er (+
) Fa
mily
ow
ners
hip
x fa
mily
cha
irman
(+)
Appendices 197
Din
g/Pu
kthu
anth
ong-
Le
(200
9)
AT
Oth
er
B
F/F
FIM
FI
O
M
arke
t ret
urn
Num
ber o
f non
-fam
ily d
irect
ors (
-)
Fam
ily o
wne
rshi
p (-
) Fa
mily
ow
ners
hip
x no
n-fa
mily
dire
ctor
s (+)
Levi
e/Le
rner
(200
9)
RB
T B
F/
N
Firm
type
Su
bjec
tive
perf
orm
ance
Firm
type
(o)
Mar
tikai
nen
et a
l. (2
009)
A
T B
F/
N
Firm
type
M
arke
t val
ue
Prof
itabi
lity
Firm
type
(+/+
)
Osw
ald
et a
l. (2
009)
A
T B
F/
F FI
O
G
row
th
Size
Fa
mily
ow
ners
hip
(o/-)
Fa
mily
insi
de o
wne
rshi
p (-
/-)
Ran
døy
et a
l. (2
009)
A
T B
F/
N
FIM
/FIS
En
viro
nmen
t
Prof
itabi
lity
Mar
ket v
alue
Fam
ily C
EO/C
hair
x le
ss c
ompe
titiv
e in
dust
ry (+
) Fa
mily
CEO
/Cha
ir x
mod
erat
e co
mpe
titiv
e in
dust
ry (o
) Fa
mily
CEO
/Cha
ir x
high
com
petit
ive
indu
stry
(o)
Setia
-Atm
aja
et a
l. (2
009)
A
T B
F/
N
FIO
/FIM
FI
S
Mar
ket v
alue
Fam
ily c
ontro
l (-)
B
oard
inde
pend
ence
(+)
Fam
ily c
ontro
l x b
oard
inde
pend
ence
(-)
Boa
rd si
ze (o
) Fa
mily
con
trol x
boa
rd si
ze (+
)
Sind
huja
(200
9)
N.N
. B
F/
N
Firm
type
M
arke
t val
ue
Mar
ket r
etur
n Pr
ofita
bilit
y Fi
rm ty
pes (
-/-/-)
Sore
nson
/Goo
dpas
ter/
Hed
berg
/Yu
(200
9)
RB
T B
F/
F C
ultu
re
Subj
ectiv
e pe
rfor
man
ce F
amily
col
labo
rativ
e di
alog
ue (+
)
Tsao
et a
l. (2
009)
R
BT
O
ther
B
F/
F FI
O
Stra
tegy
Prof
itabi
lity
Fam
ily o
wne
rshi
p (o
) Fa
mily
ow
ners
hip
x H
RM
(+)
Am
ran/
Ahm
ad (2
010)
A
T B
F/
N
Firm
type
FI
S
Prof
itabi
lity
Mar
ket v
alue
Ef
ficie
ncy
Firm
type
(o/o
/o)
Boa
rd in
depe
nden
ce (-
/+/-)
Aro
sa e
t al.
(201
0c)
AT
B
F/N
FI
O
Gen
erat
ion
Pr
ofita
bilit
y
Ow
ners
hip
conc
entra
tion
(o)
Ow
ners
hip
conc
entra
tion
x G
ener
atio
n (I
U)
198 Appendices
Bon
illa/
Sepu
lved
a/
Car
vaja
l (20
10)
AT
B
F/N
Fi
rm ty
pe
Pr
ofita
bilit
y
Firm
type
(+)
Car
r/Bat
eman
(201
0)
RB
T B
F/
N
Firm
type
Pr
ofita
bilit
y G
row
th
Firm
type
(+/o
)
Cas
elli/
Di G
iuli
(201
0)
AT
B
both
Fi
rm ty
pe
FIM
G
ener
atio
n
Pr
ofita
bilit
y
Firm
type
(+)
Fam
ily C
EO fi
rst (
+) se
cond
(o) t
hird
and
late
r ge
nera
tion
(-) Fa
mily
CFO
(-)
Cas
illas
/Mor
eno
(201
0)
RB
T B
F/
N
EO
FIM
Gro
wth
Inno
vativ
enes
s (+)
R
isk
taki
ng (o
) In
nova
tiven
ess x
FIM
(+)
Ris
k ta
king
x F
IM (-
)
Cas
illas
et a
l. (2
010
CT
B
F/N
EO
G
ener
atio
n En
viro
nmen
t
Gro
wth
Pr
oact
iven
ess (
+)
Gen
erat
iona
l inv
olve
men
t (o)
Pr
oact
iven
ess x
Gen
erat
iona
l inv
olve
men
t (+)
Cha
ng/W
u/W
ong
(201
0)
AT
B
F/N
FI
O
FIM
In
vest
or
Mar
ket r
etur
n
Vot
ing
right
s (-)
Ex
cess
fam
ily c
ontro
l (-)
Fa
mily
con
trolle
d bo
ard
(-)
Fam
ily c
ontro
l x in
stitu
tiona
l ow
ners
hip
(+)
Che
n/N
owla
nd (2
010)
A
T B
F/
N
FIM
FI
S
Mar
ket v
alue
C
EO d
ualit
y (+
*)
Boa
rd in
depe
nden
ce (I
U)
Boa
rd si
ze (o
)
Feito
-Rui
z/M
enen
dez-
Req
uejo
(201
0)
AT
B
F/N
Fi
rm ty
pe
FIO
M
arke
t ret
urn
Firm
type
(+)
Fam
ily o
wne
rshi
p (I
U)
Feng
-Li/T
sang
yao
(201
0)
AT
B
F/F
FIO
M
arke
t val
ue
Fam
ily o
wne
rshi
p (S
)
Gio
vann
ini (
2010
) A
T ST
C
T B
* bo
th
FIO
FI
M
FIS
M
arke
t ret
urn
F-Po
wer
> 0
.5 (-
) N
umbe
r of o
utsi
de /
non-
exec
utiv
e di
rect
ors (
-*)
Fam
ily C
EO (-
*)
CEO
dua
lity
(-*)
Ham
adi (
2010
) A
T B
F/
N
FIO
M
arke
t val
ue
Fam
ily o
wne
r (-)
Fa
mily
firs
t lar
gest
ow
ner (
+)
Fam
ily fi
rst l
arge
st o
wne
r with
vot
ing-
bloc
k (-
) Fa
mily
firs
t lar
gest
ow
ner v
ia b
usin
ess g
roup
(o)
Appendices 199
Kas
hmiri
/Mah
ajan
(201
0)
Oth
er
B
F/F
FIO
C
ultu
re
Stra
tegy
Pr
ofita
bilit
y
Fam
ily o
wne
rshi
p (o
) Fa
mily
nam
e (+
) Fa
mily
nam
e so
cial
wea
knes
s (-)
Fa
mily
nam
e st
rate
gic
emph
asis
(IU
)
Kel
lerm
anns
et a
l. (2
010)
A
T ST
R
BT
B
F/N
FI
O
FIM
C
ultu
re
Res
ourc
es
Su
bjec
tive
perf
orm
ance
Fa
mily
man
agem
ent (
+)
Gen
erat
iona
l ow
ners
hip
disp
ersi
on (-
) G
ener
atio
nal o
wne
rshi
p di
sper
sion
x in
nova
tiven
ess
(-)
Kow
alew
ski e
t al.
(201
0)
AT
ST
RB
T B
F/
N
Firm
type
FI
O
FIM
FI
S
Pr
ofita
bilit
y
Firm
type
(+*)
Fa
mily
ow
ners
hip
(IU
) Fa
mily
vot
ing
right
s (+)
Fa
mily
CEO
(+)
Fam
ily c
hairm
an (o
)
Ling
/Kel
lerm
anns
(201
0)
Oth
er
B
F/F
Gen
erat
ion
Fam
ily m
embe
rs
TMT
Subj
ectiv
e pe
rfor
man
ce
Gen
erat
ion
in c
ontro
l (o)
x T
MT
(+)
Num
ber o
f fam
ily e
mpl
oyee
s (o)
x T
MT
(+)
Num
ber o
f em
ploy
ed g
ener
atio
ns (+
*) x
TM
T (+
)
Mill
er e
t al.
(201
0)
RB
T B
F/
F FI
O
FIM
Fa
mily
mem
bers
M
arke
t ret
urn
Lone
foun
der l
arge
st o
wne
r (+)
Fa
mily
larg
est o
wne
r (o)
Lo
ne fo
unde
r CEO
(+)
Fam
ily C
EO (o
)
Min
ichi
lli/C
orbe
tta/
Mac
Mill
an (2
010)
R
BT
Oth
er
B
F/F
FIM
TM
T
Prof
itabi
lity
Fam
ily C
EO (+
) Fa
mily
ratio
in T
MT
(U)
Fam
ily C
EO x
Fam
ily ra
tio T
MT
(o)
Shim
/Oka
mur
o (2
010)
O
ther
B
* bo
th
Firm
type
FI
O
Pr
ofita
bilit
y M
arke
t val
ue
Gro
wth
F/N
: Firm
type
(-/-/
o)
F/F:
Hig
h/Lo
w fa
mily
ow
ners
hip
(o/o
/o)
Won
g/C
hang
/Che
n (2
010)
A
T B
F/
N
FIO
FI
M
Inve
stor
(n
ot sh
own)
Mar
ket r
etur
n (s
hort/
long
-term
)
Fam
ily v
otin
g (-
) / c
ash-
flow
righ
ts (-
) Fa
mily
exc
ess c
ontro
l (-*
/-)
Fam
ily C
EO (o
/-)
Fam
ily c
ontro
lled
boar
d (-
/o)
Yos
hika
wa/
Ras
heed
(2
010)
A
T B
F/
N
FIM
In
vest
or
Pr
ofita
bilit
y Fa
mily
dire
ctor
s (o)
Fa
mily
dire
ctor
s x b
ank
owne
rshi
p (o
) Fa
mily
dire
ctor
s x fo
reig
n ow
ners
hip
(+)
Not
e: T
heor
y: A
T ag
ency
theo
ry; S
T st
ewar
dshi
p th
eory
; RBT
reso
urce
-bas
ed th
eory
; CT
cont
inge
ncy
theo
ry, N
.N. N
ot g
iven
. Def
initi
on: B
biv
aria
te (s
ingl
e cu
t-off
po
int);
B*
biva
riate
(alte
rnat
ive
cut-o
ff p
oint
s); C
con
tinuo
us. C
ompa
rison
: F/N
Fam
ily v
s. no
n-fa
mily
firm
s; F
/F fa
mily
vs.
fam
ily fi
rms.
Pred
icto
r(s)
: FIO
Fam
ily
influ
ence
in o
wne
rshi
p; F
IM F
amily
influ
ence
in m
anag
emen
t; FI
S Fa
mily
influ
ence
in s
uper
visi
on; F
-Pow
er f
amily
pow
er; F
-PEC
fam
ily p
ower
, exp
erie
nce,
cu
lture
. Mod
erat
ors:
TM
T To
p m
anag
emen
t tea
m; H
RM H
uman
reso
urce
man
agem
ent;
FIO
Fam
ily in
fluen
ce in
ow
ners
hip;
FIM
Fam
ily in
fluen
ce in
man
agem
ent;
FIS
Fam
ily in
fluen
ce in
sup
ervi
sion
. Mai
n re
sults
: (+)
Pos
itive
sig
nific
ant r
elat
ions
hip;
(-) N
egat
ive
sign
ifica
nt re
latio
nshi
p; (o
) Ins
igni
fican
t rel
atio
nshi
p; (+
*) o
r (-
*) M
oder
atel
y po
sitiv
e/ne
gativ
e si
gnifi
cant
(p <
0.1
0); (
U) U
-sha
ped
rela
tions
hip;
(IU
) Inv
erse
ly u
-sha
ped
rela
tions
hip;
(S) C
ubic
rela
tions
hip;
div
ided
by
com
ma
e.g.
, (+,
o) F
or th
is r
elat
ions
hip
exis
t mul
tiple
fin
ding
s; d
ivid
ed b
y sl
ash(
es)
e.g.
, (+/
-) F
indi
ngs
for
two
(or
mor
e) p
erfo
rman
ce v
aria
bles
; “x”
Mod
erat
ed e
ffec
t;
“-->
” M
edia
ted
effe
ct. S
ourc
e: A
utho
r.
200 Appendices
Appendices 201
Appendix 9: Overview of Questionnaire (translated from German, shortened)
Part I: General Firm Characteristics
In which year was your firm founded? How many employees did your firm have in 2008?
In which industry is your business active? Please check all answers that apply. Automobile Food & Beverages Technology
Bank Manufacturing Telecommunication
Materials Insurance Transportation & Logistics
Chemicals Media Utility
Building Pharma & Healthcare Other
Consumer goods Retail
Financial services Software & IT
Part II: Strategy
From the following list, please identify which items best describe your business type relative to your competitors. (Please check one only) Our business...
a)
... attempts to locate and maintain a secure niche in a relatively stable product or service area, ... tends to offer a more limited range of products or services compared to competitors, ... focuses on optimizing the operative business, ... is not at the forefront of developments in the industry.
(= defender)
b)
... operates within a broad product-market domain that undergoes periodic redefinition, ... values being “first in” in new product and market areas, ... responds rapidly to areas of opportunity, which often leads to competitive actions, ... does not maintain market strength in all of the areas it enters.
(= prospector)
c)
... attempts to maintain a stable, limited line of products or services, ....while at the same time moves into selected new markets or services, ... is seldom “first in” with new products or services, ... can, however, frequently be “second in” with a more cost-efficient product or service.
(= analyzer)
d)
... does not appear to have a consistent product-market orientation, ... is neither aggressive in maintaining established products and markets, ... nor willing to take as many risks as other competitors, ... rather, responds in those areas where it is forced to by environmental pressures.
(= reactor)
202 Appendices
Part III: Organizational Structure
For the following operative decisions, please indicate the extent to which second level managers have the authority to make decisions independently (decentralized) versus the extent to which decision-making authority is retained at the top management level (centralized)?
Decision to…
By top
management only
Independent by
second level
… hire/release personnel
… determine wages
… create/change production plan
… start/stop R&D projects
… determine marketing concepts
… determine product prices
… choose/change suppliers
… determine/change warehouse policy
… implement/change IT-systems
… open/close locations
For the following financial decisions, please indicate the extent to which second level managers have the authority to make decisions independently (decentralized) versus the extent to which decision-making authority is retained at the top management level (centralized)?
Decision to…
By top
management only
Independent by
second level
… plan/determine budgets
… decide about the form of financing
… review/approve investments
… allocate profits
… plan/control liquidity
Appendices 203
For the following strategic decisions, please indicate the extent to which second level managers have the authority to make decisions independently (decentralized) versus the extent to which decision-making authority is retained at the top management level (centralized)?
Decision to…
By top
management only
Independent by
second level
… decide on corporate strategy
… decide on business strategy
… decide on executive development
… exert long-term strategic planning
Part IV: Firm Performance
How has your firm developed over the last years? Please indicate values for each year.
2006 2007 2008
Sales (in €Mill.)
EBIT (in €Mill.)
Equity (in €Mill.)
Assets (in €Mill.)
How do you evaluate your business’ performance? Please indicate how you perceive the development.
Performance relative to…
Significantly
worse
Significantly
better
… your main competitors
… your objectives
204 Appendices
Part V: Family Influence
Please indicate the proportion of share ownership held by family and non-family members.
Family
Non-family
Please indicate how strongly family members are active in managing and supervising the firm.
How many persons does it comprise?
How many management board members are family?
How many non-family board members are chosen through them?
Does the business have a supervisory board? 1. Yes 2. No
IF YES:
How many board members does it comprise?
How many board members are family?
How many non-family (external) members nominated by the family are on the board?
Please indicate how strongly family members are active in managing and supervising the firm.
What generation owns the company?
What generation(s) manages(s) the company?
What generation is active on the governance board?
How many family members participate actively in the business?
How many family members do not participate actively in the business but are interested?
How many family members are not (yet) interested at all?
%
%
Appendices 205
Please rate the extent to which you agree with the following statements:
Strongly
disagree
Strongly
agree
Your family has influence on your business
Your family members share similar values.
Your family and business share similar values
The family…
… stands behind the business in discussions with friends, employees and other family members
… is willing to contribute highest effort to the success of the firm
… is proud to be part of the family firm
… is loyal to the firm
… agrees with the family firm goals, plans, and policies
… is interested in firm development
… derives long-term personal profit
… believes in having united values
I as a family member …
… perceive that my involvement in the firm has a positive influence on my life
… understand and support family decisions regarding the future of the family firm
Note: The questionnaire has been translated and shortened. Specifically, questions irrelevant for answering the research question of this study and those addressing the change of the variables (qualifiers) have been omitted. Source: Author.
206 Appendices
Appendix 10: Comparison of Sample Industry Distribution
Industry sector Comparison representativeness
Sample Klein (2005) ZEW (2008)
Industrial production 58.72% 45.79% 42.51%
Construction 10.55% 13.97% 14.71%
Retail 9.17% 14.85% 27.65%
Services
12.84% 18.01% 15.05%
Other 8.72% 7.39% n.a.
Source: Author, Klein (2004): p. 48; Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung (ZEW)/Institute für Mittelstandsforschung (IFM) (2009): p. 26.
Appendices 207
Appendix 11: Sample by Federal State – Comparison with Top 500 Family Firms
No. Federal State Inhabitants % Size (km 2) % Sample firms % Top 500
Germany
1 Schleswig-Holstein 2,833,747 3% 1,579,938 4% 3 2% 2%
2 Mecklenburg-West Pomerania 1,643,600 2% 2,318,014 6% 3 2% 0%
3 Hamburg 1,783,975 2% 755,264 2% 4 3% 4% 4 Bremen 660,713 1% 41,923 0% 0 0% 1% 5 Lower Saxony 7,924,000 10% 4,760,952 13% 8 5% 7% 6 Brandenburg 2,506,200 3% 2,947,861 8% 1 1% 1% 7 Berlin 3,450,889 4% 89,185 0% 1 1% 1% 8 Saxony-Anhalt 2,339,000 3% 2,044,631 6% 2 1% 0% 9 Saxony 4,152,000 5% 1,841,551 5% 6 4% 1%
10 Thuringia 2,237,000 3% 1,617,210 4% 3 2% 0% 11 North Rhine-Westphalia 17,872,763 22% 3,408,831 9% 25 16% 29% 12 Hesse 6,068,000 7% 2,111,494 6% 6 4% 7% 13 Rhineland-Palatinate 4,006,000 5% 1,985,336 5% 2 1% 5% 14 Saarland 1,019,000 1% 256,870 1% 0 0% 2% 15 Baden-Württemberg 10,754,865 13% 3,575,146 10% 18 12% 19% 16 Bavaria 12,538,284 15% 7,055,157 19% 74 47% 19%
Total 81,790,036 36,389,363 156
Source: Author, Wikipedia (2011) (inhabitants, size), Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung (ZEW)/Institute für Mittelstandsforschung (IFM) (2009) (Top 500 Germany).
208 Appendices
Appendix 12: Missing Data Analysis - Univariate Statistics
Variable Valid Missing Extremes EM mean Count Percent Low High
F-Power 161 10 5.85 0 0 0.76 F-Experience 153 18 10.53 0 0 0.50 F-Culture 162 9 5.26 6 0 0.91
Strategy 160 11 6.4 - - -
Organizational structure 167 4 2.34 0 6 2.13
Average sales (€Mill.) 149 22 12.87 0 17 498.62
Average EBIT (€Mill.) 95 76 44.44 2 13 27.88
Average ROA 95 76 44.44 1 4 0.06
Average ROE 95 76 44.44 5 7 0.27
Performance vs. competitors 151 20 11.70 0 0 3.79
Performance vs. industry 150 21 12.28 0 0 3.83
Performance vs. objectives 151 20 11.70 5 0 3.25
Firm age 167 4 2.34 0 1 68.59 Firm size (employees) 168 3 1.75 0 17 2243.14 Retail sector 171 11 6.43 - - - Service sector 171 0 0.00 - - - Construction sector 171 0 0.00 - - - Industry sector 171 0 0.00 - - - Other sectors 171 0 0.00 - - -
Note: Little/Rubin’s (1987) completely missing at random test: Chi-Square = 243.42, df = 239, Sign. = 0.41.
App
endi
x 13
: Mis
sing
Dat
a A
naly
sis -
EM
-Cor
rela
tions
939
EM C
orre
latio
ns
1
23
45
67
89
1011
1213
1. F
-Pow
er
1.00
2. F
-Exp
erie
nce
0.02
1.
00
3. F
-Cul
ture
0.
05
0.10
1.00
4.
Org
aniz
atio
nal s
truct
ure
-0.3
3 0.
110.
061.
00
5. A
vera
ge sa
les (
€Mill
.) -0
.32
0.23
0.04
0.35
1.00
6.
Ave
rage
EB
IT (€
Mill
.) -0
.29
0.20
0.06
0.24
0.93
1.00
7.
Ave
rage
RO
A
0.20
-0
.03
0.28
0.00
0.01
0.07
1.00
8.
Ave
rage
RO
E 0.
03
0.01
-0.0
7-0
.10
0.05
0.14
0.45
1.00
9.
Per
form
ance
vs.
com
petit
ors
0.08
-0
.03
0.11
0.14
-0.0
4-0
.06
0.11
0.18
1.00
10. P
erfo
rman
ce v
s. in
dust
ry
0.08
-0
.10
0.21
0.06
-0.0
5-0
.05
0.36
0.29
0.67
1.
00
11. P
erfo
rman
ce v
s. ob
ject
ives
0.
05
0.02
0.19
0.07
0.00
0.01
0.18
0.24
0.42
0.
421.
00
12. F
irm a
ge
0.09
0.
620.
040.
030.
180.
12-0
.04
-0.0
70.
00
-0.0
3-0
.08
1.00
13. F
irm si
ze
-0.3
1 0.
230.
050.
320.
960.
950.
040.
14-0
.03
-0.0
40.
020.
161.
00
N
ote:
All
coef
ficie
nts e
xcep
t fou
r mee
t the
crit
erio
n 0.
6, in
dica
ting
that
the
data
is m
issi
ng c
ompl
etel
y at
rand
om.94
0
93
9 See
Litt
le/R
ubin
(198
7), c
oeff
icie
nt c
riter
ion:
<0.
6.
940 T
he in
sign
ifica
nt te
st b
y Li
ttle/
Rub
in (1
987)
satis
fies t
he a
ssum
ptio
n th
at th
e da
ta is
mis
sing
com
plet
ely
at ra
ndom
.
209 Appendices
210 Appendices
To assess whether the results from the sample can be generalized to the population of family firms in Germany as a whole, a test for potential non-response bias was conducted to determine if the responses to the questionnaire were representative and unbiased. First, respondents were divided into early and late respondents, depending on the time the questionnaire was returned. This approach is based on the assumption that nonrespondents are more similar to late respondents than to early respondents941 and respondents to the second mailing are treated as nonrespondents to the first mailing. The Kruskal-Wallis test and the Chi-square (and Fishers Exact) test for scaled and nominal variables respectively were used to compare responses to the first and second mailings along each of the variables used in this study. No statistically significant differences between the first and the second were found for any of the variables except for strategy at the 95 percent confidence level, thus mitigating the concern for potential non-response bias. The results of these tests indicate that respondents and non-respondents come from the same population. Therefore, there is no cause to suspect that this sample of family firms is not a representative sample (Appendix 14).
941 See Kanuk/Berenson (1975); Oppenheim (1998). See also Fowler (2008): pp. 48-49.
Appendices 211
Appendix 14: Test of Nonresponse Bias
Independent Early respondents Late respondents Kruskal-Wallis Chi-square / Fishers exact test* variable Mail #1 Mail #2 H Test
Mean (rank) N Mean rank N Chi2 Sign. Value Sign. F-Power 86.08 94 73.87 67 2.81 0.09 - - F-Experience 73.78 90 81.60 63 1.20 0.27 - - F-Culture 80.59 96 82.82 66 0.09 0.76 - - Strategy - 94 - 66 - - 7.49 0.01 Structure 80.62 95 88.46 72 1.08 0.30 - - Firm age 83.44 96 84.75 71 0.03 0.86 - - Firm size 80.08 97 90.54 71 1.89 0.17 - - Retail sector - 99 - 72 - - 4.54 0.05Services sector - 99 - 72 - - 0.02 1.00Construction sector - 99 - 72 - - 0.10 0.82Industry sector - 99 - 72 - - 0.83 0.43Other sectors - 99 - 72 - - 0.09 0.78
Note: No significant difference between respondents and nonrespondents at the 0.05 level except for strategy. As the assumptions of an ANOVA are not met by the independent variables a Kruskal Wallis One Way ANOVA by ranks was computed. The Kruskal Wallis test is used when there is one independent variable with two or more levels and an ordinal dependent variable. In case of two groups, Mann-Whitney U-Test and Kruskal-Wallis H-Test can be used interchangeably. As T-test assumption is also based on normal distribution, it cannot be applied. Fisher's exact test was used as alternative to a Chi-square test if one or more cells had an expected frequency of five or less. * Significances denote to exact significances. N Mail #1: 1-101, N Mail #2: 102-172. Source: Author.
212 Appendices
The dataset is composed of survey data based on same-respondent replies and, as such, could be subject to the common method variance. To assess the significance of this problem, as suggested by Podsakoff/Organ,942 a Harman's Single-Factor Test943 was conducted in which all the variables of interest are entered into a factor analysis to see whether one common factor explains a majority of the covariance between the measures. Independent and control variables were entered into a factor analysis.944 If a general factor emerged that accounted for a preponderance of the explained variance, this would have suggested a higher probability for the effects of common method bias. The test extracted six factors with Eigenvalues > 1.0, which accounted for 77.01 percent of the variance. The first factor accounted for 19.01 percent of the variance, while the remaining factors accounted for 58.00 percent of the variance. Thus, none of the factor can explain the majority of the variance.945 Since no single factor accounted for the majority of the variance and the individual factors separated cleanly. It can be concluded that common method bias was not a significant concern in the current study (Appendix 15 and Appendix 16).
942 See Podsakoff et al. (2003). 943 Harman's single-factor test is arguably the most widely known approach for assessing common method
variance in a single-method research design. Typically, in this single-factor test, all of the items in a study are subject to exploratory factor analysis (EFA). Then, common method variance is assumed to exist if (1) a single factor emerges from unrotated factor solutions, or (2) a first factor explains the majority of the variance in the variables. See Podsakoff/Organ (1986): p. 636.
944 The analysis was based on the orthogonal rotation method „varimax”. 945 Note that the average Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy was 0.43 which supports
conclusion that no common method variance exists.
Appendices 213
Appendix 15: Test of Common Method Variance - Total Variance Explained
Component
Initial Eigenvalues
Total % of
Variance Cumulative %1 2.47 19.01 19.012 2.14 16.44 35.453 1.69 13.03 48.484 1.33 10.21 58.695 1.26 9.66 68.356 1.13 8.66 77.017 0.86 6.64 83.658 0.73 5.58 89.239 0.54 4.18 93.4010 0.43 3.28 96.6811 0.41 3.12 99.8012 0.03 0.20 100.0013 0.00 0.00 100.00
Note: Note: Rotation method varimax was used. Extract based on Eigenvalue greater 1. Missing values were excluded listwise (N=70). No first factor explains the majority of the variance in the variables. No concern for common method variance.946 Source: Author.
946 See Podsakoff/Organ (1986): p. 536. For further discussion of common method variance and single source
bias, see also Söhnchen (2007).
214 Appendices
Appendix 16: Test of Common Method Variance - Components Matrix
Component
1 2 3 4 5 6 F-Power -0.44 0.41 0.50
F-Experience 0.41 0.31 0.36 0.42 F-Culture 0.81
Defender (DV) -0.88 -0.33 Prospector (DV) 0.89 -0.36
Analyzer (DV) 0.96 Reactor (DV) 0.85 Average sales 0.96
Average EBIT 0.96 Average ROA 0.70 -0.33 Average ROE 0.81 -0.35
RPC 0.58 0.32 RPO 0.56 0.44 0.34
Note: RPC= Relative performance versus competitors, RPO = relative performance versus objectives. Rotation method varimax was used. Coefficient values below 0.3 are suppressed. Missing values were excluded listwise (N=70). No single factor emerges from the rotated factor solutions. No concern for common method variance.947 Source: Author.
947 See Podsakoff/Organ (1986): p. 536.
Appendices 215
Appendix 17: Centralization Scale Reliability Analysis
Variable Items Mean S.D. DiscriminationOperational centralization scale (n=131)
Hire/release personnel 2.65 1.39 0.84Determine wages 2.29 1.27 0.84Create/change production plan 3.79 1.24 0.85
Start/stop R&D projects 2.63 1.28 0.85
Determine marketing concepts 2.82 1.26 0.84
Determine product prices 3.21 1.40 0.85
Choose/change suppliers 3.44 1.27 0.85
Determine/change warehouse policy 3.19 1.26 0.85
Implement/change IT-systems 2.43 1.17 0.86
Open/close locations 1.34 0.88 0.85
Cronbach's alpha: 0.86 Financial centralization scale (n=157)
Plan/determine budgets 2.59 1.30 0.74Decide form of financing 1.46 0.80 0.71Review/approve investments 1.97 1.06 0.69
Allocate profits 1.24 0.63 0.75
Plan/control liquidity 1.94 1.17 0.69
Cronbach's alpha: 0.76 Strategic centralization scale (n=163)
Decide on corporate strategy 1.35 0.75 0.85Decide on business strategy 2.09 1.11 0.76Decide on executive development 2.03 1.10 0.78
Exert long-term strategic planning 1.77 1.01 0.77
Cronbach's alpha: 0.84 Composite centralization scale (n=164)
Operational centralization scale 1.86 0.75 0.71Financial centralization scale 2.71 0.86 0.70Strategic centralization scale 1.82 0.84 0.67
Cronbach's alpha: 0.77 Note: Internally consistency is supported if Cronbach’s Alpha > 0.7.948
948 See Nunnally (1978): p. 265.
216 Appendices
Appendix 18: Cluster Analysis / One-way ANOVA Two Cluster Solution
Descriptives Cluster N Mean ANOVA Sum of
Squares df
Mean
Square F Sign.
F-Power 1 106 0.79 Between Groups 0.06 1.00 0.06 1.40 0.24
2 45 0.75 Within Groups 6.66 149.00 0.04
Total 151 0.78 Total 6.72 150.00
F-Experience 1 106 0.71 Between Groups 14.69 1.00 14.69 559.23 0.00
2 45 0.02 Within Groups 3.91 149.00 0.03
Total 151 0.50 Total 18.60 150.00
F-Culture 1 106 0.92 Between Groups 0.02 1.00 0.02 1.47 0.23
2 45 0.89 Within Groups 1.92 149.00 0.01
Total 151 0.91 Total 1.94 150.00
Note: If the significance value for homogeneity of variances is < 0.05, the variances of the groups are significantly different. Source: Author.
Appendix 19: Cluster Analysis / One-way ANOVA Three Cluster Solution
Descriptives Cluster N Mean ANOVA Sum of Squares df Mean
Square F Sign.
F-Power 1 65 0.77 Between Groups 0.12 2.00 0.06 1.33 0.272 41 0.82 Within Groups 6.60 148.00 0.04 3 45 0.75 Total 6.72 150.00
Total 151 0.78
F-Experience 1 65 0.84 Between Groups 17.50 2.00 8.75 1171.70 0.002 41 0.50 Within Groups 1.11 148.00 0.01
3 45 0.02 Total 18.60 150.00 Total 151 0.50
F-Culture 1 65 0.92 Between Groups 0.03 2.00 0.02 1.29 0.28 2 41 0.90 Within Groups 1.90 148.00 0.01
3 45 0.89 Total 1.94 150.00 Total 15 0.91
Note: If the significance value for homogeneity of variances is < 0.05, the variances of the groups are significantly different. Source: Author.
Appendices 217
Appendix 20: Cluster Analysis / One-way ANOVA Four Cluster Solution
Descriptives Cluster N Mean ANOVA Sum of Squares df Mean
Square F Sign.
F-Power 1 23 1.00 Between Groups 1.92 3.00 0.64 19.54 0.002 42 0.65 Within Groups 4.80 147.00 0.03 3 41 0.82 Total 6.72 150.00
4 45 0.75 Total 151 0.78
F-Experience 1 23 0.85 Between Groups 17.51 3.00 5.84 785.08 0.00 2 42 0.83 Within Groups 1.09 147.00 0.01
3 41 0.50 Total 18.60 150.00 4 45 0.02 Total 151 0.50
F-Culture 1 23 0.93 Between Groups 0.03 3.00 0.01 0.87 0.462 42 0.92 Within Groups 1.90 147.00 0.01 3 41 0.90 Total 1.94 150.004 45 0.89
Total 151 0.91
Note: If the significance value for homogeneity of variances is < 0.05, the variances of the groups are significantly different. Source: Author.
218 Appendices
Appendix 21: Cluster Analysis / One-way ANOVA Five Cluster Solution
Descriptives Cluster N Mean ANOVA Sum of Squares df Mean
Square F Sign.
F-Power 1 23 1.00 Between Groups 3.53 4.00 0.88 40.41 0.002 42 0.65 Within Groups 3.19 146.00 0.02 3 41 0.82 Total 6.72 150.00
4 33 0.86 5 12 0.43 Total 151 0.78
F-Experience 1 23 0.85 Between Groups 17.54 4.00 4.39 604.56 0.002 42 0.83 Within Groups 1.06 146.00 0.01
3 41 0.50 Total 18.60 150.00 4 33 0.01 5 12 0.07
Total 151 0.50
F-Culture 1 23 0.93 Between Groups 0.03 4.00 0.01 0.65 0.632 42 0.92 Within Groups 1.90 146.00 0.01
3 41 0.90 Total 1.94 150.00 4 33 0.89
5 12 0.89 Total 151 0.91
Note: If the significance value for homogeneity of variances is < 0.05, the variances of the groups are significantly different. Source: Author.
Appendices 219
Appendix 22: Cluster Analysis / One-way ANOVA Seven Cluster Solution
Descriptives Cluster N Mean ANOVA Sum of Squares df Mean
Square F Sign.
F-Power 1 23 1.00 Between Groups 4.72 6.00 0.79 56.60 0.002 42 0.65 Within Groups 2.00 144.00 0.01 3 21 0.66 Total 6.72 150.00
4 3 0.78 5 30 0.87 6 20 0.99
7 12 0.43 Total 151 0.78
F-Experience 1 23 0.85 Between Groups 17.54 6.00 2.92 397.75 0.002 42 0.83 Within Groups 1.06 144.00 0.01 3 21 0.50 Total 18.60 150.00
4 3 0.00 5 30 0.01 6 20 0.50
7 12 0.07 Total 151 0.50
F-Culture 1 23 0.93 Between Groups 0.66 6.00 0.11 12.33 0.002 42 0.92 Within Groups 1.28 144.00 0.01 3 21 0.92 Total 1.94 150.00
4 3 0.46 5 30 0.93 6 20 0.88
7 12 0.89
Total 151 0.91
Note: If the significance value for homogeneity of variances is < 0.05, the variances of the groups are significantly different. Source: Author.
220 Appendices
Appendix 23: Games-Howell Test Post-Hoc Test F-Power Clusters / Firm Size
F-Power Clusters Mean Difference (I-J)
Std. Error Sign.
95% Confidence Interval Lower Bound
Upper Bound
1 2 -2660.31 1731.43 0.43 -7317.00 1996.393 -700.37 470.16 0.45 -1948.70 547.954 -15338.05 8016.50 0.28 -39862.94 9186.84
2 1 2660.31 1731.43 0.43 -1996.39 7317.003 1959.93 1792.43 0.70 -2832.81 6752.684 -12677.74 8200.97 0.45 -37378.39 12022.91
3 1 700.37 470.16 0.45 -547.95 1948.702 -1959.93 1792.43 0.70 -6752.68 2832.814 -14637.68 8029.89 0.32 -39173.97 9898.62
4 1 15338.05 8016.50 0.28 -9186.84 39862.942 12677.74 8200.97 0.45 -12022.91 37378.393 14637.68 8029.89 0.32 -9898.62 39173.97
Source: Author.
Appendix 24: Games-Howell Test Post-Hoc Test F-Experience Clusters / Firm Size
F-Experience Clusters Mean Difference (I-J)
Std. Error Sign.
95% Confidence Interval Lower Bound
Upper Bound
1 2 3532.56 2160.51 0.37 -2296.05 9361.183 3945.68 2149.35 0.27 -1858.82 9750.184 1579.33 3014.17 0.95 -6372.02 9530.67
2 1 -3532.56 2160.51 0.37 -9361.18 2296.053 413.12 235.94 0.31 -214.24 1040.484 -1953.24 2126.30 0.80 -7727.33 3820.86
3 1 -3945.68 2149.35 0.27 -9750.18 1858.822 -413.12 235.94 0.31 -1040.48 214.244 -2366.35 2114.97 0.68 -8116.61 3383.91
4 1 -1579.33 3014.17 0.95 -9530.67 6372.022 1953.24 2126.30 0.80 -3820.86 7727.333 2366.35 2114.97 0.68 -3383.91 8116.61
Source: Author.
Appendices 221
Appendix 25: Games-Howell Test Post-Hoc Test F-Culture Clusters / Firm Size
F-Culture Clusters Mean Difference (I-J)
Std. Error Sign.
95% Confidence Interval Lower Bound Upper Bound
1 2 1374.07 1315.08 0.94 -2628.64 5376.77 3 989.93 1530.29 0.99 -3630.08 5609.95 4 271.83 2043.13 1.00 -5958.95 6502.62 5 2215.73 1205.64 0.53 -1442.20 5873.67 6 -1117.93 3302.32 1.00 -11641.26 9405.39 7 2079.23 1220.38 0.62 -1627.25 5785.72
2 1 -1374.07 1315.08 0.94 -5376.77 2628.64 3 -384.13 1093.66 1.00 -3853.41 3085.15 4 -1102.23 1740.32 1.00 -6558.49 4354.02 5 841.67 554.86 0.73 -1541.20 3224.54 6 -2492.00 3124.05 0.98 -12639.52 7655.52 7 705.17 586.20 0.87 -1740.07 3150.40
3 1 -989.93 1530.29 0.99 -5609.95 3630.08 2 384.13 1093.66 1.00 -3085.15 3853.41 4 -718.10 1908.15 1.00 -6603.63 5167.43 5 1225.80 959.28 0.86 -1846.17 4297.77 6 -2107.87 3220.56 0.99 -12456.35 8240.62 7 1089.30 977.74 0.92 -2041.00 4219.60
4 1 -271.83 2043.13 1.00 -6502.62 5958.95 2 1102.23 1740.32 1.00 -4354.02 6558.49 3 718.10 1908.15 1.00 -5167.43 6603.63 5 1943.90 1659.17 0.90 -3301.70 7189.50 6 -1389.77 3493.51 1.00 -12383.42 9603.89 7 1807.40 1669.91 0.93 -3466.36 7081.16
5 1 -2215.73 1205.64 0.53 -5873.67 1442.20 2 -841.67 554.86 0.73 -3224.54 1541.20 3 -1225.80 959.28 0.86 -4297.77 1846.17 4 -1943.90 1659.17 0.90 -7189.50 3301.70 6 -3333.67 3079.58 0.93 -13390.45 6723.12 7 -136.50 260.29 0.99 -3056.80 2783.80
6 1 1117.93 3302.32 1.00 -9405.39 11641.26 2 2492.00 3124.05 0.98 -7655.52 12639.52 3 2107.87 3220.56 0.99 -8240.62 12456.35 4 1389.77 3493.51 1.00 -9603.89 12383.42 5 3333.67 3079.58 0.93 -6723.12 13390.45 7 3197.17 3085.38 0.94 -6871.40 13265.73
7 1 -2079.23 1220.38 0.62 -5785.72 1627.25 2 -705.17 586.20 0.87 -3150.40 1740.07 3 -1089.30 977.74 0.92 -4219.60 2041.00
222 Appendices
4 -1807.40 1669.91 0.93 -7081.16 3466.36 5 136.50 260.29 0.99 -2783.80 3056.80 6 -3197.17 3085.38 0.94 -13265.73 6871.40
Source: Author.
Appendices 223
Appendix 26: Regression of Strategic Fit on Average Sales
Average Sales
Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 Model 5 Model 6 Step 1: Controls Firm age -0.02 -0.07 -0.11 -0.10 -0.07 -0.10 Firm size 0.53 *** 0.48 *** 0.51 *** 0.48 *** 0.48 *** 0.51 *** Retail sector -0.01 -0.01 -0.09 -0.04 -0.04 -0.04 Service sector 0.03 0.00 -0.06 -0.05 -0.04 -0.03 Construction sector -0.01 -0.03 -0.09 -0.08 -0.07 -0.07 Industry sector 0.05 0.02 -0.05 -0.05 -0.04 -0.04 Other sectors 0.01 0.03 -0.03 0.00 -0.02 0.01
Step 2: Family influence F-Power -0.12 0.01 0.39 * 0.41 * 0.36 † F-Experience 0.13 0.17 1 -0.09 -0.10 -0.21 F-Culture 0.01 0.02 0.06 0.06 0.05
Step 3: Family influence squared F-PowerSQ 0.35 *** 0.12 0.11 0.12 F-ExperienceSQ 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.01 F-CultureSQ 0.01 -0.01 -0.04 -0.19
Step 4: Family influence cubic F-PowerCU -0.56 * -0.58 * -0.54 ** F-ExperienceCU 0.29 0.28 0.42 F-CultureCU -0.08 -0.11 -0.28
Step 5: Main effect Fit949 -0.11 1 -0.14 †
Step 6: Interaction terms F-Power x Fit 0.12 1 F-Experience x Fit -0.05 F-Culture x Fit 0.15 †
R2 0.29 0.31 0.42 0.46 0.47 0.51
Adjusted R2 0.24 0.24 0.35 0.37 0.38 0.41
F change 6.23 *** 1.09 6.36 ** 2.50 † 2.09 2.64 †
Note: The regression was computed with natural log transformation of firm size and firm age. N=115, listwise deletion. Durbin-Watson = 2.145, VIF < 5.404 except F-PEC variables. 1 < 0.16 † p < 0.10 * p < 0.05 ** p < 0.01 *** p < 0.001 (all two-sided p-values). Source: Author.
949 Note that the results for fit measured as absolute deviation are in line with those measuring fit as squared
deviation, except for the significant coefficient of fit as absolute deviation (ßfit = 0.09, p = 0.28).
224 Appendices
Appendix 27: Regression of Strategic Fit on Average ROA
Average ROA Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 Model 5 Model 6 Step 1: Controls Firm age 0.08 0.20 0.23 0.22 0.24 0.26 Firm size -0.05 0.04 0.06 0.13 0.12 0.12 Retail sector -0.33 1 -0.35 1 -0.36 † -0.41 † -0.40 † -0.37 1 Service sector -0.14 -0.15 -0.19 -0.20 -0.19 -0.18 Construction sector 0.08 0.06 0.07 0.02 0.03 0.04 Industry sector -0.15 -0.12 -0.12 -0.20 -0.19 -0.18 Other sectors -0.02 -0.08 -0.06 -0.05 -0.05 -0.06
Step 2: Family influence F-Power 0.20 0.30 * 0.00 0.00 0.03 F-Experience -0.22 -0.26 -0.62 -0.62 -0.63 F-Culture 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.07 0.09
Step 3: Family influence squared F-PowerSQ 0.23 † 0.42 * 0.41 † 0.38 † F-ExperienceSQ -0.07 -0.06 -0.06 -0.06 F-CultureSQ -0.13 -0.60
1 -0.61 1 -0.63
1
Step 4: Family influence cubic F-PowerCU 0.47 0.46 0.42 F-ExperienceCU 0.38 0.37 0.35 F-CultureCU -0.49 -0.49 -0.55
Step 5: Main effect Fit950 -0.05 -0.07
Step 6: Interaction terms F-Power x Fit -0.04 F-Experience x Fit 0.04 F-Culture x Fit -0.08
R2 0.08 0.13 0.19 0.22 0.23 0.23
Adjusted R2 -0.01 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 -0.04
F change 0.87 1.36 1.40 0.87 0.18 0.19
Note: The regression was computed with natural log transformation of firm size and firm age. N=77, listwise deletion. Durbin-Watson = 1.777, VIF < 6.504 except F-PEC variables. 1 < 0.15 † p < 0.10 * p < 0.05 (all two-sided p-values). Source: Author.
950 Note that the results for fit measured as absolute deviation are in line with those measuring with fit as squared
deviation.
Appendices 225
Appendix 28: Regression of Strategic Fit on Average ROE
Average ROE Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 Model 5 Model 6 Step 1: Controls Firm age 0.03 0.07 0.11 0.13 0.07 0.16 Firm size 0.05 0.07 0.11 0.14 0.16 0.14 Retail sector -0.16 -0.11 -0.10 -0.14 -0.17 -0.11 Service sector -0.02 0.01 0.00 -0.03 -0.06 -0.03 Construction sector 0.03 0.06 0.07 0.06 0.04 0.05 Industry sector -0.07 -0.03 -0.03 -0.06 -0.09 -0.06 Other sectors -0.05 0.00 0.03 -0.02 -0.03 -0.04
Step 2: Family influence F-Power 0.05 0.09 -0.18 -0.18 -0.17 F-Experience -0.04 -0.13 -0.06 -0.06 -0.05 F-Culture -0.22 † -0.26 † -0.36 * -0.32 † -0.21
Step 3: Family influence squared F-PowerSQ 0.12 0.29 0.31 0.24 F-ExperienceSQ -0.17 -0.16 -0.15 -0.10 F-CultureSQ -0.05 0.13 0.14 -0.01
Step 4: Family influence cubic F-PowerCU 0.41 0.44 0.40 F-ExperienceCU -0.14 -0.10 -0.15 F-CultureCU 0.29 0.27 -0.02
Step 5: Main effect Fit951 0.15 0.14
Step 6: Interaction terms F-Power x Fit -0.11 F-Experience x Fit 0.00 F-Culture x Fit -0.33 *
R2 0.02 0.07 0.10 0.13 0.14 0.24
Adjusted R2 -0.08 -0.07 -0.09 -0.11 -0.10 -0.03
F change 0.23 1.08 0.68 0.63 1.25 2.38 †
Note: The regression was computed with natural log transformation of firm size and firm age. N=77, listwise deletion. Durbin-Watson = 1.960, VIF < 6.485 except F-PEC variables. † p < 0.10 * p < 0.05 (all two-sided p-values). Source: Author.
951 Note that the results for fit measured as absolute deviation are in line with those measuring with fit as squared
deviation.
226 Appendices
Appendix 29: One-Way ANOVA, Games Howell Post-Hoc Test and Eta-Squared for Association between Strategy and Firm Performance (Average Sales, ROA, and ROE)
Average Sales Average ROA Average ROE
Strategic Type Sign. Sign. Sign. Defender Prospector 0.42 0.57 0.84
Analyzer 0.60 0.90 0.99Reactor 0.78 0.95 1.00
Prospector Defender 0.42 0.57 0.84Analyzer 0.99 1.00 0.97Reactor 0.88 0.99 0.83
Analyzer Defender 0.60 0.90 0.99Prospector 0.99 1.00 0.97Reactor 0.92 1.00 0.99
Reactor Defender 0.78 0.95 1.00Prospector 0.88 0.99 0.83Analyzer 0.92 1.00 0.99
ANOVA Sign. 0.11 0.62 0.85F 2.04 0.59 0.27Eta-squared 0.06 0.02 0.01
Source: Author.
Appendices 227
Appendix 30: Regression of Organizational Structure on Firm Performance (Average Sales, ROA, ROE)
Average Sales
Average ROA
Average ROE
Variables Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 Model 2
Step 1: Controls Firm age 0.03 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.02 0.05 Firm size 0.50 *** 0.43 *** -0.15 -0.18 -0.15 -0.15 Retail sector 0.21 * 0.20 * -0.26 † -0.26 -0.18 -0.18 Service sector 0.34 ** 0.31 ** -0.13 -0.13 -0.10 -0.10 Construction sector 0.21 * 0.18 † 0.21 † 0.21 0.18 0.18
Industry sector 0.44 ** 0.40 ** -0.24 -0.24 -0.13 -0.14 Other sectors 0.35 *** 0.32 *** -0.11 -0.11 -0.09 -0.09
Step 2: Main effect Organizational structure 0.15 † 0.05 0.04
R2 0.38 0.40 0.15 0.15 2.21 0.15
Adjusted R2 0.35 0.36 0.08 0.07 7.00 1.00
F sign. 0.00 *** 0.05 † 0.04 * 0.69 0.00 0.00
Note: Listwise deletion. Average sales: N=141, Durbin-Watson = 2.146, VIF < 3.660; average ROA: N = 94, Durbin-Watson = 1.751, VIF < 3.694; average ROE: N = 94, Durbin-Watson = 1.545, VIF < 3.694. † p < 0.10 * p < 0.05 ** p < 0.01 *** p < 0.001 (all two-sided p-values). Source: Author.
List of References Achleitner, A.-K., Kaserer, C., Kauf, T., Günther, N., Ampenberger, M. (2009). Listed family firms in Germany. München: Stiftung Familienunternehmen.
Achmad, T., Neilson, J., Tower, G. (2009). The iniquitous influence of family ownership structures on corporate performance. Journal of Global Business Issues, 3(1), 41-48.
Adler, E. S., Clark, R. (2007). How its done: In invitation to social research: Thomson Learning.
Allouche, J., Amann, B., Jaussaud, J., Kurashina, T. (2008). The impact of family control on the performance and financial characteristics of family versus nonfamily businesses in Japan: A matched-pair investigation. Family Business Review, 21(4), 315-330.
Alpay, G., Bodur, M., YIlmaz, C., Çetinkaya, S., ArIkan, L. (2008). Performance implications of institutionalization process in family-owned businesses: Evidence from an emerging economy. Journal of World Business, 43(4), 435-448.
Amburgey, T. L., Dacin, T. (1994). As the left foot follows the right? The dynamics of strategic and structural change. Academy of Management Journal, 37(6), 1427-1452.
Ampenberger, M., Schmid, T., Achleitner, A., Kaserer, C. (2009). Capital structure decisions in family firms-empirical evidence from a bank-based economy. European Finance Association, Bergen Meetings, http://ssrn.com/abstract=1364153, retrieved 03.11.2010.
Amran, N. A., Ahmad, A. C. (2009). Family business, board dynamics and firm value: Evidence from Malaysia. Journal of Financial Reporting & Accounting, 7(1), 53-74.
Amran, N. A., Ahmad, A. C. (2010). Corporate governance mechanisms and performance: Analysis of Malaysian family and non-family controlled companies. Journal of Modern Accounting & Auditing, 6(2), 1-15.
Anderson, E. (1990). Two firms, one frontier: On assessing joint venture performance. Sloan Management Review, 31(2), 19-30.
Anderson, R. C., Duru, A., Reeb, D. M. (2009). Family preferences and investment policy: Evidence from capital expenditures and R&D spending. Working Paper: American University.
Anderson, R. C., Mansi, S. A., Reeb, D. M. (2003). Founding family ownership and the agency cost of debt. Journal of Financial Economics, 68(2), 263-285.
Anderson, R. C., Reeb, D. M. (2003a). Founding-family ownership and firm performance: Evidence from the S&P 500. Journal of Finance, 58(3), 1301-1328.
Anderson, R. C., Reeb, D. M. (2003b). Founding-family ownership, corporate diversification, and firm leverage. Journal of Law & Economics, 46(2), 653-684.
C. M. Lindow, A Strategic Fit Perspective on Family Firm Performance,DOI 10.1007/978-3-8349-7167-8, © Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden 2013
230 List of References
Anderson, R. C., Reeb, D. M. (2004). Board composition: Balancing family influence in S&P 500 firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 49(2), 209-237.
Andreae, C. (2007). Familienunternehmen und Publikumsgesellschaft: Führungsstrukturen, Strategien und betriebliche Funktionen im Vergleich. Wiesbaden: DUV.
Andres, C. (2008). Large shareholders and firm performance: An empirical examination of founding-family ownership. Journal of Corporate Finance, 14(4), 431-445.
Aragon-Sanchez, A., Sánchez-Marín, G. (2005). Strategic orientation, management characteristics, and performance: A study of Spanish SMEs. Journal of Small Business Management, 43(3), 287-309.
Aronoff, C. E. (1998). Megatrends in family business. Family Business Review, 11(3), 181-186.
Aronoff, C. E., Ward, J. L. (1995). Family-owned businesses: A thing of the past or a model for the future? Family Business Review, 8(2), 121-130.
Arosa, B., Iturralde, T., Maseda, A. (2010a). Board of directors and firm performance in Spanish non-listed family firms. IFERA 2010 Conference Proceedings, PPR034, http://cdn.cloudfiles.mosso.com/c84492/20037-1.pdf, 30.06.2010.
Arosa, B., Iturralde, T., Maseda, A. (2010b). Outsiders on the board of directors and firm performance: Evidence from Spanish non-listed family firms. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 1(4), 236-245.
Arosa, B., Iturralde, T., Maseda, A. (2010c). Ownership structure and firm performance in non-listed firms: Evidence from Spain. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 1(2), 88-96.
Arregle, J. L., Hitt, M. A., Sirmon, D. G., Very, P. (2007). The development of organizational social capital: Attributes of family firms. Journal of Management Studies, 44(1), 73-95.
Ashley-Cotleur, C., King, S. (1999). Family business and relationship marketing: The impact of relationship marketing on second generation family businesses. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the United States Association of Small Business and Entrepreneurship. San Diego.
Asthana, H. S., Bhushan, B. (2007). Statistics for social sciences. New Dehli: Prentice-Hall.
Astrachan, J. H. (1988). Family firm and community culture. Family Business Review, 1(2), 165-189.
Astrachan, J. H. (2003). Commentary on the special issue: The emergence of a field. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(5), 567-572.
Astrachan, J. H. (2010). Strategy in family business: Toward a multidimensional research agenda. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 1(1), 6-14.
Astrachan, J. H., Jaskiewicz, P. (2008). Emotional returns and emotional costs in privately held family businesses: Advancing traditional business valuation. Family Business Review, 21(2), 139-149.
List of References 231
Astrachan, J. H., Klein, S. B., Smyrnios, K. X. (2002). The F-PEC scale of family influence: A proposal for solving the family business definition problem. Family Business Review, 15(1), 45-58.
Astrachan, J. H., Kolenko, T. A. (1994). A neglected factor explaining family business success: Human resource practices. Family Business Review, 7(3), 251-262.
Astrachan, J. H., Shanker, M. (2006). Family business’ contribution to the US economy: A closer look. In Poutziouris, P. Z., Smyrnios, K. X., Klein, S. B. (Eds.), Handbook of research on family business (56-79). Cheltenham and Northampton: Edward Elgar.
Astrachan, J. H., Zellweger, T. (2008). Performance of family firms: A literature review and guidance for future research. Zeitschrift für KMU und Entrepreneurship, 56(1/2), 83-108.
Athanassiou, N., Crittenden, W. F., Kelly, L. M., Marquez, P. (2002). Founder centrality effects on the Mexican family firm's top management group: Firm culture, strategic vision and goals, and firm performance. Journal of World Business, 37(2), 139-150.
Avendano-Alcaraz, J., Kelly, L., Trevinyo-Rodríguez, R. N., Gómez, S. M. (2009). A family-based competitive advantage: Handling key success family factors in Mexican family businesses. Cuadernos de Administración, 22(39), 191-212.
Baack, D., Cullen, J. B. (1994). Decentralization in growth and decline: A catastrophe theory approach. Behavioral Science, 39(3), 213-228.
Bammens, Y., Voordeckers, W., Van Gils, A. (2008). Boards of directors in family firms: A generational perspective. Small Business Economics, 31(2), 163-180.
Bammens, Y., Voordeckers, W., Van Gils, A. (2010). Boards of directors in family businesses: A literature review and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 1-19, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2010.00289.x, OnlineFirst 15.09.2010, retrieved 12.11.2010.
Bancel, F., Mittoo, U. R. (2004). Cross-country determinants of capital structure choice: A survey of European firms. Financial Management, 33(4), 103-132.
Barca, F., Becht, M. (2001). The control of corporate Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Barnett, T., Eddleston, K., Kellermanns, F. W. (2009). The effects of family versus career role salience on the performance of family and nonfamily firms. Family Business Review, 22(1), 39-52.
Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99-120.
Barney, J. B. (1986). Organizational culture: Can it be a source of sustained competitive advantage? Academy of Management Review, 11(3), 656-665.
Barontini, R., Caprio, L. (2006). The effect of family control on firm value and performance: Evidence from continental Europe. European Financial Management, 12(5), 689-723.
232 List of References
Barth, E., Gulbrandsen, T., Schønea, P. (2005). Family ownership and productivity: The role of owner-management. Journal of Corporate Finance, 11(1/2), 107-127.
Bartholomeusz, S., Tanewski, G. A. (2006). The relationship between family firms and corporate governance. Journal of Small Business Management, 44(2), 245-267.
Basu, N., Dimitrova, L., Paeglis, I. (2009). Family control and dilution in mergers. Journal of Banking & Finance, 33(5), 829-841.
Bea, F. X., Haas, J. (2009). Strategisches Management (5th Edn.). Stuttgart: Lucius & Lucius.
Ben-Amar, W., André, P. (2006). Separation of ownership from control and acquiring firm performance: The case of family ownership in Canada. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 33(3-4), 517-543.
Bennedsen, M., Nielsen, K., Pérez-González, F., Wolfenzon, D. (2007). Inside the family firm: The role of families in succession decisions and performance. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 122(2), 647-691.
Bergeron, F., Raymond, L., Rivard, S. (2001). Fit in strategic information technology management research: An empirical comparison of perspectives. Omega, 29(2), 125-142.
Berle, A. A., Means, G. C. (1932). Modern corporation and private property. New York and Chicago: Transaction Publishers.
Bertrand, M., Johnson, S., Samphantharak, K., Schoar, A. (2008). Mixing family with business: A study of Thai business groups and the families behind them. Journal of Financial Economics, 88(3), 466-498.
Bird, B., Welsch, H., Astrachan, J. H., Pistrui, D. (2002). Family business research: The evolution of an academic field. Family Business Review, 15(4), 337-350.
Blau, P. M., Scott, W. R. (1962). Formal organizations. San Francisco: Chandler.
Block, J. (2010a). Family management, family ownership, and downsizing: Evidence from S&P 500 firms. Family Business Review, 23(2), 109-130.
Block, J. (2010b). Long-term orientation of firms: An investigation of R&D investments, downsizing practices, and executive pay. Wiesbaden: Gabler.
Bonilla, C. A., Sepulveda, J., Carvajal, M. (2010). Family ownership and firm performance in Chile: A note on Martinez et al.'s evidence. Family Business Review, 23(2), 148-154.
Bornheim, S. P. (2000). The organizational form of family business. Norwell: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
List of References 233
Bowman, C., Ambrosini, V. (1997). Using single respondents in strategy research. British Journal of Management, 8(2), 119-131.
Bozec, Y., Laurin, C. (2008). Large shareholder entrenchment and performance: Empirical evidence from Canada. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 35(1-2), 25-49.
Brace, I. (2008). Questionnaire design: How to plan, structure and write survey material for effective market research. London and Philadelphia: Kogan Page.
Braun, M., Sharma, A. (2007). Should the CEO also be chair of the board? An empirical examination of family-controlled public firms. Family Business Review, 20(2), 111-126.
Brick, J., Kalton, G. (1996). Handling missing data in survey research. Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 5(3), 215-238.
Brose, T. (2006). Der Beirat in Familienunternehmen. Bremen: Salzwasser-Verlag.
Brush, C., Vanderwerf, P. (1992). A comparison of methods and sources for obtaining estimates of new venture performance. Journal of Business Venturing, 7(2), 157-170.
Bryman, A., Bell, E. (2007). Business research methods. New York: Oxford University Press.
Bryman, A., Hardy, M. A. (2009). Handbook of data analysis. London: Sage.
Burke, W. (Ed.) (1983). Organizational dynamics, New York: American Management Association.
Burns, T., Stalker, G. M. (1961). The management of innovation. London: Tavistock.
Burton, R., Obel, B. (2004). Strategic organizational diagnosis and design: The dynamics of fit (3rd Edn.). Norwell: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Carlisle, H. M. (1974). A contingency approach to decentralization. Advanced Management Journal, 39(3), 9-18.
Carlock, R. S., Ward, J. L. (2001). Strategic planning for the family business: Parallel planning to unify the family and business. Houndsmill: Palgrave MacMillan.
Carney, M. (2005). Corporate governance and competitive advantage in family-controlled firms. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(3), 249-265.
Carr, C., Bateman, S. (2009). International strategy configurations of the world’s top family firms. Management International Review, 49(6), 733-758.
Carr, C., Bateman, S. (2010). Does culture count? Comparative performances of top family and non-family firms. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 10(2), 241-262.
234 List of References
Carsrud, A. L. (2006). Commentary: "Are we family and are we treated as family? Nonfamily employees' perceptions of justice in the family firm": It all depends on perceptions of family, fairness, equity, and justice. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(6), 855-860.
Carter, N. M., Cullen, J. B. (1984). A comparison of centralization/decentralization of decision making concepts and measures. Journal of Management, 10(2), 259-268.
Carton, R., Hofer, C. (2006). Measuring organizational performance: Metrics for entrepreneurship and strategic management research. Cheltenham and Northampton: Edward Elgar.
Caselli, S., Di Giuli, A. (2010). Does the CFO matter in family firms? Evidence from Italy. The European Journal of Finance, 16(5), 381-411.
Caselli, S., Di Giuli, A., Gatti, S. (2008). Family firms' performance and agency theory: What's going on in the Italian market? ICFAI Journal of Corporate Governance, 7(1), 36-50.
Caselli, S., Gatti, S. (2007). Long-run venture-backed IPO performance analysis of Italian family-owned firms: What role do closed-end funds play? In Gregoriou, G. N., Kooli, M., Kraeussl, R. (Eds.), Venture capital in Europe (343-360). Burlington: Butterworth-Heinemann.
Casillas, J. C., Moreno, A. M. (2010). The relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and growth: The moderating role of family involvement. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development: An International Journal, 22(3), 265-291.
Casillas, J. C., Moreno, A. M., Barbero, J. L. (2010). A configurational approach of the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and growth of family firms. Family Business Review, 23(1), 27-44.
Castillo, J., Wakefield, M. W. (2006). An exploration of firm performance factors in family business: Do family value only the "bottom line"? Journal of Small Business Strategy, 17(2), 37-51.
Cater, J., Schwab, A. (2008). Turnaround strategies in established small family firms. Family Business Review, 21(1), 31-50.
Chahine, S. (2007). Block-holder ownership, family control and post-listing performance of French IPOs. Managerial Finance, 33(6), 388-400.
Chakravarthy, B. S. (1986). Measuring strategic performance. Strategic Management Journal, 7(5), 437-458.
Chandler, A. D. (1962). Strategy and structure: Chapters in the history of the industrial enterprise. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Chang, J. J., Shin, H.-H. (2007). Family ownership and performance in Korean conglomerates. Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, 15(4), 329-352.
Chang, S.-C., Wu, W.-Y., Wong, Y.-J. (2010). Family control and stock market reactions to innovation announcements. British Journal of Management, 21(1), 152-170.
List of References 235
Channon, D. (1997). The Blackwell encyclopedic dictionary of strategic management. Oxford and Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers.
Chen, E.-T., Nowland, J. (2010). Optimal board monitoring in family-owned companies: Evidence from Asia. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 18(1), 3-17.
Chen, H.-L., Hsu, W.-T. (2009). Family ownership, board independence, and R&D investment. Family Business Review, 22(4), 347-362.
Chen, Z., Cheung, Y.-L., Stouraitis, A., Wong, A. W. S. (2005). Ownership concentration, firm performance, and dividend policy in Hong Kong. Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, 13(4), 431-449.
Child, J. (1974a). Managerial and organizational factors associated with company performance - Part I. Journal of Management Studies, 11(3), 175-189.
Child, J. (1974b). What determines organization performance? The universals vs. the it-all-depends. Organizational Dynamics, 3(1), 2-18.
Child, J. (1975). Managerial and organizational factors associated with company performance - Part II: A contingency analysis. Journal of Management Studies, 12(1), 12-27.
Chrisman, J. J., Chua, J. H., Kellermanns, F. W. (2009). Priorities, resource stocks, and performance in family and nonfamily firms. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(3), 739-760.
Chrisman, J. J., Chua, J. H., Kellermanns, F. W., Chang, E. P. C. (2007a). Are family managers agents or stewards? An exploratory study in privately held family firms. Journal of Business Research, 60(10), 1030-1038.
Chrisman, J. J., Chua, J. H., Litz, R. (2003a). A unified systems perspective of family firm performance: An extension and integration: Theories of family business. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(4), 467-472.
Chrisman, J. J., Chua, J. H., Litz, R. A. (2004). Comparing the agency costs of family and non-family firms: Conceptual issues and exploratory evidence. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 28(4), 335-354.
Chrisman, J. J., Chua, J. H., Pearson, A. W., Barnett, T. (2010a). Family involvement, family influence, and family-centered non-economic goals in small firms. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00407.x, OnlineFirst 07.09.2010, retrieved 10.10.2010.
Chrisman, J. J., Chua, J. H., Sharma, P. (1998). Important attributes of successors in family businesses: An exploratory study. Family Business Review, 11(1), 19-34.
Chrisman, J. J., Chua, J. H., Sharma, P. (2003b). Current trends and future directions in family business management studies: Toward a theory of the family firm. Coleman Foundation White Paper Series. Madison, WI: Coleman Foundation and U.S. Association of Small Business and Entrepreneurship. http://www.usasbe.org/knowledge/whitepapers/ index.asp, retrieved 09.06.2009.
236 List of References
Chrisman, J. J., Chua, J. H., Sharma, P. (2005). Trends and directions in the development of a strategic management theory of the family firm. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(5), 555-575.
Chrisman, J. J., Chua, J. H., Steier, L. P. (2003c). An introduction to theories of family business. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(4), 441-448.
Chrisman, J. J., Chua, J. H., Zahra, S. A. (2003d). Creating wealth in family firms through managing resources: Comments and extensions. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 27(4), 359-365.
Chrisman, J. J., Kellermanns, F. W., Chan, K. C., Liano, K. (2010b). Intellectual foundations of current research in family business: An identification and review of 25 influential articles. Family Business Review, 23(1), 9-26.
Chrisman, J. J., Sharma, P., Taggar, S. (2007b). Family influences on firms: An introduction. Journal of Business Research, 60(10), 1005-1011.
Chrisman, J. J., Steier, L. P., Chua, J. H. (2008). Toward a theoretical basis for understanding the dynamics of strategic performance in family firms. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 32(6), 935-947.
Chu, W. (2009a). Family ownership and firm performance: Influence of family management, family control, and firm size. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 1-19.
Chu, W. (2009b). The influence of family ownership on SME performance: Evidence from public firms in Taiwan. Small Business Economics, 33(3), 353-373.
Chua, J. H., Chrisman, J. J., Sharma, P. (1999). Defining the family business by behavior. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 23(4), 19-39.
Chua, J. H., Chrisman, J. J., Steier, L. P. (2003). Extending the theoretical horizons of family business research. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 27(4), 331-338.
Claessens, S., Djankov, S., Fan, J. P. H., Lang, L. H. P. (2002). Disentangling the incentive and entrenchment effects of large shareholdings. Journal of Finance, 57(6), 2741-2771.
Claessens, S., Djankov, S., Lang, L. (2000). The separation of ownership and control in East Asian Corporations. Journal of Financial Economics, 58(1-2), 81-112.
Cliff, J. E., Jennings, P. D. (2005). Commentary on the multidimensional degree of family influence construct and the F-PEC measurement instrument. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(3), 341-347.
Cockburn, I. M., Henderson, R. M. (2000). Untangling the origins of competitive advantage. Strategic Management Journal, 21(10/11), 1123-1145.
Colli, A. (2003). The history of family business 1850 - 2000. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
List of References 237
Colli, A., Rose, M. B. (2003). Family firms in comparative perspective. In Amatori, F., Jones, G. (Eds.), Business history around the world. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Combs, J. G., Penney, C. R., Crook, T. R., Short, J. C. (2010). The impact of family representation on CEO compensation. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34(6), 1125-1144.
Conant, J. S., Mokwa, M. P., Varadarajan, P. R. (1990). Strategic types, distinctive marketing competencies and organizational performance: A multiple measures-based study. Strategic Management Journal, 11(5), 365-383.
Cooper, H. (2010). Research synthesis and meta-analysis: A step-by-step approach (4th Edn.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Cooper, M. J., Upton, N., Seaman, S. (2005). Customer relationship management: A comparative analysis of family and nonfamily business practices. Journal of Small Business Management, 43(3), 242-256.
Corbetta, G. (1995). Patterns of development of family businesses in Italy. Family Business Review, 8(4), 255-265.
Corbetta, G., Salvato, C. (2004a). The board of directors in family firms: One size fits all? Family Business Review, 17(2), 119-134.
Corbetta, G., Salvato, C. (2004b). Self-serving or self-actualizing? Models of man and agency costs in different types of family firms: A commentary on "Comparing the agency costs of family and non-family firms: Conceptual issues and exploratory evidence". Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 28(4), 355-362.
Covin, J. G., Slevin, D. P. (1989). Strategic management of small firms in hostile and benign environments. Strategic Management Journal, 10(1), 75-87.
Craig, J., Dibrell, C. (2006). The natural environment, innovation, and firm performance: A comparative study. Family Business Review, 19(4), 275-288.
Craig, J., Lindsay, N. (2002). Incorporating the family dynamic into the entrepreneurship process. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 9(4), 416-430.
Craig, J. B., Dibrell, C., Davis, P. S. (2008). Leveraging family-based brand identity to enhance firm competitiveness and performance in family businesses. Journal of Small Business Management, 46(3), 351-371.
Craig, J. B., Howorth, C., Moores, K., Poutziouris, P. (2009). Family business research at a tipping point threshold. Journal of Management & Organization, 15(3), 282-293.
Craig, J. B., Moores, K. (2006). A 10-year longitudinal investigation of strategy, systems, and environment on innovation in family firms. Family Business Review, 19(1), 1-10.
238 List of References
Cramer, D. (1998). Fundamental statistics for social research: Step-by-step calculations and computer techniques using SPSS for Windows. New York: Routledge.
Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (2nd Edn.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Cromie, S., Stephenson, B., Monteith, D. (1995). The management of family firms: An empirical investigation. International Small Business Journal, 13(4), 11-34.
Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16(3), 297-334.
Cronqvist, H., Nilsson, M. (2003). Agency costs of controlling minority shareholders. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 38(04), 695-719.
Daily, C., Near, J. (2000). CEO satisfaction and firm performance in family firms: Divergence between theory and practice. Social indicators research, 51(2), 125-170.
Daily, C. M., Dollinger, M. J. (1991). Family firms are different. Review of Business, 13(1/2), 3-5.
Daily, C. M., Dollinger, M. J. (1992). An empirical examination of ownership structure in family and professionally managed firms. Family Business Review, 5(2), 117-136.
Daily, C. M., Dollinger, M. J. (1993). Alternative methodologies for identifying family- versus nonfamily-managed businesses. Journal of Small Business Management, 31(2), 79-90.
Daily, C. M., Thompson, S. S. (1994). Ownership structure, strategic posture, and firm growth: An empirical examination. Family Business Review, 7(3), 237-249.
Dalton, D. R., Todor, W. D., Spendolini, M. J., Gordon, J. F., Porter, L. W. (1980). Organization structure and performance: A critical review. The Academy of Management Review, 5(1), 49-64.
Davis, J. A., Pitts, E. L., Cormier, K. (2000). Challenges facing family companies in the Gulf region. Family Business Review, 13(3), 217-237.
Davis, J. A., Tagiuri, R. (1989). The influence of life-stage on father-son work relationships in family companies. Family Business Review, 2(1), 47-74.
Davis, J. H., Schoorman, F. D., Donaldson, L. (1997). Toward a stewardship theory of management. Academy of Management Review, 22(1), 20-47.
Davis, P., Harveston, P. (1998). The influence of family on the family business succession process: A multi-generational perspective. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 22(3), 31-33.
Davis, P. S., Harveston, P. D. (2000). Internationalization and organizational growth: The impact of internet usage and technology involvement among entrepreneur-led family businesses. Family Business Review, 13(2), 107-120.
List of References 239
De Kok, J. M. P., Uhlaner, L. M., Thurik, A. R. (2006). Professional HRM practices in family owned managed enterprises. Journal of Small Business Management, 44(3), 441-460.
De Lema, D., Durendez, A. (2007). Managerial behaviour of small and medium-sized family businesses: An empirical study. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 13(3), 151-172.
De Vaus, D. (2002). Surveys in social research. London: Routledge.
De Wit, B., Meyer, R. (2010). Strategy process, content, context: An international perspective (4th Edn.). Hampshire: Cengage.
Debicki, B. J., Matherne, C. F., III, Kellermanns, F. W., Chrisman, J. J. (2009). Family business research in the new millennium: An overview of the who, the where, the what, and the why. Family Business Review, 22(2), 151-166.
Delery, J., Doty, D. (1996). Modes of theorizing in strategic human resource management: Tests of universalistic, contingency, and configurational performance predictions. Academy of Management Journal, 39(4), 802-835.
Denison, D., Lief, C., Ward, J. L. (2004). Culture in family-owned enterprises: Recognizing and leveraging unique strengths. Family Business Review, 17(1), 61-70.
Desarbo, W. S., Di Benedetto, C. A., Song, M., Sinha, I. (2005). Revisiting the miles and snow strategic framework: Uncovering interrelationships between strategic types, capabilities, environmental uncertainty, and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 26(1), 47-74.
Dess, G. G., Robinson Jr, R. B. (1984). Measuring organizational performance in the absence of objective measures: The case of the privately-held firm and conglomerate business unit. Strategic Management Journal, 5(3), 265-273.
Deutsche Börse (2009). Leitfaden zu den deutschen Aktienindizes der Deutschen Börse. http://www.boerse-frankfurt.de/DE/MediaLibrary/Document/Wissen/ equity_indices_guide.pdf, retrieved 01.08.2009.
Dillman, D. (1991). The design and administration of mail surveys. Annual Review of Sociology, 17, 225-249.
Dillman, D. A., Eltinge, J. L., Groves, R. M., Roderick, J. A. (2002). Survey nonresponse in design, data collection, and analysis. In Groves, R. M., Dillman, D., Eltinge, J. L., Little, R. J. A. (Eds.), Survey nonresponse. New York: Wiley.
Ding, H.-B., Pukthuanthong-Le, K. (2009). Family firm IPO performance and market signals. Journal of Enterprising Culture, 17(1), 55-77.
Donaldson, L. (1987). Strategy and structural adjustment to regain fit and performance: In defence of contingency theory. Journal of Management Studies, 24(1), 1-24.
240 List of References
Donaldson, L. (1996a). For positivist organization theory: Proving the hard core. London: Sage.
Donaldson, L. (1996b). The normal science of structural contingency theory. In Clegg, S., Hardy, C., Nord, W. R. (Eds.), Handbook of organization studies (57-76). London: Sage.
Donaldson, L. (2001a). The contingency theory of organizations. London: Sage.
Donaldson, L. (2001b). Structural contingency theory. In Neil, J. S., Paul, B. B. (Eds.), International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (15210-15215). Oxford: Pergamon.
Donaldson, L. (2006). The contingency theory of organizational design: Challenges and opportunities. In Burton, R. M., Håkonsson, D. D., Eriksen, B., Snow, C. C. (Eds.), Organization design (19-40). Springer.
Donckels, R., Fröhlich, E. (1991). Are family businesses really different? European experiences from STRATOS. Family Business Review, 4(2), 149-160.
Dong-Ku, S. (1999). A standardization technique to reduce the problem of multicollinearity in polynomial regression analysis. http://www.stat.fi/isi99/proceedings/ arkisto/varasto/kim_0574.pdf, retrieved 29.04.2011.
Doty, D., Glick, W. (1998). Common methods bias: Does common methods variance really bias results. Organizational Research Methods, 1(4), 374-406.
Doty, D. H., Glick, W. H. (1994). Typologies as a unique form of theory building: Toward improved understanding and modeling. Academy of Management Review, 19(2), 230-251.
Doty, D. H., Glick, W. H., Huber, G. P. (1993). Fit, equifinality, and organizational effectiveness: A test of two configurational theories. Academy of Management Journal, 36(6), 1196-1250.
Drazin, R., Van De Ven, A. H. (1985). Alternative forms of fit in contingency theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 30(4), 514-539.
Dreux, D. R. (1990). Financing family business: Alternatives to selling out or going public. Family Business Review, 3(3), 225-243.
Driffield, N., Mahambare, V., Pal, S. (2007). How does ownership structure affect capital structure and firm value? Economics of Transition, 15(3), 535-573.
Dsouza, D. (1990). Strategy types and environmental correlates of strategy for high-growth firms: An exploratory study. Dissertation, Georgia State University.
Durand, R., Coeurderoy, R. (2001). Age, order of entry, strategic orientation, and organizational performance. Journal of Business Venturing, 16(5), 471-494.
Durand, R., Vargas, V. (2003). Ownership, organization, and private firms' efficient use of resources. Strategic Management Journal, 24(7), 667-675.
List of References 241
Dyer, G. W., Jr. (2006). Examining the “family effect” on firm performance. Family Business Review, 19(4), 253-273.
Dyer, W. G. (1988). Culture and continuity in family firms. Family Business Review, 1(1), 37-50.
Dyer, W. G. (2003). The family: The missing variable in organizational research. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 27(4), 401-416.
Ebers, M. (2004). Kontingenzansatz. In Schreyögg, G., von Werder, A. (Eds.), Handwörterbuch Unternehmensführung und Organisation (653-667). Stuttgart: Schäffer-Poeschel.
Eckert, M. (2008). Evolution von Familienunternehmen: Organisationsstruktur, Marktumfeld und Unternehmenserfolg. Lohmar: Eul.
Economist (1996). The family connection. Vol. 341, No. 7986, 5. October, p. 62.
Eddleston, K. A., Kellermanns, F. W. (2007). Destructive and productive family relationships: A stewardship theory perspective. Journal of Business Venturing, 22(4), 545-565.
Eddleston, K. A., Kellermanns, F. W., Sarathy, R. (2008). Resource configuration in family firms: Linking resources, strategic planning and technological opportunities to performance. Journal of Management Studies, 45(1), 26-50.
Edwards, J. (1993). Problems with the use of profile similarity indices in the study of congruence in organizational research. Personnel Psychology, 46(3), 641-665.
Edwards, J. (2001). Ten difference score myths. Organizational Research Methods, 4(3), 265-287.
Edwards, J., Parry, M. (1993). On the use of polynomial regression equations as an alternative to difference scores in organizational research. Academy of Management Journal, 36(6), 1577-1613.
Ehrhardt, O., Nowak, E. (2003). The effect of IPOs on German family-owned firms: Governance changes, ownership structure, and performance. Journal of Small Business Management, 41(2), 222-233.
Ehrhardt, O., Nowak, E., Weber, F. M. (2006). Running in the family: The evolution of ownership, control, and performance in German family-owned firms, 1903-2003. Swiss
Finance Institute Research Paper No. 06-13. http://www.cepr.org/meets/ wkcn/5/5522/papers/EhrhardtNowakWeber.pdf, retrieved 08.08.2008.
Ellington, E. P., Jones, R. T., Deane, R. (1996). TQM adoption practices in the family-owned business. Family Business Review, 9(1), 5-14.
Encyclopaedia Britannica (1973). S.v. "Family" (15th Edn.). Chicago: Encyclopaedia Britannica.
Enders, C. K. (2010). Applied missing data analysis. New York: The Guilford Press.
242 List of References
Ensign, P. (2001). The concept of fit in organizational research. International Journal of Organization Theory & Behavior, 4(3/4), 287-306.
Faccio, M., Lang, L. (2002). The ultimate ownership of Western European corporations. Journal of Financial Economics, 65(3), 365-395.
Familienunternehmen, S. (2009). Die volkswirtschaftliche Bedeutung der Familienunternehmen. München: Stiftung für Familienunternehmen.
Family Business (2006). America’s largest family businesses. http://www.familybusinessmagazine .com/index.php?/articles/single/americas_largest_family_businesses/, retrieved 10.09.2010.
Family Business (2009). The world’s largest family businesses. http://www.familybusinessmagazine .com/index.php?/articles/single/the_worlds_largest_family_businesses1/, retrieved 10.09.2010.
FBN International (2008). Family business international monitor. http://www.fbn-i.org/fbn/web.nsf/ ArticlesLU/AA3786AA36C250F9872575210070073E/$FILE/Monitor2008.pdf, retrieved 24.09.2010.
Feito-Ruiz, I., Menendez-Requejo, S. (2010). Family firm mergers and acquisitions in different legal environments. Family Business Review, 23(1), 60-75.
Feltham, T. S., Feltham, G., Barnett, J. J. (2005). The dependence of family businesses on a single decision-maker. Journal of Small Business Management, 43(1), 1-15.
Feng-Li, L., Tsangyao, C. (2010). Does family ownership affect firm value in Taiwan? A panel threshold regression analysis. International Research Journal of Finance & Economics(42), 45-53.
Fernández, Z., Nieto, M. J. (2005). Internationalization strategy of small and medium-sized family businesses: Some influential factors. Family Business Review, 18(1), 77-89.
Fernández, Z., Nieto, M. J. (2006). Impact of ownership on the international involvement of SMEs. Journal of International Business Studies, 37(3), 340-351.
Filatotchev, I., Lien, Y.-C., Piesse, J. (2005). Corporate governance and performance in publicly listed, family-controlled firms: Evidence from Taiwan. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 22(3), 257-283.
Fisher, R. (1922). On the interpretation of chi-square from contingency tables and the calculation of PJ. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 85, 87-94.
Fleming, Q. J. (2000). Keep the family baggage out of the family business: Avoiding the seven deadly sins that destroy family businesses. New York: Fireside.
Flemons, D. G., Cole, P. M. (1992). Connecting and separating family and business: A relational approach to consultation. Family Business Review, 5(3), 257-269.
List of References 243
Flören, R. H. (1998). The significance of family business in the Netherlands. Family Business Review, 11(2), 121-134.
Flören, R. H. (2002). Crown princes in the clay: An empirical study on the tackling of succession challenges in Dutch family farms. Assen: Royal Van Gorcum.
Ford, J. D. (1979). Institutional versus questionnaire measures of organizational structure: A reexamination. The Academy of Management Journal, 22(3), 601-610.
Fowler, F. J. (2008). Survey research methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Fox, J. (2000). Nonparametric simple regression. Thousand Oaks, London, and Greater Kailash: Sage Publications.
Franks, J., Mayer, C. (2001). Ownership and control of German corporations. Review of Financial Studies, 14(4), 943-977.
Frasl, E. J. (2007). Family Business Handbuch: Zukunftssicherung von Familienunternehmen über Generationen. Wien: Linde Verlag.
Fredrickson, J. W. (1986). The strategic decision process and organizational structure. Academy of Management Review, 11(2), 280-297.
Frey, U., Halter, F., Zellweger, T. (2004). Bedeutung und Struktur von Familienunternehmen in der Schweiz, Universität St. Gallen, St. Gallen.
Galbraith, J. R., Nathanson, D. A. (1978). Strategy implementation: The role of structure and process. St. Paul: West Publishing.
Gallo, M. A. (1995a). Family businesses in Spain: Tracks followed and outcomes reached by those among the largest thousand. Family Business Review, 8(4), 245-254.
Gallo, M. A. (1995b). The role of family business and its distinctive characteristic behavior in industrial activity. Family Business Review, 8(2), 83-97.
Gallo, M. A., Garcia-Pont, C. (1996). Important factors in family business internationalization. Family Business Review, 9(1), 45-59.
Gallo, M. A., Tapies, J., Cappuyns, K. (2004). Comparison of family and nonfamily business: Financial logic and personal preferences. Family Business Review, 17(4), 303-318.
Gallo, M. A., Vilaseca, A. (1996). Finance in family business. Family Business Review, 9(4), 387-401.
Garcia-Alvarez, E., Lopez-Sintas, J. (2001). A taxonomy of founders based on values: The root of family business heterogeneity. Family Business Review, 14(3), 209-230.
244 List of References
Gedajlovic, E., Lubatkin, M. H., Schulze, W. S. (2004). Crossing the threshold from founder management to professional management: A governance perspective. Journal of Management Studies, 41(5), 899-912.
Geeraerts, G. (1984). The effect of ownership on the organization structure in small firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29(2), 232-237.
Gerdin, J., Greve, J. (2004). Forms of contingency fit in management accounting research: A critical review. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 29(3-4), 303-326.
Geringer, J. M., Hebert, L. (1991). Measuring performance of international joint ventures. Journal of International Business Studies, 22(2), 249-263.
Gersick, K. E., Davis, J., Hampton, M., Lansberg, I. (1997). Generation to generation: Life cycles of the family business. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Giovannini, R. (2010). Corporate governance, family ownership and performance. Journal of Management and Governance, 14(2), 145-166.
Glassop, L. (2009). Australia’s top 100 private family firms. http://www.ffi.org/user_files /documents/resource_articles/2008_top_100_australian_family_firms.pdf, retrieved 10.09.2010.
Goffee, R., Scase, R. (1985). Proprietorial control in family firms: Some functions of 'quasi-organic' management systems. Journal of Management Studies, 22(1), 53-68.
Gómez-Mejía, L. R., Haynes, K. T., Núñez-Nickel, M., Jacobson, K. J. L., Moyano-Fuentes, J. (2007). Socioemotional wealth and business risks in family-controlled firms: Evidence from Spanish olive oil mills. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52(1), 106-137.
Gómez-Mejía, L. R., Larraza-Kintana, M., Makri, M. (2003). The determinants of executive compensation in family-controlled public corporations. Academy of Management Journal, 46(2), 226-237.
Gómez-Mejía, L. R., Makri, M., Kintana, M. L. (2010). Diversification decisions in family-controlled firms. Journal of Management Studies, 47(2), 223-252.
Gómez-Mejía, L. R., Nunez-Nickel, M., Gutierrez, I. (2001). The role of family ties in agency contracts. Academy of Management Journal, 44(1), 81-95.
Górriz, C. G., Fumás, V. S. (1996). Ownership structure and firm performance: Some empirical evidence from Spain. Managerial and Decision Economics, 17(6), 575-586.
Gresov, C., Drazin, R. (1997). Equifinality: Functional equivalence in organization design. The Academy of Management Review, 22(2), 403-428.
Grüning, M. (2002). Performance-Measurement-Systeme: Messung und Steuerung von Unternehmensleistung. Wiesbaden: DUV.
List of References 245
Gudmundson, D., Hartman, E. A., Tower, C. B. (1999). Strategic orientation: Differences between family and nonfamily firms. Family Business Review, 12(1), 27-39.
Gudmundson, D., Hartman, E. A., Tower, C. B. (2004). Family business strategies: A comparative study. http://www.usasbe.org/knowledge/proceedings/1997/P179Gudmundson.PDF, retrieved 12.11.2009.
Gupta, A. K., Govindarajan, V. (1984). Business unit strategy, managerial characteristics, and business unit effectiveness at strategy implementation. Academy of Management Journal, 27(1), 25-41.
Güttler, K. (2009). Formale Organisationsstrukturen in wachstumsorientierten kleinen und mittleren Unternehmen. Wiesbaden: Gabler.
Habbershon, T. G., Williams, M., MacMillan, I. C. (2003). A unified systems perspective of family firm performance. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(4), 451-465.
Habbershon, T. G., Williams, M. L. (1999). A resource-based framework for assessing the strategic advantages of family firms. Family Business Review, 12(1), 1-25.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L. (2005). Multivariate data analysis (6th Edn.). Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.
Hall, P. D. (1988). A historical overview of family firms in the United States. Family Business Review, 1(1), 51-68.
Hamadi, M. (2010). Ownership concentration, family control and performance of firms. European Management Review, 7(2), 116-131.
Hambrick, D. C. (1980). Operationalizing the concept of business-level strategy in research. The Academy of Management Review, 5(4), 567-575.
Hambrick, D. C. (1981). Strategic awareness within top management teams. Strategic Management Journal, 2(3), 263-279.
Hambrick, D. C. (1983). Some tests of the effectiveness and functional attributes of Miles and Snow's strategic types. Academy of Management Journal, 26(1), 5-26.
Hambrick, D. C. (2003). On the staying power of defenders, analyzers, and prospectors. The Academy of Management Executive (1993-2005), 115-118.
Hambrick, D. C., Geletkanycz, M. A., Fredrickson, J. W. (1993). Top executive commitment to the status quo: Some tests of its determinants. Strategic Management Journal, 14(6), 401-418.
Hamilton, R. T., Shergill, G. S. (1992). The relationship between strategy-structure fit and financial performance in New Zealand: Evidence of generality and validity with enhanced controls. Journal of Management Studies, 29(1), 95-113.
246 List of References
Handler, W. C. (1989). Methodological issues and considerations in studying family businesses. Family Business Review, 2(3), 257-276.
Handler, W. C. (1992). The succession experience of the next generation. Family Business Review, 5(3), 283-307.
Harris, D., Martinez, J. I., Ward, J. L. (1994). Is strategy different for the family-owned business? Family Business Review, 7(2), 159-174.
Hart, C. (1998). Doing a literature review: Releasing the social science research imagination. London: Sage.
Haunschild, L., Wallau, F., Hauser, H.-E., Wolter, H.-J. (2007). Die volkswirtschaftliche Bedeutung der Familienunternehmen: Gutachten im Auftrag der Stiftung Familienunternehmen. IfM-Materialien Nr. 172, http://www.ifm-bonn.org/assets/documents/IfM-Materialien-172.pdf, retrieved 10.08.2010.
Haynes, G. W., Walker, R., Rowe, B. R., Hong, G.-S. (1999). The intermingling of business and family finances in family-owned businesses. Family Business Review, 12(3), 225-239.
Heck, R. (2004). A commentary on "Entrepreneurship in family vs. non-family firms: A resource-based analysis of the effect of organizational culture". Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 28(4), 383-389.
Heck, R., Trent, E. (1999). The prevalence of family business from a household sample. Family Business Review, 12(3), 209-219.
Heck, R. K. Z., Stafford, K. (2001). The vital institution of family business: Economic benefits hidden in plain sight. In McCann, G., Upton, N. (Eds.), The Holistic Model: Destroying myths and creating value in family business (9-17). Deland, FL: Stetson University.
Hill, C. W. L., Hitt, M. A., Hoskisson, R. E. (1992). Cooperative versus competitive structures in related and unrelated diversified firms. Organization Science, 3(4), 501-521.
Hill, M. A. (1997). SPSS missing value analysis 7.5. Chicago: Spss Inc.
Hill, T., Lewicki, P. (2006). Statistics: Methods and applications: A comprehensive reference for science, industry, and data mining. Tulsa: StatSoft, Inc.
Hitt, M., Boyd, B., Li, D. (2004). The state of strategic management research and a vision of the future. Research Methodology in Strategy and Management, 1, 1-31.
Hofer, C., Charan, R. (1984). The transition to professional management: Mission impossible? American Journal of Small Business, 9(1), 1-11.
Hollander, B. S., Elman, N. S. (1988). Family-owned businesses: An emerging field of inquiry. Family Business Review, 1(2), 145-164.
List of References 247
Holt, D. T., Rutherford, M. W., Kuratko, D. F. (2010). Advancing the field of family business research: Further testing the measurement properties of the F-PEC. Family Business Review, 23(1), 76-88.
Hoopes, D. G., Miller, D. (2006). Ownership preferences, competitive heterogeneity, and family-controlled businesses. Family Business Review, 19(2), 89-101.
Hoskisson, R. E., Hitt, M. A., Wan, W. P., Yiu, D. (1999). Theory and research in strategic management: Swings of a pendulum. Journal of Management, 25(3), 417-456.
Hosmer, D. W., Lemeshow, S. (2000). Applied logistic regression (2nd Edn.). New York: Wiley & Sons.
Hoy, F. (2003). Legitimizing family business scholarship in organizational research and education. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 27(4), 417-422.
Hoy, F., Sharma, P. (2006). Navigating the family business eduction maze. In Poutziouris, P. Z., Smyrnios, K. X., Klein, S. B. (Eds.), Handbook of research on family business (11-24). Cheltenham and Northampton: Edward Elgar.
Hoy, F., Verser, T. G. (1994). Emerging business, emerging field: Entrepreneurship and the family firm. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 19(1), 9-23.
Hungenberg, H., Wulf, T. (2007). Grundlagen der Unternehmensführung (3rd Edn.). Springer.
Ibrahim, A. B., McGuire, J. B. (2011). Family business research: An assessment and future directions. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, 12(1), 1-14.
IFERA (2003a). Family businesses dominate. Family Business Review, 16(4), 235-240.
IFERA (2003b). Quality research guidelines: As endorsed by the International Family Enterprise Research Academy (IFERA). Family Business Review, 16(2), 109-111.
Institut für Mittelstandsforschung Bonn (IfM) (2011). KMU-Definition des IfM Bonn. http://www.ifm-bonn.org/index.php?id=67, retrieved 21.02.2011.
Institute für Mittelstandsforschung (2007). Die volkswirtschaftliche Bedeutung der Familienunternehmen: Top 500-Listen. http://www.ifm-bonn.org/assets/documents/IfM-Materialien-172.pdf, retrieved 23.05.2010.
Jacquemin, A., De Ghellinck, E. (1980). Familial control, size and performance in the largest French firms. European Economic Review, 13(1), 81-91.
James, H. S. (1999). Owner as manager, extended horizons and the family firm. International Journal of the Economics of Business, 6(1), 41-55.
248 List of References
James, W. J., Hatten, K. J. (1995). Further evidence on the validity of the self typing paragraph approach: Miles and Snow strategic archetypes in banking. Strategic Management Journal, 16(2), 161-168.
James, W. L., Hatten, K., J (1994). Evaluating the performance effects of Miles' and Snow's strategic archetypes in banking, 1983 to 1987: big or small? Journal of Business Research, 31(2-3), 145-154.
Jara-Bertin, M., López-Iturriaga, F. J., López-de-Foronda, Ó. (2008). The contest to the control in European family firms: How other shareholders affect firm value. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 16(3), 146-159.
Jaskiewicz, P. (2006). Performance-Studie börsennotierter Familienunternehmen in Deutschland, Frankreich und Spanien. Lohmar: Josef Eul.
Jaskiewicz, P., Gonzalez, V. M., Menendez, S., Schiereck, D. (2005). Long-run IPO performance analysis of German and Spanish family-owned businesses. Family Business Review, 18(3), 179-202.
Jaskiewicz, P., Klein, S. B. (2005). Family influence and performance: Theoretical concepts and empirical results. http://web.dcci.ae/LibNewsLetter/EN/ EN_April07/study%20april.pdf, retrieved 11.07.2010.
Jaskiewicz, P., Klein, S. B. (2007). The impact of goal alignment on board composition and board size in family businesses. Journal of Business Research, 60(10), 1080-1089.
Jennings, D. F., Rajaratnam, D., Lawrence, F. B. (2003). Strategy-performance relationships in service firms: A test for equifinality. Journal of Managerial Issues, 15(2), 208-222.
Jensen, M. C., Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305-360.
Johnson, S. C. (1990). Why we’ll never go public. Family Business Magazine, http://www.familybusinessmagazine.com/FBfiles/goingpubl531.html, retrieved 25.05.2010.
Jones, C. D., Makri, M., Gomez-Mejia, L. R. (2008). Affiliate directors and perceived risk bearing in publicly traded, family-controlled firms: The case of diversification. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice, 32(6), 1007-1026.
Jorissen, A., Laveren, E., Martens, R., Reheul, A.-M. (2005). Real versus sample-based differences in comparative family business research. Family Business Review, 18(3), 229-246.
Kahn, J. A., Henderson, D. A. (1992). Location preferences of family firms: Strategic decision making or "home sweet home"? Family Business Review, 5(3), 271-282.
Kalton, G. (1983). Introduction to survey sampling. Newbury Park, London, and Greater Kailash: Sage.
Kanuk, L., Berenson, C. (1975). Mail surveys and response rates: A literature review. Journal of Marketing Research, 12(4), 440-453.
List of References 249
Kashmiri, S., Mahajan, V. (2010). What's in a name?: An analysis of the strategic behavior of family firms. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 27(3), 271-280.
Kayser, G., Wallau, F. (2003). Der industrielle Mittelstand: Ein Erfolgsmodell. In Bundesverband der Deutschen Industrie e.V. (BDI) (Ed.), Untersuchung im Auftrag des Bundesverbandes der Deutschen Industrie eV (BDI) und der Ernst & Young AG Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft. Berlin.
Keats, B., Bracker, J. (1988). Toward a theory of small firm performance: A conceptual model. American Journal of Small Business, 12(4), 41-58.
Kellermanns, F. W. (2005). Family firm resource management: Commentary and extensions. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(3), 313-319.
Kellermanns, F. W., Eddleston, K. A. (2004). Feuding families: When conflict does a family firm good. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 28(3), 209-229.
Kellermanns, F. W., Eddleston, K. A. (2006). Corporate entrepreneurship in family firms: A family perspective. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(6), 809-830.
Kellermanns, F. W., Eddleston, K. A. (2007). A family perspective on when conflict benefits family firm performance. Journal of Business Research, 60(10), 1048-1057.
Kellermanns, F. W., Eddleston, K. A., Sarathy, R., Murphy, F. (2010). Innovativeness in family firms: A family influence perspective. Small Business Economics, http://www.springerlink .com/content/04l30r4712224640/?p=2162e07a1d9f43feb14bf83a8e1094b7&pi=28, OnlineFirst 06.03.2010, retrieved 06.06.2010.
Kelly, L. M., Athanassiou, N., Crittenden, W. F. (2000). Founder centrality and strategic behavior in the family-owned firm. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 25(2), 27-42.
Kenyon-Rouvinez, D., Ward, J. (2005). Family business: Key issues. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.
Kepner, E. (1983). The family and the firm: A coevolutionary perspective. Organizational Dynamics, 12(1), 57-70.
Ketchen, D. J., Jr., Combs, J. G., Russell, C. J., Shook, C., Dean, M. A., Runge, J., Lohrke, F. T., Naumann, S. E., Haptonstahl, D. E., Baker, R., Beckstein, B. A., Handler, C., Honig, H., Lamoureux, S. (1997). Organizational configurations and performance: A meta-analysis. Academy of Management Journal, 40(1), 223-240.
Ketchen, D. J., Jr., Thomas, J. B., Snow, C. C. (1993). Organizational configurations and performance: A comparison of theoretical approaches. Academy of Management Journal, 36(6), 1278-1313.
Kets de Vries, M. F. R. (1993). The dynamics of family controlled firms: The good and the bad news. Organizational Dynamics, 21(3), 59-71.
Kets de Vries, M. F. R. (1996). Family business: Human dilemmas in the family firm. London: Thomson.
250 List of References
Kieser, A., Kubicek, H. (1983). Organisation. Berlin: de Gruyter.
King, M. R., Santor, E. (2008). Family values: Ownership structure, performance and capital structure of Canadian firms. Journal of Banking & Finance, 32(11), 2423-2432.
Kirchhoff, B. A., Kirchhoff, J. J. (1987). Family contributions to productivity and profitability in small business. Journal of Small Business Management, 25(4), 25-31.
Klaas, P., Lauridsen, J., Håkonsson, D. D. (2006). New developments in contingency fit theory. In Burton, R. M., Håkonsson, D. D., Eriksen, B., Snow, C. C. (Eds.), Organization design (143-164). New York: Springer.
Klein, P., Shapiro, D., Young, J. (2005a). Corporate governance, family ownership and firm value: The Canadian evidence. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 13(6), 769-784.
Klein, S. (1991). Der Einfluß von Werten auf die Gestaltung von Organisationen. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.
Klein, S. B. (2000). Family businesses in Germany: Significance and structure. Family Business Review, 13(3), 157-182.
Klein, S. B. (2004). Familienunternehmen: Theoretische und empirische Grundlagen (2nd Edn.). Wiesbaden: Gabler.
Klein, S. B. (2008). Corporate Governance in Familienunternehmen. Zeitschrift für KMU und Entrepreneurship, 56(1/2), 18-35.
Klein, S. B., Astrachan, J. H., Smyrnios, K. X. (2005b). The F-PEC scale of family influence: Construction, validation, and further implication for theory. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(3), 321-339.
Kleinsorge, I. K. (1994). Financial and efficiency differences in family-owned and non-family-owned nursing homes: An Oregon study. Family Business Review, 7(1), 73-86.
Koiranen, M. (2002). Over 100 years of age but still entrepreneurially active in business: Exploring the values and family characteristics of old finnish family firms. Family Business Review, 15(3), 175-187.
Kontinen, T., Ojala, A. (2010). The internationalization of family businesses: A review of extant research. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 1(2), 97-107.
Kotey, B. (2005a). Are performance differences between family and non-family SMEs uniform across all firm sizes? International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 11(6), 394-421.
Kotey, B. (2005b). Goals, management practices, and performance of family SMEs. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 11(1), 3-24.
List of References 251
Kotter, J., Heskett, J. (1992). Corporate culture and performance. New York: Free Press.
Kowalewski, O., Talavera, O., Stetsyuk, I. (2010). Influence of family involvement in management and ownership on firm performance: Evidence from Poland. Family Business Review, 23(1), 45-59.
Kula, V., Tatoglu, E. (2006). Board process attributes and company performance of family-owned businesses in Turkey. Corporate Governance, 6(5), 624-634.
La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., Shleifer, A. (1999). Corporate ownership around the world. Journal of Finance, 54(2), 471-517.
Laitinen, E. (2008). Value drivers in Finnish family-owned firms: Profitability, growth and risk. International Journal of Accounting and Finance, 1(1), 1-41.
Lansberg, I. S. (1983). Managing human resources in family firms: The problem of institutional overlap. Organizational Dynamics, 12(1), 39-46.
Lauterbach, B., Vaninsky, A. (1999). Ownership structure and firm performance: Evidence from Israel. Journal of Management & Governance, 3(2), 189-201.
Lawrence, P., Lorsh, J. (1967). Organization and enviroment: Managing differentiation and integration. Boston: Harvard University.
Le Breton-Miller, I., Miller, D. (2006). Why do some family businesses out-compete? Governance, long-term orientations, and sustainable capability. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(6), 731-746.
Leach, P., Bogod, T. (1999). Guide to the family business (3rd Edn.). London: Kogan Page Publishers.
Lee, J. (2004). The effects of family ownership and management on firm performance. SAM Advanced Management Journal, 69(4), 46-53.
Lee, J. (2006). Family firm performance: Further evidence. Family Business Review, 19(2), 103-114.
Lee, K. S., Lim, G. H., Lim, W. S. (2003). Family business succession: Appropriation risk and choice of successor. Academy of Management Review, 28(4), 657-666.
Lee, M. S., Rogoff, E. G. (1996). Research note: Comparison of small businesses with family participation versus small businesses without family participation: An investigation of differences in goals, attitudes, and family/business conflict. Family Business Review, 9(4), 423-437.
Leiber, M. K. (2008). Performance-Studie deutscher Familienunternehmen. http://deposit.ddb.de/cgi-bin/dokserv?idn=990104435&dok_var=d1&dok_ext =pdf&filename=990104435.pdf, retrieved 10.05.2008.
Levie, J., Lerner, M. (2009). Resource mobilization and performance in family and nonfamily businesses in the United Kingdom. Family Business Review, 22(1), 25-38.
252 List of References
Levinson, R. E. (1991). Problems in managing a family-owned business. In Aronoff, C. E., Ward, J. L. (Eds.), Family Business Sourcebook (169-174). Detroit: Omnigraphics.
Liao, Y.-S. (2006). Human resource management control system and firm performance: A contingency model of corporate control. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 17(4), 716-733.
Limberg, T. (2008). Examining innovation management from a fair process perspective. Wiesbaden: Springer.
Lin, S.-h., Hu, S.-y. (2007). A family member or professional management? The choice of a CEO and its impact on performance. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 15(6), 1348-1362.
Ling, Y., Kellermanns, F. W. (2010). The effects of family firm specific sources of TMT diversity: The moderating role of information exchange frequency. Journal of Management Studies, 47(2), 322-344.
Little, R., Rubin, D. (1987). Statistical analysis with missing data. New York: Wiley.
Litz, R. (1995). The family business: Toward definitional clarity. Family Business Review, 8(2), 71-81.
Liu, W., Yang, H., Zhang, G. (2010). Does family business excel in firm performance? An institution-based view. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10490-010-9216-6, OnlineFirst 03.07.2010, retrieved 08.09.2010.
Love, L. G., Priem, R. L., Lumpkin, G. T. (2002). Explicitly articulated strategy and firm performance under alternative levels of centralization. Journal of Management, 28(5), 611-628.
Low, M. B., MacMillan, I. C. (1988). Entrepreneurship: Past research and future challenges. Journal of Management, 14(2), 139-161.
Lumpkin, G. T., Brigham, K. H., Moss, T. W. (2010). Long-term orientation: Implications for the entrepreneurial orientation and performance of family businesses. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development: An International Journal, 22(3), 241-264.
Machi, L. A., McEvoy, B. T. (2008). The literature review: Six steps to success. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Mahérault, L. (2000). The influence of going public on investment policy: An empirical study of french family-owned businesses. Family Business Review, 13(1), 71-79.
Mahto, R. V., Davis, P. S., Pearce II, J. A., Robinson Jr, R. B. (2010). Satisfaction with firm performance in family businesses. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34(5), 985-1001.
Mandl, I. (2008). Overview of family business relevant issues: Final Report. http://ec.europa.eu/enter prise/policies/sme/files/craft/family_business/doc/familybusiness_study_en.pdf, retrieved 24.05.2010.
List of References 253
Marchisio, G., Mazzola, P., Sciascia, S., Miles, M., Astrachan, J. (2010). Corporate venturing in family business: The effects on the family and its members. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development: An International Journal, 22(3), 349-377.
Markides, C. C., Williamson, P. J. (1996). Corporate diversification and organizational structure: A resource-based view. Academy of Management Journal, 39(2), 340-367.
Marlin, D., Hoffman, J. J., Lamont, B. T. (1994). Porter's generic strategies, dynamic environments, and performance: A profile deviation fit perspective. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 2(2), 155-175.
Marshall, J. P., Sorenson, R., Brigham, K., Wieling, E., Reifman, A., Wampler, R. S. (2006). The paradox for the family firm CEO: Owner age relationship to succession-related processes and plans. Journal of Business Venturing, 21(3), 348-368.
Martikainen, M., Nikkinen, J., Vähämaa, S. (2009). Production functions and productivity of family firms: Evidence from the S&P 500. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 49(2), 295-307.
Martinez, J. I., Stöhr, B. S., Quiroga, B. F. (2007). Family ownership and firm performance: Evidence from public companies in Chile. Family Business Review, 20(2), 83-94.
Maury, B. (2006). Family ownership and firm performance: Empirical evidence from Western European corporations. Journal of Corporate Finance, 12(2), 321-341.
McCann, J. E., III., Leon-Guerrero, A. Y., Haley Jr, J. D. (2001). Strategic goals and practices of innovative family businesses. Journal of Small Business Management, 39(1), 50-59.
McCollom, M. E. (1988). Integration in the family firm: When the family system replaces controls and culture. Family Business Review, 1(4), 399-417.
McCollom, M. E. (1990). Problems and prospects in clinical research on family firms. Family Business Review, 3(3), 245-262.
McConaughy, D. L. (2000). Family CEOs vs. nonfamily CEOs in the family-controlled firm: An examination of the level and sensitivity of pay to performance. Family Business Review, 13(2), 121-131.
McConaughy, D. L., Matthews, C. H., Fialko, A. S. (2001). Founding family controlled firms: Performance, risk, and value. Journal of Small Business Management, 39(1), 31-50.
McConaughy, D. L., Mendoza, D., Mishra, C. (1996). Loyola University Chicago Family Firm Stock Index. Family Business Review, 9(2), 125-137.
McConaughy, D. L., Phillips, G. M. (1999). Founders versus descendants: The profitability, efficiency, growth characteristics and financing in large, public, founding-family-controlled firms. Family Business Review, 12(2), 123-131.
254 List of References
McConaughy, D. L., Walker, M. C., Henderson, G. V., Mishra, C. S. (1998). Founding family controlled firms: Efficiency and value. Review of Financial Economics, 7(1), 1-19.
McKee, D. O., Varadarajan, P. R., Pride, W. M. (1989). Strategic adaptability and firm performance: A market-contingent perspective. The Journal of Marketing, 53(3), 21-35.
Megginson, L. C., Mosley, D. C., Pietri, P. H. (1986). Management: Concepts and applications (2nd Edn.). New York: Harper & Row.
Mehta, C. R., Patel, N. R., Science, S. P. S. (1996). SPSS exact tests 7.0 for Windows. Chicago: SPSS, Inc.
Meilich, O. (2006). Bivariate models of fit in contingency theory. Organizational Research Methods, 9(2), 161-193.
Mertens, C. (2009). Herausforderungen für Familienunternehmen im Zeitverlauf. Erlangen-Nürnberg: Eul.
Meyer, A. D. (1982). Adapting to environmental jolts. Administrative Science Quarterly, 27(4), 515-537.
Meyer, A. D., Tsui, A. S., Hinings, C. R. (1993). Configurational approaches to organizational analysis. Academy of Management Journal, 36(6), 1175-1195.
Miles, R. E., Snow, C. C. (1978). Organizational strategy, structure, and process. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Miles, R. E., Snow, C. C. (2003). Organizational strategy, structure, and process (2nd Edn.). Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Miles, R. E., Snow, C. C. (2004). Fit, failure and the hall of fame. New York: McMillan.
Miles, R. E., Snow, C. C., Meyer, A. D., Coleman, H. J., Jr. (1978). Organizational strategy, structure, and process. The Academy of Management Review, 3(3), 546-562.
Miller, D. (1981). Toward a new contingency approach: The search for organizational gestalts. Journal of Management Studies, 18(1), 1-26.
Miller, D. (1983). The correlates of entrepreneurship in three types of firms. Management Science, 29(7), 770-791.
Miller, D. (1986). Configurations of strategy and structure: Towards a synthesis. Strategic Management Journal, 7(3), 233-249.
Miller, D. (1987). Strategy making and structure: Analysis and implications for performance. Academy of Management Journal, 30(1), 7-32.
List of References 255
Miller, D. (1992). Environmental fit versus internal fit. Organization Science, 3(2), 159-178.
Miller, D., Droge, C., Toulouse, J. M. (1988). Strategic process and content as mediators between organizational context and structure. The Academy of Management Journal, 31(3), 544-569.
Miller, D., Friesen, P. H. (1977). Strategy-making in context: Ten empirical archetypes. Journal of Management Studies, 14(3), 253-280.
Miller, D., Friesen, P. H. (1978). Archetypes of strategy formulation. Management Science, 24(9), 921-933.
Miller, D., Le Breton-Miller, I. (2006). Family governance and firm performance: Agency, stewardship, and capabilities. Family Business Review, 19(1), 73-87.
Miller, D., Le Breton-Miller, I., Lester, R. H. (2010). Family and lone founder ownership and strategic behaviour: Social context, identity, and institutional logics. Journal of Management Studies, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2009.00896.x, OnlineFirst 02.11.2009, retrieved 03.06.2010.
Miller, D., Le Breton-Miller, I., Lester, R. H., Cannella, A. A. (2007). Are family firms really superior performers? Journal of Corporate Finance, 13(5), 829-858.
Miller, D., Le Breton-Miller, I., Scholnick, B. (2008). Stewardship vs. stagnation: An empirical comparison of small family and non-family businesses. Journal of Management Studies, 45(1), 51-78.
Miller, J. G., Roth, A. V. (1994). A taxonomy of manufacturing strategies. Management Science, 40(3), 285-304.
Minichilli, A., Corbetta, G., MacMillan, I. C. (2010). Top management teams in family-controlled companies: 'Familiness', 'faultlines', and their impact on financial performance. Journal of Management Studies, 47(2), 205-222.
Mintzberg, H. (1978). Patterns in strategy formation. Management Science, 24(9), 934-948.
Mintzberg, H. (1979). The structuring of organizations. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
Mintzberg, H., Quinn, J. B., Voyer, J. (1995). The strategy process. Englewood-Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
Mishra, C., McConaughy, D. (1999). Founding family control and capital structure: The risk of loss of control and the aversion to debt. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 23(4), 53-64.
Mishra, C. S., Randoy, T., Jenssen, J. I. (2001). The effect of founding family influence on firm value and corporate governance. Journal of International Financial Management & Accounting, 12(3), 235-259.
Mobach, M. P., Rogier, J. J. H., de Leeuw, A. C. J. (1998). Fit and the system theory of control.http://som.eldoc.ub.rug.nl/FILES/reports/1995-1999/themeA/1998/98A29/98a29.pdf, retrieved 21.03.2011.
256 List of References
Moore, M. (2005). Towards a confirmatory model of retail strategy types: An empirical test of Miles and Snow. Journal of Business Research, 58(5), 696-704.
Moores, K. (2009). Paradigms and theory building in the domain of business families. Family Business Review, 22(2), 167-180.
Moores, K., Barrett, M. (2002). Learning family business: Paradoxes and pathways. London: Ashgate Publishing.
Moores, K., Mula, J. (2000). The salience of market, bureaucratic, and clan controls in the management of family firm transitions: Some tentative Australian evidence. Family Business Review, 13(2), 91-106.
Morck, R., Shleifer, A., Vishny, R. W. (1988). Management ownership and market valuation: An empirical analysis. Journal of Financial Economics, 20(1), 293-315.
Morck, R., Strangeland, D., Yeung, B. (2000). Inherited wealth, corporate control and economic growth: The canadian disease? In Morck, R. K. (Ed.), Concentrated corporate ownership (319-369). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Morck, R., Yeung, B. (2003). Agency problems in large family business groups. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 27(4), 367-382.
Muntean, S. C. (2008). Analyzing the dearth in family business research. In Phan, P. H., Butler, J. E. (Eds.), Theoretical developments and future research in family business (3-26). Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.
Murphy, G. B., Trailer, J. W., Hill, R. C. (1996). Measuring performance in entrepreneurship research. Journal of Business Research, 36(1), 15-23.
Murray, J. Y., Kotabe, M. (2005). Performance implications of strategic fit between alliance attributes and alliance forms. Journal of Business Research, 58(11), 1525-1533.
Mustakallio, M., Autio, E., Zahra, S. A. (2002). Relational and contractual governance in family firms: Effects on strategic decision making. Family Business Review, 15(3), 205-222.
Nagl, A. (2005). Wie regele ich meine Nachfolge?: Leitfaden für Familienunternehmen. Wiesbaden: Gabler Verlag.
Naldi, L., Nordqvist, M. (2008). Family firms venturing into international markets: A resource dependence perspective. Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research, 28(14), Article 1.
Naldi, L., Nordqvist, M., Sjöberg, K., Wiklund, J. (2007). Entrepreneurial orientation, risk taking, and performance in family firms. Family Business Review, 20(1), 33-47.
Naman, J. L., Slevin, D. P. (1993). Entrepreneurship and the concept of fit: A model and empirical tests. Strategic Management Journal, 14(2), 137-153.
List of References 257
Neubauer, F., Lank, A. G. (1998). The family business: Its governance for sustainability. London: MacMillan.
Neuendorf, K. (2002). The content analysis guidebook. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Newby, R., Watson, J., Woodliff, D. (2003). SME survey methodology: Response rates, data quality, and cost effectiveness. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice, 28(2), 163-173.
Ng, C. Y. M. (2005). An empirical study on the relationship between ownership and performance in a family-based corporate environment. Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance, 20(2), 121-146.
Nordqvist, M. (2007). Understanding the role of ownership in strategizing. Doctoral dissertation, Jönköping International Business School, Jönköping.
Nordqvist, M., Melin, L. (2010). The promise of the strategy as practice perspective for family business strategy research. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 1(1), 15-25.
Nunnally, J. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
O'Regan, N., Ghobadian, A. (2006). Perceptions of generic strategies of small and medium sized engineering and electronics manufacturers in the UK: The applicability of the Miles and Snow typology. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 17(5), 603-620.
O’Brien, R. M. (2007). A caution regarding rules of thumb for variance inflation factors. Quality and Quantity, 41(5), 673-690.
Okoroafo, S. C. (1999). Internationalization of family businesses: Evidence from northwest Ohio, U.S.A. Family Business Review, 12(2), 147-158.
Olson, E. M., Slater, S. F., Hult, G. T. M. (2005). The performance implications of fit among business strategy, marketing organization structure, and strategic behavior. Journal of Marketing, 69(3), 49-65.
Olson, P. D., Zuiker, V. S., Danes, S. M., Stafford, K., Heck, R. K. Z., Duncan, K. A. (2003). The impact of the family and the business on family business sustainability. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(5), 639-666.
Oppenheim, A. N. (1998). Questionnaire design, interviewing and attitude measurement (3rd Edn.). New York: Continuum.
Oswald, S. L., Muse, L. A., Rutherford, M. W. (2009). The influence of large stake family control on performance: Is it agency or entrenchment? Journal of Small Business Management, 47(1), 116-135.
Oxford English dictionary (1993). S.v. "contingency". (2nd Edn.). New York: Oxford University Press.
Parnell, J., Wright, P. (1993). Generic strategy and performance: An empirical test of the Miles and Snow typology. British Journal of Management, 4(1), 29-36.
258 List of References
Payne, P. (1984). Family business in Britain: An historical and analytical survey. In Okochi, A., Yasuoka, S. (Eds.), Family business in the era of industrial growth: Its ownership and management (171-206). Tokyo: University of Tokyo Press.
Pearce, J. A., Robbins, D. K., Robinson Jr, R. B. (1987). The impact of grand strategy and planning formality on financial performance. Strategic Management Journal, 8(2), 125-134.
Pearson, A. W., Carr, J. C., Shaw, J. C. (2008). Toward a theory of familiness: A social capital perspective. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 32(6), 949-969.
Pearson, K. (1922). On the X2 test of goodness of fit. Biometrika, 14(1-2), 186-191.
Pedersen, T., Thomsen, S. (1997). European patterns of corporate ownership: A twelve-country study. Journal of International Business Studies, 28(4), 759-778.
Peng, M. W., Tan, J., Tong, T. W. (2004). Ownership types and strategic groups in an emerging economy. Journal of Management Studies, 41(7), 1105-1129.
Pérez-González, F. (2006). Inherited control and firm performance. American Economic Review, 96(5), 1559-1588.
Perrow, C. (1967). A framework for the comparative analysis of organizations. American Sociological Review, 32(2), 194-208.
Pieper, T. M. (2003). Corporate governance in family firms: A literature review. Working Paper 2003/97/IIFE, INSEAD, Fontainebleau.
Pieper, T. M., Klein, S. B. (2007). The bulleye: A systems approach to modeling family firms. Family Business Review, 20(4), 301-319.
Piesse, J., Filatotchev, I., Lien, Y.-C. (2007). Corporate governance in family-controlled firms in Taiwan. International Review of Economics, 54(1), 176-193.
Pittino, D., Visintin, F. (2009). Innovation and strategic types of family SMEs: A test and extension of Miles and Snow's configurational model. Journal of Enterprising Culture, 17(3), 257-295.
Pleshko, L., Nickerson, I. (2008). Strategic orientation, organizational structure, and the associated effects on performance in industrial firms. Academy of Strategic Management Journal, 7, 95-110.
Podsakoff, P., MacKenzie, S., Lee, J., Podsakoff, N. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879-903.
Podsakoff, P. M., Organ, D. W. (1986). Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and prospects. Journal of Management, 12(4), 531-544.
List of References 259
Pollak, R. (1985). A transaction cost approach to families and households. Journal of economic literature, 23(2), 581-608.
Pondy, L. R. (1969). Effects of size, complexity, and ownership on administrative intensity. Administrative Science Quarterly, 14(1), 47-60.
Porter, M. E. (1980). Competitive strategy: Techniques for analyzing industries and competitors. New York: Free Press.
Porter, M. E. (1985). Competitive advantage: Creating and sustaining superior performance. New York: Free Press.
Poutziouris, P., Michaelas, N., Chittenden, F., Sitorious, S. (2000). The financial structure, behaviour and performance of SMEs: Family and private companies. Small Business and Enterprise Development Conference. Manchester.
Poutziouris, P. Z. (2001). The views of family companies on venture capital: Empirical evidence from the UK small to medium-size enterprising economy. Family Business Review, 14(3), 277-291.
Poutziouris, P. Z. (2002). The financial affairs of smaller family companies. In Fletcher, D. (Ed.), Understanding the small family business (111-126). London: Routledge.
Powell, T. C. (1996). How much does industry matter? An alternative empirical test. Strategic Management Journal, 17(4), 323-334.
Pugh, D., Hickson, D. (1976). Organizational structure in its context: The Aston Programme: London: Saxon House/ Lexington: Lexington Books.
Pugh, D. S., Hickson, D. J., Hinings, C. R., Macdonald, K. M., Turner, C., Lupton, T. (1963). A conceptual scheme for organizational analysis. Administrative Science Quarterly, 8(3), 289-315.
Pugh, D. S., Hickson, D. J., Hinings, C. R., Turner, C. (1968). Dimensions of organization structure. Administrative Science Quarterly, 13(1), 65-105.
Raab-Steiner, E., Benesch, M. (2008). Der Fragebogen: Von der Forschungsidee zur SPSS-Auswertung. Wien: UTB.
Randolph, J. (2009). A guide to writing the dissertation literature review. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 14(13), 1-13.
Randøy, T., Dibrell, C., Craig, J. (2009). Founding family leadership and industry profitability. Small Business Economics, 32(4), 397-407.
Randoy, T., Goel, S. (2003). Ownership structure, founder leadership, and performance in Norwegian SMEs: Implications for financing entrepreneurial opportunities. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(5), 619-637.
260 List of References
Reid, R., Adams, J. (2001). Human resource management: A survey of practices within family and non-family firms. Journal of European Industrial Training, 25(6), 310-320.
Reid, R., Morrow, T., Kelly, B., Adams, J., McCartan, P. (2000). Human resource management practices in SMEs: A comparative analysis of family and non-family businesses. Irish Journal of Management, 21(2), 157-180.
Reid, R., Morrow, T., Kelly, B., McCartan, P. (2002). People management in SMEs: An analysis of human resource strategies in family and non-family businesses. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 9(3), 245-259.
Reuber, R. A. (2010). Strengthening your literature review. Family Business Review, 23(2), 105-108.
Richard, P. J., Devinney, T. M., Yip, G. S., Johnson, G. (2009). Measuring organizational performance: Towards methodological best practice. Journal of Management, 35(3), 718-804.
Rogoff, E. G., Heck, R. K. Z. (2003). Evolving research in entrepreneurship and family business: Recognizing family as the oxygen that feeds the fire of entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(5), 559-566.
Romano, C., Tanewski, G., Smyrnios, K. (2001). Capital structure decision making: A model for family business. Journal of Business Venturing, 16(3), 285-310.
Rossaro, F. (2007). Zu den Beständigkeitsmerkmalen von Familienunternehmen: Eine Analyse aus soziologischer und mikrotheoretischer Sicht. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.
Roth, D. K. D. (2010). Hidden Champions-Erfolgsfaktoren und -strategien unbekannter Weltmarktführer. Norderstedt: GRIN Verlag.
Rue, L. W., Ibrahim, N. A. (1996). The status of planning in smaller family-owned business. Family Business Review, 9(1), 29-43.
Rumelt, R., Schendel, D., Teece, D. (1995). Fundamental issues in strategy. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Rutherford, M. W., Kuratko, D. F. (2008). Examining the link between familiness and performance: Can the F-PEC untangle the family business theory jungle? Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 32(6), 1089-1109.
Rutherford, M. W., Muse, L. A., Oswald, S. L. (2006). A new perspective on the developmental model for family business. Family Business Review, 19(4), 317-333.
Ryan, P. J. (1986). Euclidean and non-Euclidean geometry: An analytical approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sabherwal, R., Chan, Y. (2001). Alignment between business and IS strategies: A study of prospectors, analyzers, and defenders. Information Systems Research, 12(1), 11-33.
List of References 261
Saito, T. (2008). Family firms and firm performance: Evidence from Japan. Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, 22(4), 620-646.
Salant, P., Dillman, D. (1994). How to conduct your own survey. New York: Wiley.
Salvato, C. (2004). Predictors of entrepreneurship in family firms. The Journal of Private Equity, 7(3), 68-76.
Sandberg, W. R. (1992). Strategic management's potential contributions to a theory of entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 16(3), 73-90.
Sandig, A., Labadie, G., Saris, W., Mayordomo, X. (2006). Internal factors of family business performance: An integrated theoretical model. In Poutziouris, P. Z., Smyrnios, K. X., Klein, S. B. (Eds.), Handbook of research on family business (145-164). Cheltenham and Northampton: Edward Elgar.
Sarkar, M. B., Echambadi, R., Harrison, J. S. (2001). Alliance entrepreneurship and firm market performance. Strategic Management Journal, 22(6 7), 701-711.
Sathe, V. (1978). Institutional versus questionnaire measures of organizational structure. The Academy of Management Journal, 21(2), 227-238.
Sattes, I. (1998). Erfolg in kleinen und mittleren Unternehmen: Ein Leitfaden für die Führung und Organisation in KMU. Zurich: vdf Hochschulverlag.
Schachner, M., Speckbacher, G., Wentges, P. (2006). Steuerung mittelständischer Unternehmen: Größeneffekte und Einfluss der Eigentums- und Führungsstruktur. Zeitschrift für Betriebswirtschaft, 76(6), 589-614.
Schein, E. H. (1983). The role of the founder in creating organizational culture. Organizational Dynamics, 12(1), 13-28.
Schmid, T., Ampenberger, M., Kaserer, C., Achleitner, A.-K. (2008). Family firms, agency costs and risk aversion: Empirical evidence from diversification and hedging decisions. CEFS Working Paper No. 2008-13, available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1314823, retrieved 03.11.2010.
Schulze, W. S., Lubatkin, M. H., Dino, R. N., Buchholtz, A. K. (2001). Agency relationships in family firms: Theory and evidence. Organization Science, 12(2), 99-116.
Schwass, J. (2007). Wachstumsstrategien für Familienunternehmen: In der Praxis getestete Langfriststrategien. Munich: FinanzBuch-Verlag.
Sciascia, S., Mazzola, P. (2008). Family involvement in ownership and management: Exploring nonlinear effects on performance. Family Business Review, 21(4), 331-345.
Scott, W. R. (1998). Organizations: Rational, natural, and open systems. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall
262 List of References
Segev, E. (1989). A systematic comparative analysis and synthesis of two business-level strategic typologies. Strategic Management Journal, 10(5), 487-505.
Setia-Atmaja, L., Tanewski, G. A., Skully, M. (2009). The role of dividends, debt and board structure in the governance of family controlled firms. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 36(7-8), 863-898.
Shanker, M. C., Astrachan, J. H. (1996). Myths and realities: Family businesses' contribution to the US economy: A framework for assessing family business statistics. Family Business Review, 9(2), 107-123.
Sharma, P. (2003). Stakeholder mapping technique: Toward the development of a family rm typology. Laurier Business & Economics Working Paper 2003-01 MOB.
Sharma, P. (2004). An overview of the field of family business studies: Current status and directions for the future. Family Business Review, 17(1), 1-36.
Sharma, P. (2006). An overview of the field of family business studies: Current status and directions for the future. In Poutziouris, P. Z., Smyrnios, K. X., Klein, S. B. (Eds.), Handbook of research on family business (25-55). Cheltenham and Northampton: Edward Elgar.
Sharma, P., Chrisman, J. J., Chua, J. H. (1996). A review and annotated bibliography of family business studies. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Sharma, P., Chrisman, J. J., Chua, J. H. (1997). Strategic management of the family business: Past research and future challenges. Family Business Review, 10(1), 1-35.
Sharma, P., Chrisman, J. J., Chua, J. H. (2008). Das Management von Familienunternehmen: Einleitung und Folgerungen. Zeitschrift für KMU und Entrepreneurship, 56(1/2), 1-17.
Sharma, P., Manikutty, S. (2005). Strategic divestments in family firms: Role of family structure and community culture. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(3), 293-311.
Shim, J., Okamuro, H. (2010). Does ownership matter in mergers? A comparative study of the causes and consequences of mergers by family and non-family firms. Journal of Banking & Finance, In Press, Corrected Proof.
Short, J. C., Payne, G. T., Brigham, K. H., Lumpkin, G. T., Broberg, J. C. (2009). Family firms and entrepreneurial orientation in publicly traded firms: A comparative analysis of the S&P 500. Family Business Review, 22(1), 9-24.
Short, J. C., Payne, G. T., Ketchen, D. J. (2008). Research on organizational configurations: Past accomplishments and future challenges. Journal of Management, 34(6), 1053-1079.
Shortell, S. M., Zajac, E. J. (1990). Perceptual and archival measures of Miles and Snow's strategic types: A comprehensive assessment of reliability and validity. Academy of Management Journal, 33(4), 817-832.
List of References 263
Simon, H. (1996). Hidden champions: Lessons from 500 of the world's best unknown companies (2nd Edn.). Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Sindhuja, P. N. (2009). Performance and value creation: Family managed business versus non-family managed business. IUP Journal of Business Strategy, 6(3/4), 66-80.
Sirmon, D., G., Arregle, J.-L., Hitt, M., A., Webb, J., W. (2008). The role of family influence in firms' strategic responses to threat of imitation. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 32(6), 979-998.
Slater, S. F., Narver, J. C. (1993). Product-market strategy and performance: An analysis of the Miles and Snow strategy types. European Journal of Marketing, 27(10), 33-51.
Slater, S. F., Olson, E. M. (2000). Strategy type and performance: The influence of sales force management. Strategic Management Journal, 21(8), 813-829.
Smith, B., Amoako-Adu, B. (1999). Management succession and financial performance of family controlled firms. Journal of Corporate Finance, 5(4), 341-368.
Smith, K. G., Guthrie, J. P., Chen, M.-J. (1986). Miles and Snow's typology of strategy, organizational size and organizational performance. Academy of Management Proceedings, 45-49.
Smith, K. G., Guthrie, J. P., Ming-Jer, C. (1989). Strategy, size and performance. Organization Studies, 10(1), 63-81.
Smyrnios, K., Tanewski, G., Romanom, C. (1998). Development of a measure of the characteristics of family business. Family Business Review, 11(1), 49-60.
Smyrnios, K. X., Dana, L. (2006). The Australian family and private business survey. Melbourne: RMIT University.
Snow, C. C., Hambrick, D. C. (1980). Measuring organizational strategies: Some theoretical and methodological problems. Academy of Management Review, 5(4), 527-538.
Snow, C. C., Hrebiniak, L. G. (1980). Strategy, distinctive competence, and organizational performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25(2), 317-336.
Snow, C. C., Miles, R. E., Miles, G. (2006). The configurational approach to organization design: Four recommended initiatives. In Burton, R. M., Håkonsson, D. D., Eriksen, B., Snow, C. C. (Eds.), Organization design (3-18). New York: Springer.
Söhnchen, F. (2007). Common method variance und single source bias. In Albers, S., Klapper, D., Konradt, U., Walter, A., Wolf, J. (Eds.), Methodik der empirischen Forschung (135-150). Wiesbaden: Gabler.
Song, M., Droge, C., Hanvanich, S., Calantone, R. (2005). Marketing and technology resource complementarity: An analysis of their interaction effect in two environmental contexts. Strategic Management Journal, 26(3), 259-276.
264 List of References
Sorenson, R. L. (2000). The contribution of leadership style and practices to family and business success. Family Business Review, 13(3), 183-200.
Sorenson, R. L., Goodpaster, K. E., Hedberg, P. R., Yu, A. (2009). The family point of view, family social capital, and firm performance: An exploratory test. Family Business Review, 22(3), 239-253.
Speed, R. (1993). Maximizing the potential of strategic typologies for marketing strategy research. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 1(3), 171-188.
Sraer, D., Thesmar, D. (2007). Performance and behavior of family firms: Evidence from the French stock market. Journal of the European Economic Association, 5(4), 709-751.
Stavrou, E., Kassinis, G., Filotheou, A. (2007). Downsizing and stakeholder orientation among the Fortune 500: Does family ownership matter? Journal of Business Ethics, 72(2), 149-162.
Steier, L. (2001). Family firms, plural forms of governance, and the evolving role of trust. Family Business Review, 14(4), 353-367.
Steier, L. (2003). Variants of agency contracts in family-financed ventures as a continuum of familial altruistic and market rationalities. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(5), 597-618.
Swanson, R. A. (2005). Research in organizations: Foundations and methods of inquiry: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Swartz, S. (1989). The challenges of multidisciplinary consulting to family-owned businesses. Family Business Review, 2(4), 329-339.
Swinth, R. L., Vinton, K. L. (1993). Do family-owned businesses have a strategic advantage in international joint ventures? Family Business Review, 6(1), 19-30.
Tagiuri, R., Davis, J. (1996). Bivalent attributes of the family firm. Family Business Review, 9(2), 199-208.
Tagiuri, R., Davis, J. A. (1992). On the goals of successful family companies. Family Business Review, 5(1), 43-62.
Taylor, F. W. (1919). The principles of scientific management. New York: Harper & Brothers.
Teal, E. J., Upton, N., Seaman, S. L. (2003). A comparative analysis of strategic marketing practices of high-growth US family and non-family firms. Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship, 8(2), 177-195.
The Oxford thesaurus (1992). S.v. "misfit". Oxford University Press: New York.
Thomas, J., Graves, C. (2005). Internationalization of the family firm: The contribution of an entrepreneurial orientation. Journal of Business & Entrepreneurship, 17(2), 91-113.
List of References 265
Thomsen, S., Pedersen, T. (2000). Ownership structure and economic performance in the largest European companies. Strategic Management Journal, 21(6), 689-705.
Thomson, J. (1967). Organizations in action. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Todd, E., Garrioch, D. (1985). The explanation of ideology: Family structures and social systems. Oxford and New York: Blackwell.
Tosi Jr, H. L., Slocum Jr, J. W. (1984). Contingency theory: Some suggested directions. Journal of Management, 10(1), 9-26.
Tsang, E. W. K. (2002). Learning from overseas venturing experience: The case of Chinese family businesses. Journal of Business Venturing, 17(1), 21-40.
Tsao, C.-W., Chen, S.-J., Lin, C.-S., Hyde, W. (2009). Founding-family ownership and firm performance: The role of high-performance work systems. Family Business Review, 22(4), 319-332.
Tushman, M. L., Romanelli, E. (1985). Organizational evolution: A metamorphosis model of convergence and reorientation. Research in Organizational Behavior, 7, 171-222.
Uhlaner, L. M., Kellermanns, F. W., Eddleston, K. A., Hoy, F. (2010). The entrepreneuring family: a new paradigm for family business research. Small Business Economics, 1-11, Online First http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11187-011-9315-x, retrieved 18.05.2011.
Umanath, N. S. (2003). The concept of contingency beyond "It depends": Illustrations from IS research stream. Information & Management, 40(6), 551-562.
Upton, N., Teal, E. J., Felan, J. T. (2001). Strategic and business planning practices of fast growth family firms. Journal of Small Business Management, 39(1), 60-72.
Upton, N., Teal, E. J., Seaman, S. L. (2003). Growth goals, strategies and compensation practices of US family and non-family high-growth firms. The International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, 4(2), 113-120.
Vallejo, M. (2008). Is the culture of family firms really different? A value-based model for its survival through generations. Journal of Business Ethics, 81(2), 261-279.
Van de Ven, A. H., Drazin, R. (1985). The concept of fit in contingency theory. Research in Organizational Behavior, 7(3), 333-365.
Van Gils, A., Voordeckers, W., Van den Heuvel, J. (2004). Environmental uncertainty and strategic behavior in Belgian family firms. European Management Journal, 22(5), 588-595.
Veliyath, R., Srinivasan, T. (1995). Gestalt approaches to assessing strategic coalignment: A conceptual integration. British Journal of Management, 6(3), 205-219.
266 List of References
Venkatraman, N. (1989). The concept of fit in strategy research: Toward verbal and statistical correspondence. Academy of Management Review, 14(3), 423-444.
Venkatraman, N. (1990). Performance implications of strategic coalignment: A methodological perspective. Journal of Management Studies, 27(1), 19-41.
Venkatraman, N., Camillus, J. C. (1984). Exploring the concept of "fit" in strategic management. Academy of Management Review, 9(3), 513-525.
Venkatraman, N., Prescott, J. E. (1990). Environment-strategy coalignment: An empirical test of its performance implications. Strategic Management Journal, 11(1), 1-23.
Venkatraman, N., Ramanujam, V. (1986). Measurement of business performance in strategy research: A comparison of approaches. Academy of Management Review, 11(4), 801-814.
Venkatraman, N., Ramanujam, V. (1987). Measurement of business economic performance: An examination of method convergence. Journal of Management, 13(1), 109-122.
Verweire, K., Baeten, X., Somers, L., Van den Berghe, L. (2006). Performance from a finance perspective: Shareholder value and beyond. In Verweire, K., Van den Berghe, L. (Eds.), Integrated performance management: A guide to strategy implementation (19-36). London: Sage.
Villalonga, B., Amit, R. (2006). How do family ownership, control and management affect firm value? Journal of Financial Economics, 80(2), 385-417.
Viviani, D., Giorgino, M., Steri, R. (2008). Private equity-backed IPOs and long-run market performance analysis of Italian firms. Journal of Private Equity, 11(3), 50-60.
Von Bertalanffy, L. (1952). Problems of life: An evaluation of modern biological and scientific thought. New York: Harper & Brothers.
Voordeckers, W., Van Gils, A., Van den Heuvel, J. (2007). Board composition in small and medium-sized family firms. Journal of Small Business Management, 45(1), 137-156.
Walker, E., Brown, A. (2004). What success factors are important to small business owners? International Small Business Journal, 22(6), 577-594.
Wall, R. (1998). An empirical investigation of the production function of the family firm. Journal of Small Business Management, 36(2), 24-32.
Walton, E. J. (1981). The comparison of measures of organization structure. The Academy of Management Review, 6(1), 155-160.
Wang, Y., Ahmed, P., Farquhar, S. (2007). Founders versus descendants: The profitability, growth and efficiency characteristics comparison in the UK small and medium sized family businesses Journal of Entrepreneurship, 16(2), 173-195.
List of References 267
Ward, J. (2004). Perpetuating the family business: 50 lessons learned from long-lasting, successful families in business. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.
Ward, J. L. (1987). Keeping the family business healthy: How to plan for continuing growth, profitability, and family leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Ward, J. L. (1988). The special role of strategic planning for family businesses. Family Business Review, 1(2), 105-117.
Ward, J. L. (1997). Growing the family business: Special challenges and best practices. Family Business Review, 10(4), 323-337.
Ward, J. L., Handy, J. L. (1988). A survey of board practices. Family Business Review, 1(3), 289-308.
Weber, H. (2009). Familienexterne Unternehmensnachfolge: Eine empirische Untersuchung über Akquisitionen von Familienunternehmen. Wiesbaden: Gabler.
Weber, M. (1947). The theory of social and economic organization. New York: Free Press.
Webster's unabridged dictionary of the English language (1989). S.v. "fit". New York: Portland House.
Weisberg, S. (2005). Applied linear regression. Hoboken: Wiley.
Welsch, J. (1991). Family enterprises in the United Kingdom, the Federal Republic of Germany, and Spain: A transnational comparison. Family Business Review, 4(2), 191-203.
Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5(2), 171-180.
Westhead, P., Cowling, M. (1997). Performance contrasts between family and non-family unquoted companies in the UK. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 3(1), 30-52.
Westhead, P., Cowling, M. (1998). Family firm research: The need for a methodological rethink. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 23(1), 31-56.
Westhead, P., Howorth, C. (2006). Ownership and management issues associated with family firm performance and company objectives. Family Business Review, 19(4), 301-316.
Westhead, P., Howorth, C. (2007). ‘Types’ of private family firms: An exploratory conceptual and empirical analysis. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development: An International Journal, 19(5), 405-431.
Wikipedia (2011). Rahmendaten der Länder URL: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_%28 Deutschland%29, retrieved 2/14/2011.
268 List of References
Wiklund, J., Shepherd, D. (2003). Knowledge-based resources, entrepreneurial orientation, and the performance of small and medium-sized businesses. Strategic Management Journal, 24(13), 1307-1314.
Winter, M., Fitzgerald, M. A., Heck, R. K. Z., Haynes, G. W., Danes, S. M. (1998). Revisiting the study of family businesses: Methodological challenges, dilemmas, and alternative approaches. Family Business Review, 11(3), 239-252.
Wong, Y. J., Chang, S. C., Chen, L. Y. (2010). Does a family-controlled firm perform better in corporate venturing? Corporate Governance: An International Review, 18(3), 175-192.
Wood, S. (1979). A reappraisal of the contingency approach to organization. Journal of Management Studies, 16(3), 334-354.
Woodward, J. (1958). Management and technology. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office.
Woodward, J. (1965). Industrial organization: Theory and practice. New York: Oxford University Press.
Wortman, M. S. (1994). Theoretical foundations for family-owned business: A conceptual and research-based paradigm. Family Business Review, 7(1), 3-27.
Wulf, T. (2007). Diversifikationserfolg: Eine top-management-orientierte Perspektive. Wiesbaden: Deutscher UniversitSts-Verlag.
Yammeesri, J., Lodh, S. (2004). Is family ownership a pain or gain to firm performance. Journal of American Academy of Business, 4(1/2), 263-289.
Yeh, Y. (2005). Do controlling shareholders enhance corporate value? Corporate Governance: An International Review, 13(2), 313-325.
Yeh, Y., Lee, T., Woidtke, T. (2001). Family control and corporate governance: Evidence from Taiwan. International Review of Finance, 2(1/2), 21-48.
Yeh, Y., Woidtke, T. (2005). Commitment or entrenchment?: Controlling shareholders and board composition. Journal of Banking & Finance, 29(7), 1857-1885.
Yin, X., Zajac, E. J. (2004). The strategy/governance structure fit relationship: Theory and evidence in franchising arrangements. Strategic Management Journal, 25(4), 365-383.
Yoshikawa, T., Rasheed, A. A. (2010). Family control and ownership monitoring in family-controlled firms in Japan. Journal of Management Studies, 47(2), 274-295.
Yuan, D., Hua, Z., Junxi, Z. (2008). The financial and operating performance of Chinese family-owned listed firms. Management International Review, 48(3), 297-318.
List of References 269
Zahra, S. A. (2003). International expansion of U.S. manufacturing family businesses: The effect of ownership and involvement. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(4), 495-512.
Zahra, S. A. (2005). Entrepreneurial risk taking in family firms. Family Business Review, 18(1), 23-40.
Zahra, S. A., Covin, J. G. (1994). The financial implications of fit between competitive strategy and innovation types and sources. The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 5(2), 183-211.
Zahra, S. A., Hayton, J. C., Neubaum, D. O., Dibrell, C., Craig, J. B. (2008). Culture of family commitment and strategic flexibility: The moderating effect of stewardship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 32(6), 1035-1054.
Zahra, S. A., Hayton, J. C., Salvato, C. (2004). Entrepreneurship in family vs. non-family firms: A resource-based analysis of the effect of organizational culture. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 28(4), 363-381.
Zahra, S. A., Pearce II, J. A. (1990). Research evidence on the Miles-Snow typology. Journal of Management, 16(4), 751-768.
Zahra, S. A., Sharma, P. (2004). Family business research: A strategic reflection. Family Business Review, 17(4), 331-346.
Zajac, E. J., Kraatz, M. S., Bresser, R. K. F. (2000). Modeling the dynamics of strategic fit: A normative approach to strategic change. Strategic Management Journal, 21(4), 429-453.
Zajac, E. J., Shortell, S. M. (1989). Changing generic strategies: Likelihood, direction, and performance implications. Strategic Management Journal, 10(5), 413-430.
Zajac, E. J., Westphal, J. D. (1994). The costs and benefits of managerial incentives and monitoring in large U.S. corporations: When is more not better? Strategic Management Journal, 15, 121-142.
Zellweger, T. (2006). Investitionsentscheidungen von Familien- und Nichtfamilienunternehmern. Zeitschrift für KMU und Entrepreneurship, 54(2), 93-115.
Zellweger, T. (2007a). Familieneinfluss und Performance privat gehaltener Familienunternehmen. Zeitschrift für KMU und Entrepreneurship, 55(2), 77-95.
Zellweger, T. (2007b). Time horizon, costs of equity capital, and generic investment strategies of firms. Family Business Review, 20(1), 1-15.
Zellweger, T., Astrachan, J. H. (2008a). Performance of family firms: A literature review and guidance for future research. Zeitschrift für KMU und Entrepreneurship, 56(2), 83-108.
Zellweger, T., Meister, R., Fueglistaller, U. (2007). The outperformance of family firms: The role of variance in earnings per share and analyst forecast dispersion on the Swiss market. Financial Markets and Portfolio Management, 21(2), 203-220.
270 List of References
Zellweger, T., Nason, R. (2008). A stakeholder perspective on family firm performance. Family Business Review, 21(3), 203-216.
Zellweger, T. M., Astrachan, J. H. (2008b). On the emotional value of owning a firm. Family Business Review, 21(4), 347-363.
Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung (ZEW) (2008). Wirtschaftliche und gesellschaftliche Bedeutung von Familienunternehmen. Mannheim.
Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung (ZEW), Institute für Mittelstandsforschung (IFM) (2009). Die volkswirtschaftliche Bedeutung der Familienunternehmen. München: Stiftung für Familienunternehmen.