A Systematic Review on Conceptualizations of Preventing and Promoting Factors of Change in Family Organizations

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

• Tahereh Ebadi ¹
• Seyed Hosein Kazemi ²
• Hassan Danaeefard ³

¹ M.Sc. in Organization Development, Dep. of Public Administration, Faculty of Management & Economics, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran

² Assistant Professor, Department of Public Administration, Faculty of Management & Economics, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran

³ Professor, Department of Public Administration, Faculty of Management & Economics, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran

https://doi.org/10.22067/tmj.2024.82388.1431

Abstract

 
1- INTRODUCTION
Although family organizations are usually on the sidelines of management research, they play a significant role in local and international economies. Therefore, in the last few decades, studies have focused on the differences between these organizations and conventional ones. One of these areas of attention is researching survival and organizational changes in these organizations. Due to their dual identity (family on the one hand and business on the other), family organizations face different change issues and have distinct characteristics that can prevent or promote changes.
 
2- THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
Previous research has addressed many issues and research questions about the different aspects of experiencing organizational change in family organizations. Specifically, the main research topics include the person-centered behaviors of the founders (such as their leadership style and entrepreneurial behaviors) alongside the specific features of these organizations (such as cultural differences). Another main focus of the literature has been explaining the distinct nature of family organizations, resulting in a middle-range theory about the dualistic nature of their identity, namely, the socioemotional wealth theory. Socioemotional wealth refers to financial aspects of the firm that meet the family's affective needs, such as identity, the ability to exercise family influence, and the perpetuation of the family dynasty. However, what is lacking in the literature is a more comprehensive look at how family organizations experience organizational changes. To answer this question, secondary data analysis, i.e., how previous studies have conceptualized organizational changes and its promoting and preventing factors in family organizations, would be a suitable path.
 
3- METHODOLOGY
The current study tried to answer the research question by systematically reviewing the literature from 2000 to 2020. Unlike traditional narrative review, systematic review is repeatable and transparent. It provides a structured and documented approach to the literature selection and review process to reduce review bias. We followed the procedures and recommendations of some authoritative articles to conduct this review. Accordingly, the first step was determining clear and specific questions at the beginning of the study: “What approaches and theories are used in the conceptualization of change in family organizations?” and “What are the factors that promote or prevent change in family organizations?” The next step was doing an initial search and identifying related articles in 5 online databases (Google Scholar, Sage Publications, Science Direct, Taylor & Francis, and Wiley). We used two categories of keywords and logical operators (AND, OR) to perform the search. The search was conducted in September 2020 and only among sources published in English between 2000 and 2020. For the selection of articles, we set some inclusion and exclusion criteria, such as “the study should be empirical and being published in a peer-reviewed journal,” which were applied through software-aided control, referring to related sites, and reviewing the abstracts of the articles. By the end, 81 final articles were selected for this review. To extract data, we created an Excel file with columns related to the general characteristics of the articles and our research questions. During a back-and-forth process between the researchers, we negotiated and finally agreed upon the extracted information. Since the data and methods of the reviewed articles were heterogeneous, we combined the findings in this study qualitatively. To do so, the final articles were entered into ATLAS.ti (version 8) software for content analyzing and coding and their information was combined into three main themes: the approach or theory used for conceptualizing the change and its promoting and preventing factors.
 
4- RESULTS & DISCUSSION
This study was to summarize the findings of past studies and provide a more general picture of change and transformation in family organizations. Specifically, this research aimed to answer two main questions: “What approaches and theories are used in the conceptualization of change in family organizations?” and “What are the factors promoting and preventing change in family organizations?” Regarding the first question, the finding of this study is that change in family organizations is mainly conceptualized around five main perspectives: succession, entrepreneurship, sustainable business development, socio-emotional wealth, and organizational culture. As for the second question, reviewing articles shows that factors preventing and promoting change in family organizations are not far from these topics. For example, one factor that drives change in family organizations is the existence of an entrepreneurial culture and the existence of an entrepreneurial leader and founder. Also, the existence of a suitable substitute and non-family expert staff are factors that lead to change. This means that change in family organizations mainly happens either through an internal factor (i.e., entrepreneurial culture) or an external factor (i.e., the presence of non-family experts). These two observations show two main strategies to facilitate change in family organizations that can be used by managers or change consultants. The same pattern is observed among preventing factors. The existence of non-professional managers, traditional attitudes towards organization management, and nepotism have been among the preventing factors. This means that if the organizational culture of a family organization is institutionalized in the form of anti-change norms such as nepotism or authoritarian leadership, it would be one of the biggest obstacles to change. In such a case, managers or change consultants can facilitate changes in these organizations by making cultural interventions such as organizational confrontation meetings.
 
5- CONCLUSIONS & SUGGESTIONS
By categorizing and combining theories/approaches to the conceptualization of change and its preventing and promoting factors in family organizations, this study paves the way for developing a change management model in family organizations. For this purpose, this study has categorized all the obtained preventing and promoting factors into five capabilities: adaptability, human capital, generational transition, manager/s, and change management. This means that those factors that help to create these five capabilities are the promoting factors, and those that weaken these capabilities are the factors that prevent change in these organizations. Based on this classification, future studies can conduct research on how to measure and mature these capabilities in family organizations and provide a model for promoting and successfully managing changes in family organizations.

Keywords

• Family Organizations
• Change Management
• Organizational Change
• Systematic Review

References

Abiodun, O. A.; Agbaeze, E. K.; Adeleke, B. S.; Ghasi, N. C., & Ude, A. O. (2019). Do leadership roles affect survivability of family businesses in developing economies? International Journal of Entrepreneurship, 23(2), 1-10.

Antheaume, N.; Robic, P., & Barbelivien, D. (2013). French family business and longevity: have they been conducting sustainable development policies before it became a fashion? Business History, 55(6), 942-962.

Bakker, R. M. (2010). Taking stock of temporary organizational forms: a systematic review and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(4), 466-486.

Basco, R. (2013). The family’s effect on family firm performance: a model testing the demographic and essence approaches. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 4(1), 42-66.

Bennedsen, M.; Nielsen, K. M.; 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.

Bernhard, F., & Labaki, R. (2021). Moral emotions in family businesses: exploring vicarious guilt of the next generation. Family Business Review, 34(2), 193-212.

Berrone, P.; Cruz, C., & Gómez- Mejía, L. R. (2012). Socioemotional wealth in family firms: theoretical dimensions, assessment approaches, and agenda for future research. Family Business Review, 25(3), 258–279.

Bhasi, M.; Renuka, V. V., & Rajkumar, S. (2020). A study of factors affecting inheritance success in family businesses in Kerala. International Journal of Family Business and Regional Development, 1(1), 62-80.

Carsrud, A., & Cucculelli, M. (2014). Family firms, entrepreneurship, and economic development. Journal of Small Business Management, 52(2), 189-191.

Cater, J., & Schwab, A. (2008). Turnaround strategies in established small family firms. Family Business Review, 21(1), 31-50.

Chalus‐Sauvannet, M. C.; Deschamps, B., & Cisneros, L. (2016). Unexpected succession: when children return to take over the family business. Journal of Small Business Management, 54(2), 714-731.

Chirico, F., & Nordqvist, M. (2010). Dynamic capabilities and transgenerational value creation in family firms: the role of organizational culture. International Small Business Journal, 28(5), 1–18.

Chirico, F., & Salvato, C. (2008). Knowledge integration and dynamic organizational adaptation in family firms. Family Business Review, 21(2), 169–181.

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.

Colli, A.; Pérez, P. F., & Rose, M. B. (2003). National determinants of family firm development? family firms in Britain, Spain, and Italy in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Enterprise & Society, 4(1), 28-64.

Cucculelli, M., & Bettinelli, C. (2016). Corporate governance in family firms, learning and reaction to recession: evidence from Italy. Futures, 75, 92-103.

Cummings, T. G., & Worley, C. G. (2014). Organization development and change. Cengage learning.

Erdogan, I.; Rondi, E., & De Massis, A. (2020). Managing the tradition and innovation paradox in family firms: a family imprinting perspective. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 44(1), 20-54

Flynn, J., & Duesing, R. J. (2020). Toward developing an applied framework to help foster success in generational transition of family businesses. Journal of Small Business & Entrepreneurship, 32(3), 287-308.

Gilding, M. (2000). Family business and family change: individual autonomy, democratization, and the new family business institutions. Family Business Review, 13(3), 239-250.

Giner, B., & Ruiz, A. (2020). Family entrepreneurial orientation as a driver of longevity in family firms: a historic analysis of the ennobled Trenor family and Trenor y Cía. Business History, 1-32.

Hall, A.; Melin, L., & Nordqvist, M. (2001). Entrepreneurship as radical change in the family business: exploring the role of cultural patterns. Family Business Review, 14(3), 193-208.

Handler, W. C. (1989). Succession in family business: a review of the research. Family Business Review, 7(2), 133-159.

Hatum, A.; Pettigrew, A., & Michelini, J. (2010). Building organizational capabilities to adapt under turmoil. Journal of Change Management, 10(3), 257-274.

Herriau, C., & Touchais, L. (2015). The role of control systems in the process of change: application to a family business succession. Journal of Change Management, 15(1), 19-42.

Kähkönen, T.; Blomqvist, K.; Gillespie, N., & Vanhala, M. (2021). Employee trust repair: a systematic review of 20 years of empirical research and future research directions. Journal of Business Research, 130, 98-109.

Kellermanns, F. W., & Eddleston, K. A. (2004). Feuding families: when conflict does a family firm good. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 28(3), 209–228.

King, D. R.; Meglio, O.; Gomez‐Mejia, L.; Bauer, F., & De Massis, A. (2022). Family business restructuring: a review and research agenda. Journal of Management Studies, 59(1), 197-235.

Kotlar, J., & Chrisman, J. J. (2019). Point: how family involvement influences organizational change. Journal of Change Management, 19(1), 26-36.

Le Breton–Miller, I.; Miller, D., & Steier, L. P. (2004). Toward an integrative model of effective FOB succession. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 28(4), 305-328.

Lee, D. S.; Lim, G. H., & Lim, W. S. (2003). Family business succession: appropriation risk and choice of successor. Academy of Management Review, 28, 657-666.

Ling, Y.; Lubatkin, M., & Schulze, B. (2002). Altruism, utility functions and agency problems at family firm. In C.S. Galbraith (Eds.), Volume 3: Strategies and organizations in transition: 171–188.

Littunen, H. (2003). Management capabilities and environmental characteristics in the critical operational phase of entrepreneurship—a comparison of Finnish family and nonfamily firms. Family Business Review, 16(3), 183-197.

Lumpkin, G. T.; Martin, W., & Vaughn, M. (2008). Family orientation: Individual-level influences on family firm outcomes. Family Business Review, 21(2), 127–138.

Mazzi, C. (2011). Family business and financial performance: current state of knowledge and future research challenges. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 2(3), 166-181.

Muka, T.; Glisic, M.; Milic, J.; Verhoog, S.; Bohlius, J.; Bramer, W.; ... & Franco, O. H. (2020). A 24-step guide on how to design, conduct, and successfully publish a systematic review and meta-analysis in medical research. European journal of epidemiology, 35, 49-60.

Neubauer, H. (2003). The dynamics of succession in family businesses in western european countries. Family Business Review, 16(4), 269-281.

Nguyen, D. H.; de Leeuw, S., & Dullaert, W. E. (2018). Consumer behaviour and order fulfilment in online retailing: a systematic review. International Journal of Management Reviews, 20(2), 255-276.

Nyberg, R. S.; & Jensen, T. C. (2009). Honoring the Kun Lun way: cross-cultural organization development consulting to a hospitality company in datong, China. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 45(2), 305-337.

Rondi, E.; De Massis, A., & Kotlar, J. (2019). Unlocking innovation potential: a typology of family business innovation postures and the critical role of the family system. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 10(4), 100236.

Sharma, P.; Chrisman, J. J.; Pablo, A., & Chua, J. H. (2001). Determinants of initial satisfaction with the succession process in family firms: a conceptual model, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 25(3), 17-35.

Shoham, H. (2011). Rethinking tradition: From ontological reality to assigned temporal meaning. European Journal of Sociology, 52(02), 313–340.

Stamm, I., & Lubinski, C. (2011). Crossroads of family business research and firm demography—a critical assessment of family business survival rates. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 2(3), 117-127.

Stavrou, E. T.; Kleanthous, T., & Anastasiou, T. (2005). Leadership personality and firm culture during hereditary transitions in family firms: model development and empirical investigation. Journal of Small Business Management, 43(2), 187-206.

Strike, V. (2012). Advising the family firm: reviewing the past to build the future. Family Business Review, 25, 156-177.

Su, E. & Dou, J. (2013). How does knowledge sharing among advisors from different disciplines affect the quality of the services provided to the family business client? an investigation from the family business advisor’s perspective. Family Business Review, 26(3): 256–270.

Tagiuri, R., & Davis, J. A. (1996). Bivalent attributes of the family firm. Family Business Review, 9(2), 199 – 208.

Tranfield, D.; Denyer, D., & Smart, P. (2003). Towards a methodology for developing evidence‐informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. British Journal of Management, 14(3), 207-222.

Vago, M. (2004). Integrated Change Management: challenges for family business clients and consultants. Family Business Review, 17(1), 71-80.

Van Gils, A.; Dibrell, C.; Neubaum, D. O., & Craig, J. B. (2014). Social issues in the family enterprise. Family Business Review, 27(3), 193-205

Wang, D.; Ma, G.; Song, X., & Liu, Y. (2016). Political connection and business transformation in family firms: evidence from China. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 7(2), 117-130.

Ward, J. L. (2011). Keeping the family business healthy: how to plan for continuing growth, profitability, and family leadership, Palgrave Macmilalan, New York.

Yew, J. L. K. (2020). Tacit knowledge and generational change: the China factor, enterprise development and Malaysian Chinese family SMEs in traditional food production. China Report, 56(1), 103-128.