Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

“With our feet on the ground and our minds free to fly”: multiple embeddedness and entrepreneurial orientation in small and medium-sized family businesses

  • Published:
Journal of Management and Governance Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Based on a qualitative multiple-case study, this article focuses on the effect that multiple embeddedness—that is, both local and family embeddedness—has on the entrepreneurial orientation of small and medium-sized family businesses. The study’s results indicate that whereas local embeddedness influences small family businesses’ entrepreneurial orientation, especially in terms of their adherence to local customs and traditions and attention to local legitimisation, family embeddedness exerts particular influence on their adherence to family history and their replication of family rules and roles within the firm. The varying extents to which local embeddedness and family embeddedness manifest in the sampled businesses suggest four types of entrepreneurial behaviours: prudent, conservative, brave and pioneering.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aldrich, H. E., Brumana, M., Campopiano, G., & Minola, T. (2021). Embedded but not asleep: Entrepreneurship and family business research in the 21st century. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 12(1), 100390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aldrich, H. E., & Cliff, J. E. (2003). The pervasive effects of family on entrepreneurship: Toward a family embeddedness perspective. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(5), 573–596.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alsos, G. A., Carter, S., & Ljunggren, E. (2014). Kinship and business: How entrepreneurial households facilitate business growth. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 26(1–2), 97–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alvarez, S. A., & Barney, J. B. (2007). Discovery and creation: Alternative theories of entrepreneurial action. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 1(1–2), 11–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alvesson, M., & Sandberg, J. (2011). Generating research questions through problematization. Academy of Management Review, 36(2), 247–271.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, R. C., & Reeb, D. M. (2003). Founding-family ownership and firm performance: Evidence form the S&P 500. The Journal of Finance, 58(3), 1301–1328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aronoff, C., & Ward, J. (2011). Family business values: How to assure a legacy of continuity and success. Palgrave MacMillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Astrachan, J. H., & Shanker, M. C. (2003). Family businesses’ contribution to the us economy: A closer look. Family Business Review, 16(3), 211–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Backman, M., & Palmberg, J. (2015). Contextualizing small family firms: How does the urban–rural context affect firm employment growth? Journal of Family Business Strategy, 6(4), 247–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bamberger, P. (2008). From the editors beyond contextualization: Using context theories to narrow the micro-macro gap in management research. Academy of Management Briarcliff Manor, 51, 839–846.

    Google Scholar 

  • Basco, R. (2015). Family business and regional development—A theoretical model of regional familiness. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 6(4), 259–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Basco, R. (2017a). Epilogue: Multiple embeddedness contexts for entrepreneurship. Contextualizing entrepreneurship in emerging economies and developing countries (pp. 329–336). Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Basco, R. (2017b). Epilogue: The multiple embeddedness of family firms in the Arab world. Family businesses in the Arab world (pp. 247–256). Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Baù, M., Chirico, F., Pittino, D., Backman, M., & Klaesson, J. (2019). Roots to grow: Family firms and local embeddedness in rural and urban contexts. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 43(2), 360–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berglund, K., Gaddefors, J., & Lindgren, M. (2016). Provoking identities: Entrepreneurship and emerging identity positions in rural development. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 28(1–2), 76–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894486511435355

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Binz-Astrachan, C., Botero, I., Astrachan, J., & Prügl, R. (2018). Branding the family firm: A review of foundations, current knowledge, and avenues for further research. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 9(1), 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bird, M., & Wennberg, K. (2014). Regional influences on the prevalence of family versus non-family start-ups. Journal of Business Venturing, 29(3), 421–436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boschma, R. (2005). Proximity and innovation: A critical assessment. Regional Studies, 39(1), 61–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carney, M. (2005). Corporate governance and competitive advantage in family-controlled firms. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(3), 249–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chrisman, J. J., Chua, J. H., De Massis, A., Frattini, F., & Wright, M. (2015). The ability and willingness paradox in family firm innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 32(3), 310–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chrisman, J. J., Chua, J. H., Kellermanns, F. W., & Chang, E. P. C. (2007). Are family managers agents or stewards? An exploratory study in privately held family firms. Journal of Business Research, 60(10), 1030–1038.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chrisman, J. J., Chua, J. H., & Steier, L. P. (2005). Sources and consequences of distinctive familiness: An introduction. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(3), 237–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chrisman, J. J., & Patel, P. C. (2012). Variations in R&D investments of family and nonfamily firms: Behavioral agency and myopic loss aversion perspectives. Academy of Management Journal, 55(4), 976–997. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.0211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chua, J. H., Chrisman, J. J., & Sharma, P. (1999). Defining the family business by behavior. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 23(4), 19–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CNA. (2017). Imprese e politiche ai tempi della crisi. Presentazione 7° rapporto congiunturale delle imprese artigiane della Sardegna.

  • Covin, J. G., & Slevin, D. P. (1989). Strategic management of small firms in hostile and benign environments. Strategic Management Journal, 10(1), 75–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cruz, C., Justo, R., & De Castro, J. O. (2012). Does family employment enhance MSEs performance?: Integrating socioemotional wealth and family embeddedness perspectives. Journal of Business Venturing, 27(1), 62–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dacin, M. T., Beal, B. D., & Ventresca, M. J. (1999). The embeddedness of organizations: Dialogue & directions. Journal of Management, 25(3), 317–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Massis, A., & Kotlar, J. (2014). The case study method in family business research: Guidelines for qualitative scholarship. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 5(1), 15–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deephouse, D. L., & Jaskiewicz, P. (2013). Do family firms have better reputations than non-family firms? An integration of socioemotional wealth and social identity theories. Journal of Management Studies, 50(3), 337–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532–550.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M. (2021). What is the Eisenhardt Method, really? Strategic Organization, 19(1), 147–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M., & Graebner, M. E. (2007). Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 25–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M., Graebner, M. E., & Sonenshein, S. (2016). Grand challenges and inductive methods: Rigor without rigor mortis. Academy of Management Briarcliff Manor, 59, 1113–1123.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elo, M., & Dana, L.-P. (2019). Embeddedness and entrepreneurial traditions: Entrepreneurship of Bukharian Jews in diaspora. Journal of Family Business Management. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFBM-03-2019-0016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferraris, A. (2014). Rethinking the literature on “multiple embeddedness” and subsidiary-specific advantages. The Multinational Business Review, 22(1), 15–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Floris, M., Dettori, A., & Dessì, C. (2020a). Handling innovation in small family firms: The role of context. International Journal of Business and Management, 15(5), 12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Floris, M., Dettori, A., & Dessì, C. (2020b). Innovation within tradition: Interesting insights from two small family bakeries. Piccola Impresa/Small Business, 1, 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Floris, M., Dettori, A., Melis, C., & Dessì, C. (2020c). Entrepreneurial orientation and the role of the context. The case of the firm “Sa Panada Srl.” Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 27(3), 349–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garcés-Galdeano, L., Larraza-Kintana, M., García-Olaverri, C., & Makri, M. (2016). Entrepreneurial orientation in family firms: The moderating role of technological intensity and performance. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 12(1), 27–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gioia, D. A., Corley, K. G., & Hamilton, A. L. (2013). Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research: Notes on the Gioia methodology. Organizational Research Methods, 16(1), 15–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies of qualitative research. Wiedenfeld and Nicholson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gomez-Mejia, L., Basco, R., Gonzalez, A. C., & Muller, C. G. (2020). Family business and local development in Iberoamerica. Cross Cultural and Strategic Management, 27(1), 51–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gómez-Mejía, L. R., Cruz, C., Berrone, P., & Castro, J. (2011). The bind that ties: Socioemotional wealth preservation in family firms. The Academy of Management Annals, 5(1), 653–707.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Granovetter, M. (1985a). Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91(3), 481–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Granovetter, M. S. (1985b). Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness. The American Journal of Sociology, 91(3), 481–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenman, A. (2013). Everyday entrepreneurial action and cultural embeddedness: An institutional logics perspective. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 25(7–8), 631–653.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hagedoorn, J. (2006). Understanding the cross-level embeddedness of interfirm partnership formation. Academy of Management Review, 31(3), 670–680.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hahn, D., Spitzley, D. I., Brumana, M., Ruzzene, A., Bechthold, L., Prügl, R., & Minola, T. (2021). Founding or succeeding? Exploring how family embeddedness shapes the entrepreneurial intentions of the next generation. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 173, 121182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hellerstedt, K., Wigren-Kristoferson, C., Aggestam, M., Stevenson, A., & Brundin, E. (2019). Disembeddedness, prior industry knowledge and opportunity creation processes. Rigour and relevance in entrepreneurship research, resources and outcomes. Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jack, S. L., & Anderson, A. R. (2002). The effects of embeddedness on the entrepreneurial process. Journal of Business Venturing, 17(5), 467–487.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • James, A., Hadjielias, E., Guerrero, M., Discua Cruz, A., & Basco, R. (2021). Entrepreneurial families in business across generations, contexts, and cultures. Journal of Family Business Management, 11(4), 355–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kalantaridis, C. (2009). SME strategy, embeddedness and performance in East Cleveland, North East England. International Small Business Journal, 27(4), 496–521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kammerlander, N., Dessì, C., Bird, M., Floris, M., & Murru, A. (2015). The impact of shared stories on family firm innovation a multicase study. Family Business Review, 28(4), 332–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karlsson, C., & Dahlberg, R. (2003). Entrepreneurship, firm growth and regional development in the new economic geography: Introduction. Small Business Economics, 21(2), 73–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kellermanns, F. W., Eddleston, K. A., Barnett, T., & Pearson, A. W. (2008). An exploratory study of family member characteristics and involvement: Effects on entrepreneurial behavior in the family firm. Family Business Review, 21(1), 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kenney, M., & Goe, W. R. (2004). The role of social embeddedness in professorial entrepreneurship: A comparison of electrical engineering and computer science at UC Berkeley and Stanford. Research Policy, 33(5), 691–707.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, S.-Y., Graham, S. S., Ahn, S., Olson, M. K., Card, D. J., Kessler, M. M., DeVasto, D. M., Roberts, L. R., & Bubacy, F. A. (2016). Correcting biased cohen’s kappa in NVivo. Communication Methods and Measures, 10(4), 217–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kraus, S., Clauss, T., Breier, M., Gast, J., Zardini, A., & Tiberius, V. (2020). The economics of COVID-19: Initial empirical evidence on how family firms in five European countries cope with the corona crisis. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 214(1), 26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krueger, N., Bogers, M. L., Labaki, R., & Basco, R. (2021). Advancing family business science through context theorizing: The case of the Arab world. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 12(1), 100377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Legard, R., Keegan, J., & Ward, K. (2003). In-depth interviews. Qualitative Research Practice: A Guide for Social Science Students and Researchers, 6(1), 138–169.

    Google Scholar 

  • Letaifa, S. B., & Rabeau, Y. (2013). Too close to collaborate? How geographic proximity could impede entrepreneurship and innovation. Journal of Business Research, 66(10), 2071–2078.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lumpkin, G., & Bacq, S. (2022). Family business, community embeddedness, and civic wealth creation. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 13(2), 100469.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lumpkin, G. T., & Dess, G. G. (1996). Clarifying the entrepreneurial orientation construct and linking it to performance. Academy of Management Review, 21(1), 135–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mari, M., Poggesi, S., & De Vita, L. (2016). Family embeddedness and business performance: Evidences from women-owned firms. Management Decision, 54(2), 476–500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mbengue, A. (2014). Management des connaissances: Codification, personnalisation et nouvelles perspectives. Management Avenir, 67(1), 243–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Memili, E., Fang, H., Chrisman, J. J., & De Massis, A. (2015). The impact of small-and medium-sized family firms on economic growth. Small Business Economics, 45(4), 771–785.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, K. E., Mudambi, R., & Narula, R. (2011). Multinational enterprises and local contexts: The opportunities and challenges of multiple embeddedness. Journal of Management Studies, 48(2), 235–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M., & Huberman, M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D. (1983). The correlates of entrepreneurship in three types of firms. Management Science, 29(7), 770–791.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D., & Friesen, P. H. (1978). Archetypes of strategy formulation. Management Science, 24(9), 921–933.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moreno, A. M., & Casillas, J. C. (2008). Entrepreneurial orientation and growth of SMEs: A causal model. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 32(3), 507–528.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nooteboom, B., Van Haverbeke, W., Duysters, G., Gilsing, V., & Van den Oord, A. (2007). Optimal cognitive distance and absorptive capacity. Research Policy, 36(7), 1016–1034.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nordqvist, M., Hall, A., & Melin, L. (2008). Methodology and family business studies: the interpretive approach. CeFEO Working Paper Series.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pittino, D., Visintin, F., & Lauto, G. (2017). A configurational analysis of the antecedents of entrepreneurial orientation. European Management Journal, 35(2), 224–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pittino, D., Visintin, F., & Lauto, G. (2018). Fly away from the nest? A configurational analysis of family embeddedness and individual attributes in the entrepreneurial entry decision by next-generation members. Family Business Review, 31(3), 271–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Polanyi, K. (1944). The great transformation. Beacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ras, R. A. D. S. (2017a). Le imprese guida in Sardegna Vol I e Vol II

  • Ras, R. A. D. S. (2017b). Sardegna in cifre 2017b. Cagliari: Servizio della Statistica Regionale http://www.sardegnastatistiche.it/documenti/12_103_20170727151245.pdf.

  • Rauch, A., Wiklund, J., Lumpkin, G. T., & Frese, M. (2009). Entrepreneurial orientation and business performance: An assessment of past research and suggestions for the future. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(3), 761–787.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reay, T., & Zhang, Z. (2014). Qualitative methods in family business research. In L. Melin, M. Nordqvist, & P. Sharma (Eds.), The Sage handbook of family business (pp. 573–593). Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Rondi, E., De Massis, A., & Kotlar, J. (2018). Unlocking innovation potential: A typology of family business innovation postures and the critical role of the family system. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 10, 100236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Runyan, R. C. (2006). Small business in the face of crisis: Identifying barriers to recovery from a natural disaster 1. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 14(1), 12–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwandt, T. A. (1994). Constructivist, interpretivist approaches to human inquiry. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 221–259). Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sieger, P., & Minola, T. (2017). The family’s financial support as a “poisoned gift”: A family embeddedness perspective on entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of Small Business Management, 55, 179–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. (2009). Hidden champions of the twenty-first century: The success strategies of unknown world market leaders. Springer Science & Business Media.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stough, R., Welter, F., Block, J., Wennberg, K., & Basco, R. (2015). Family business and regional science: “Bridging the gap.” Journal of Family Business Strategy, 6(4), 208–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suddaby, R. O. Y. (2006). From the editors: What grounded theory is not. The Academy of Management Journal, 49(4), 633–642.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thiétart, R.-A. (2014). Méthodes de recherche en management-4ème édition. Dunod.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uzzi, B. (1997). Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(1), 35–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uzzi, B. (2018). Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness. The sociology of economic life (pp. 213–241). Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Venkataraman, S. (1997). The distinctive domain of entrepreneurship research. Advances in Entrepreneurship, Firm Emergence and Growth, 3(1), 119–138.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wacheux, F. (1996). Méthodes qualitatives de recherches en gestion

  • Wallace, C. (2002). Household strategies: Their conceptual relevance and analytical scope in social research. Sociology, 36(2), 275–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, C. L., & Altinay, L. (2012). Social embeddedness, entrepreneurial orientation and firm growth in ethnic minority small businesses in the UK. International Small Business Journal, 30(1), 3–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Welter, F. (2011). Contextualizing entrepreneurship—conceptual challenges and ways forward. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 35(1), 165–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Welter, F., Baker, T., Audretsch, D. B., & Gartner, W. B. (2017). Everyday entrepreneurship—a call for entrepreneurship research to embrace entrepreneurial diversity. SAGE Publications Sage CA.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wigren-Kristoferson, C., Brundin, E., Hellerstedt, K., Stevenson, A., & Aggestam, M. (2022). Rethinking embeddedness: A review and research agenda. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 34(1–2), 32–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, M., & Kellermanns, F. W. (2011). Family firms: A research agenda and publication guide. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 2(4), 187–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research (3rd ed.). Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (2008). Case study research (4th ed.). Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (2011). Applications of case study research. Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (2013). Validity and generalization in future case study evaluations. Evaluation, 19(3), 321–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A. (2005). Entrepreneurial risk taking in family firms. Family Business Review, 18(1), 23–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A. (2007). Contextualizing theory building in entrepreneurship research. Journal of Business Venturing, 22(3), 443–452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A. (2012). Organizational learning and entrepreneurship in family firms: Exploring the moderating effect of ownership and cohesion. Small Business Economics, 38(1), 51–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A., & Covin, J. G. (1995). Contextual influences on the corporate entrepreneurship-performance relationship: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Business Venturing, 10(1), 43–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A., Wright, M., & Abdelgawad, S. G. (2014). Contextualization and the advancement of entrepreneurship research. International Small Business Journal, 32(5), 479–500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zellweger, T. M., Nason, R. S., Nordqvist, M., & Brush, C. G. (2013). Why do family firms strive for nonfinancial goals? An organizational identity perspective. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 37(2), 229–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zucchella, A. (2006). Local cluster dynamics: Trajectories of mature industrial districts between decline and multiple embeddedness. Journal of Institutional Economics, 2(1), 21–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Economic and Business Sciences, University of Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy

    Michela Floris & Angela Dettori

Authors
  1. Michela Floris
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Angela Dettori
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michela Floris.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Floris, M., Dettori, A. “With our feet on the ground and our minds free to fly”: multiple embeddedness and entrepreneurial orientation in small and medium-sized family businesses. J Manag Gov 28, 565–595 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-023-09674-9

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-023-09674-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation