Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A model to study the organizational culture of the family firm

  • Published:
Small Business Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The results of research of the utilitarian type on the culture of the family firm is reported here. A model is built and defined on the basis of the main arguments supporting the following theories: general systems theory, neoinstitutional theory, transformational leadership theory, field theory, learning theory, and group dynamics theory. The resulting model is an instrument that can be used to deepen our understanding of the organizational culture of this type of firm. It should prove to be a powerful tool to exploit the competitive potential of this culture, which has often been noted in the literature.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. According to Schein (1988), the organizational culture consists of three different levels: artifacts (first level), values (second level), and assumptions (third level). A scale of perception exists from the first level to the third level. Thus, artifacts are the most clearly perceptible, while the perception of values and, especially, assumptions is more difficult. For this reason, values and assumptions are known as the two invisible levels of the organizational culture.

  2. In general, family culture refers to the artifacts, perspectives, basic values, and assumptions shared by the members of a particular family (Dyer 1986).

  3. The regulative pillar of institutions provides explicit guidance to organizational members about rules, controls, rewards, and sanctions (Scott, 1995a), so it does not contribute to explaining the flow of values and their cognition from the family to the family business like the other two pillars.

  4. In family firms, this mode of getting the institutional elements is different because their members are exposed to two socialization processes of a family nature—the socialization process of their own families and the socialization process of the owning family of the firm—and also because the literature considers the family to be the most important socialization agent (Macionis and Plumier 1999). From an organizational perspective, the main goal of socialization is just to make the new members understand the organizational culture defined in terms of its shared values (Chatman 1991; Bauer et al. 1998).

  5. Although McGregor (1960) does not speak about trust specifically or directly, he does so indirectly when he notes that the organizational structure must be based on cooperation and mutual support, since trust is the key issue in most of the specialized literature on cooperation in organizational and inter-organizational relationships (see Gambetta 1988; Jung and Avolio 2000; Korsgaard et al. 2002).

  6. Kim (1993) distinguishes between individual mental models and shared mental models. Individual mental models are described as deeply held internal images of how the world works that have a powerful influence on what we do because they also affect what we see. Shared mental models are described as thought constructs that affect the way organizations see how the world works and how they operate in the world.

References

  • Abrams, D., & Hogg, M. (1998). Prospects for research in group processes and intergroup relations. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 1, 7–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adams, J., Tashchian, A., & Shore, T. (1996). Ethics in family and non-family owned firms: An exploratory study. Family Business Review, 9, 157–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ahlstrom, D., & Bruton, G. (2001). Learning from successful local private firms in China: Establishing legitimacy. Academy of Management Executive, 15, 72–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ainsworth, S., & Wolfram, J. (2003). Families divided: Culture and control in small family business. Organization Studies, 24, 1463–1485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allen, N., & Meyer, J. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63, 1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, R., & Reeb, D. (2003). Founding family ownership and firm performance: Evidence from the S&P 500. Journal of Finance, 58, 1301–1329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aronoff, C. (2004). Self-perpetuation family organization built on values: Necessary condition for long-term family business survival. Family Business Review, 17, 55–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aronoff, C., & Ward, J. (1993). How families work together. Marietta: Business Owner Resources.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aronoff, C., & Ward, J. (1995). Family-owned business: A thing of the past or a model of the future? Family Business Review, 8, 121–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Astrachan, J. (1988). Family firm and community culture. Family Business Review, 1, 165–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1982). Teoría del aprendizaje social. Madrid: Espasa Calpe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social-cognitive view. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A., & Walters, R. (1959). Adolescent aggression. New York: Ronald Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bass, B. (1985). Leadership performance beyond expectations. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bass, B. (1997). Does the transactional-transformational paradigm transcend organizational and national boundaries? American Psychologist, 52, 130–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bass, B. (1999). Two decades of research and development in transformational leadership. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 8, 9–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bass, B., & Steidlmeier, P. (1999). Ethics, character and authentic transformational leadership behavior. Leadership Quarterly, 10, 181–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bauer, T., Morrison, E., & Callister, R. (1998). Organizational socialization: A review of directions and future research. In G. Forris (Ed.), Research in personnel and human resources management (pp. 149–214). Greenwich: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baum, J., & Oliver, C. (1991). Institutional linkages and organizational mortality. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36, 187–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennis, W., & Goldsmith, J. (1997). Learning to lead: A workbook on becoming a leader. Reading: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bluedorn, A., & Lundgren, E. (1993). A culture-match perspective for strategic change. Research in Organizational Change and Development, 7, 137–139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burke, R. (2001). Organizational values, work experiences and satisfactions among managerial and professional women. Journal of Management Development, 20, 346–354.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burns, J. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bush, A., Smith, R., & Martin, C. (1999). The influence of consumer socialization variables on attitude toward advertising: A comparison of African-Americans and Caucasians. Journal of Advertising, 28, 13–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Casey, A. (2005). Enhancing individual and organizational learning. Management Learning, 36, 131–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chatman, J. (1991). Matching people and organizations: Selection and socialization in public accounting firm. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36, 459–484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Churchill, N., & Hatten, K. (1987). Non-market-based transfers of wealth and power: A research framework for family businesses. American Journal of Small Business, 12, 53–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, J., & Porras, J. (1996). Empresas que perduran. Barcelona: Paidós.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cox, T., Lobel, S., & Mcleod, P. (1991). Effects of ethnic group cultural differences on cooperative and competitive behavior on a group task. Academy of Management Journal, 34, 827–847.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D’aunno, T., Sutton, R., & Price, H. (1991). Isomorphism and external support in conflicting institutional environments: A study of drug abuse treatment units. Academy of Management Journal, 34, 636–661.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daily, C., & Dollinger, M. (1992). An empirical examination of ownership structure in family and professionally managed firms. Family Business Review, 5, 117–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Danco, L. (1975). Beyond survival. Cleveland: Center for Family Business.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danes, S., Rueter, M., Kwon, H., & Doherty, W. (2002). Family FIRO model: An application to family business. Family Business Review, 15, 31–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De La Calle, C., & Maeztu, I. (2000). El Compromiso y la Flexibilidad en la Gestión de los Recursos Humanos. In: Proceedings of the XIV National Congress, X Spanish-French Congress of AEDEM (pp. 485–492), Jaén.

  • De Quijano, S., Navarro, J., & Cornejo, J. (2000). Un Modelo Integrado de Compromiso e Identificación con la Organización: Análisis del Cuestionario ASH-ICI. Revista de Psicología Social Aplicada, 10, 27–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Visscher, F., Aronoff, C., & Ward, J. (1995). Financing transitions: Managing capital and liquidity in the family business. Family business leadership series. Marietta: Business Owner Resources.

    Google Scholar 

  • Denison, D. (1984). Bringing corporate culture to the bottom line. Organizational Dynamics, 13, 4–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denison, D., Colleen, L., & Ward, J. (2004). Culture in family-owned enterprises: Recognizing and leveraging unique strengths. Family Business Review, 17, 61–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dimaggio, P., & Powell, W. (1991). Introduction. In W. Powell & P. DiMaggio (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 1–38). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dobni, D., & Ritchie, J. (2000). Organizational values: The inside view of service productivity. Journal of Business Research, 47, 91–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donckels, R., & Fröhlick, E. (1991). Are family business really different? European experiences from STRATOS. Family Business Review, 4, 149–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dyer, W. (1986). Cultural change in family firms: Anticipating and managing business and family traditions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eddleston, K., Otondo, R., & Kellermanns, F. (2008). Conflict, participative decision-making and generational ownership dispersion: A multilevel analysis. Journal of Small Business Management, 46, 457–485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellemers, N. (2001). Social identity, commitment and work behavior. In M. Hogg & D. Terry (Eds.), Social identity process in organizational contexts (pp. 101–114). Philadelphia: Psychology Press, Taylor and Francis Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fairclough, G. (1998). Culture clashes after combinations spur a new brand of due diligence. Wall Street Journal, p. A1.

  • Fey, C., & Denison, D. (2003). Organizational culture and effectiveness: Can American theory be applied in Russia? Organization Science, 14, 686–706.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fiol, C., Harris, D., & House, R. (1999). Charismatic leadership: Strategies for effecting social change. Leadership Quarterly, 10, 449–482.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gallo, M. (1993). Cultura en Empresa Familiar. In M. Gallo (Ed.), La Empresa Familiar 4 (pp. 225–249). Barcelona: IESE, Publicaciones de la Cátedra de Empresa Familiar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallo, M. (1995). La Empresa Familiar. Textos y Casos. Barcelona: Praxis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallo, M., & Vilaseca, A. (1996). Finance in family business. Family Business Review, 9, 387–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gallo, M., Tàpies, J., & Cappuyns, K. (2004). Comparison of family and non family business: Financial logic and personal preferences. Family Business Review, 17, 303–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gambetta, D. (1988). Can we trust? In D. Gambetta (Ed.), Trust: Making and breaking cooperative relations (pp. 213–237). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gersick, K., Davis, J., McCollom, M., & Lansberg, I. (1997). Empresas familiares, generación a generación. México: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goffee, R., & Scase, R. (1985). Proprietorial control in family firms: Some Functions of quasiorganic management systems. Journal of Management Studies, 22, 54–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Habbershon, T., & Williams, M. (1999). A resource-based framework for assessing the strategic advantages of family firms. Family Business Review, 12, 1–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, P. (1988). A historical overview of family firms in the Unites States. Family Business Review, 1, 51–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hater, J., & Bass, B. (1988). Superiors’ evaluations and subordinates’ perceptions of transformational and transactional leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 695–702.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henry, J. (2006). Organizational culture and performance measurement systems. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 31, 77–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s consequences: International differences in work-related values. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofstede, G. (1991). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. Intercultural cooperation and its importance for survival. London: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hogg, M. (2000). Social identity and self categorization processes in organizational contexts. Academy of Management Review, 25, 121–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hogg, M. (2001). A social identity theory of leadership. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5, 184–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hosmer, L. (1995). Trust: The connecting link between organizational theory and philosophical ethics. Academy of Management Review, 20, 379–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iles, P., Foster, A., & Tinline, G. (1996). The changing relationship between work commitment, personal flexibility and employability: An evaluation of field experiment in executive development. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 11, 18–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jiatao-Li, X., & Pillutla, M. (2002). Multi-cultural leaders teams and organizational identification in international joint ventures. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 13, 320–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, R., & Marakas, G. (2000). Research report: The role of behavioral modeling in computer skills acquisition. Toward Refinement of the Model. Information Systems Research, 11, 402–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jung, D., & Avolio, B. (2000). Opening the black box: An experimental investigation of the mediating effects of trust and value. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21, 949–965.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kark, R., Shamir, B., & Gilad, C. (2003). The two faces of transformational leadership: Empowerment and dependency. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 246–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kast, F., & Rosenzweig, J. (1987). Administración en las organizaciones. Enfoque de sistemas y contingencias, 4ª edición. México: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kets De Vries, M. (1993). The dynamics of family controlled firms. The good news and the bad news. Organizational Dynamics, 21, 59–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, D. (1993). The link between individual and organizational learning. Sloan Management Review, Fall, 37–50.

  • Korsgaard, M., Brodt, S., & Whitener, E. (2002). Trust in the face of conflict: The role of managerial trustworthy behavior and organizational context. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 312–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kotter, J., & Heskett, J. (1995). Cultura de empresa y rentabilidad. Madrid: Díez de Santos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuratko, D., Hornsby, J., & Naffziger, D. (1997). An examination of owner’s goals in sustaining entrepreneurship. Journal of Small Business Management, 35, 24–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kwon, U., Beatty, S., & Lueg, J. (2000). Organizational values, work norms and relational role behaviours: An empirical retail assessment. International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, 10, 401–416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lachapelle, K., & Barnes, L. (1998). The trust catalyst in the family-owned business. Family Business Review, 11, 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, T. (1999). Institutional strategy. Journal of Management, 25, 161–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leach, P. (1993). La Empresa Familiar. Barcelona: Granica.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, J. (2006). Family firm performance: Further evidence. Family Business Review, 19, 103–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, C., & Chen, W. (2005). The effects of internal marketing and organizational culture on knowledge management in the information technology industry. International Journal of Management, 22, 661–672.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lyman, A. (1991). Customer service: Does family ownership make a difference? Family Business Review, 4, 303–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macionis, J., & Plumier, K. (1999). Sociología. Madrid: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martín, R., & Epitropaki, O. (2001). Role of organizational identification on implicit leadership theories (ILTs), influences of self-deception and self-efficacy. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 4, 247–262

    Google Scholar 

  • Martínez, R., & Dacin, T. (1999). Efficiency motives and normative forces: Combining transaction costs and institutional logic. Journal of Management, 25, 75–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Masi, R., & Cooke, R. (2000). Effects of transformational leadership on subordinate motivation, empowering norms and organizational productivity. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 8, 16–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McConaughy, D., & Philips, G. (1999). Founders versus descendants: The profitability, efficiency, growth. Characteristics and financing in large, public, founding family-controlled firms. Family Business Review, 12, 123–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McConaughy, D., Walker, M., Henderson, G., & Mishra, C. (1995). Founding family controlled firms: Efficiency and value. In Paper presented at the European Financial Management Association.

  • McGrath, J., Arrow, H., & Berdahl, J. (2000). The study of groups: Past, present and future. Personality and Social Psychology-Review, 4, 95–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGregor, D. (1960). The human side of enterprise. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, J., & Allen, N. (1984). Testing the side-bet theory of organizational commitment: Some methodological considerations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 372–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, J., & Allen, N. (1991). A three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment. Human Resource Management Review, 1, 61–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, J., & Allen, N. (1997). Commitment in the workplace. Theory, research and application. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, J., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure, myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83, 340–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, N., Fitzgerald, M., Winter, M., & Paul, J. (1999). Exploring the overlap of family and business demands: Household and family business managers’ adjustment strategies. Family Business Review, 12, 253–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrow, P. (1993). The theory and measurement of work commitment. Greenwich: Jai Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moscetello, L. (1990). The Pitcairns want you. Family Business Magazine, February, 3–15.

  • Neubauer, F., & Lank, A. (1998). The family business: Its governance for sustainability. Hampshire: McMillan Business.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ogbonna, E., & Harris, L. (2000). Leadership style, organizational culture and performance: Empirical evidence from the UK companies. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 11, 766–788.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ogbonna, E., & Harris, L. (2002). Organizational culture: A ten year, two phase study of change in the UK food retailing sector. Journal of Management Studies, 39, 673–707.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, C. (1991). Strategic responses to institutional processes. Academy of Management Review, 16, 145–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pervin, A. (1997). A conversation with Henry Mintzberg. Family Business Review, 10, 185–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pillai, R., & Williams, E. (2004). Transformational leadership, self-efficacy, group cohesiveness, commitment and performance. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 17, 144–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poutziouris, P. (2001). The views of family companies on venture capital: Empirical evidence from the UK small to medium-size enterprising economy. Family Business Review, 14, 277–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Powell, W. (1991). Expanding the scope of institutional analysis. In W. Powell & P. DiMaggio (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 183–203). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poza, E. (1995). A la Sombra del Roble: la Empresa Privada Familiar y su Continuidad. Ohio: Editorial Universitaria para la Empresa Familiar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poza, E., Alfred, T., & Maheshwari, A. (1997). Stakeholder perceptions of culture and management practices in family and family firms—A preliminary report. Family Business Review, 10, 135–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raelin, J. (2001). Public reflection as the basis of learning. Management Learning, 32, 11–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ravasi, D., & Schultz, M. (2006). Responding to organizational identity threats: Exploring the role of organizational culture. Academy of Management Journal, 49, 433–458.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riordan, D., & Riordan, M. (1993). Field theory: An alternative to systems theories in understanding the small family business. Journal of Small Business Management, 31, 66–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, S., & O’Leary-Kelly, A. (1998). Monkey see, monkey do: The influence of work groups on the antisocial behavior of employees. Academy of Management Journal, 41, 658–672.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenblatt, P., Demik, L., Anderson, R., & Johnson, P. (1985). The family in business: Understanding and dealing with the challenges entrepreneurial families face. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sathe, V. (1985). How to decipher and change corporate culture? In R. Kilman, M. Saxton, R. Serpa, & Associates (Eds.), Gaining control of corporate culture (pp. 230–261). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scase, R., & Goffe, R. (1980). The real world of the small business owner. London: Groom Helm.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schein, E. (1988). La Cultura Organizacional y el Liderazgo: Una Visión Dinámica. Barcelona: Plaza y Janés.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schein, E. (1996). Culture: The missing concept in organization studies. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 229–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scott, W. (1995a). Institutions and organizations. Thousands Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, W. (1995b). Introduction: Institutional theory and organizations. In: W. Scott & S. Christensen (Eds.), The institutional construction of organizations (pp. 11–23). Thousands Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shamir, B., House, R., & Arthur, M. (1993). The motivational effects of charismatic leadership: A self-concept theory. Organization Science, 4, 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, M. (1994). Dinámica de grupo: Psicología de la conducta de los pequeños grupos. Barcelona: Herder.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, R. (1997). Trust in the balance. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. (1997). Líderes en la sombra. Barcelona: Planeta.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, E., Murphy, J., & Coats, S. (1999). Attachment to groups: Theory and measurement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 94–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sorensen, J. (2002). The strength of corporate culture and the reliability of firm performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47, 70–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sorenson, R. (1999). Conflict management strategies used by successful family business. Family Business Review, 13, 183–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sorenson, R. (2000). The contribution of leadership style and practices to family and business success. Family Business Review, 13, 183–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sosik, J. (1997). Effects of transformational leadership and anonymity on idea generation in computer-mediated groups. Group and Organization Management, 22, 460–487.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sosik, J., Potosky, D., & Jung, D. (2002). Adaptive self-regulation: Meetings others’ expectations of leadership and performance. The Journal of Social Psychology, 142, 211–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sparks, J., & Schenk, J. (2001). Explaining the effects of transformational leadership: An Investigation of the effects on subordinates. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22, 849–867.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • St. James, H. (1999). What can the family contribute to business? Examining contractual relationships. Family Business Review, 12, 61–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steier, L. (2001). Family firms, plural forms of governance, and evolving role of trust. Family Business Review, 14, 353–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stinnett, N. (1983). Strong families: A portrait. In D. Mace (Ed.), Prevention in family services (pp. 27–38). Beverly Hills: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stinnett, N. (1986). Building family strengths: A manual for families. Lincoln: University of Nebraska.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stinnett, N. (1992). Strong families. In J. Hemslin (Ed.), Marriage and family in a changing society (pp. 496–506). New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tagiuri, R., & Davis, J. (1992). On the goals of successful family companies. Family Business Review, 5, 43–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. (1985). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel & W. Austin (Eds.), Intergroups psychology relations (2nd ed., pp. 7–24). Chicago: Nelson Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trostel, A., & Nichols, M. (1982). Private-held and publicly-held companies: A comparison of strategic choices and management processes. Academy of Management Journal, 25, 47–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Viator, R. (2001). The relevance of transformational leadership to nontraditional accounting services: Information systems assurance and business consulting. Journal of Information Systems, 15, 99–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Viedma, J. (1990). La excelencia empresarial española. Barcelona: Viama Editors.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walumbwa, F., Wang, P., Lawler, J., & Shi, K. (2004). The role of collective efficacy in the relations between transformational leadership and work outcomes. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 77, 515–530.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ward, J. (1988). The special role of strategic planning for family businesses. Family Business Review, 1, 105–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ward, J. (1991). Creating effective boards for private enterprises: Meeting the challenges of continuity and competition. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ward, J., & Aronoff, G. (1991). Trust gives you the advantage. Nation’s Business, 79, 42–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yammarino, F., & Bass, B. (1990). Long term forecasting of transformational leadership and its effects among naval officers: Some preliminary findings. In: K. Clark & M. Clark (Eds.), Measures of leadership (pp. 151–170). West Orange: Leadership Library of América.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zucker, L. (1977). The role of institutionalization in cultural persistence. American Sociological Review, 42, 726–743.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Facultad de Ciencias Sociales y Juridicas, University of Jaén (Spain), Building D-3, Office 155, Campus Las Lagunillas s/n, 23071, Jaén, Spain

    Manuel Carlos Vallejo

Authors
  1. Manuel Carlos Vallejo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Manuel Carlos Vallejo.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Vallejo, M.C. A model to study the organizational culture of the family firm. Small Bus Econ 36, 47–64 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-009-9175-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-009-9175-9

Keywords

JEL Classifications

Search

Navigation