Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Driving factors of innovation in family and non-family SMEs

  • Published:
Small Business Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Prior findings are inconclusive concerning the innovation output of family and non-family SMEs. The study at hand takes one step back and examines the drivers of innovation output. Applying a contextualized approach, we use data of 1.870 SMEs located in Germany, arguing that the main characteristic of family SMEs is the unity of ownership and leadership. These specific elements affect both the drivers and the output of innovation leading to a more detailed understanding of family firm innovation. Our results indicate that a long-term perspective positively affects innovation output in small family firms. We also show that family firms are better able to preserve the knowledge of the workforce through lower fluctuation rates which leads to higher levels of innovation output. Finally, the succeeding generations of family firm leaders seem to be more risk averse than the founder generation. As a result, the innovation output continuously decreases from generation to generation.

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

  • Alberti, G., & Pizzurno, E. (2013). Technology, innovation and performance in family firms. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, 17(1/2/3), 142–161. doi:10.1504/IJEIM.2013.055253.

    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. doi:10.1016/S0883-9026(03)00011-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ang, J., Cole, R., & Lin, J. (2000). Agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Finance, 55(1), 81–106. doi:10.1111/0022-1082.00201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Astrachan, J. H., Klein, S. B., & Smynios, K. X. (2002). The F-PEC scale of family influence: a proposal for solving the family business definition problem. Family Business Review, 15, 45–58. doi:10.1111/j.1741-6248.2002.00045.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Basco, R. (2013). Family business and regional development—a theoretical model of regional familiness. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 6(4), 259–271. doi:10.1016/j.jfbs.2015.04.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bassanini, A., Breda, T., Caroli, E., & Rebérioux, A. (2013). Working in family firms: paid less but more secure? Evidence from French matched employer-employee data. ILR Review, 66(2), 433–466. doi:10.1177/001979391306600206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beck, L., Janssens, W., Debruyne, M., & Lommelen, T. (2011). A study of the relationships between generation, market orientation, and innovation in family firms. Family Business Review, 24(3), 252–272. doi:10.1177/0894486511409210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bergfeld, M. M., & Weber, F. M. (2011). Dynasties of innovation: highly performing German family firms and the owners’ role for innovation. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, 13(1), 80–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berrone, P., Cruz, C., & Gómez-Mejía, L. (2012). Socioemotional wealth in family firms: theoretical dimensions, assessment approaches, and agenda for future research. Family Business Review, 25(3), 258–279. doi:10.1177/0894486511435355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bird, M., & Wennberg, K. (2014). Regional influences on the prevalence of family vs. non-family start-ups. Journal of Business Venturing, 29(3), 421–436. doi:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2013.06.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Block, J. (2012). R&D investments in family and founder firms: an agency perspective. Journal of Business Venturing, 27(2), 248–265. doi:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2010.09.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Block, J., & Spiegel, F. (2013). Family firm density and regional innovation output: an exploratory analysis. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 4(4), 270–280. doi:10.1016/j.jfbs.2013.10.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brigham, K. H., Lumpkin, G. T., Payne, G. T., & Zachary, M. A. (2014). Researching long-term orientation: a validation study and recommendations for future research. Family Business Review, 27(1), 72–88. doi:10.1177/0894486513508980.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Broekaert, W., Andries, P., & Debackere, K. (2016). Innovation processes in family firms: the relevance of organizational flexibility. Small Business Economics, 47(3), 771–785. doi:10.1007/s11187-016-9760-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cabrera-Suárez, K., De Saá-Pérez, P., & Garcia-Almeida, D. (2001). The succession process from a resource- and knowledge-based view of the family firm. Family Business Review, 14(1), 37–46. doi:10.1111/j.1741-6248.2001.00037.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carmon, A. F., Miller, A. N., Raile, A. N. W., & Roers, M. M. (2010). Fusing family and firm: employee perceptions of perceived homophily, organizational justice, organizational identification, and organizational commitment in family businesses. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 1(4), 210–223. doi:10.1016/j.jfbs.2010.10.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carnes, C., & Ireland, D. (2013). Familiness and innovation: resource bundling as the missing link. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 37(6), 1399–1419. doi:10.1111/etap.12073.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Centre for European Economic Research (2016). Results of CIS 2014 for Germany. http://www.zew.de/de/publikationen/zew-gutachten-und-forschungsberichte/forschungsberichte/innovationen/community-innovation-survey-cis/. Downloaded March 10, 2017.

  • Chin, C. L., Chen, Y. J., Kleinman, G., & Lee, P. (2009). Corporate ownership structure and innovation: evidence from Taiwan’s electronics industry. Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Finance, 24(1), 145–175. doi:10.1177/0148558X0902400108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chrisman, J., Chua, J., & Litz, R. (2004). Comparing the agency costs of family and non-family firms: conceptual issues and exploratory evidence. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 28(4), 335–354. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6520.2004.00049.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chrisman, J., Chua, J., Pearson, A. W., & Barnett, T. (2012). Family involvement, family influence, and family-centered non-economic goals in small firms. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 36(2), 267–293. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00407.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Choi, S. B., Lee, S. H., & Williams, C. (2011). Ownership and firm innovation in a transition economy: evidence from China. Research Policy, 40, 441–452. doi:10.1177/0001839216674457.

    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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chua, J. H., Chrisman, J. J., Steier, L. P., & Rau, S. B. (2012). Sources of heterogeneity in family firms: an introduction. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 36(6), 1103–1113. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6520.2012.00540.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, A. E., Georgellis, Y., & Sanfey, P. (1998). Job satisfaction, wage changes and quits: evidence from German panel data. Research in Labor Economics, 17, 88–101. doi:10.1108/S0147-9121(2012)0000035041.

    Google Scholar 

  • Classen, N., Carree, M., Van Gils, A., & Peters, B. (2014). Innovation in family and non-family SMEs: an exploratory analysis. Small Business Economics, 42(3), 595–609. doi:10.1007/s11187-013-9490-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Classen, N., Van Gils, A., Bammens, Y., & Carree, M. (2012). Accessing resources from innovation partners: the search breadth of family SMEs. Journal of Small Business Management, 50(2), 191–215. doi:10.1111/j.1540-627X.2012.00350.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, W., & Levinthal, D. (1990). Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128–152. doi:10.2307/2393553.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corbetta, G., & Salvato, C. (2004). 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. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6520.2004.00050.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Craig, J., & Dibrell, C. (2006). The natural environment, innovation, and firm performance: a comparative study. Family Business Review, 19(4), 275–288. doi:10.1111/j.1741-6248.2006.00075.x.

    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. doi:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2010.07.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davenport, T. H., & Prusak, L. (1998). Working knowledge: how organisations manage what they know. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. doi:10.1145/348772.348775.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidsson, P., & Honig, B. (2003). The role of social and human capital among nascent entrepreneurs. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(3), 301–331. doi:10.1016/S0883-9026(02)00097-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, P. (1983). Realizing the potential of the family business. Organizational Dynamics, 12(1), 47–56. doi:10.1016/0090-2616(83)90026-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, J., Schoorman, F., & Donaldson, L. (1997). Toward a stewardship theory of management. Academy of Management Review, 22(1), 20–47. doi:10.5465/AMR.1997.9707180258.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Massis, A., Audretsch, D., Uhlander, L., & Kammerlander, N. (2017). Innovation with limited resources: management lessons from the German Mittelstand. Journal of Product Innovation Management (online first). doi:10.1111/jpim.12373.

  • De Massis, A., Frattini, F., Kotlar, J., Petruzzelli, A. M., & Wright, M. (2016). Innovation through tradition: lessons from innovative family businesses and directions for future research. Academy of Management Perspectives, 30(1), 93–116. doi:10.5465/amp.2015.0017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Massis, A., Frattini, F., & Lichtenhaler, U. (2013). Research on technological innovation in family firms: present debates and future directions. Family Business Review, 26(1), 10–31. doi:10.1177/0894486512466258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Massis, A., Frattini, F., Pizzurno, E., & Cassia, L. (2015). Product innovation in family versus nonfamily firms: an exploratory analysis. Journal of Small Business Management, 53(1), 1–36. doi:10.1111/jsbm.12068.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duran, P., Kammerlander, N., van Essen, M., & Zellweger, T. (2016). Doing more with less: innovation input and output in family firms. Academy of Management Journal, 59(4), 1224–1264. doi:10.5465/amj.2014.0424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eddleston, K. A., & Kellermanns, F. W. (2007). Destructive and productive family relation-ships: a stewardship theory perspective. Journal of Business Venturing, 22, 545–565. doi:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2006.06.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2009). Overview of family-business-relevant issues: research, networks, policy measures and existing studies. http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/sme/promoting-entrepreneurship/family-business/family_business_expert_group_report_en.pdf. Downloaded January 24, 2012.

  • Fama, E., & Jensen, M. (1983). Separation of ownership and control. Journal of Law and Economics, 26(2), 301–325. doi:10.1086/467037.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gómez-Mejía, L. R., Haynes, K., Nuñez-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. doi:10.2189/asqu.52.1.106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gómez-Mejía, L. R., Tochman Campbell, J., Martin, G., Hoskisson, R. E., Makri, M., & Sirmon, D. G. (2014). Socioemotional wealth as a mixed gamble: revisiting family firm R&D investments with the behavioral agency model. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 38(6), 1351–1374. doi:10.1111/etap.12083.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gudmundson, D., Tower, C., & Hartman, E. (2003). Innovation in small business: culture and ownership structure do matter. Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship, 8(1), 1–17. doi:10.1177/0266242613484946.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habbershon, T., & Williams, M. (1999). A resource-based framework for assessing the strategic advantages of family firms. Family Business Review, 12(1), 1–25. doi:10.1111/j.1741-6248.1999.00001.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hecker, A. & Ganter, A. (2013). The influence of product market competition on technological and management innovation: firm-level evidence from a large-scale survey. European Management Review, 10. doi: 10.1111/emre.12005.

  • Hilbe, J. M. (2009). Logistic regression models. London: CRC Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoetker, G. (2007). The use of logit and probit models in strategic management research: critical issues. Strategic Management Journal, 28(4), 331–343. doi:10.1002/smj.582.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsu, L. C., & Chang, H. C. (2011). The role of behavioral strategic controls in family firm innovation. Industry and Innovation, 18(7), 709–727. doi:10.1080/13662716.2011.604474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jaskiewicz, P., Combs, J. G., & Rau, S. B. (2015). Entrepreneurial legacy: toward a theory of how some family firms nurture transgenerational entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 30(1), 29–49. doi:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2014.07.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M., & Meckling, W. (1976). Theory of the firm: managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305–360. doi:10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-X.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jianming, T. (2006). Competition and innovation behaviour. Research Policy, 35(1), 68–82. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2005.08.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kammerlander, N., Burger, D., Fust, A., & Fueglistaller, U. (2015). Exploration and exploitation in established small and medium-sized enterprises: the effect of CEOs’ regulatory focus. Journal of Business Venturing, 30, 582–602. doi:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2014.09.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kellermanns, F., Eddleston, K., Sarathy, R., & Murphy, F. (2012). Innovativeness in family firms: a family influence perspective. Small Business Economics, 38(1), 85–101. doi:10.1007/s11187-010-9268-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kenny, D. A., Kashy, D. A., & Bolger, N. (1998). Data analysis in social psychology. In D. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (Vol. 1, 4th ed., pp. 233–265). New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, S. (2000). Family businesses in Germany: significance and structure. Family Business Review, 13(3), 157–182. doi:10.1111/j.1741-6248.2000.00157.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kotey, B. (2005). Are performance differences between family and non-family SMEs uniform across all firm sizes? International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 11(6), 394–421. doi:10.1108/13552550510625168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6520.2006.00147.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Le Breton-Miller, I., Miller, D., & Lester, R. (2011). Stewardship or agency? A cocial embeddedness reconciliation of conduct and performance in public family businesses. Organization Science, 22(3), 704–721. doi:10.1287/orsc.1100.0541.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, J. (2006). Family firm performance: further evidence. Family Business Review, 19(2), 103–114. doi:10.1111/j.1741-6248.2006.00060.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lipparini, A., & Sobrero, M. (1994). The glue and the pieces: entrepreneurship and innovation in small business networks. Journal of Business Venturing, 9(2), 125–140. doi:10.1016/0883-9026(94)90005-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Llach, J., & Nordqvist, M. (2010). Innovation in family and non-family businesses: a resource perspective. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Venturing, 2(3/4), 381–399. doi:10.1504/IJEV.2010.037119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacKinnon, D. P., Krull, J. L., & Lockwood, C. M. (2000). Equivalence of the mediation, confounding, and suppression effect. Prevention Science, 1, 173–181. doi:10.1023/A:1026595011371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maxwell, S. E., & Delaney, H. D. (1993). Bivariate median splits and spurious statistical significance. Psychological Bulletin, 113, 181–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCallum, R., Zhang, S., Preacher, K. J., & Rucker, D. D. (2002). On the practice of dichotomization of quantitative variables. Psychological Methods, 7(1), 19–40. doi:10.1037//1082-989X.7.1.19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D., Minichilli, A., & Corbetta, G. (2013). Is family leadership always beneficial? Strategic Management Journal, 34(5), 553–571. doi:10.1002/smj.2024.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, M. N. (2012). Interpreting and visualizing regression models using Stata. Texas: Stata Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nieto, M. J., Santamaria, L., & Fernandez, Z. (2015). Understanding the innovation behavior of family firms. Journal of Small Business Management, 53(2), 382–399. doi:10.1111/jsbm.12075.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD (2005). Oslo manual. Guidelines for collecting and interpreting innovation data, 3rd edition. OECD. http://www.oecd.org/sti/oslomanual. Accessed 07 December 2016. doi:10.1787/19900414.

  • Partanen, J., Chetty, S. K., & Rajala, A. (2014). Innovation types and network relationships. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 38(5), 1027–1055. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6520.2011.00474.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peng, M. W., & Jiang, Y. (2010). Institutions behind family ownership and control in large firms. Journal of Management Studies, 47, 253–273. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2009.00890.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Penney, C. R., & Combs, J. G. (2013). Insights from family science: the case of innovation. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 37(6), 1421–1427. doi:10.1111/etap.12074.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pittino, D., & Visintin, F. (2013). Collaborative technology strategies and innovation in family firms. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, 17(1/2/3), 8–27. doi:10.1504/IJEIM.2013.055226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Podsakoff, P. M., & Organ, D. W. (1986). Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and prospects. Journal of Management, 12, 69–82. doi:10.1177/014920638601200408.

  • Posch, A., & Wiedenegger, A. (2014). Innovativeness in family firms: drivers of innovation and their mediating role. ZfB-Special Issue, 4/2013, 91–129. doi:10.1007/978-3-658-04092-5_5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schumpeter, J. (1987). Theorie der wirtschaftlichen Entwicklung, Eine Untersuchung über Unternehmergewinn, Kapital, Kredit, Zins und den Konjunkturzyklus (7th ed.). Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sieger, P., Bernhard, F., & Frey, U. (2011). Affective commitment and job satisfaction among non-family employees: investigating the roles of justice perceptions and psychological ownership. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 2(2), 78–89. doi:10.1016/j.jfbs.2011.03.003.

    Article  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. doi:10.1016/j.jfbs.2015.11.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uhlander, L., Van Stel, A., Duplat, V., & Zhou, H. (2013). Disentangling the effects of organizational capabilities, innovation and firm size on SME sales growth. Small Business Economics, 41(3), 581–607. doi:10.1007/s11187-012-9455-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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. doi:10.1007/s10551-007-9493-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Villalonga, B., & Amit, R. (2006). How do family ownership, control and management affect firm value? Journal of Financial Economics, 80, 385–417. doi:10.1016/j.jfineco.2004.12.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vives, X. (2008). Innovation and competitive pressure. The Journal of Industrial Economics, 56(3), 419–469. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6451.2008.00356.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Welter, F. (2011). Contextualizing entrepreneurship—conceptual challenges and ways forward. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 35(1), 165–184. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00427.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Welter, F., Strobl-May, E., & Wolter, H.-G. (2014). Mittelstand companion and promotor of structural change. IfM-Materialien. (Nr. 232).

  • Westhead, P., & Cowling, M. (1998). Family firm research: the need for a methodological rethink. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 23(1), 31–56. doi:10.1111/j.1741-6248.2001.00369.x.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wooldridge, J. M. (2003). Introductory econometrics: a modern approach. Mason: Thomson Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A. (1996). Governance, ownership, and corporate entrepreneurship: the moderating impact of industry technological opportunities. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 1713–1735. doi:10.2307/257076.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A. (2005). Entrepreneurial risk taking in family firms. Family Business Review, 18(1), 23–40. doi:10.1111/j.1741-6248.2005.00028.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A., Donald, O. N., & Larraneta, B. (2007). Knowledge sharing and technological capabilities: the moderating role of family involvement. Journal of Business Research, 60(10), 1070–1079. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2006.12.014.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zellweger, T. (2007). Time horizon, costs of equity capital, and generic investment strategies of firms. Family Business Review, 20(1), 1–15. doi:10.1111/j.1741-6248.2007.00080.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zellweger, T., Nason, R., & Nordqvist, M. (2012b). From longevity of firms to transgenerational entrepreneurship of families: introducing family entrepreneurial orientation. Family Business Review, 25(2), 136–155. doi:10.1177/0894486511423531.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zellweger, T. M., Kellermanns, F. W., Chrisman, J. J., & Chua, J. H. (2012a). Family control and family firm valuation by family CEOs: the importance of intentions for transgenerational control. Organization Science, 23, 851–868. doi:10.1287/orsc.1110.0665.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge helpful comments and a friendly review from Professor Dr. Friederike Welter.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Siegen, Unteres Schloß 3, 57072, Siegen, Germany

    Arndt Werner

  2. Institut fuer Mittelstandsforschung (IfM) Bonn, Maximilianstrasse 20, 53111, Bonn, Germany

    Christian Schröder & Simone Chlosta

Authors
  1. Arndt Werner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Christian Schröder
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Simone Chlosta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Simone Chlosta.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Werner, A., Schröder, C. & Chlosta, S. Driving factors of innovation in family and non-family SMEs. Small Bus Econ 50, 201–218 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-017-9884-4

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-017-9884-4

Keywords

JEL classification

Search

Navigation