Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

How Do Owning Families Ensure the Creation of Value Across Generations? A “Dual Balance” Approach

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover The Palgrave Handbook of Heterogeneity among Family Firms

Abstract

The ability to pursue both exploitation and exploration is known to enhance family firm performance. Nevertheless, the interplay that family-centered non-economic goals and socioemotional wealth preservation have in the process of exploitation and exploration is still unknown. In this exploratory study, we address ambidextrous orientation and socioemotional wealth preservation of entrepreneurial families, to introduce the “dual balance” of Transgenerational Families. Using cluster analysis in the Latin American context, our study attempts to open further discussions in the intersection of strategic management with family business research.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 299.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 379.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 379.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Not shown in this chapter

References

  • Acs, Z. J., & Amorós, J. E. (2008). Entrepreneurship and competitiveness dynamics in Latin America. Small Business Economics, 31(3), 305–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allison, T. H., McKenny, A. F., & Short, J. C. (2013). Integrating time into family business research: Using random coefficient modeling to examine temporal influences on family firm ambidexterity. Family Business Review, 0894486513494782. 27(1), 20–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amit, R., & Villalonga, B. (2014). Financial performance of FBs. Sage handbook of family business. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amorós, J. E., Fernández, C., & Tapia, J. (2012). Quantifying the relationship between entrepreneurship and competitiveness development stages in Latin America. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 8(3), 249–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amorós, J. E., Borraz, F., & Veiga, L. (2016). Entrepreneurship and socioeconomic indicators in Latin America. Latin American Research Review, 51(4), 186–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ancona, D. G., Goodman, P. S., Lawrence, B. S., & Tushman, M. L. (2001). Time: A new research lens. Academy of Management Review, 26(4), 645–663.

    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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benner, M. J., & Tushman, M. L. (2003). Exploitation, exploration, and process management: The productivity dilemma revisited. Academy of Management Review, 28(2), 238–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berrone, P., Cruz, C., Gomez-Mejia, L. R., & Larraza-Kintana, M. (2010). Socioemotional wealth and corporate responses to institutional pressures: Do family-controlled firms pollute less?. Administrative Science Quarterly, 55(1), 82–113.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birkinshaw, J., & Gupta, K. (2013). Clarifying the distinctive contribution of ambidexterity to the field of organization studies. Academy of Management Perspectives, 27(4), 287–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Botero, Isabel C. and Gonzalo Gómez Betancourt, “Contextual Factors that Affect Selection and Use of Governance Structures in Latin American Family Enterprises”, in The Routledge Companion to Family Business ed. Franz W. Kellermanns and Frank Hoy (Abingdon: Routledge, 29 sep 2016).

    Google Scholar 

  • Brundin, E., & Härtel, C. E. (2014). Emotions in family firms, in The SAGE Handbook of Family Business, edited by Leif Melin, et al., SAGE Publications, 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cao, Q., Gedajlovic, E., & Zhang, H. (2009). Unpacking organizational ambidexterity: Dimensions, contingencies, and synergistic effects. Organization Science, 20(4), 781–796.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cao, Q., Simsek, Z., & Zhang, H. (2010). Modelling the joint impact of the CEO and the TMT on organizational ambidexterity. Journal of Management Studies, 47(7), 1272–1296.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carter, N. M., Stearns, T. M., Reynolds, P. D., & Miller, B. A. (1994). New venture strategies: Theory development with an empirical base. Strategic Management Journal, 15(1), 21–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cennamo, C., Berrone, P., Cruz, C., & Gomez-Mejia, L. R. (2012). Socioemotional wealth and proactive stakeholder engagement: Why family-controlled firms care more about their stakeholders. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 36(6), 1153–1173.

    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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Chrisman, J. J., Sharma, P., Steier, L. P., & Chua, J. H. (2013). The influence of family goals, governance, and resources on firm outcomes. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 37(6), 1249–1261.

    Article  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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chua, J. H., Chrisman, J. J., & De Massis, A. (2015). A closer look at socioemotional wealth: Its flows, stocks, and prospects for moving forward. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 39(2), 173–182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Craig, J. B., Dibrell, C., & Davis, P. S. (2008). Leveraging family-based brand identity to enhance firm competitiveness and performance in family businesses. Journal of Small Business Management, 46(3), 351–371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cruz, C., & Arredondo, H. (2016). Going back to the roots of socioemotional wealth. Management Research: Journal of the Iberoamerican Academy of Management, 14(3), 234–243.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cruz, C., & Fernandez, L. (2016). Soluciones para familias empresarias: Transferir el patrimonio sin matar la ambición. White Paper – Credit Suisse.

    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 

  • Cruz, C., Imperatore, C., & Gomez-Mejia, L. R. (2015). Family firms, income smoothing and financial crisis: Evidence from European Countries. In Academy of Management Proceedings (Vol. 2015, No. 1, p. 16811). Briarcliff Manor, NY 10510: Academy of Management.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cyert, R. M., & March, J. G. (1963). A behavioral theory of the firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 2, 169–187.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daspit, J. J., Chrisman, J. J., Sharma, P., Pearson, A. W., & Long, R. G. (2017). A strategic management perspective of the family firm: Past trends, new insights, and future directions. Journal of Managerial Issues, 29(1), 6–29.

    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 

  • Duncan, R. B. (1976). The ambidextrous organization: Designing dual structures for innovation. The Management of Organization, 1, 167–188.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duran, P., Kammerlander, N., Essen, M. van, & Zellweger, T. (2016). Doing more with less: Innovation input and output in family firms. Academy of Management Journal, amj.2014.0424.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dyer, W. G., & Whetten, D. A. (2006). Family firms and social responsibility: Preliminary evidence from the S&P 500. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(6), 785–802.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M. (2000). Paradox, spirals, ambivalence: The new language of change and pluralism. Academy of Management Review, 25(4), 703–705.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M., & Martin, J. A. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: What are they? Strategic Management Journal, 21, 1105–1121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gagné, M., Sharma, P., & De Massis, A. (2014). The study of organizational behaviour in family business. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 23(5), 643–656.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gedajlovic, E., Cao, Q., & Zhang, H. (2012). Corporate shareholdings and organizational ambidexterity in high-tech SMEs: Evidence from a transitional economy. Journal of Business Venturing, 27(6), 652–665.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gentry, R., Dibrell, C., & Kim, J. (2016). Long-term orientation in publicly traded family businesses: Evidence of a dominant logic. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 40(4), 733–757.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gersick, K., J. A. Davis, M. M. Hampton, & I. Lansberg. Generation to Generation: Life Cycles of the Family Business. Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, C. B., & Birkinshaw, J. (2004). The antecedents, consequences, and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. Academy of Management Journal, 47(2), 209–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New York: Aldine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goel, S., & Jones, R. J. (2016). Entrepreneurial exploration and exploitation in family business a systematic review and future directions. Family Business Review, 29(1), 94–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gomez-Mejia, L. R., Haynes, K. T., Núñez-Nickel, M., Jacobson, K. J. L., & Moyano-Fuentes, J. (2007). Socioemotional wealth and business risks in family-controlled firms: Evidence from Spanish olive oil mills. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52(1), 106–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gomez-Mejia, L. R., Makri, M., & Kintana, M. L. (2010). Diversification decisions in family-controlled firms. Journal of Management Studies, 47(2), 223–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gomez-Mejia, L., Cruz, C., & Imperatore, C. (2014a). Financial reporting and the protection of socioemotional wealth in family-controlled firms. European Accounting Review, 23(3), 387–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gomez-Mejia, L. R., Campbell, J. T., Martin, G., Hoskisson, R. E., Makri, M., & Sirmon, D. G. (2014b). 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gomez-Mejia, L. R., Patel, P. C., & Zellweger, T. M. (2015). In the horns of the dilemma: Socioemotional wealth, financial wealth, and acquisitions in family firms. Journal of Management, 0149206315614375.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, A. K., Smith, K. G., & Shalley, C. E. (2006). The interplay between exploration and exploitation. Academy of Management Journal, 49(4), 693–706.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Habbershon, T. G., & Pistrui, J. (2002). Enterprising families domain: Family-influenced ownership groups in pursuit of transgenerational wealth. Family Business Review, 15(3), 223–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (Vol. 6). Upper Saddle River: Pearson Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartigan, J. A. (1975). Clustering algorithms (Vol. 209). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartigan, J. A., & Wong, M. A. (1979). Algorithm AS 136: A k-means clustering algorithm. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series C (Applied Statistics), 28(1), 100–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • He, Z.-L., & Wong, P.-K. (2004). Exploration vs. exploitation: An empirical test of the ambidexterity hypothesis. Organization Science, 15(4), 481–494. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1040.0078.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heavey, C., & Simsek, Z. (2017). Distributed cognition in top management teams and organizational ambidexterity: The influence of Transactive memory systems. Journal of Management, 43(3), 919–945.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hiebl, M. R. W. (2015). Family involvement and organizational ambidexterity in later-generation family businesses: A framework for further investigation. Management Decision, 53(5), 1061–1082.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoy, F., & Mendoza-Abarca, K. (2014). Latin America. In S. M. Carraher & D. H. B. Welsh (Eds.), Global entrepreneurship (2nd ed., pp. 293–312). Dubuque: Kendall Hunt Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ingram, A. E., Lewis, M. W., Barton, S., & Gartner, W. B. (2016). Paradoxes and innovation in family firms: The role of paradoxical thinking. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 40(1), 161–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jansen, J. J., Van Den Bosch, F. A., & Volberda, H. W. (2006). Exploratory innovation, exploitative innovation, and performance: Effects of organizational antecedents and environmental moderators. Management Science, 52(11), 1661–1674.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jaskiewicz, P., Uhlenbruck, K., Balkin, D. B., & Reay, T. (2013). Is nepotism good or bad? Types of nepotism and implications for knowledge management. Family Business Review, 26(2), 121–139.

    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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Junni, P., Sarala, R. M., Taras, V., & Tarba, S. Y. (2013). Organizational ambidexterity and performance: A meta-analysis. Academy of Management Perspectives, 27(4), 299–312.

    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 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kellermanns, F. W., & Eddleston, K. A. (2006). Corporate entrepreneurship in family firms: A family perspective. Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 30(6), 809-830.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kellermanns, F. W., Eddleston, K. A., & Zellweger, T. M. (2012). Extending the socioemotional wealth perspective: A look at the dark side. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 36(6), 1175–1182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kotlar, J., Signori, A., De Massis, A., & Vismara, S. (2017). Financial wealth, socioemotional wealth and IPO underpricing in family firms: A two-stage gamble model. Academy of Management Journal, amj. 2016.0256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lavie, D., Stettner, U., & Tushman, M. L. (2010). Exploration and exploitation within and across organizations. The Academy of Management Annals, 4(1), 109–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lavine, M. (2014). Paradoxical leadership and the competing values framework. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 50(2), 189–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leonard, D. (1992). Core capabilities and core rigidities: A paradox in managing new product development. Strategic Management Journal, 13(2), 111–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Litz, R. A. (2012). Dual roles, dual binds? Dual bind theory and family business research. In Understanding family businesses (pp. 115–132). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lubatkin, M. H., Simsek, Z., Ling, Y., & Veiga, J. F. (2006). Ambidexterity and performance in small-to medium-sized firms: The pivotal role of top management team behavioral integration. Journal of Management, 32(5), 646–672.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marques, P., Presas, P., & Simon, A. (2014). The heterogeneity of family firms in CSR engagement: The role of values. Family Business Review, 27(3), 206–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, G., & Gomez-Mejia, L. (2016). The relationship between socioemotional and financial wealth: Re-visiting family firm decision making. Management Research: Journal of the Iberoamerican Academy of Management, 14(3), 215–233.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D., & Breton-Miller, L. (2014). Deconstructing socioemotional wealth. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 38(4), 713–720.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moss, T. W., Payne, G. T., & Moore, C. B. (2014). Strategic consistency of exploration and exploitation in family businesses. Family Business Review, 27(1), 51–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naldi, L., Cennamo, C., Corbetta, G., & Gomez‐Mejia, L. (2013). Preserving socioemotional wealth in family firms: Asset or liability? The moderating role of business context. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 37(6), 1341–1360.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nordqvist, M., & Zellweger, T. (Eds.). (2010). Transgenerational entrepreneurship: Exploring growth and performance in family firms across generations. Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nordqvist, M., Sharma, P., & Chirico, F. (2014). Family firm heterogeneity and governance: A configuration approach. Journal of Small Business Management, 52(2), 192–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Reilly III, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2008). Ambidexterity as a dynamic capability: Resolving the innovator’s dilemma. Research in organizational behavior, 28, 185–206.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Reilly III, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2013). Organizational ambidexterity: Past, present, and future. Academy of Management Perspectives, 27(4), 324–338.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plate, M., & Schlippe, A von. (2010). Organizational paradoxes and paradox management in family firms. In 4th Workshop on Family Firms Management Research EIASM, Naples Italy, June 8–10, 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E. (1990). The competitive advantage of nations. Harvard Business Review, 68(2), 73–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M., Sachs, J., & McArthur, J. (2001). Executive summary: Competitiveness and stages of economic development. The Global Competitiveness Report, 2002, 16–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poza, E. J. (1995). Global competition and the family-owned business in Latin America. Family Business Review, 8(4), 301–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pukall, T. J., & Calabrò, A. (2014). The internationalization of family firms a critical review and integrative model. Family Business Review, 27(2), 103–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raisch, S., Birkinshaw, J., Probst, G., & Tushman, M. L. (2009). Organizational Ambidexterity: Balancing Exploitation and Exploration for Sustained Performance. Organization Science, 20(4), 685–695.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salvato, C., Chirico, F., & Sharma, P. (2010). A farewell to the business: Championing exit and continuity in entrepreneurial family firms. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 22(3–4), 321–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmid, T., Ampenberger, M., Kaserer, C., & Achleitner, A.-K. (2015). Family firm heterogeneity and corporate policy: Evidence from diversification decisions. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 23(3), 285–302. https://doi.org/10.1111/corg.12091.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharma, P., & Salvato, C. (2011). Commentary: Exploiting and exploring new opportunities over life cycle stages of family firms. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 35(6), 1199–1205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharma, P., Auletta, N., DeWitt, R. L., Parada, M. J., & Yusof, M. (Eds.). (2015). Developing next generation leaders fortransgenerational entrepreneurial family enterprises. Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shepherd, D., & Haynie, J. M. (2009). Family business, identity conflict, and an expedited entrepreneurial process: A process of resolving identity conflict. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(6), 1245–1264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siggelkow, N., & Levinthal, D. A. (2003). Temporarily divide to conquer: Centralized, decentralized, and reintegrated organizational approaches to exploration and adaptation. Organization Science, 14(6), 650–669.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silva, T., Cunha, M. P. E., Clegg, S. R., Neves, P., Rego, A., & Rodrigues, R. A. (2014). Smells like team spirit: Opening a paradoxical black box. Human Relations, 67(3), 287–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sirmon, D. G., & Hitt, M. A. (2003). Managing resources: Linking unique resources, management, and wealth creation in family firms. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 27(4), 339–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W. (2011). Toward a theory of paradox: A dynamic equilibrium model of organizing. Academy of Management Review, 36(2), 381–403.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stubner, S., Blarr, W. H., Brands, C., & Wulf, T. (2012). Organizational ambidexterity and family firm performance. Journal of Small Business and Entrepreneurship, 25(2), 217–229, 253–254.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, A., & Helfat, C. E. (2009). Organizational linkages for surviving technological change: Complementary assets, middle management, and ambidexterity. Organization Science, 20(4), 718–739.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509–533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turner, N., Swart, J., & Maylor, H. (2013). Mechanisms for managing ambidexterity: A review and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 15(3), 317–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uotila, J., Maula, M., Keil, T., & Zahra, S. A. (2009). Exploration, exploitation, and financial performance: Analysis of S&P 500 corporations. Strategic Management Journal, 30(2), 221–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Veider, V., & Matzler, K. (2016). The ability and willingness of family-controlled firms to arrive at organizationalambidexterity. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 7(2), 105–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verbeke, A., & Kano, L. (2012). The transaction cost economics theory of the family firm: Family-based human asset specificity and the bifurcation bias. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 36(6), 1183–1205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Voss, G. B., Sirdeshmukh, D., & Voss, Z. G. (2008). The effects of slack resources and environmental threat on product exploration and exploitation. Academy of Management Journal, 51(1), 147–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webb, J. W., Ketchen, D. J., Jr., & Ireland, R. D. (2010). Strategic entrepreneurship within family-controlled firms: Opportunities and challenges. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 1(2), 67–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yitzhack Halevi, M., Carmeli, A., & Brueller, N. N. (2015). Ambidexterity in SBUs: TMT behavioral integration and environmental dynamism. Human Resource Management, 54(S1), s223–s238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A., Hayton, J. C., & Salvato, C. (2004). Entrepreneurship in family vs. non-family firms: A resource-based analysis of the effect of organizational culture. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 28(4), 363–381.

    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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zellweger, T. (2007). Time horizon, costs of equity capital, and generic investment strategies of firms. Family Business Review, 20(1), 1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zellweger, T. (2017). Managing the family business: theory and practice. Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zellweger, T. M., & Nason, R. S. (2008). A stakeholder perspective on family firm performance. Family Business Review, 21(3), 203–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zellweger, T. M., Kellermanns, F. W., Chrisman, J. J., & Chua, J. H. (2011). Family control and family firm valuation by family CEOs: The importance of intentions for transgenerational control. Organization Science, 23(3), 851–868.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Universidad Adolfo Ibañez, Santiago de Chile, Chile

    Horacio Arredondo

  2. IE Business School, Madrid, Spain

    Cristina Cruz

Authors
  1. Horacio Arredondo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Cristina Cruz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Horacio Arredondo .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Bryan School of Business and Economics, University of North Carolina-Greensboro, Greensboro, NC, USA

    Esra Memili

  2. School of Business Administration, The University of Mississippi, University, MS, USA

    Clay Dibrell

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Arredondo, H., Cruz, C. (2019). How Do Owning Families Ensure the Creation of Value Across Generations? A “Dual Balance” Approach. In: Memili, E., Dibrell, C. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Heterogeneity among Family Firms. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-77676-7_29

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation