The authors provide insights concerning the current state of family business research through a survey that included input from more than 80 family business scholars. Findings suggest two general conclusions: first, a collective sense that significant progress has been made; second, a widespread conviction there is still much work to be done. The authors conclude with several recommendations for the field’s continued evolution, which include greater use of family sciences research, the development of innovative measures, the adoption of rich longitudinal methodologies, and inclusion of more diverse subjects and samples.
AckoffR. (1986). Growth versus development. In Ackoff’s best: His classic writings on management (pp. 44-45). New York, NY: John Wiley.
2.
AlloucheJ.AmannB.JaussadJ.KurishinaT. (2008). The impact of family control on the performance and financial characteristics of family versus nonfamily businesses in Japan: A matched-pair investigation. Family Business Review, 21, 315-329.
3.
BarneyJ. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17, 99-120.
4.
BerroneP.CruzC.Gomez-MejiaL. R.Larraza- KintanaM. (2010). Socioemotional wealth and corporate responses to institutional pressures: Do family-controlled firms pollute less?Administrative Science Quarterly, 55(1): 82-113.
5.
BirdB.WelschH.AstrachanJ. H.PistruiD. (2002). Family business research: The evolution of an academic field. Family Business Review, 4, 337-350.
6.
BjörnbergÅ.NicholsonN. (2007). The family climate scales: Development of a new measure for use in family business research. Family Business Review, 20, 229-246.
7.
BouldingK. (1970). Beyond economics: Essays on society, religion and ethics. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
8.
CarlandJ. W.HoyF.BoultonW. R.CarlandJ. A. C. (1984). Differentiating entrepreneurs from small business owners: A conceptualization. Academy of Management Review, 9, 354-359.
9.
CasillasJ.AcedoF. (2007). Evolution of the intellectual structure of family business literature: A bibiliometric study of FBR. Family Business Review, 20, 141-162.
10.
ChrismanJ. J.KellermannsF. W.ChanK. C.LianoK. (2010). Intellectual foundations of current research in family business: An identification and review of 25 influential articles. Family Business Review, 23, 9-26.
11.
ChuaJ. H.ChrismanJ. J.SteierL. P. (2003). Extending the theoretical horizons of family business research. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 27, 351-338.
12.
CraigJ. B.MooresK. (2010). Championing family business issues to influence public policy: Evidence from Australia. Family Business Review, 23, 170-180.
13.
DavisM. (1971). That’s interesting! Towards a phenomenology of sociology and a sociology of phenomenology. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 1, 309-344.
14.
DubinR. (1969). Theory building. New York, NY: Free Press.
15.
DyckB.MauwsM.StarkeF.MischkeG. (2002). Passing the baton: The importance of sequence, timing, technique and communication in executive succession. Journal of Business Venturing, 17, 143-162.
16.
DyerW. G.(2009). Putting the family into family business research. Family Business Review, 22, 216-219.
17.
DyerW. G.SanchezM. (1998). Current state of family business theory and practice as reflected in Family Business Review 1988-1997. Family Business Review, 11, 287-295.
18.
EisenhardtK. M. (1989). Agency theory: A reassessment and review. Academy of Management Review, 14, 57-74.
19.
FietJ. (2000). The theoretical side of teaching entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 16, 1-24.
20.
FrostP.CummingsL. L. (1995). Publishing in the organizational sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
21.
GersickK. E.DavisJ. A.HamptonM. M.LansbergI. (1997). Generation to generation: Life cycles of the family business. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
22.
HabbershonT. G.WilliamsM. L. (1999). A resource-based framework for assessing the strategic advantages of family firms. Family Business Review, 12, 1-22.
23.
HabbersonT.NordqvistM.ZellwegerT. (2010). Transgenerational entrepreneurship: Exploring growth and performance in family firms across generations. Cheltenham, England: Edward Elgar.
24.
HandlerW. C. (1989). Methodological issues and considerations in studying family businesses. Family Business Review, 2, 257-276.
25.
HoffmanJ.HoelscherM.SorensonR. (2006). Achieving sustained competitive advantage: A family capital theory. Family Business Review, 19, 135-145.
26.
JamesA.JenningsJ.BreitkrkeuzR. (2012). Worlds apart? Integrating theories from family science within research on family business. Family Business Review, 25, 87-108.
27.
JimenezR. M. (2009). Research on women in family firms: Current status and future directions. Family Business Review, 22, 53-64.
28.
KellermannsF.EddlestonK. (2004). Feuding families: When conflict does a family firm good. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 23, 209-228.
29.
KowalewskiO.TalaveraO.StetsyukI. (2010). Influence on family involvement in management and ownership on firm performance: Evidence from Poland. Family Business Review, 23, 45-59.
30.
KuhnT. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.
31.
LansbergI.PerrowE.L.RogolskyS. (1988). Editor’s notes. Family Business Review, 1, 1-8.
32.
LaplumeA.SonparK.LitzR. (2008). Stakeholder theory: Reviewing a theory that moves us. Journal of Management, 34, 1152-1189.
33.
LevinsonH. (1971). Conflicts that plague family businesses. Harvard Business Review, 49, 90-98.
34.
LitzR. A. (1997). The family firm’s exclusion from business school research: Explaining the void, addressing the opportunity. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 21, 55-71.
35.
LitzR. A. (2008). Two sides of a one-sided phenomenon: Conceptualizing the family business and business family as a Möbius strip. Family Business Review, 21, 217-236.
36.
MarshackK. J. (1993). Copreneurs and dual-career couples: Are they different?Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 19, 49-69.
37.
McCannG. (2003). Where do we go from here? Strategic answers for university-based family business programs. Family Business Review, 16, 125-144.
38.
MeyerA. (1991). What is strategy’s distinctive competence?Journal of Management, 17, 821-833.
39.
MillerD.Le Breton-MillerI. (2007). Kicking the habit: Broadening our horizons by studying family businesses. Journal of Management Inquiry, 16, 27-30.
40.
MintzbergH. (1995). Strategic thinking as seeing. In GarrattB.(Ed.), Developing strategic thought: Rediscovering the art of direction-giving (pp. 67-70). London, England: McGraw-Hill.
41.
MooresK. (2009). Paradigms and theory building in the domain of business families. Family Business Review, 22, 167-180.
42.
NicholsonN. (2008). Evolutionary psychology, organizational culture, and the family firm. Academy of Management Perspectives, 22, 73-84.
43.
PloyhartR.VandenbergR. (2010). Longitudinal research: The theory, design, and analysis of change. Journal of Management, 36, 94-120.
44.
ReuberA. R. (2010). Strengthening your literature review. Family Business Review, 23, 105-108.
45.
SalvatoC.ChiricoF.SharmaP. (2010). A farewell to the business: Championing exit and continuity in entrepreneurial family firms. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 22, 321-348.
46.
SharmaP. (2004). An overview of the field of family business studies: Current status and direction for the future. Family Business Review, 17, 1-36.
47.
SharmaP. (2011). Editor’s notes: 2010: A year in review. Family Business Review, 24, 5-8.
48.
SharmaP.ChrismanJ. J.ChuaJ. H. (1997). Strategic management of the family business: Past research and future challenges. Family Business Review, 10, 1-35.
49.
SharmaP.HoyF.AstrachanJ.KoiranenM. (2007). The practice-driven evolution of family business education. Journal of Business Research, 60, 1012-1021.
50.
SharmaP.IrvingG. (2005). Four bases of family business successor commitment: Antecedents and consequences. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29, 13-33.
51.
StewartA. (2008). Who could best complement a team of family business researchers: Scholars down the hall or in another building?Family Business Review, 4, 279-293.
52.
ShortJ. C.PayneG. T.BrighamK. H.LumpkinG. T.BrobergJ. C. (2009). Family firms and entrepreneurial orientation in publicly traded firms: A comparative analysis of the S&P 500. Family Business Review, 22, 9-24.
53.
SiegerP.ZellwegerT.NasonR.ClintonE. (2011). Portfolio entrepreneurship in family firms: A resource-based perspective. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 5, 327-351.
54.
TagiuriR.DavisJ. (1996). Bivalent attributes of the family firms. Family Business Review, 9, 199-208.
55.
TsaiW. H.HungJ. H.KuoY. C.KuoL. (2006). CEO tenure in Taiwanese family and nonfamily firms: An agency theory perspective. Family Business Review, 19, 11-28.
56.
WortmanM. S.(1994). Theoretical foundations for family-owned businesses: A conceptual and research based paradigm. Family Business Review, 7, 3-27.
57.
ZacharyM. A.McKenneyA.ShortJ. C.PayneG. T. (2011). Family business and market orientation: Construct validation and comparative analysis. Family Business Review. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/ 089448651039687110.1177/ 0894486510396871
58.
ZahraS.SharmaP. (2004). Family business research: A strategic reflection. Family Business Review, 17, 331-346.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
