In this article, we introduce socioemotional selectivity theory (SEST) from psychology to the family business literature. Applying the theory to family businesses, we argue that a family business’s age influences whether it trusts family or professional business advisors most. Consistent with SEST, we find that business age relates to whether the family business emphasizes financial or socioemotional wealth more and that this wealth emphasis relates to whether family members or professional business advisors are trusted most. Based on these findings, we believe that SEST has much to offer to the study of family and nonfamily businesses.
BaronR. M.KennyD. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.
2.
BarnettT.LongR. G.MarlerL. E. (2012). Vision and exchange in intra-family succession: Effects on procedural justice climate among nonfamily managers. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 36, 1207-1225.
3.
BennettR. J.RobsonP. J. A. (1999a). Intensity of interaction in supply of business advice and client impact: A comparison of consultancy, business associations and government support initiatives for SMEs. British Journal of Management, 10, 351-369.
4.
BennettR. J.RobsonP. J. A. (1999b). The use of external business advice by SMEs in Britain. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 11, 155-180.
5.
BennettR. J.RobsonP. J. A. (2004). The role of trust and contract in the supply of business advice. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 28, 471-488.
6.
BennettR. J.RobsonP. J. A. (2005). The advisor-SME client relationship: Impact, satisfaction and commitment. Small Business Economics, 25, 255-271.
7.
BerroneP.CruzC.Gómez-MejiaL. R. (2012). Socioemotional wealth in family firms: Theoretical dimensions, assessment approaches, and agenda for future research. Family Business Review, 25, 258-279.
8.
CampbellD.StanleyJ. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago, IL: Rand-McNally.
9.
CarstensenL. L. (1993). Motivation for social contact across the life span: A theory of socioemotional selectivity. In JacobsJ. (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation (pp. 209-254). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
10.
CarstensenL. L.FredricksonB. F. (1998). Socioemotional selectivity in healthy older people and younger people living with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV): The centrality of emotion when the future is constrained. Health Psychology, 17, 494-503.
11.
CarstensenL. L.IsaacowitzD. M.CharlesS. T. (1999). Taking time seriously: A theory of socioemotional selectivity. American Psychologist, 54, 165-181.
12.
ChrismanJ. J.SharmaP.SteierL. P.ChuaJ. H. (2013). The influence of family goals, governance, and resources on firm outcomes. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 37, 1249-1261.
13.
ConwayJ. M.LanceC. E. (2010). What reviewers should expect from authors regarding common method bias in organizational research. Journal of Business and Psychology, 25, 325-334.
14.
CruzC.JustoR.De CastroJ. O. (2012). Does family employment enhance MSEs performance? Integrating socioemotional wealth and family embeddedness perspectives. Journal of Business Venturing, 27, 62-76.
15.
DuncanK.MooresK. (2014). Accountability and stewardship of family business entities. In MelinL.NordqvistM.SharmaP. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of family business (pp. 383-402). London, England: Sage.
16.
EktaS. (2012). HR issues and intervention model for family business. International Journal of Business Economics and Management Research, 2, 288-297.
17.
EnsleyM. D.PearsonA. W. (2005). An exploratory comparison of the behavioral dynamics of top management teams in family and nonfamily ventures: Cohesion, potency, and consensus. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29, 267-284.
18.
EvansD. (1987). The relationship between firm growth, size, and age: Estimates for 100 manufacturing industries. Journal of Industrial Economics, 35, 567-581.
19.
FelinT.FossN. J. (2005). Strategic organization: A field in search of micro-foundations. Strategic Organization, 3, 441-455.
20.
FligsteinN. (1985). The spread of the multidivisional form among large firms, 1919-1979. American Sociological Review, 50, 377-391.
21.
FungH. H.CarstensenL. L. (2004). Motivational changes in response to blocked goals and foreshortened time: Testing alternatives to socioemotional selectivity theory. Psychology and Aging, 19, 68-78.
22.
FungH. H.CarstensenL. L. (2006). Goals change when life’s fragility is primed: Lessons learned from older adults, the September 11 attacks and SARS. Social Cognition, 24, 248-278.
23.
FungH. H.CarstensenL. L.LutzM. A. (1999). Influence of time on social preferences: Implications for life-span development. Psychology and Aging, 14, 595-604.
24.
GersickK. E.DavisJ. A.HamptonM. M.LansbergI. (1997). Generation to generation: Life cycles of the family business. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
25.
Gómez-MejiaL. R.CruzC.BerroneP.De CastroJ. (2011). The bind that ties: Socioemotional wealth preservation in family firms. Academy of Management Annals, 5, 653-707.
26.
Gómez-MejiaL. R.HaynesK. T.Núňez-NickelM.JacobsonK. J. L.Moyano-FuentesJ. (2007). Socioemotional wealth and business risks in family-controlled firms: Evidence from Spanish olive oil mills. Administrative Science Quarterly, 5, 106-137.
27.
HambrickD. C.MasonP. A. (1984) Upper echelons: The organization as a reflection of its top managers. Academy of Management Review, 9, 193-206.
28.
JamesH. S. (1999). Owner as manager, extended horizons, and the family firm. International Journal of the Economics of Business, 6, 41-55.
29.
JauchL. R.OsbornR. N.MartinT. N. (1980). Structured content analysis of cases: A complementary method for organizational research. Academy of Management Review, 5, 517-525.
30.
JohnsonD.GraysonK. (2005). Cognitive and affective trust in service relationships. Journal of Business Research, 58, 500-507.
31.
KinA. M. Y.FungH. H. (2004). Goals and social network composition among young adults with and without a history of cancer. Journal of Psychology in Chinese Societies, 5, 97-111.
32.
KothariA.TobwalaS. (2010). Growing role of women as successor in family business. Pacific Business Quarterly, 3, 59-60.
33.
LiuC. K. M.FungH. H. (2005). Gang members’ social network composition and psychological well-being: Extending socioemotional selectivity theory to the study of gang involvement. Journal of Psychology in Chinese Societies, 6, 89-108.
34.
LussierR. N.SonfieldM. C. (2004). Family business management activities, styles, and characteristics: A correlational study. American Journal of Business, 19, 47-54.
35.
McDonaldM. L.WestphalJ. D. (2003). Getting by with the advice of their friends: CEOs’ advice networks and firms’ strategic responses to poor performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48, 1-32.
36.
MussolinoD.CalabroA. (2014). Paternalistic leadership in family firms: Types and implications for intergenerational succession. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 5, 197-210.
37.
NicholsonN. (2008). Evolutionary psychology and family business: A new synthesis for theory, research, and practice. Family Business Review, 21, 103-118.
38.
PodsakoffP.MacKenzieS.LeeJ.PodsakoffN. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879-903.
39.
PruzanK.IsaacowitzD. M. (2006). An attentional application of socioemotional selectivity theory in college students. Social Development, 15, 326-338.
40.
RobsonP. J. A.JackS. L.FreelM. S. (2008). Gender and the use of business advice: Evidence from firms in the Scottish service sector. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 26, 292-314.
41.
RosenbergR. D. (1987). Managerial morality and behavior: The questionable payments issue. Journal of Business Ethics, 6, 23-36.
42.
SchulzeW. S.LubatkinM. H.DinoR. N. (2003). Exploring the agency consequences of ownership dispersion among the directors of private family firms. Academy of Management Journal, 46, 179-194.
43.
SharmaP.SalvatoC.ReayT. (2014). Temporal dimensions of family enterprise research. Family Business Review, 27, 10-19.
44.
SonginiL. (2006). The professionalization of family firms: Theory and practice. In PoutziourisP. Z.SmyrniosK. X.KleinS. B. (Eds.), Handbook of research on family business (pp. 269-297). Cheltenham, England: Edward Elgar.
45.
StreetC. T.CameronA.-F. (2007). External relationships and the small business: A review of small business alliance and network research. Journal of Small Business Management, 45, 239-266.
46.
StrikeV. M. (2012). Advising the family firm: Reviewing the past to build the future. Family Business Review, 25, 156-177.
47.
UptonN.VintonK.SeamanS.MooreC. (1993). Family business consultants: Who we are, what we do, and how we do it. Family Business Review, 6, 301-311.
48.
VerbekeA.KanoL. (2012). The transaction cost economics theory of the family firm: Family-based human asset specificity and the bifurcation bias. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 36, 1183-1205.
49.
WardJ. L. (1990). Should we professionalize family business consulting? A commentary. Family Business Review, 3, 263-265.
50.
YeungH. W. (2000). Limits to the growth of family-owned business? The case of Chinese Transnational corporations from Hong Kong. Family Business Review, 13, 55-70.
51.
Yildirim-ÖktemÖ.ÜsdikenB. (2010). Contingencies versus external pressure: Professionalization in boards of firms affiliated to family business groups in late industrializing countries. British Journal of Management, 21, 115-130.
52.
ZellwegerT. M.AstrachanJ. H. (2008). On the emotional value of owning a firm. Family Business Review, 21, 347-363.
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.
