In this study we explore how the institutions of kinship and commerce are integrated within family businesses. Previous research shows that family firms’ characteristic synthesis of institutional logics often unravels during intergenerational successions; however, it remains unclear how this process can be arrested, or by whom. Through inductive analysis, we offer a novel insight: outside advisors can act as surrogates for family in this integrative role. Specifically, we identify fiduciaries—professionals with special client obligations—as key actors in preserving family firms’ viability as commercial enterprises and kinship groups. Our findings contribute to theories of family businesses, professions, and institutions.
AldrichN. (1997). Old money: The mythology of wealth in America. New York, NY: Allworth.
2.
BeaverstockJ.HubbardP.ShortJ. (2004). Getting away with it?Geoforum, 35, 401-407.
3.
BoxxK. (2012). Too many tiaras: Conflicting fiduciary duties. Houston Law Review, 49, 233-290.
4.
Cap-Gemini. (2016). World wealth report. Paris, France: Author.
5.
CarneyM.NasonR. (2016). Family business and the 1%. Business & Society. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/0007650316661165
6.
CarrJ.ChrismanJ.ChuaJ.SteierL. (2016). Family firm challenges in intergenerational wealth transfer. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 40, 1197-1208.
7.
ColcloughT. (2009). To PTC or not to PTC?STEP Journal, November/December, 51-53.
8.
CreswellJ.MillerD. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory Into Practice, 39, 124-130.
9.
DaughertyM. (2013). Performance in family business. In SorensonR.YuA.BrighamK.LumpkinG. (Eds.), The landscape of family business (pp.64-77). Cheltenham, England: Edward Elgar.
10.
de LimaA. (2000) Is blood thicker than economic interest in familial enterprises? In SchweitzerP. (Ed.), Dividends of kinship: Meanings and uses of social relatedness (pp. 151-176). London, England: Routledge.
11.
EddlestonK.KellermannsF. (2007). Destructive and productive family relationships: A stewardship theory perspective. Journal of Business Venturing, 22, 545-565.
12.
EvansM. (2012). Success at succession. STEP Journal, July, 30-33.
13.
FaircloughS.MicelottaE. (2013). Beyond the family firm: Reasserting the influence of the family institutional logic across organizations. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 39, 63-98.
FriedlandR.AlfordR. (1991). Bringing society back in. In PowellW.DiMaggioP. (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 232-266). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
18.
GioiaD. (2004). A renaissance self: Prompting personal and professional revitalization. In StableinR.FrostP. (Eds.) Renewing research practice (pp. 97-114). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
19.
Gómez-MejiaL.CruzC.BerroneP.de CastroJ. (2011). The bind that ties: Socioemotional wealth preservation in family firms. Academy of Management Annals, 5, 653-707.
20.
GordonG.NicholsonN. (2008). Family wars. London, England: Kogan Page.
21.
HallettT.VentrescaM. (2006) Inhabited institutions: Social interactions and organizational forms in Gouldner’s Patterns of Industrial Bureaucracy. Theory and Society, 35, 213-236.
22.
HarringtonB. (2012). From trustees to wealth managers. In ErreygersG.CunliffeJ. (Eds.), Inherited wealth, justice, & inequality (pp. 190-209). Cheltenham, England: Routledge.
23.
HarringtonB. (2016). Capital without borders. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
24.
HarringtonB. (2017). Habitus and the labor of representation among elite professionals. Journal of Professions and Organization, 4, 282-301.
HillerströmH. (2012). Why is succession so difficult?STEP Journal, July, 35.
27.
HughesJ. (1997). Family wealth: Keeping it in the family. Princeton Junction, NJ: NetWrx Inc.
28.
JarzabkowskiP.KaplanS.SeidlD.WhittingtonR. (2016). On the risk of studying practices in isolation: Linking what, who and how in strategy research. Strategic Organization, 14, 248-259.
29.
JaskiewiczP.CombsJ.RauS. (2015). Entrepreneurial legacy: Toward a theory of how some family firms nurture transgenerational entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 30, 29-49.
30.
JaskiewiczP.HeinrichsK.RauS.ReayT. (2016). To be or not to be: How family firms manage family and commercial logics in succession. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 40, 781-813.
31.
KidwellR.KellermannsF.EddlestonK. (2012). Harmony, justice, confusion, and conflict in family firms: Implications for ethical climate and the “Fredo effect.”Journal of Business Ethics, 106, 503-517.
32.
LalondeJ.-F. (2013) Cultural determinants of Arab entrepreneurship: An ethnographic perspective. Journal of Enterprising Communities, 7, 213-232.
33.
Le Breton-MillerI.MillerD.SteierL. (2004). Toward an integrative model of effective FOB succession. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 28, 305– 328.
34.
LockeK. (2011). Field research practice in management and organization studies. Academy of Management Annals, 5, 613-652.
35.
MarcusG. (1983). The fiduciary role in American family dynasties and their institutional legacy. In MarcusG. (Ed.), Elites: Ethnographic issues (pp. 221-256). Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.
36.
MarcusG.HallP. (1992). Lives in trust. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
37.
MehrotraV.MorckR.ShimJ.WiwattanakantangY. (2013). Adoptive expectations: Rising sons in Japanese family firms. Journal of Financial Economics, 108, 840-854.
38.
MillerD.Le Breton-MillerI. (2006). Family governance and firm performance: Agency, stewardship, and capabilities. Family Business Review, 19, 73-87.
39.
MillerD.Le Breton-MillerI.AmoreM.MinichilliA.CorbettaG. (2017). Institutional logics, family firm governance and performance. Journal of Business Venturing, 32, 674-693.
40.
MillerD.Le Breton-MillerI.LesterR. (2011). Family and lone founder ownership and strategic behaviour: Social context, identity, and institutional logics. Journal of Management Studies, 48, 1-25.
41.
MorrellA. (2017). An ex-Morgan Stanley rainmaker, the Rockefeller family, and Viking Global are combining to form a new investment firm. Business Insider.
42.
OsiC. (2009). Family business governance and independent directors: The challenges facing an independent family business board. University of Pennsylvania Journal of Business Law, 12, 181-233.
43.
PacheA.SantosF. (2010). When worlds collide. Academy of Management Review, 35, 455-476.
44.
PacheA.SantosF. (2013). Inside the hybrid organization: Selective coupling as a response to competing institutional logics. Academy of Management Journal, 56, 972-1001.
45.
ParkinsonM. (2004). Certificate in international trust management. Birmingham, England: CLT International.
46.
ParkinsonM. (2005). Trust creation: Law and practice (3rd ed.). Birmingham, England: CLT International.
47.
ParkinsonM. (2006). Company law and practice (5th ed.). Birmingham, England: CLT International.
48.
Pérez-GonzálezF. (2006). Inherited control and firm performance. American Economic Review, 96, 1559-1588.
49.
PerryJ.BeremanN. (2016). Comparing family and nonfamily candidates for promotion: Manager selection at Acme Lumber. CASE Journal, 12, 422-439.
50.
ReayT.JaskiewiczP.HiningsC. (2015). How family, business and community logics shape family firm behavior and “rules of the game” in an organizational field. Family Business Review, 28, 292-311.
51.
SalvatoC.CorbettaG. (2013). Transitional leadership of advisors as a facilitator of successors’ leadership construction. Family Business Review, 26, 235-255.
52.
SewellW. (1992). A theory of structure. American Journal of Sociology, 98, 1-29.
SmetsM.MorrisT.GreenwoodR. (2012). From practice to field: A multilevel model of practice-driven institutional change. Academy of Management Journal, 55, 877-904.
55.
SpenceC.CarterC. (2014). An exploration of the professional habitus in the Big 4 accounting firms. Work, Employment and Society, 28, 946-962.
StewartC. (2010). Family business succession planning: East versus west. STEP Journal, January, 27-29.
58.
StrikeV. (2012). Advising the family firm. Family Business Review, 25, 156-177.
59.
StrikeV. (2013). The most trusted advisor and the subtle advice process in family firms. Family Business Review, 26, 293-313.
60.
StrikeV.RerupC. (2016). Mediated sensemaking. Academy of Management Journal, 59, 880-905.
61.
SuE.DouJ. (2013). How does knowledge sharing among advisors from different disciplines affect the quality of the services provided to the family business client?Family Business Review, 26, 256-270.
62.
ThorntonP. (2004). Markets from culture: Institutional logics and organizational decisions in higher education publishing. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press
63.
ThorntonP.JonesC.KuryK. (2005). Transformation in cultural industries. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 23, 125-170.
64.
ThorntonP.OcasioW. (2008). Institutional logics. In GreenwoodR.OliverC.SuddabyR.SahlinK. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of organizational institutionalism (pp. 99-128). London: Sage.
65.
ThorntonP.OcasioW.LounsburyM. (2012). The institutional logics perspective. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
66.
van MaanenJ. (1973). Observations on the making of policemen. Human Organization, 32, 407-418.
67.
WashingtonJ. (2013). Keeping it in the family. STEP Journal, April, 30-31.
68.
WeberM. (1949). The methodology of the social sciences. New York, NY: Free Press.
