How do entrepreneurs fill institutional voids that prevail in emerging markets? By incorporating insights from both the political and family embeddedness perspectives, we argue that both political ties and family ties can compensate for gaps in the institutional infrastructure of emerging markets. Specifically, we propose and examine the partial substitutability of family ties for political ties as a means of filling institutional voids. Our empirical work based on Chinese private enterprises strongly supports this argument. We also find that the effective utilization of family ties is contingent on both family members’ motivation (willingness to use resources for the firm) and entrepreneurs’ mobilization (authority in the family to mobilize family members). This study bridges the literature on political ties and family ties to understand their respective costs and benefits and therefore advances our understanding of entrepreneurs’ networking strategies in emerging markets.
AdlerP. S.KwonS.-W. (2002) Social capital: Prospects for a new concept. Academy of Management Review27(1): 17–40.
2.
AldrichH. E.CliffJ. E. (2003) The pervasive effects of family on entrepreneurship: Toward a family embeddedness perspective. Journal of Business Venturing18(5): 573–596.
3.
ArmstrongJ. S.OvertonT. S. (1977) Estimating nonresponse bias in mail surveys. Journal of Marketing Research14(3): 396–402.
4.
ArregleJ.-L.BatjargalB.HittM. A.WebbJ. W.MillerT.TsuiA. S. (2015) Family ties in entrepreneurs’ social networks and new venture growth. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice39(2): 313–344.
5.
BanalievaE. R.EddlestonK. A.ZellwegerT. M. (2015) When do family firms have an advantage in transitioning economies? Toward a dynamic institution-based view. Strategic Management Journal36(9): 1358–1377.
6.
BatjargalB.HittM. A.TsuiA. S.ArregleJ.-L.WebbJ. W.MillerT. L. (2013) Institutional polycentrism, entrepreneurs’ social networks, and new venture growth. Academy of Management Journal56(4): 1024–1049.
7.
BurtR. S. (2000) The network structure of social capital. Research in Organizational Behavior22: 345–423.
8.
CarneyM. (1998) A management capacity constraint? Obstacles to the development of the overseas Chinese family business. Asia Pacific Journal of Management15(2): 137–162.
9.
CarneyM. (2005) Corporate governance and competitive advantage in family-controlled firms. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice29(3): 249–265.
10.
ChiricoF.IrelandR. D.SirmonD. G. (2011) Franchising and the family firm: Creating unique sources of advantage through “familiness”. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice35(3): 483–501.
11.
ChrismanJ. J.ChuaJ. H.KellermannsF. (2009) Priorities, resource stocks, and performance in family and nonfamily firms. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice33(3): 739–760.
12.
ChrismanJ. J.ChuaJ. H.LitzR. (2003) A unified systems perspective of family firm performance: An extension and integration. Journal of Business Venturing18(4): 467–472.
13.
ChuaJ. H.ChrismanJ. J.SharmaP. (2003) Succession and nonsuccession concerns of family firms and agency relationship with nonfamily managers. Family Business Review16(2): 89–107.
14.
ChungC.-N. (2006) Beyond guanxi: Network contingencies in Taiwanese business groups. Organization Studies27(4): 461–489.
15.
ChungC.-N.LuoX. R. (2013) Leadership succession and firm performance in an emerging economy: Successor origin, relational embeddedness, and legitimacy. Strategic Management Journal34(3): 338–357.
16.
CruzA. D.HoworthC.HamiltonE. (2013) Intrafamily entrepreneurship: The formation and membership of family entrepreneurial teams. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice37(1): 17–46.
17.
CruzC.JustoR.De CastroJ. O. (2012) Does family employment enhance MSEs performance? Integrating socioemotional wealth and family embeddedness perspectives. Journal of Business Venturing27(1): 62–76.
18.
DacinM. T.VentrescaM. J.BealB. D. (1999) The embeddedness of organizations: Dialogue & directions. Journal of Management25(3): 317–356.
19.
DeephouseD. L.JaskiewiczP. (2013) Do family firms have better reputations than non-family firms? An integration of socioemotional wealth and social identity theories. Journal of Management Studies50(3): 337–360.
20.
DielemanM.SachsW. M. (2008) Coevolution of institutions and corporations in emerging economies: How the Salim group morphed into an institution of Suharto’s crony regime. Journal of Management Studies45(7): 1274–1300.
21.
DyerW. G.MortensenS. P. (2005) Entrepreneurship and family business in a hostile environment: The case of Lithuania. Family Business Review18(3): 247–258.
22.
FaccioM. (2006) Politically connected firms. American Economic Review96(1): 369–386.
23.
FaccioM.MasulisR. W.McConnellJ. J. (2006) Political connections and corporate bailouts. The Journal of Finance61(6): 2597–2635.
24.
FanG.WangX.ZhuH. (2007) NERI index of marketization of China’s provinces, Beijing: Economics Science Press.
25.
FismanR. (2001) Estimating the value of political connections. American Economic Review91(4): 1095–1102.
26.
FukuyamaF. (1995) Trust: The social virtues and the creation of prosperity, New York, NY: Free Press.
27.
GedajlovicE.CarneyM. (2010) Markets, hierarchies, and families: Toward a transaction cost theory of the family firm. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice34(6): 1145–1172.
28.
GedajlovicE.CarneyM.ChrismanJ. J.KellermannsF. W. (2012) The adolescence of family firm research: Taking stock and planning for the future. Journal of Management38(4): 1010–1037.
29.
Gómez-MejíaL. R.CruzC.BerroneP.De CastroJ. (2011) The bind that ties: Socioemotional wealth preservation in family firms. Academy of Management Annals5(1): 653–707.
30.
GreeneW. H. (2011) Econometric analysis, 7th ed. Old Tappan, NJ: Prentice Hall.
31.
GreenhalghS. (1994) De-orientalizing the Chinese family firm. American Ethnologist21(4): 746–775.
32.
GreveA.SalaffJ. W. (2003) Social networks and entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice28(1): 1–22.
33.
HabbershonT. G.WilliamsM. L. (1999) A resource-based framework for assessing the strategic advantages of family firms. Family Business Review12(1): 1–25.
34.
HansenM. H. (2008) Organising the old: Senior authority and the political significance of a rural Chinese ‘non-governmental organisation’. Modern Asian Studies42(5): 1057–1078.
35.
HillmanA. J. (2005) Politicians on the board of directors: Do connections affect the bottom line?Journal of Management31(3): 464–481.
36.
HillmanA. J.HittM. A. (1999) Corporate political strategy formulation: A model of approach, participation, and strategy decisions. Academy of Management Review24(4): 825–842.
37.
HillmanA. J.KeimG. D.SchulerD. (2004) Corporate political activity: A review and research agenda. Journal of Management30(6): 837–857.
38.
HoffmanJ.HoelscherM.SorensonR. (2006) Achieving sustained competitive advantage: A family capital theory. Family Business Review19(2): 135–145.
39.
HuangY. (2008) Capitalism with Chinese characteristics: Entrepreneurship and the state, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
JaskiewiczP.HeinrichsK.RauS. B.ReayT. P. (2016) To be or not to be: How family firms manage family and commercial logics in succession. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice40(4): 781–813.
42.
JiaN. (2014) Are collective political actions and private political actions substitutes or complements? Empirical evidence from China’s private sector. Strategic Management Journal35(2): 292–315.
43.
KeimG. D.HillmanA. J. (2008) Political environments and business strategy: Implications for managers. Business Horizons51(1): 47–53.
44.
KhannaT.PalepuK. (1997) Why focused strategies may be wrong for emerging markets. Harvard Business Review75(4): 41–51.
45.
KhannaT.PalepuK. (1999) Policy shocks, market intermediaries, and corporate strategy: The evolution of business groups in Chile and India. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy8(2): 271–310.
46.
KhavulS.BrutonG. D.WoodE. (2009) Informal family business in Africa. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice33(6): 1219–1238.
47.
KozhikodeR. K.LiJ. (2012) Political pluralism, public policies, and organizational choices: Banking branch expansion in India, 1948–2003. Academy of Management Journal55(2): 339–359.
48.
LesterR. H.HillmanA.ZardkoohiA.CannellaA. A. (2008) Former government officials as outside directors: The role of human and social capital. Academy of Management Journal51(5): 999–1013.
49.
LiY.ChenH.LiuY.PengM. W. (2014) Managerial ties, organizational learning, and opportunity capture: A social capital perspective. Asia Pacific Journal of Management31(1): 271–291.
50.
LiH.MengL.WangQ.ZhouL. (2008) Political connections, financing and firm performance: Evidence from Chinese private firms. Journal of Development Economics87(2): 283–299.
51.
LiH.ZhangY. (2007) The role of managers’ political networking and functional experience in new venture performance: Evidence from China’s transition economy. Strategic Management Journal28(8): 791–804.
52.
LuoX.ChungC.-N. (2005) Keeping it all in the family: The role of particularistic relationships in business group performance during institutional transition. Administrative Science Quarterly50(3): 404–439.
53.
LuoX. R.ChungC.-N. (2013) Filling or abusing the institutional void? Ownership and management control of public family businesses in an emerging market. Organization Science24(2): 591–613.
54.
LuoY.ChenM. (1997) Does guanxi influence firm performance?Asia Pacific Journal of Management14(1): 1–16.
55.
LuxS.CrookT. R.WoehrD. J. (2011) Mixing business with politics: A meta-analysis of the antecedents and outcomes of corporate political activity. Journal of Management37(1): 223–247.
56.
MarquisC.RaynardM. (2015) Institutional strategies in emerging markets. Academy of Management Annals9(1): 291–335.
57.
MillerD.LeeJ.ChangS.Le Breton-MillerI. (2009) Filling the institutional void: The social behavior and performance of family vs non-family technology firms in emerging markets. Journal of International Business Studies40(5): 802–817.
58.
NeeV. (1992) Organizational dynamics of market transition: Hybrid forms, property rights, and mixed economy in China. Administrative Science Quarterly37(1): 1–27.
59.
NguyenT. V.LeN. T. B.BryantS. E. (2013) Sub-national institutions, firm strategies, and firm performance: A multilevel study of private manufacturing firms in Vietnam. Journal of World Business48(1): 68–76.
60.
ParishW. L.WhyteM. K. (1980) Village and family in contemporary China, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
61.
ParkS. H.LuoY. (2001) Guanxi and organizational dynamics: Organizational networking in Chinese firms. Strategic Management Journal22(5): 455–477.
62.
PearsonA. W.CarrJ. C.ShawJ. C. (2008) Toward a theory of familiness: A social capital perspective. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice32(6): 949–969.
63.
PengM. W. (2003) Institutional transitions and strategic choices. Academy of Management Review28(2): 275–296.
64.
PengY. (2004) Kinship networks and entrepreneurs in China’s transitional economy. American Journal of Sociology109(5): 1045–1074.
65.
PengM. W.HeathP. S. (1996) The growth of the firm in planned economies in transition: Institutions, organizations, and strategic choice. Academy of Management Review21(2): 492–528.
66.
PengM. W.LuoY. (2000) Managerial ties and firm performance in a transition economy: The nature of a micro-macro link. Academy of Management Journal43(3): 486–501.
67.
PengM. W.SunS. L.PinkhamB.ChenH. (2009) The institution-based view as a third leg for a strategy tripod. Academy of Management Perspectives23(3): 63–81.
68.
PengM. W.WangD. Y. L.JiangY. (2008) An institution-based view of international business strategy: A focus on emerging economies. Journal of International Business Studies39(5): 920–936.
69.
PortesA.SensenbrennerJ. (1993) Embeddedness and immigration: Notes on the social determinants of economic action. American Journal of Sociology98(6): 1320–1350.
70.
PufferS. M.McCarthyD. J.BoisotM. (2010) Entrepreneurship in Russia and China: The impact of formal institutional voids. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice34(3): 441–467.
71.
ReayT.JaskiewiczP.HiningsC. R. (2015) How family, business, and community logics shape family firm behavior and “rules of the game” in an organizational field. Family Business Review28(4): 292–311.
72.
ReddingS. G. (1993) The spirit of Chinese capitalism, New York, NY: Walter de Gruyter.
73.
RooksG.KlyverK.SserwangaA. (2016) The context of social capital: A comparison of rural and urban entrepreneurs in Uganda. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice40(1): 111–130.
74.
SharmaP. (2004) An overview of the field of family business studies: Current status and directions for the future. Family Business Review17(1): 1–36.
75.
ShleiferA.VishnyR. W. (2002) The grabbing hand: Government pathologies and their cures, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
76.
SirmonD. G.HittM. A. (2003) Managing resources: Linking unique resources, management, and wealth creation in family firms. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice27(4): 339–358.
77.
SteierL.GreenwoodR. (2000) Entrepreneurship and the evolution of angel financial networks. Organization Studies21(1): 163–192.
78.
SunP.MellahiK.ThunE. (2010) The dynamic value of MNE political embeddedness: The case of the Chinese automobile industry. Journal of International Business Studies41(7): 1161–1182.
79.
ThébaudS. (2015) Status beliefs and the spirit of capitalism: Accounting for gender biases in entrepreneurship and innovation. Social Forces94(1): 61–86.
80.
TsaiK. S. (2006) Adaptive informal institutions and endogenous institutional change in China. World Politics59(1): 116–141.
81.
TsangE. W. K. (2002) Learning from overseas venturing experience. Journal of Business Venturing17(1): 21–40.
82.
UzziB. (1997) Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly42(1): 35–67.
83.
WangH.QianC. (2011) Corporate philanthropy and corporate financial performance: The roles of stakeholder response and political access. Academy of Management Journal54(6): 1159–1181.
84.
WangX.YuJ.FanG. (2013) Business environment index for China’s provinces 2013 report, Beijing: China CITIC Press.
85.
WankD. L. (1996) The institutional process of market clientelism: Guanxi and private business in a South China city. China Quarterly147: 820–838.
86.
WhyteM. K. (1996) The Chinese family and economic development: Obstacle or engine?Economic Development and Cultural Change45(1): 1–30.
87.
XinK. R.PearceJ. L. (1996) Guanxi: Connections as substitutes for formal institutional support. Academy of Management Journal39(6): 1641–1658.
88.
ZangX. (1999) Research note: Personalism and corporate networks in Singapore. Organization Studies20(5): 861–877.
89.
ZhouW. (2013) Political connections and entrepreneurial investment: Evidence from China’s transition economy. Journal of Business Venturing28(2): 299–315.
90.
ZhuH.ChungC.-N. (2014) Portfolios of political ties and business group strategy in emerging economies: Evidence from Taiwan. Administrative Science Quarterly59(4): 599–638.
