In this article, we investigate family firms' position in the intercorporate ownership network. Rooting our predictions in the Behavioral Agency Model and a Network analytical framework, we predict and find that family involvement decreases the likelihood of business group affiliation and of cross-group ties leading to a lower embeddedness within the overall network. We predict and find the opposite effect for community involvement. We use the complete longitudinal dataset of publicly listed firms' corporate ownership ties in India (2001, 2005, and 2009). Theoretical and substantive contributions are to research on family businesses and to research on interorganizational networks.
AhujaG. (2000) Collaboration networks, structural holes, and innovation: A longitudinal study. Administrative Science Quarterly43: 425–455.
2.
AkerlofG. (1970) The market for lemons. Quarterly Journal of Economics84: 488–500.
3.
AndersonR. C.ReebD. M. (2003) Founding-family ownership and firm performance: Evidence from the s&p 500. The Journal of Finance58: 1301–1328.
4.
AndersonT. W.HsiaoC. (1981) Estimation of dynamic models with error components. Journal of the American statistical Association76: 598–606.
5.
AroraA.ArunachalamV. S.AsundiJ.FernandesR. (2001) The Indian software services industry. Research Policy30: 1267–1287.
6.
Bartels, B. (2008, July 9–12). Beyond “fixed versus random effects”: A framework for improving substantive and statistical analysis of panel, time-series cross-sectional, and multilevel data. Paper Presented at the Political Methodology Conference, Ann Arbor, MI.
7.
BellG. G. (2005) Clusters, networks, and firm innovativeness. Strategic Management Journal26: 287–295.
8.
BerroneP.CruzC.Gomez-MejiaL. R.Larraza-KintanaM. (2010) Socioemotional wealth and corporate responses to institutional pressures: Do family-controlled firms pollute less?. Administrative Science Quarterly55: 82–113.
9.
BertrandM.JohnsonS.SamphantharakK.SchoarA. (2008) Mixing family with business: A study of Thai business groups and the families behind them. Journal of Financial Economics88: 466–498.
10.
BertrandM.MehtaP.MullainathanS. (2000) Ferreting out tunneling: An application to Indian business groups. Quarterly Journal of Economics117: 121–148.
11.
BurtR. S. (1992) Structural holes: The social structure of competition, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
12.
CannellaA. A.JonesC. D.WithersM. C. (2015) Family-versus lone-founder-controlled public corporations: Social identity theory and boards of directors. Academy of Management Journal58: 436–459.
13.
CaprioL.CrociE.Del GiudiceA. (2011) Ownership structure, family control, and acquisition decisions. Journal of Corporate Finance17: 1636–1657.
14.
CarneyR. W.ChildT. B. (2013) Changes to the ownership and control of East Asian corporations between 1996 and 2008: The primacy of politics. Journal of Financial Economics107: 494–513.
15.
ChrismanJ. J.PatelP. C. (2012) Variations in R&D investments of family and nonfamily firms: Behavioral agency and myopic loss aversion perspectives. Academy of Management Journal55: 976–997.
16.
ClaessensS.DjankovS.LangL. H. P. (2000) The separation of ownership and control in East Asian corporations. Journal of Financial Economics58: 81–112.
17.
ColemanJ. S. (1988) Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology94: 95–120.
18.
CruzC. C.Gómez-MejiaL. R.BecerraM. (2010) Perceptions of benevolence and the design of agency contracts: CEO-TMT relationships in family firms. Academy of Management Journal53: 69–89.
19.
DavisG. F.YooM.BakerW. E. (2003) The small world of the American corporate elite, 1982–2001. Strategic Organization1: 301–326.
20.
FranksJ.MayerC.VolpinP.WagnerH. F. (2011) The life cycle of family ownership: International evidence. Review of Financial Studies25: 1675–1712.
21.
GillionK. L. (1968) Ahmedabad: A study in Indian urban history, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
22.
Gomez-MejiaL. R.CruzC.BerroneP.De CastroJ. (2011) The bind that ties: Socioemotional wealth preservation in family firms. Academy of Management Annals5: 653–707.
23.
Gómez-MejíaL. R.HaynesK. T.Núñez-NickelM.JacobsonK. J. L.Moyano-FuentesJ. (2007) Socioemotional wealth and business risks in family-controlled firms: Evidence from Spanish olive oil mills. Administrative Science Quarterly52: 106–137.
24.
Gomez-MejiaL. R.MakriM.KintanaM. L. (2010) Diversification decisions in family-controlled firms. Journal of Management Studies47: 223–252.
25.
GranovetterM. (1985) Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology91: 481–510.
26.
GranovetterM. (2005) Business groups and social organization. In: SmelserN. J.SwedbergR. (eds) The handbook of economic sociology, 2nd. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, pp. 429–450.
27.
GuillénM. F. (2000) Business groups in emerging economies: A resource-based view. Academy of Management Journal43: 362–380.
28.
HardgroveA. (2004) Community and public culture: The Marwaris in Calcutta, c. 1897–1997, New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
29.
IyerG. R. (1999) The impact of religion and reputation in the organization of Indian merchant communities. Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing14: 102–117.
30.
KalninsA.ChungW. (2006) Social capital, geography, and survival: Gujarati immigrant entrepreneurs in the U.S. lodging industry. Management Science52: 233–247.
31.
KeisterL. A. (2001) Exchange structures in transition: Lending and trade relations in Chinese business groups. American Sociological Review66: 336–360.
32.
KennedyR. E. (1962) The protestant ethic and the Parsis. American Journal of Sociology68: 11–20.
33.
KhannaT.PalepuK. G. (2000) Is group affiliation profitable in emerging markets? An analysis of diversified Indian business groups. Journal of Finance55: 867–891.
34.
KhannaT.PalepuK. G. (2004) Globalization and convergence in corporate governance: Evidence from Infosys and the Indian software industry. Journal of International Business Studies35: 484–508.
35.
KhannaT.PalepuK. G. (2005) The evolution of concentrated ownership in India: Broad patterns and a history of the Indian software industry. In: MorckR. K. (ed.) A history of corporate governance around the world: Family business groups to professional managers, Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, pp. 283–324.
36.
KhannaT.RivkinJ. W. (2006) Interorganizational ties and business group boundaries: Evidence from an emerging economy. Organization Science17: 333–352.
37.
KilduffM.CrosslandC.TsaiW.KrackhardtD. (2008) Organizational network perceptions versus reality: A small world after all?. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes107: 15–28.
38.
KimE. M. (1996) The industrial organization and growth of the Korean Chaebol: Integrating development and organizational theories. In: HamiltonG. G. (ed.) Asian business networks, New York, NY: Walter de Gruyter, pp. 231–251.
39.
KogutB.WalkerG. (2001) The small world of firm ownership and acquisitions in Germany from 1993 to 1997: The durability of national networks. American Sociological Review66: 317–335.
40.
LambH. B. (1958) The Indian merchant. Journal of American Folklore71: 231–240.
41.
La PortaR.Lopez-de-SilanesF.ShleiferA. (1999) Corporate ownership around the world. Journal of Finance54: 471–517.
42.
LightI. H.BonacichE. (1991) Immigrant entrepreneurs: Koreans in Los Angeles, 1965–1982, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
43.
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: 404–439.
44.
ManiD.MoodyJ. (2014) Moving beyond stylized economic network models: The hybrid world of the Indian firm ownership network. American Journal of Sociology119: 1629–1669.
45.
ManikandanK.RamachandranJ. (2014) Beyond institutional voids: Business groups, incomplete markets, and organizational form. Strategic Management Journal36: 598–617.
46.
ManikuttyS. (2000) Family business groups in India: A resource-based view of the emerging trends. Family Business Review13: 279–292.
47.
MarquisC. (2003) The pressure of the past: Network imprinting in intercorporate communities. Administrative Science Quarterly48(4): 655–689.
48.
MartinG.GözübüyükR.BecerraM. (2015) Interlocks and firm performance: The role of uncertainty in the directorate interlock-performance relationship. Strategic Management Journal36: 235–253.
49.
MartinG. P.Gomez-MejiaL. R.WisemanR. M. (2013) Executive stock options as mixed gambles: Revisiting the behavioral agency model. Academy of Management Journal56: 451–472.
50.
McEvilyB.ZaheerA. (1999) Bridging ties: A source of firm heterogeneity in competitive capabilities. Strategic Management Journal20: 1133–1156.
51.
MillerD.Breton-MillerL.LesterR. H. (2010) Family ownership and acquisition behavior in publicly-traded companies. Strategic Management Journal31: 201–223.
52.
MoodyJ.WhiteD. R. (2003) Structural cohesion and embeddedness: A hierarchical concept of social groups. American Sociological Review68: 103–127.
53.
MorckR.WolfenzonD.YeungB. (2005) Corporate governance, economic entrenchment and growth. Journal of Economic Literature43: 655–720.
54.
MorckR.YeungB. (2004) Family control and the rent-seeking society. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice28: 391–409.
55.
MustakallioM.AutioE.ZahraS. A. (2002) Relational and contractual governance in family firms: Effects on strategic decision making. Family Business Review15: 205–222.
56.
PanditD. P. (1957) Creative response in Indian economy. The Economic Weekly9: 283–285.
57.
PaxtonP.MoodyJ. (2003) Structure and sentiment: Explaining emotional attachment to group. Social Psychology Quarterly66: 34–47.
58.
PiramalG. (1998) Business legends, New Delhi: Penguin Books.
59.
PortesA.SensenbrennerJ. (1993) Embeddedness and immigration: Notes on the social determinants of economic action. American Journal of Sociology98: 1320–1350.
60.
PowellW. W.WhiteD. R.KoputK. W.Owen-SmithJ. (2005) Network dynamics and field evolution: The growth of interorganizational collaboration in the life sciences. American Journal of Sociology110: 1132–1205.
61.
RosenkopfL.PadulaG. (2008) Investigating the microstructure of network evolution: Alliance formation in the mobile communications industry. Organization Science19: 669–687.
62.
RudnerD. (1989) Banker's trust and the culture of banking among the Nattukottai Chettiars of colonial South India. Modern Asian Studies23: 417–458.
63.
RussellR. V. (1916) Tribes and castes of the central provinces of India, London: Macmillan & Co.
64.
SedaitisJ. (1998) The alliances of spin-offs versus start-ups: Social ties in the genesis of post-Soviet alliances. Organization Science9: 368–381.
65.
ShleiferA.VishnyR. W. (1997) A survey of corporate governance. The Journal of Finance52: 737–783.
66.
SodaG.UsaiA.ZaheerA. (2004) Network memory: The influence of past and current networks on performance. Academy of Management Journal47: 893–906.
67.
ThorntonP. H.OcasioW.LounsburyM. (2012) The institutional logics perspective: A new approach to culture, structure, and process, New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
68.
TimbergT. A. (1978) The Marwaris, from traders to industrialists, New Delhi: Vikas Publishers.
69.
TripathiD.KudaisyaM. (2011) Marwaris: From ‘community’ to ‘class’, New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
70.
UsdikenB. (2010) The kin and the professional: Top leadership in family business groups. In: ColpanA. M.HikinoT.LincolnJ. R. (eds) The Oxford handbook of business groups, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 696–716.
71.
UzziB. (1996) The sources and consequences of embeddedness for the economic performance of organizations: The network effect. American Sociological Review61: 674–698.
72.
UzziB. (1999) Embeddedness in the making of financial capital: How social relations and networks benefit firms seeking financing. American Sociological Review64: 481–505.
73.
UzziB.SpiroJ. (2005) Collaboration and creativity: Big differences from small world networks. American Journal of Sociology111: 447–504.
74.
VissaB. (2011) A matching theory of entrepreneurs' tie formation intentions and initiation of economic exchange. Academy of Management Journal54: 137–158.
75.
WattsD. J.StrogatzS. H. (1998) Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks. Nature393: 409–410.
76.
WisemanR. M.Gomez-MejiaL. R. (1998) A behavioral agency model of managerial risk taking. Academy of Management Review23: 133–153.
77.
ZaheerA.SodaG. (2009) Network evolution: The origins of structural holes. Administrative Science Quarterly54: 1–31.
78.
ZellwegerT. (2017) Managing the family business: Theory and practice, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
