This paper explores the entrepreneurial motivations of older entrepreneurs, specifically the importance of affective motivations and the influence of family and personal wellbeing on older entrepreneurs’ decisions to start-up and their subsequent business model choices. Departing from the extant literature examining the effects of family on firm and vice versa, the focus here is on the influence of family outside the boundary of the firm. Drawing on socioemotional selectivity theory (SST), the paper reports a study of older entrepreneurs who report motivations that prioritise family-based affective value external to the enterprise itself. As such, the paper contributes new knowledge on motivations for entrepreneurship and the embedded nature of family and business, particularly for older entrepreneurs.
AldrichHECliffJE (2003) The pervasive effects of family on entrepreneurship: toward a family embeddedness perspective. Journal of Business Venturing18(5): 573–596.
3.
AlrubaishiDAlarifiGMcAdamM (2021) Innovation heterogeneity in family firms: evidence from the date industry in Saudi Arabia. The International Journal of Entrepreneurship Innovation22(2): 75–87.
4.
AlsosGACarterSLjunggrenE (2014) Entrepreneurial families and households. In: BakerTWelterF (eds) The Routledge Companion for Entrepreneurship. London: Routledge, pp.165–178.
5.
Baixauli-SolerJSBelda-RuizMSánchez-MarínG (2021) Socioemotional wealth and financial decisions in private family SMEs. Journal of Business Research123: 657–668.
6.
BaltesMMCarstensenLL (1999) Social-psychological theories and their applications to aging: from individual to collective. In: BengstonVLSchaieKW (eds) Handbook of Theories of Aging. New York: Springer Publishing Company, pp.209–226.
7.
BerronePCruzCGomez-MejiaLR (2012) Socioemotional wealth in family firms: theoretical dimensions, assessment approaches, and agenda for future research. Family Business Review25(3): 258–279.
8.
BertauxD (1981) Biography and Society: The Life History Approach in the Social Sciences. London: Sage.
9.
Bloemen-BekxMVoordeckersWRemeryC, et al. (2019) Following in parental footsteps? The influence of gender and learning experiences on entrepreneurial intentions. International Small Business Journal37(6): 642–663.
10.
CarstensenLLFungHHCharlesST (2003) Socioemotional selectivity theory and the regulation of emotion in the second half of life. Motivation and Emotion27(2): 103–123.
11.
CarstensenLLIsaacowitzDMCharlesST (1999) Taking time seriously: a theory of socioemotional selectivity. American Psychologist54(3): 165.
12.
ChiricoFGómez-MejiaLRHellerstedtK, et al. (2020) To merge, sell, or liquidate? Socioemotional wealth, family control, and the choice of business exit. Journal of Management46(8): 1342–1379.
13.
CloutierCRavasiD (2021) Using tables to enhance trustworthiness in qualitative research. Strategic Organization19(1): 113–133.
14.
CruzCCGómez-MejiaLRBecerraM (2010) Perceptions of benevolence and the design of agency contracts: CEO-TMT relationships in family firms. Academy of Management Journal53(1): 69–89.
15.
CurranJBlackburnRA (2001) Researching the Small Enterprise. London: Sage Publications Ltd
16.
DanermarkBEkstromMJakobsenL, et al. (2002) Explaining Society: Critical Reaslim in the Social Sciences. New York, NY: Routledge.
17.
DawsonCHenleyA (2012) “Push” versus “pull” entrepreneurship: an ambiguous distinction?International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research18(6): 697–719.
18.
DeTienneDRChiricoFJ (2013) Exit strategies in family firms: how socioemotional wealth drives the threshold of performance. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice37(6): 1297–1318.
19.
DuffPABellJS (2002) Narrative research in TESOL: narrative inquiry: more than just telling stories. TESOL quarterly36(2): 207–213.
20.
El ShoubakiAStephanM (2018) The life partner and the life satisfaction of the entrepreneur. Central European Business Review7(3): 26.
21.
GallowayLKapasiIWimalasenaL (2019) A theory of venturing: a critical realist explanation of why my father is not like richard branson. International Small Business Journal37(6): 626–641.
22.
GartnerWBBirleyS (2002) Introduction to the special issue on qualitative methods in entrepreneurship research. Journal of Business Venturing17(5): 387–395.
23.
Gibson-GrahamJK (2006) The end of Capitalism (as We Knew It): A Feminist Critique of Political Economy. Minneapolis, MN: First University of Minnesota Press.
24.
GoelSJonesRJIII (2016) Entrepreneurial exploration and exploitation in family business: a systematic review and future directions. Family Business Review29(1): 94–120.
25.
HamiltonE (2006) Whose story is it anyway? Narrative accounts of the role of women in founding and establishing family businesses. International Small Business Journal24(3): 253–271.
26.
HatakIKautonenTFinkM, et al. (2016) Innovativeness and family-firm performance: the moderating effect of family commitment. Technological Forecasting and Social Change102: 120–131.
27.
HoltDTPearsonAWCarrJC, et al. (2017) Family firm (s) outcomes model: structuring financial and nonfinancial outcomes across the family and firm. Family Business Review30(2): 182–202.
28.
JohnsonJLAdkinsDChauvinS (2020) A review of the quality indicators of rigor in qualitative research. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education84(1): 7120.
29.
KapasiIStirzakerRGallowayL, et al. (2022) The (mixed) motivations of those engaged in enterprise and experiencing poverty. In: BattistiMDannZEkinsmythC, et al. (eds) Disadvantaged Entrepreneurship and the Entrepreneurial Ecosystem. Bingley: Emerald Publishing, 11–32.
30.
KautonenT (2012) Do age-related expectations influence entrepreneurial activity in later life?The International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation13(3): 179–187.
31.
KautonenT (2013) Senior Entrepreneurship. A background paper for the OECD centre for entrepreneurship. SME’s and local development. Reportno. Report Number, Date. Place Published|: Institution.
32.
KiblerEWainwrightTKautonenT, et al. (2015) Can social exclusion against “older entrepreneurs” be managed. Journal of Small Business Management53(1): 193–208.
33.
KreftingL (1991) Rigor in qualitative research: the assessment of trustworthiness. American Journal of Occupational Therapy45(3): 214–222.
34.
KruegerN (2009) Entrepreneurial intentions are dead: long live entrepreneurial intentions. In: CarsrudABrannbackM (eds) Understanding the Entrepreneurial Mind. Heidelberg: Springer, pp.51–72.
35.
LincolnYSGubaEG (1985) Naturalistic Inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
36.
Llanos-ContrerasOJabriMSharmaP (2019) Temporality and the role of shocks in explaining changes in socioemotional wealth and entrepreneurial orientation of small and medium family enterprises. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal15(4): 1269–1289.
McCarthyPTO’RiordanCGriffinR (2014) The other end of entrepreneurship: a narrative study of insolvency practice in Ireland. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research20(2): 173–192.
40.
MikušováMFriedrichVHorváthováP (2020) Who is more sustainable? Family business or non-family business? Czech evidence. Sustainability12(14): 5540.
41.
MilesMBHubermanAMSaldanaJ (2014) Qualitative Data Analysis: A Methods Sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
42.
NowellLSNorrisJMWhiteDE, et al. (2017) Thematic analysis: striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods16(1): 1609406917733847.
43.
PerryJTRingJKBrobergJC (2015) Which type of advisors do family businesses trust most? An exploratory application of socioemotional selectivity theory. Family Business Review28(3): 211–226.
44.
RoulstonKSheltonSA (2015) Reconceptualizing bias in teaching qualitative research methods. Qualitative Inquiry21(4): 332–342.
SchepersJVoordeckersWSteijversT, et al. (2014) The entrepreneurial orientation–performance relationship in private family firms: the moderating role of socioemotional wealth. Small Business Economics43(1): 39–55.
47.
SchøttTRogoffEHerringtonM, et al. (2017) GEM: Special Report on Senior Entrepreneurship. London, UK: Global Entrepreneurship Research Association.
48.
ShaperoASokolL (1982) The social dimensions of entrepreneurship. In: KentCASextonDLVesperKH (eds) Encyclopedia of Entrepreneurship. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, Inc., pp.72–90.
49.
SiegerPMinolaT (2017) The family’s financial support as a “poisoned gift”: a family embeddedness perspective on entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of Small Business Management55(sup1): 179–204.
50.
SinghGDeNobleA (2003) Early retirees as the next generation of entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice27(3): 207–226.
51.
StirzakerRGallowayLPotterL (2019) Entrepreneurship, ageing and socioemotional selectivity. Journal of Small Business Management57(2): 616–636.
52.
StirzakerRJGallowayL (2017) Ageing and redundancy and the silver lining of entrepreneurship. The International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation18(2): 105–114.
53.
TedmansonDVerduynKEssersC, et al. (2012) Critical perspectives in entrepreneurship research. Organization19(5): 531–541.
54.
WainwrightTKiblerE (2013) Beyond financialization: older entrepreneurship and retirement planning. Journal of Economic Geography14(4): 849–864.
55.
WeberPSchaperM (2004) Understanding the grey entrepreneur. Journal of Enterprising Culture12(2): 147–164.
56.
WelterFBakerTAudretschDB, et al. (2017) Everyday entrepreneurship—a call for entrepreneurship research to embrace entrepreneurial diversity. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice41(3): 311–321.
57.
WilliamsCC (2008) Beyond necessity-driven versus opportunity-driven entrepreneurship A study of informal entrepreneurs in England, Russia and Ukraine. The International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation9(3): 157–165.
58.
ZissimopoulosJMKarolyLA (2007) Transitions to self-employment at older ages: the role of wealth, health, health insurance and other factors. Labour Economics14(2): 269–295.
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.
