Home-region focus and performance of family firms: The role of family vs non-family leaders

By Elitsa R. Banalieva, K. Eddleston. 2011

254 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Accounting, Management of Technology and Innovation, Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/32b3a730008be9ebaa9ebf34b2b2c7290f28ad81

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Accounting

In Management of Technology and Innovation

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

Citations in the corpus

Family firm internationalization: heritage assets and the impact of bifurcation bias (2018, unknown): “Banalieva and Eddleston (2011) analyze the impact of family leadership in family firm international diversification, and show that family firms with non-family leaders achieve higher performance with higher levels of globalization (defined as relative presence in the three regions of the triad of…”
Family firms in the global economy: Toward a deeper understanding of internationalization determinants, processes, and outcomes (2018, background): “…to justify the different international performances of firms with and without family leaders at high and low levels of regional focus (e.g., Banalieva and Eddleston, 2011), or integrating agency and stewardship theories into transaction cost economics (e.g., Gedajlovic and Carney, 2010;…”
Why is Family Firms’ Internationalization Unique? A Meta–Analysis (2017, background): “Banalieva and Eddleston (2011) also found that family firms prefer to select foreign markets in a firm’s geographic home region, possibly because the family managers have a better knowledge of or expertise in those proximate markets.”
The Three Faces of Bounded Reliability: Alfred Chandler and the Micro-Foundations of Management Theory (2015, methodology): “BRel has been invoked in several studies in international business and entrepreneurship and now requires further contextualization in the more general areas of strategy and general management.(16)”
Ownership of Corporations (2016, background): “…2010; Fernández & Nieto, 2006; Gomez-Mejia et al., 2010), and internationalization strategies are more successful when the CEO is a non–family member (Banalieva & Eddleston, 2011), or in presence of an external blockholder or of a foreign investor (Bhaumik et al., 2010; Fernández & Nieto, 2006).”
The Internationalization of Family Firms (2014, background): “Banalieva and Eddleston (2011) differentiate between family and nonfamily leadership and find that with family leadership, a stronger home region focus can be a profitable strategy, whereas if the firm has a more global strategic focus, external leadership is the better choice for family firms (Bana”
A Socioemotional Wealth Perspective on how Collaboration Intensity, Trust, and International Market Knowledge affect Family Firms' Multinationality (2016, background): “Family firms will not recruit nonfamily external managers as a solution because doing so would jeopardize family influence and SEW (e.g., Arregle, Naldi, Nordqvist, & Hitt, 2012; Banalieva & Eddleston, 2011; Chang & Shim, 2015).”
Global corporate governance: On the relevance of firms’ ownership structure (2016, background): “…analyzed the effects of ownership on an array of firm outcomes such as firm performance (Demsetz & Villalonga, 2001), diversification strategies (Banalieva & Eddleston, 2011), CSR investment (Cruz, Larraza-Kintana, Garcés-Galdeano, & Berrone, 2014; Graves & Waddock, 1994), resilience to the…”
Family involvement and firms’ establishment mode choice in foreign markets (2016, background): “It is common in FF literature to assume that a firm is family managed if the leader of the firm is a member of the owning family (Banalieva & Eddleston, 2011; Miller et al., 2013).”