Resources and Innovation in Family Businesses: The Janus-Face of Socioemotional Preferences
By Danny Miller, Mike Wright, Isabelle Le Breton-Miller, L. Scholes. 2015
148 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Family business socio-emotional preferences are often Janus-faced. Some strive to create a strong business they can pass on to offspring by building innovation-promoting resources such as human, relational, and financial capital. Other family firms cater to family desires for unqualified nepotism, altruism towards undeserving kin, and appropriation of firm assets to fulfill parochial desires that erode these resources. This article explores how such preferences, together with their impact on resources and the innovation demands of their markets, shape the approach to innovation.
Subfields: Management of Technology and Innovation, Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/b28bdbc5ae277c0b3a6ee6362a53fb4427ba6595
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Management of Technology and Innovation
- Giovanna Campopiano
- Sascha Kraus
- Johanna Gast
- Andrea Calabro
- Mariangela Vecchiarini
- Alfredo De Massis
In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management
- Sascha Kraus
- Giovanna Campopiano
- Johanna Gast
- Andrea Calabro
- Mariangela Vecchiarini
- Alfredo De Massis
Citations in the corpus
- Innovation in Family Firms: A Systematic Literature Review and Guidance for Future Research (2018, background): “This is in line with a Janus-faced view of innovation in FFs (Miller et al. 2015) or paradoxical thinking affecting FF innovation (De Massis et al. 2015a; Ingram et al. 2016).”
- Family firm internationalization: heritage assets and the impact of bifurcation bias (2018, unknown): “Investment in training has traditionally been somewhat atypical in family firms (Carney, 2005); this can be particularly damaging in complex, high-velocity or highly uncertain environments (Miller et al. , 2015; Verbeke and Kano, 2012), which cross-border operations epitomize.”