BACK TO THE CORE
Addressing paradoxes and ambiguities in family business research
Family Business research has been growing significantly over the last three decades. Recent bibliometric analyses of the field indicate that more than 1400 papers have been published since 1988 (Brigham et al., 2022; Rovelli et al., 2021). The field matures, encouraging us to move from empirically accumulated knowledge toward developing solid theoretical frames, connecting with broader conversations in management and related fields, and paving ways for new and meaningful theorizing. To do so, it seems warranted that the field should go back to the fundamental paradoxes and ambiguities thar make family business a unique and intellectually stimulating research subject.
It is difficult to fully understand family businesses, their characteristics, behaviors and performances, without embracing paradoxes, commonly referred to as “contradictory yet interrelated elements that exist simultaneously and persist over time” (Smith & Lewis, 2011, p. 382). Indeed, paradoxical tensions are inherent to virtually all forms of organizing (e.g., Poole & Van de Ven, 1989; Schad et al., 2016) and are, perhaps not surprisingly, central to some of the most alive theoretical debates in the field, such as the seemingly contradictory theoretical positions of agency and stewardship theory (e.g., Chrisman, 2019; Le Breton-Miller & Miller, 2018). Also, competing institutional demands from the business realm and the family system are well known to create ambiguities as to the legitimacy of strategy and decision-making processes (e.g., Greenwood et al., 2010; Miller et al., 2013). Finally, research has started to highlight the links, tensions and inconsistencies between multiple dimensions of family firms’ socioemotional wealth that drive family firms’ strategic behavior (Berrone et al. 2012), revealing multiple paradoxes relative to aspects such as governance (Berent-Braun & Uhlaner, 2012), identity (Shepherd & Haynie, 2009), social embeddedness (Cruz et al., 2012), emotions (de Cunha et al., 2021), or intergenerational relations (Magrelli et al., 2022).
For these reasons, a deeper look at paradoxes and ambiguities in family business research holds the promise to shed new and useful insights about important outcomes on which prior research has produced mixed results, such as innovation (e.g., Calabrò et al., 2019; Chrisman et al., 2015; De Massis et al., 2015), internationalization (e.g., Arregle et al. 2021), succession (e.g., Lee et al. 2003), resilience in face of major crises (e.g., Czakon et al. 2022), and, ultimately, performance (e.g., Irava & Moores, 2010).
We therefore invite scholars to address the tensions between opposite logics, mixed empirical findings, and apparent anomalies pervasive in family business research, starting from, but not limited to, the following questions:
We welcome cross-disciplinary, empirical (qualitative and quantitative) as well as conceptual explorations of these topics and look forward to your submissions.
IFERA 2023 welcomes a varied and wide range of submissions to create a vibrant conference environment among family business scholars. Submission types include:
Arregle, J. L., Chirico, F., Kano, L., Kundu, S. K., Majocchi, A., & Schulze, W. S. (2021). Family firm internationalization: Past research and an agenda for the future. Journal of International Business Studies, 52(6), 1159-1198.
Berent-Braun, M. M., & Uhlaner, L. M. (2012). Family governance practices and teambuilding: paradox of the enterprising family. Small Business Economics, 38(1), 103-119.
Berrone, P., Cruz, C., & Gomez-Mejia, L. R. (2012). Socioemotional wealth in family firms: Theoretical dimensions, assessment approaches, and agenda for future research. Family business review, 25(3), 258-279.
Brigham, K. H., Serrano, C. C., Kammerlander, N., & Kotlar, J. (2022). Accumulating Knowledge Over Time: Introduction to the Fourth FBR Review Issue. Family Business Review, 35(1), 6-14.
Calabrò, A., Vecchiarini, M., Gast, J., Campopiano, G., De Massis, A., & Kraus, S. (2019). Innovation in family firms: A systematic literature review and guidance for future research. International Journal of Management Reviews, 21(3), 317-355.
Chrisman, J. J. (2019). Stewardship theory: Realism, relevance, and family firm governance. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 43(6), 1051-1066.
Chrisman, J. J., Chua, J. H., De Massis, A., Frattini, F., & Wright, M. (2015). The ability and willingness paradox in family firm innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 32(3), 310-318.
Cruz, C., Justo, R., & De Castro, J. O. (2012). Does family employment enhance MSEs performance?: Integrating socioemotional wealth and family embeddedness perspectives. Journal of Business Venturing, 27(1), 62-76.
Calabrò, A., Vecchiarini, M., Gast, J., Campopiano, G., De Massis, A., & Kraus, S. (2019). Innovation in family firms: A systematic literature review and guidance for future research. International Journal of Management Reviews, 21(3), 317-355.
Czakon, W., Hajdas, M., & Radomska, J. (2022). Playing the wild cards: Antecedents of family firm resilience. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 100484.
De Massis, A., Di Minin, A., & Frattini, F. (2015). Family-driven innovation: Resolving the paradox in family firms. California Management Review, 58(1), 5-19.
de Cunha, M. P., Rego, A., Clegg, S., & Jarvis, W. P. (2021). Stewardship as process: A paradox perspective. European Management Journal, 39(2), 247-259.
Greenwood, R., Díaz, A. M., Li, S. X., & Lorente, J. C. (2010). The multiplicity of institutional logics and the heterogeneity of organizational responses. Organization Science, 21(2), 521-539.
Irava, W. J., & Moores, K. (2010). Clarifying the strategic advantage of familiness: Unbundling its dimensions and highlighting its paradoxes. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 1(3), 131-144
Le Breton-Miller, I., & Miller, D. (2018). Looking back at and forward from:“Family governance and firm performance: Agency, stewardship, and capabilities”. Family Business Review, 31(2), 229-237.
Lee, K. S., Lim, G. H., & Lim, W. S. (2003). Family business succession: Appropriation risk and choice of successor. Academy of Management Review, 28(4), 657-666.
Magrelli, V., Rondi, E., De Massis, A., & Kotlar, J. (2022). Generational brokerage: An intersubjective perspective on managing temporal orientations in family firm succession. Strategic Organization, 20(1), 164-199.
Miller, D., Breton-Miller, I. L., & Lester, R. H. (2013). Family firm governance, strategic conformity, and performance: Institutional vs. strategic perspectives. Organization Science, 24(1), 189-209.
Poole, M. S., & Van de Ven, A. H. (1989). Using paradox to build management and organization theories. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 562-578.
Rovelli, P., Ferasso, M., De Massis, A., & Kraus, S. (2021). Thirty years of research in family business journals: Status quo and future directions. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 100422.
Schad, J., Lewis, M. W., Raisch, S., & Smith, W. K. (2016). Paradox research in management science: Looking back to move forward. Academy of Management Annals, 10(1), 5-64.
Shepherd, D., & Haynie, J. M. (2009). Family business, identity conflict, and an expedited entrepreneurial process: A process of resolving identity conflict. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(6), 1245-1264.
Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W. (2011). Toward a theory of paradox: A dynamic equilibrium model of organizing. Academy of Management Review, 36(2), 381-403.
Submit before February 27, 2023.
We strongly believe that sessions that do not relate with paper presentations are equally important and beneficial to the delegate’s experience. We also realized that this is a great opportunity for our community to actively contribute to the conference program and bring fresh perspectives and people to the floor.
So, we would like to invite all of you to challenge yourself and finally bring to life that idea currently sitting in the back of your head.
As much as we love building our scientific program, we really think that you can be more innovative and improve the IFERA experience even more.
WHAT ARE WE LOOKING FOR?
We are looking for sessions in the form of panels, workshops, debates, interviews, invited speakers, experiments and any other innovative format you can think of.
The session should be relevant to our audience and should be:
HOW CAN YOU PARTICIPATE?
Please send a proposal to office@ifera.org by February 27 that includes the following points:
The proposal must be sent as a word file.
IMPORTANT INFO
This proposal is referred to a one-hour session at the IFERA 2023 Annual Conference in Kraków, Poland.
Slots dedicated to special sessions will be on July 6, 7 and 8 and will be allocated in any of these 3 dates by the Program Committee.
The author/s of the proposal, if selected, will be the session chair/s.
As a chair you will be responsible for the overall organization and coordination of the session, and you will provide the IFERA Office with all relevant info in a timely manner.
All speakers are welcome to contribute to their session and attend all other academic sessions on the same day at no charge. However, we would kindly ask them to register if they have a paper to present at the conference or they wish to participate in the full program and the social events.
May you need any further information about the process, please write an email to office@ifera.org.
Good luck with your proposal!
GO TO THE SUBMISSION WEBSITE AT: https://ifera2023.exordo.com/
Once you have accessed the website click on “New Submission” from the Submissions section.
The conference is organized around multiple tracks. Please read carefully the general and track-specific guidelines, and make sure you are making the correct choice for your submission. Once you make your selection you will be guided by the system to input all the relevant information for your selected track.
Email all inquiries about online process to the Program Committee at research@ifera.org
IFERA 2023 welcomes a varied and wide range of submissions to create a vibrant conference environment among family business scholars. The program will be organized in two main parts: the Academic Program and the Research Development Program. These include the following submission types:
The Program Committee reserves the right to change the original submission type at its discretion, based on reviewers feedback and conference program constraints. In such a case, the Program Committee will contact the authors and offer the alternative presentation format.
Description of each type:
Full Paper (FP) is a submission of a finished product – an original completed research manuscript that is ready for peer review. FP submissions will be assessed according to a double-blind process with at least two reviewers. FPs are eligible for Best Conference Paper Awards.
Length: Maximum 35 pages including references, tables and figures.
Work in Progress (WIP) is a submission of a well-developed original idea that is not yet completed. WIP submissions include at a minimum the research question, preliminary literature review, conceptual/theoretical framework, methodology (if relevant) and its contribution to theory and practice. They will be evaluated for their potential and promise according to a double-blind process with two reviewers. WIP are eligible for Track-specific awards.
Length: Maximum of 7 pages (5 pages for the body which can include charts, graphs, diagrams, etc. and up to 2 pages of references).
Here is a TEMPLATE for this submission.
The doctoral consortium (DC) is open to any scholar interested in an introduction to family business research, especially doctoral students at mid-advanced stage of their studies and scholars who are new to family business research.
Check the dedicated page for complete information where you will also find a TEMPLATE for this submission.
The Paper Development Workshop (PDW) is a unique opportunity to engage in an in-depth discussion with the Editors of highly ranked journals, and to receive detailed feedback about your manuscript aimed at advancing your work toward journal submission.
Check the dedicated page for complete information.
Upon completion of peer review, if your submission is selected for inclusion in the conference, you will be notified with the decision on the presentation format of your submission.
All submissions are deemed as final after the main deadline. Therefore the following will not be accepted after the deadline.
Cancellation of registration is not eligible for cash refunds. In case of cancellation the registration fee can be transferred to another author of the same paper. In case of single authored papers, 50% of the paid registration will be applied to the next year’s conference registration fee
The following guidelines apply to all submission types:
The title page should not contain author information. Just include the title of the manuscript and abstract in the first page.
Limit: 150 words
A concise abstract is required. The abstract should state briefly the purpose of the research, the principal results and major conclusions. An abstract is often presented separately from the article, so it must be able to stand alone. For this reason, references should be avoided, but if essential, then cite the author(s) and year(s). Also, non-standard or uncommon abbreviations should be avoided, but if essential they must be defined at their first mention in the abstract itself.
Please follow APA style for references both in-text and in the reference section located at the end of the paper. References within the text of your manuscript: Use the author-date method of citation. For instance, “As noted by Smith (1776).”
Reference to a journal publication:Van der Geer, J., Hanraads, J. A. J., & Lupton, R. A. (2010). The art of writing a scientific article. Journal of Scientific Communications, 163, 51–59.
Reference to a book:
Strunk, W., Jr., & White, E. B. (1979). The elements of style. (4th ed.). New York: Longman, (Chapter 4).
Reference to a chapter in an edited book:
Mettam, G. R., & Adams, L. B. (2009). How to prepare an electronic version of your article. In B. S. Jones, & R. Z. Smith (Eds.), Introduction to the electronic age (pp. 281–304). New York: E-Publishing Inc.
Please follow a consistent format and for more details regarding the APA style please visit: http://linguistics.byu.edu/faculty/henrichsenl/apa/apa01.html
