Search

This study examines the interplay between two influential yet opposing shareholder types—family blockholders and hedge funds—in relation to corporate innovation output. Using panel data on U.S. publicly traded firms listed in the S&P 1500, we find that family blockholders have a negative effect on radical innovation output in the form of citation-weighted patents and that this negative effect is intensified in the presence of activist hedge funds. Our study advances insight into the implications of ownership heterogeneity for innovation output choices in family-influenced firms.

Prior research has revealed a negative association between family influence and R&D spending. The dominant explanation for this association centers on the role of socioemotional considerations in decision-making. These socioemotional decision considerations are argued to play a more prominent role among family firms and to lower their R&D spending intensity. However, to date, this negative explanatory mechanism has not been empirically verified. Moreover, a deeper analysis of the literature suggests that some family-induced socioemotional considerations may actually stimulate R&D investments. In this study, four socioemotional decision considerations are delineated-namely, concern for current control, for extended preservation, for organizational reputation, and for organizational values and traditions-of which the first two are anchored in a family's nurturer role identity and the latter two in a family's organizational identification. It is hypothesized that those socioemotional considerations derived from a family's nurturer role identity constrain R&D spending, while those derived from the family's organizational identification boost R&D spending. The empirical study concentrates on the setting of privately held manufacturing SMEs, and using survey data on 365 such companies in the Netherlands, a structural equation model is estimated. The analyses reveal several interesting results: (1) the overall association between family firm status and R&D spending indeed turns out to be negative, and this negative effect is fully explained by family firms' preoccupation with extended preservation; (2) concerns for organizational reputation and for organizational values and traditions partly compensate the negative effect of the extended preservation mechanism. Key academic and practical implications of these findings are discussed.

Prior research has revealed a negative association between family influence and R&D spending. The dominant explanation for this association centers on the role of socioemotional considerations in decision-making. These socioemotional decision considerations are argued to play a more prominent role among family firms and to lower their R&D spending intensity. However, to date, this negative explanatory mechanism has not been empirically verified. Moreover, a deeper analysis of the literature suggests that some family-induced socioemotional considerations may actually stimulate R&D investments. In this study, four socioemotional decision considerations are delineated-namely, concern for current control, for extended preservation, for organizational reputation, and for organizational values and traditions-of which the first two are anchored in a family's nurturer role identity and the latter two in a family's organizational identification. It is hypothesized that those socioemotional considerations derived from a family's nurturer role identity constrain R&D spending, while those derived from the family's organizational identification boost R&D spending. The empirical study concentrates on the setting of privately held manufacturing SMEs, and using survey data on 365 such companies in the Netherlands, a structural equation model is estimated. The analyses reveal several interesting results: (1) the overall association between family firm status and R&D spending indeed turns out to be negative, and this negative effect is fully explained by family firms' preoccupation with extended preservation; (2) concerns for organizational reputation and for organizational values and traditions partly compensate the negative effect of the extended preservation mechanism. Key academic and practical implications of these findings are discussed.

Prior research has revealed a negative association between family influence and R&D spending. The dominant explanation for this association centers on the role of socioemotional considerations in decision-making. These socioemotional decision considerations are argued to play a more prominent role among family firms and to lower their R&D spending intensity. However, to date, this negative explanatory mechanism has not been empirically verified. Moreover, a deeper analysis of the literature suggests that some family-induced socioemotional considerations may actually stimulate R&D investments. In this study, four socioemotional decision considerations are delineated—namely, concern for current control, for extended preservation, for organizational reputation, and for organizational values and traditions—of which the first two are anchored in a family's nurturer role identity and the latter two in a family's organizational identification. It is hypothesized that those socioemotional considerations derived from a family's nurturer role identity constrain R&D spending, while those derived from the family's organizational identification boost R&D spending. The empirical study concentrates on the setting of privately held manufacturing SMEs, and using survey data on 365 such companies in the Netherlands, a structural equation model is estimated. The analyses reveal several interesting results: (1) the overall association between family firm status and R&D spending indeed turns out to be negative, and this negative effect is fully explained by family firms' preoccupation with extended preservation; (2) concerns for organizational reputation and for organizational values and traditions partly compensate the negative effect of the extended preservation mechanism. Key academic and practical implications of these findings are discussed.

This study provides an exploratory analysis of differences between family and non-family firms in innovation investment, product and process innovation outcomes, and labor productivity. Using data from the Community Innovation Survey on 2,087 German small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), we observe significant disparities at each stage of the innovation process. Whereas family SMEs have a higher propensity to invest in innovation at all, conditional on investing in innovation, these companies do so less intensively than their non-family counterparts. Family SMEs further tend to outperform non-family SMEs in terms of process innovation outcomes when controlling for innovation investment. Given the level of product and process innovation, however, family SMEs underperform regarding labor productivity in comparison to non-family SMEs. These findings complement previous empirical research by illustrating how the presence of a dominant family relates to innovation inputs and outputs of SMEs in Europe's largest economy and its innovative SME sector.