Search results

Based on the resource orchestration perspective, this paper aims to examine whether family firms are more efficient in their collaboration for innovation process than non-family firms, considering different types of collaboration for innovation depending on the kind of partner.

This study empirically develops and tests the hypotheses based on a panel data sample of 14,937 firm-year observations from 1,867 Spanish manufacturing firms over the period 2007–2014, performing a Propensity Score Matching (Propensity score matching)-based analysis.

Results reveal that family firms outperform non-family firms, despite less collaboration and innovation inputs, thereby extending the ongoing debate surrounding the innovation efficiency of family firms. Family firms obtained better results through vertical collaborations for innovation, both in terms of product and process innovations. For horizontal collaborations, family firms only outperform their non-family counterparts in process innovation. When collaborating with universities and other research centers, there are no significant differences in the innovation outcomes between the two groups.

Recent literature points out that more research is needed to know when, how and under what circumstances family firms show superior innovative efficiency. This work empirically proves that family firms outperform non-family firms in collaboration for innovation. However, not all collaboration partners help family firms to reach this superior innovative efficiency. Family firms obtained better results just through vertical and horizontal collaborations.

Previous studies considered effectuation and causation as alternative decision-making strategies used by entrepreneurs to navigate uncertainty, having various individual- and firm-level antecedents. This study aims to broaden our understanding of individual-level antecedents by examining the role of Chief Executive Officer (CEO) temporal focus in decision-making processes in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).

Based on a multiple case study research design, the authors empirically analyse 16 Russian SMEs to uncover how the CEO temporal focus relates to the choice of effectuation/causation strategies under uncertainty.

CEOs with past orientation tend to adopt causation, future-oriented CEOs adhere to effectuation, while present-focused CEOs rely on both decision-making strategies (i.e. ambidexterity). Prior crisis-related experience is the underlying mechanism behind the relationship between CEO temporal orientation and effectuation/causation strategies. The authors formulate several propositions that may be tested in future studies in the field.

The contribution of this study consists in uncovering a new individual-level antecedent of effectuation/causation under uncertainty (i.e. CEO temporal focus) and suggesting that prior crisis experience acts as a mechanism underlying this relationship. The authors advance the strategic leadership theory by underscoring the CEO’s role in decision-making processes in SMEs.