Search results

The purpose of this paper is to review Bayesian analysis in recent entrepreneurship research to assess how scholars have employed these methods to study the entrepreneurship process. Researchers in other business fields (e.g. management science, marketing, and finance) have increasingly employed Bayesian methods to study issues like decision making. To date, however, Bayesian methods have seen only limited use in entrepreneurship research.

After providing a general overview of Bayesian methods, this study examines how extant entrepreneurship research published in leading journals has employed Bayesian analysis and highlights topics these studies have investigated most frequently. It next reviews topics that scholars from other business disciplines have investigated using these methods, focusing on issues related to decision making, in particular.

Only seven articles published in leading management and entrepreneurship journals between 2000 and 2016 employed or discussed Bayesian methods in depth when studying the entrepreneurship process. In addition, some of these studies were conceptual.

This review suggests that Bayesian methods may provide another important tool for researchers to employ when studying decision making in high uncertainty situations or the impact of entrepreneurial experience on decision making over time.

This review demonstrates that Bayesian analysis may be particularly appropriate for entrepreneurship research. By employing these methods, scholars may gain additional insights into entrepreneurial phenomenon by allowing researchers to examine entrepreneurial decision making. Through this review and these recommendations, this study hopes to encourage greater Bayesian analysis usage in future entrepreneurship research.

The purpose of this study is to identify the key determinants which inhibit intra-family business succession. The study also explores the effects these determinants have on preventing intra-family business succession. Finally, the study explores the probability that intra-family business succession does not take place based upon the effects of the identified determinants.

A total of 250 surveys were mailed to family business owners across the United States, yielding 68 usable responses (27.2% response rate). Factor analysis was used to determine the most influential factors which inhibit intra-family business succession, and Bayesian Networks were constructed to determine the probability that intra-family business succession does not occur based on these factors.

The study results indicate that there are four key constructs comprised of 23 variables which have the most influence on deterring intra-family business successions. The results also suggest managerial actions that can be taken to improve the probability of intra-family business succession.

A possible research limitation is that the survey respondents may not represent the entire cross-section of family-owned business in the United States. Additionally, the impact of company size, age, industry, and other demographic factors were not considered in the analysis of results. Finally, the selection of the key determinants was made based upon the highest value extracted from the principle components analysis. Combining these variables with other relatively high values may lead to different results.

The empirical findings contained in this study demonstrate that process, context, and governance factors have the largest effect on increasing the probability that intra-family succession does not take place. Additionally, the results of this study suggest several managerial actions that can be taken to improve the probability of intra-family business succession. Thus, the results of this study can be used by practitioners to assist them in intra-family business successions. The results can also be used by researchers as a basis for conducting additional empirical studies in this area.

This paper seeks to further develop the bargaining power model of political risk management by employing a historical case study to uncover issues not presently considered in the model.

It first examines current political risk research, primarily focusing on the bargaining power model and then reviews a historical case study to demonstrate that the model remains incomplete. Next, both the resource‐based view (RBV) of the firm and institutional theory are examined to develop propositions to guide future bargaining power research.

Examining the bargaining power model by employing a historical case study of Panton, Leslie and Company, which operated in the present day Southeastern USA during its tumultuous colonization period, not only provides an interesting historical account of how one firm managed political risk, it suggests the need to modify the bargaining power model to consider both the specific resources required for differentiation and the need to balance differentiation and conformity pressures in managing political risk. Based on what this case study reveals about the model, it is suggested that the RBV provides insights into factors that may help an multinational enterprise (MNE) maintain its bargaining power based on differentiation even under changing environmental conditions. Further, it is suggested that institutional theory highlights conditions that make it more or less necessary for an MNE to conform to host government demands, which can reduce or enhance its bargaining power, respectively. Thus, in tandem, both may provide useful insights to produce a more “balanced” bargaining power view of political risk.

For practitioners, the findings highlight critical considerations in managing political risk by illustrating the need to balance differentiation and conformity. In addition, this review provides propositions to guide future empirical political risk research, especially studies focusing on bargaining power issues.

This paper introduces the Journal of Management History, relaunched as a stand‐alone journal and explores its raison d'être.

The articles that constitute this first issue of the relaunched journal form the launching pad for this discussion, with these ideas and those from previous research used to comment on the theme of “the worthy endeavour of the scribe”.

In The Life of Reason, Santayana said “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it”. Managers looking for the “next big thing”, without being able to effectively incorporate it into their experience, and the experience of those who are long gone, are condemned to repeat not just only the past but also the mistakes of the past. Accordingly, it is also critical for management scholars to both recognise and take advantage of earlier thinking and empirical work to inform their contemporary musings and research if they are to provide meaningful frameworks for practitioners.

Drawing on the themes presented in the articles of this issue, the paper demonstrates the value of knowing accurately the history of management thought to scholars and practitioners alike.

The purpose of this paper is to continue and extend the ongoing conversation about greatness in American business.

This survey, conducted in 2021, replicates and extends McCormick and Folsom’s 2001 and 2011 rankings of the greatest entrepreneurs and businesspeople in American history. The authors’ pool surveyed 51 experts to develop an updated ranking and explore factors of greatness.

Henry Ford topped the ranking followed by John D. Rockefeller and Steve Jobs. Business scholars ranked Oprah Winfrey the greatest female and minority businessperson.

The authors extend previous research by surveying the authors’ expert pool about factors of greatness in American business history. “Ability to imagine or envision the future” ranked highest with “created wealth for shareholders” in last place.