Search results

This paper aims to analyze the effect of industry growth rates on the characteristics of high-growth firms (HGFs) that are active in a particular industry. By making a distinction between HGFs active in stable and declining industries and HGFs active in growing and high-growing industries, it is analyzed if the main dimensions of firm performance are significantly different for HGFs active in one of these different industry types. Gaining more insight into this industry aspect of high firm growth is important as governmental measures towards HGFs may be more effective if they have a specific sectoral focus.

A subset of 740 Belgian HGFs was analyzed. Data were gathered from the Belfirst database. HGFs were classified within their corresponding industry type: a declining industry (negative growth), a stable industry (0 −5% growth), a growing industry (5 −10% growth) and a high-growth industry (>10% growth). Four dimensions of structural firm performance that are expected to correlate with high growth were taken into consideration: productivity (value added per FTE), profitability (ROA), innovativeness (intangible assets) and financial health (solvency and liquidity).Tukey's range tests in conjunction with post-hoc analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests were carried out to test for significant differences in all the mentioned variables for the HGFs in the four different industry types.

Results show that HGFs active in a stable industry are not significantly more profitable or innovative than HGFs active in a growth industry. However, significant differences could be encountered when it comes to the other two dimensions of structural firm performance: productivity and financial health. It is shown that HGFs active in declining and stable industries are significantly more productive than HGFs active in growth industries and high-growth industries. Also, HGFs active in declining and stable industries have significantly higher liquidity ratios than firms active in growth industries, pointing towards a better financial health for HGFs in nongrowing industries.

The results confirm the conceptual logic that the differences between resource-based view (RBV) and industrial organization (IO) propositions will have an impact on the drivers of firm performance and high business growth. Every future study that focuses on the growth determinants of HGFs should be aware that considering the subset of HGFs as one homogenous group may be suboptimal. It is likely that the growth determinants of both HGF types will indeed be fundamentally different.

Until now, all studies on HGFs have considered the subset of HGFs as a whole. This paper tried to disentangle the subset based on the growth rate of the industry in which HGFs are mainly active. In this proposition, a reason for the lack of knowledge about characteristics of HGFs may – at least partially – be found in the fact that industry membership plays an important role in determining the characteristics of a high-growth firm. Future studies focusing on high-growth determinants may benefit from systematically taking the industry growth rates into account, with the knowledge that the propositions of two different theories – IO and RBV – may be the fundamental drivers of a firm's high-growth rates.

This study aims to unravel a potential determinant of employee engagement in family firms. In particular, we focus on the role of the CEO by studying the influence of CEO transformational leadership on employee engagement. Moreover, we look into the potential mediating psychological safety might play in this relationship.

Based on an extensive literature review, we propose that there will be a significant positive relationship between family firm CEOs’ transformational leadership and the level of employee engagement. We argue that psychological safety will serve as an underlying mechanism explaining this positive relationship. We empirically tested our research model using quantitative data collected through a questionnaire, completed by 508 employees from Belgian family firms.

The results confirm the positive relationship between CEOs’ transformational leadership and employee engagement. Moreover, these results show that the degree of psychological safety mediates this relationship.

This study forms a significant contribution to family firm literature. Until now, even though existing studies on employee engagement in general are numerous, we had little to no knowledge of the factors influencing employee engagement taking into account the unique context of family firms. With this study, we take an important step in this matter. In addition, this study also contributes to the general literature on employee engagement, since previous studies on the impact of leadership on employee engagement tended to focus on the role of the immediate supervisors and not the CEO.

The purpose of this study is to explore to what extent passionate family chief executive officers (CEOs) increase the entrepreneurial orientation (EO) of the family firm. More specifically, the authors investigate the impact of the family CEO’s entrepreneurial passion (EP) on the firm’s EO and explore whether the generational stage of the family CEO alters this relationship.

A multiple moderated regression model was used to test the hypothesized relationships, based on a unique sample of 140 private Belgian family firms. All respondent CEOs are members of the controlling family, meaning they are in a unique position to influence firm-level outcomes.

The results reveal a significant positive effect of a CEO’s EP on the family firm’s EO. The generational stage of the family CEO moderates the EP-EO relationship, so the positive effect is strongest in first-generation family CEOs and becomes negative in third- or later-generation CEOs.

This research builds on insights from imprinting and upper echelon theory to explore how the EP of the family CEO impacts the family firm’s EO. This study thereby contributes to research regarding the antecedents of EO and introduces the concept of EP in a family firm context. The present study further contributes to the literature on imprinting, as it empirically shows how the EP-EO relationship differs depending on the generational stage of the family CEO. In a family firm context, the generational stage acts as a contingency variable, determining the dominant theory (i.e. upper echelon or imprinting theory) in explaining the EP-EO relationship.

Family governance mechanisms serve to govern and strengthen relations between the family and the business, as well as the relationships between the members of the business family itself. However, despite agreement on the importance of adopting family governance structures, explicit research on the determinants of family governance mechanisms is currently missing. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to uncover the determinants of family meetings. In order to do so, the social systems theory is used to unravel several determining factors of this crucial form of family governance mechanisms in private family firms.

The authors perform a qualitative study by conducting semi-structured interviews in eight Belgian private family firms in order to discover the antecedents of the implementation of family meetings. The authors use a pattern-matching technique as an analytical strategy.

The findings of the study highlight the importance of “soft,” relational, qualitative issues as antecedents of family meetings as opposed to previous research on family governance, which predominantly focused on “hard,” quantitative measures (e.g. family ownership). The findings of the study also provide novel insights into the origins of the family component (i.e. family meetings) of family business governance.

While the current literature has only focused on describing the different types of family governance and their positive consequences for the family firm, the authors take a step back to explain why family meetings, as a form of family governance, are adopted in the first place. Second, the authors demonstrate the instrumentality of the social systems theory in understanding the family's needs that necessitate the implementation of family governance mechanisms.