Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T07:29:23.118Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ethics in the Family Firm: Cohesion through Reciprocity and Exchange

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 January 2015

Rebecca G. Long  and
K. Michael Mathews
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

The ubiquity of family dominated firms in economies worldwide suggests that inquiry into the nature of the ethical frames of these types of firms is increasingly important. In the context of a social exchange approach and the norm of reciprocity, this manuscript addresses social cohesion in a dominant family firm coalition. It is argued that the factors underlying this cohesion, direct versus indirect reciprocity, shape unique attributes of family firms such as intentions for transgenerational sustainability, the pursuit of non-economic goals, and strong interpersonal ties. Exchange structures, represented by direct and indirect reciprocity, lead family and non-family firms toward development of distinctive ethical frames of reference.

Type
Articles
Information
Business Ethics Quarterly , Volume 21 , Issue 2 , April 2011 , pp. 287 - 308
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Business Ethics 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Arregle, J., Hitt, M., Sirmon, D., & Very, P. 2007. The development of organizational social capital: Attributes of family firms. Journal of Management Studies, 44: 73–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Astrachan, J., & Jaskiewicz, P. 2008. Emotional returns and emotional costs in privately held family businesses: Advancing traditional business valuation. Family Business Review, 21: 139–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barach, J. A., & Elstrott, J. B. 1988. The transactional ethic: The ethical foundations of free enterprise reconsidered. Journal of Business Ethics, 7: 545–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnett, T., Pearson, A., Chrisman, J., & Chua, J. 2008. Comparing the essence and components of involvement approaches for defining family business using non-economic goals as a local solution. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Barnett, T., & Schubert, E. 2002. Perceptions of the ethical work climate and covenantal relationships. Journal of Business Ethics, 36: 279–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Becker, L. C. 1986. Reciprocity. New York: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. 1967. The social construction of reality: A treatise on the sociology of knowledge. New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
Blau, P. 1964. Exchange and power in social life. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Bosse, D. A., Phillips, R. A., & Harrison, J. S. 2009. Stakeholders, reciprocity, and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 30: 447–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bourdieu, P. 1986. The forms of capital. In Richardson, J. G. (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for sociology education: 241–58. New York: Greenwood.Google Scholar
Bowie, N. E. 1991. Challenging the egoistic paradigm. Business Ethics Quarterly, 1: 11–12.Google Scholar
Cabrera-Suarez, K., De Saá-Pérez, P., & García-Almeida, D. 2001. The succession process from a resource- and knowledge-based view of the family firm. Family Business Review, 14: 37–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cameron, K. S., & Quinn, R. E. 1999. Diagnosing and changing organizational culture: Based on the competing values framework. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Carney, M. 2005. Corporate governance and competitive advantage in family-controlled firms. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29: 249–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carr, P. 2003. Revisiting the protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism: Understanding the relationship between ethics and enterprise. Journal of Business Ethics, 47: 7–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chan, D. 1998. Functional relations among constructs in the same content domain at different levels of analysis: A typology of composition models. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83: 234–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chandler, A. 1977. The invisible hand: The managerial revolution in American business. Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap.Google Scholar
Chrisman, J., Chua, J., Kellermanns, F. & Chang, E. 2007. Are family managers agents or stewards? An exploratory study in privately held family firms. Journal of Business Research, 60: 1030–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chrisman, J.Chua, J., & Litz, R. 2003a. Extending the theoretical horizons of family business research. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 27: 331–38.Google Scholar
Chrisman, J.Chua, J., & Litz, R.. 2003b. A unified systems perspective of family firm performance: An extension and integration. Journal of Business Venturing, 18: 467–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chrisman, J., Chua, J., Pearson, A., and Barnett, T. Forthcoming. Family involvement, family influence, and family-centered non-economic goals in small firms. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice.Google Scholar
Chrisman, J., Chua, J., & Sharma, P. 2005. Trends and directions in the development of a strategic management theory of the family firm. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29: 555–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chua, J., Chrisman, J., & Sharma, P. 1999. Defining the family business by behavior. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 23: 19–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coleman, J. 1986. Social theory, social research, and a theory of action. American Journal of Sociology, 91: 1309–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coleman, J.. 1990. Foundations of Social Theory. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Collins, R. 1975. Conflict sociology: Toward an explanatory science. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Collins, R.. 1981. On the microfoundations of macrosociology. American Journal of Sociology, 86: 984–1014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corbetta, G., & Salvato, C. 2004. Self-serving or self-actualizing? Models of man and agency costs in different types of family firms: A commentary on “Comparing the agency costs of family and non-family firms: Conceptual issues and exploratory evidence,” Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 28: 355–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daily, C., & Dollinger, M. 1992. An empirical examination of ownership structure in family and professionally managed firms. Family Business Review, 5: 117–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, J., Schoorman, F., & Donaldson, L. 1997. Toward a stewardship theory of management. Academy of Management Review, 22: 20–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, J., & Tagiuri, R. 1989. The influence of life stage on father-son work relationships in family companies. Family Business Review, 2: 47–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deckop, J. R., Cirka, C. G., & Andersson, L. M. 2003. Doing unto others: The reciprocity of helping behavior in organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 47: 101–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DiMaggio, P., & Powell, W. 1983. The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48: 147–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Durkheim, E. 1997. The division of labor in society. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Eddleston, K., & Kellermanns, F. 2007. Destructive and productive family relationships: A stewardship theory perspective. Journal of Business Venturing, 22: 545–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ekeh, P. P. 1974. Social exchange theory: The two traditions. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Ensley, M. D., & Pearson, A. W. 2005. An exploratory comparison of the behavioral dynamics of top management teams in new ventures: Cohesion, conflict, potency, and consensus. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29: 267–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiske, A. P. 1990. Relativity within Moose (“Mossi”) culture: Four incommensurable models for social relationships. Ethos, 18: 180–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiske, A. P.. 1992. The four elementary forms of sociality: Framework for a unified theory of social relations. Psychological Review, 99: 689–723.Google Scholar
Friedman, M. 1970. The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. The New York Times Magazine (September): 13, 32–33, 122–26.Google Scholar
Geeraerts, G. 1984. The effect of ownership on the organization structure in small firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29: 232–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giddens, A. 1984. The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Gilligan, C. 1982. In a different voice: Psychological theory and women’s development. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard.Google Scholar
Gillmore, M. R. 1987. Implications of generalized versus restricted exchange. In Cook, K. S. (Ed.), Social Exchange Theory: 170–89. Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage.Google Scholar
Goffman, E. 1983. The interaction order. American Sociological Review, 48: 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldthorpe, J. H. 1998. Rational action theory for sociology. The British Journal of Sociology, 49: 167–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gomez-Mejia, L., Haynes, K., Nunez-Nickel, M., Jacobson, K., & Moyano-Fuentes, J. 2007. Socio-emotional wealth and business risks in family-controlled firms: Evidence from Spanish olive mills. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52: 106–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gouldner, A. 1960. The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological Review, 25: 161–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Granovetter, M. 1973. The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78: 1360–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Habbershon, T., & Williams, M. 1999. A resource-based framework for assessing the strategic advantages of family firms. Family Business Review, 13: 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Habbershon, T., Williams, M., & MacMillan, I. 2003. A unified systems perspective of family firm performance. Journal of Business Venturing, 18: 451–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hechter, M. 1987. Principles of group solidarity. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Hendry, J. 2001. After Durkheim: An agenda for the sociology of business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 34: 209–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hernandez, M. 2008. Promoting stewardship behavior in organizations: A leadership model. Journal of Business Ethics, 80: 121–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howell, S. (Ed.). 1997. The Ethnography of Moralities. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Jensen, M., & Meckling, W. 1976. Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs, and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3: 305–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karra, N., Tracey, P., & Phillips, N. 2006. Altruism and agency in the family firm: Exploring the role of family, kinship, and ethnicity. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30: 861–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelley, H., & Thibaut, J. 1978. Interpersonal Relations: A Theory of Interdependence. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Kozlowski, S., & Klein, K. 2000. A multilevel approach to theory and research in organizations: Contextual, temporal, and emergent process. In Klein, K. & Kozlowski, S. (Eds.), Multilevel Theory, Research, and Methods in Organizations: Foundations, Extensions, and New Directions: 3–90. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Kung, H. 1997. A global ethic in an age of globalization. Business Ethics Quarterly, 7: 17–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leana, C., & Van Buren, H. 1999. Organizational social capital and employment relations, Academy of Management Review, 24: 538–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindenberg, S. 2006. Prosocial behavior, solidarity, and framing processes. In Fetchenhauer, D.Flache, A.Buunk, A., & Lindenberg, S. (Eds.), Solidarity and Prosocial Behavior: An Integration of Sociological and Psychological Perspectives: 23–44. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Litz, R. 1995. The family business: Toward definitional clarity. Proceedings of the Academy of Management, 100–04.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lubatkin, M., Durand, R., & Ling, Y. 2007. The missing lens in family firm governance theory: A self-other typology of parental altruism. Journal of Business Research, 60(10): 1022–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacIntyre, A. 1984. After virtue: A study in moral theory. Notre Dame, Ind.: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
Maitland, I. 2002. The human face of self-interest. Journal of Business Ethics, 38: 3–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mathews, K. M., White, M. C., Long, R. G., Soper, B., & Von Bergen, C. W. 1998. An analysis of the relationship between indicators and predictors of tie strength. Psychological Reports, 83: 1459–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mauss, M. 2000. The gift: The form and reason for exchange in archaic societies. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
McClennen, E. F. 1999. Moral rules as public goods. Business Ethics Quarterly, 9: 103–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mead, G. H. 1967. Mind, self, and society: From the standpoint of a social behaviorist. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, D., & Le Breton-Miller, I. 2006. Family governance and firm performance: Agency, stewardship, and capabilities. Family Business Review, 19: 73–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, R., Agle, B., & Wood, D. 1997. Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review, 22: 853–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nahapiet, J., & Ghoshal, S. 1998. Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23: 242–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, R. E., & Mathews, K. M. 1991. Cause maps and social network analysis in organizational design. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 27: 379–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nobile, V. 2003. Why it hurts to watch Frank Capra’s It’s a Wonderful Life. http://hnn.us/articles/1846.html.Google Scholar
Pearson, A., Carr, J., & Shaw, J. 2008. Toward a theory of familiness: A social capital perspective. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 32: 949–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, R. 1997. Stakeholder theory and a principle of fairness. Business Ethics Quarterly, 7: 51–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, R.. 2003. Stakeholder theory and organizational ethics. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.Google Scholar
Piaget, J. 1999. The construction of reality in the child. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Pollack, R. 1985. A transaction cost approach to families and households. Journal of Economic Literature, 23: 581–608.Google Scholar
Portes, A. 1998. Social capital: Its origins and applications in modern sociology. Annual Review of Sociology, 24: 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rousseau, D. 1985. Issues of level in organizational research: Multi-level and cross-level perspectives. Research in Organizational Behavior, 7: 1–37.Google Scholar
Rowley, T., & Moldoveanu, M. 2003. When will stakeholder groups act? An interest- and identity-based model of stakeholder group mobilization. Academy of Management Review, 28: 204–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schein, E. 1985. Organizational culture and leadership: A dynamic view. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Schulze, W., Lubatkin, M., & Dino, R. 2003. Toward a theory of agency and altruism in family firms. Journal of Business Venturing, 18: 473–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharma, P., Chrisman, J., & Chua, J. 1997. Strategic management of the family business: Past research and future challenges. Family Business Review, 10: 1–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simmel, G. 1973. The problem of sociology. In Levine, D. N. (Ed.), Georg Simmel on individuality and social forms: Selected writings. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Simon, H. 1983. Reason in Human Affairs. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Solomon, R. C. 1994. The corporation as community: A reply to Ed Hartman. Business Ethics Quarterly, 4: 271–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steier, L. 2003. Variants of agency contracts in family-financed ventures as a continuum of familial altruistic and market rationalities. Journal of Business Venturing, 18: 597–618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stieb, J. A. 2006. Clearing up the egoist difficulty with loyalty. Journal of Business Ethics, 63: 75–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strauss, A. L. 1978. Negotiations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Strauss, A. L.. 1987. Qualitative analysis for social scientists. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suchman, M. 1995. Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20: 571–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tönnies, F. 2002. Community and society. Andover, Mass.: Dover Press.Google Scholar
Turner, J. H. 1988. A theory of social interaction. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Turner, J. H.. 2003. The structure of sociological theory. Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
Uehara, E. 1990. Dual exchange theory, social networks, and informal social support. American Journal of Sociology, 96: 521–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wade-Benzoni, K. K. 2002. A golden rule over time: Reciprocity in intergenerational allocation decisions. Academy of Management Journal, 45: 1011–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weber, M. 1978. Economy and society: An outline of interpretive sociology. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Werhane, P. H. 1994. Justice, impartiality, and reciprocity: A response to Edwin Hartman. Business Ethics Quarterly, 4: 287–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Westhead, P., & Howorth, C. 2006. Ownership and management issues associated with family firm performance and company objectives. Family Business Review, 19: 301–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williamson, O. E. 1981. The economics of organization: The transaction cost approach. American Journal of Sociology, 87: 548–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williamson, O. E.. 1991. Strategizing, economizing, and economic organization. Strategic Management Review, 12: 75–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zellweger, T., & Astrachan, J. 2008. On the emotional value of owning a firm. Family Business Review, 21: 347–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zellweger, T., & Nason, R. 2008. A stakeholder perspective on family firm performance. Family Business Review, 21: 203–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar