Relational Embeddedness and Firm Growth: Comparing Spousal and Sibling Entrepreneurs

References

• Achtenhagen L, Naldi L, Melin L (2010) “Business growth”—Do practitioners and scholars really talk about the same thing? Entrepreneurship Theory Practice 34(2):289–316.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Adler PS, Kwon S-W (2002) Social capital: Prospects for a new concept. Acad. Management Rev. 27(1):17–40.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Alchian AA, Woodward S (1988) The firm is dead; long live the firm: A review of Oliver E. Williamson’s The Economic Institutions of Capitalism. J. Econom. Literature 26(1):65–79.Google Scholar
• Aldrich HE, Cliff JE (2003) The pervasive effects of family on entrepreneurship: Toward a family embeddedness perspective. J. Bus. Venturing 18(5):573–596.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aldrich HE, Kim PH (2007) A life course perspective on occupational inheritance: Self-employed parents and their children. Ruef M, Lounsbury M, eds. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, Vol. 25 (JAI Press, Amsterdam), 33–82.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Almus M, Nerlinger EA (1999) Growth of new technology-based firms: Which factors matter? Small Bus. Econom. 13(2):141–154.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Amit R, Villalonga B (2013) Financial performance of family firms. Melin L, Nordqvist M, Sharma P, eds. The SAGE Handbook of Family Business (SAGE Publications, London), 157–178.Google Scholar
• Angelini P, Generale A (2008) On the evolution of firm size distributions. Amer. Econom. Rev. 98(1):426–438.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Arregle J-L, Hitt MA, Sirmon DG, Very P (2007) The development of organizational social capital: Attributes of family firms. J. Management Stud. 44(1):73–95.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ashforth BE, Mael F (1989) Social identity theory and the organization. Acad. Management Rev. 14(1):20–39.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Audretsch DB (1995) Innovation and Industry Evolution (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Audretsch DB, Coad A, Segarra A (2014) Firm growth and innovation. Small Bus. Econom. 43(4):743–749.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ballinger GA (2004) Using generalized estimating equations for longitudinal data analysis. Organ. Res. Methods 7(2):127–150.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barden JQ, Mitchell W (2007) Disentangling the influences of leaders’ relational embeddedness on interorganizational exchange. Acad. Management J. 50(6):1440–1461.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barney J (1991) Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. J. Management 17(1):99–120.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barney J, Wright M, Ketchen DJ (2001) The resource-based view of the firm: Ten years after 1991. J. Management 27(6):625–641.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baron JN, Hannan MT, Burton MD (1999) Building the iron cage: Determinants of managerial intensity in the early years of organizations. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 64(4):527–547.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Batjargal B, Hitt MA, Tsui AS, Arregle J-L, Webb JW, Miller TL (2013) Institutional polycentrism, entrepreneurs’ social networks, and new venture growth. Acad. Management J. 56(4):1024–1049.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Batt R (2002) Managing customer services: Human resources practices, quit rates, and sales growth. Acad. Management J. 45(3):587–597.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baum RJ, Locke EA, Smith KG (2001) A multidimensional model of venture growth. Acad. Management J. 44(2):292–303.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Becker GS (1973) A theory of marriage: Part I. J. Political Econom. 81(4):813–846.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Becker GS (1993) Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis, with Special Reference to Education, 3rd ed. (University of Chicago Press, Chicago).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Beckert J (2003) Economic sociology and embeddedness: How shall we conceptualize economic action? J. Econom. Issues 37(3):769–787.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Belenzon S, Patacconi A, Zarutskie R (2015) Married to the firm? A large scale investigation of the social context of ownership. Strategic Management J. 37(13):2611–2638.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bengtson VL, Acock AC, Allen AR, Dilworth-Anderson P, Klein DM (2005) Sourcebook of Family Theory and Research (SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ben-Porath Y (1980) The F-connection: Families, friends, and firms and the organization of exchange. Population Development Rev. 6(1):1–30.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bird M, Wennberg K (2014) Regional influences on the prevalence of family versus non-family start-ups. J. Bus. Venturing 29(3):421–436.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bird M, Wennberg K (2016) Why family matters: The impact of family resources on immigrant entrepreneurs’ exit from entrepreneurship. J. Bus. Venturing 31(6):687–704.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Blatt R (2009) Though love: How communal schemas and contracting practices build relational capital in entrepreneurial teams. Acad. Management Rev. 34(3):533–551.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bolino M, Turnley WH, Bloodgood JM (2002) Citizenship behavior and the creation of social capital in organizations. Acad. Management Rev. 27(4):505–522.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bradley SW, Wiklund J, Shepherd DA (2011) Swinging a double-edged sword: The effect of slack on entrepreneurial management and growth. J. Bus. Venturing 26(5):537–554.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brannon DL, Wiklund J, Haynie MJ (2013) The varying effects of family relationships in entrepreneurial teams. Entrepreneurship Theory Practice 37(1):107–132.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brody GH (1998) Sibling relationship quality: Its causes and consequences. Annual Rev. Psych. 49(1):1–24.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brüderl J, Preisendörfer P (1998) Network support and the success of newly founded businesses. Small Bus. Econom. 10(3):213–225.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brush TH, Bromiley P, Hendrickx M (2000) The free cash flow hypothesis for sales growth and firm performance. Strategic Management J. 21(4):455–472.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Buchanan D, Badham R (2008) Power, Politics, and Organizational Change: Winning the Turf Game (SAGE Publications, London).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chambers D (2015) A Sociology of Family Life: Change and Diversity in Intimate Relations (Polity Press, Cambridge, UK).Google Scholar
• Chua JH, Chrisman JJ, Steier LP, Rau SB (2012) Sources of heterogeneity in family firms: An introduction. Entrepreneurship Theory Practice 36(6):1103–1113.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Coleman JS (1990) Foundations of Social Theory (Belknap Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Colombo MG, Grilli L (2005) Founders’ human capital and the growth of new technology-based firms: A competence-based view. Res. Policy 34(6):795–816.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cooper RG, Gimeno-Gascon FJ, Woo CY (1994) Initial human and financial capital as predictors of new venture performance. J. Bus. Venturing 9(5):371–395.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dacin MT, Ventresca MJ, Beal BD (1999) The embeddedness of organizations: Dialogue and directions. J. Management 25(3):317–356.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Danes SM, Morgan EA (2004) Family business-owning couples: An EFT view into their unique conflict culture. Contemporary Family Therapy 26(3):241–260.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Daunfeldt S-O, Halvarsson D (2015) Are high-growth firms one-hit wonders? Evidence from Sweden. Small Bus. Econom. 44(2):361–383.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Davidoff L (2006) The sibling relationship and sibling incest in historical context. Coles P, ed. Sibling Relationships (Karnac, London), 17–48.Google Scholar
• Davidsson P, Achtenhagen E, Naldi L (2010) Small firm growth. Foundations Trends Entrepreneurship 6(2):69–166.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Davidsson P, Delmar F, Wiklund J (2006) Entrepreneurship and the Growth of Firms (Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Delmar F (2006) Measuring growth: Methodological considerations and empirical results. Davidsson P, Wiklund J, Delmar F, eds. Entrepreneurship and the Growth of Firms (Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK), 62–84.Google Scholar
• Delmar F, Wiklund J (2008) The effect of small business managers’ growth motivation on firm growth: A longitudinal study. Entrepreneurship Theory Practice 32(3):437–457.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Delmar F, Davidsson P, Gartner WB (2003) Arriving at the high-growth firm. J. Bus. Venturing 18(2):189–216.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dutton JE, Dukerich JM, Harquail CV (1994) Organizational images and member identification. Admin. Sci. Quart. 39(2):239–263.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dyer JH, Chu W (2012) The role of trustworthiness in reducing transaction costs and improving performance: Empirical evidence from the United States, Japan, and Korea. Organ. Sci. 14(1):57–68.Link, Google Scholar
• Ebben J, Johnson A (2006) Bootstrapping in small firms: An empirical analysis of change over time. J. Bus. Venturing 21(6):851–865.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt KM, Bird Schoonhoven C (1990) Organizational growth: Linking founding team, strategy, environment, and growth among U.S. semiconductor ventures, 1978–1988. Admin. Sci. Quart. 35(3):504–529.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Elder GH (1998) The life course as developmental theory. Child Development 69(1):1–12.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ensley MD, Pearson AW, Amason AC (2002) Understanding the dynamics of new venture top management teams: Cohesion, conflict and new venture performance. J. Bus. Venturing 17(4):365–386.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fama EF, Jensen MC (1983) Separation of ownership and control. J. Law Econom. 26(2):301–325.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Folta TB, Delmar F, Wennberg K (2010) Hybrid entrepreneurship. Management Sci. 56(2):253–269.Link, Google Scholar
• Francis DH, Sandberg WR (2000) Friendship within entrepreneurial teams and its association with team and venture performance. Entrepreneurship Theory Practice 25(2):5–25.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Furman W, Buhrmester D (1985) Children’s perceptions of the personal relationships in their social networks. Developmental Psych. 21(6):1016–1024.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Galaskiewicz J, Bielefeld W, Dowell M (2006) Networks and organizational growth: A study of community based nonprofits. Admin. Sci. Quart. 51(3):337–380.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Garnsey E (2002) The growth of new ventures: Analysis after Penrose. Pitelis C, ed. The Growth of the Firm: The Legacy of Edith Penrose (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK), 101–125.Google Scholar
• Gilbert BA, McDougall PP, Audretsch DB (2006) New venture growth: A review and extension. J. Management 32(6):926–950.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gómez-Mejía LR, Makri M, Larraza-Kintana M (2010) Diversification decisions in family-controlled firms. J. Management Stud. 47(2):223–252.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gordon G, Nicholson N (2008) Family Wars: Classic Conflicts in Family Business and How to Deal with Them (Kogan Page Publishers, London).Google Scholar
• Granovetter MS (1973) The strength of weak ties. Amer. J. Sociol. 78(6):1360–1380.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Granovetter MS (1985) Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness. Amer. J. Sociol. 91(3):481–510.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Granovetter MS (1992) Problems of explanation in economic sociology. Nohria N, Eccles R, eds. Networks and Organizations: Structure, Form, and Action (Harvard Business School Press, Boston), 25–56.Google Scholar
• Grant AM, Asforth SJ (2008) The dynamics of proactivity at work. Res. Organ. Behav. 28:3–34.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Greene PG, Brown TE (1997) Resource needs and the dynamic capitalism typology. J. Bus. Venturing 12(3):161–173.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Greene W (2000) Econometric Analysis (Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ).Google Scholar
• Greve HR (2008) A behavioral theory of firm growth: Sequential attention to size and performance goals. Acad. Management J. 51(3):476–494.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gurman AS, Kniskern DP (2013) Handbook of Family Therapy (Routledge, London).Google Scholar
• Hambrick DC, Mason PA (1984) Upper echelons: The organization as a reflection of its top managers. Acad. Management Rev. 9(2):193–206.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hantrais L (2004) Family Policy Matters—Responding to Family Change in Europe (Policy Press, Bristol, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Harrison DA, Klein KJ (2007) What’s the difference? Diversity constructs as separation, variety, or disparity in organizations. Acad. Management Rev. 32(4):1199–1228.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Heckman J, Ichimura H, Todd P (1998) Matching as an econometric evaluation estimator. Rev. Econom. Stud. 65(2):261–294.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jaskiewicz P, Combs JG, Rau SB (2015) Entrepreneurial legacy: Toward a theory of how some family firms nurture transgenerational entrepreneurship. J. Bus. Venturing 30(1):29–49.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jennings J, Breitkreuz RS, James AE (2014) Theories from family science: A review and roadmap for family business research. Melin L, Nordqvist M, Sharma P, eds. The SAGE Handbook of Family Business (SAGE Publications, London), 25–46.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kale P, Singh H, Perlmutter H (2000) Learning and protection of proprietary assets in strategic alliances: Building relational capital. Strategic Management J. 21(3):217–237.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kammerlander N, Dessi C, Bird M, Floris M (2015) The impact of shared stories on family firm innovation: A multicase study. Family Bus. Rev. 28(4):332–354.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Keeble D, Walker S (1994) New firms, small firms and dead firms: Spatial patterns and determinants in the United Kingdom. Regional Stud. 28(4):411–427.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ketokivi K (2012) The intimate couple, family and the relational organization of close relationships. Sociology 46(3):473–489.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Knez M, Camerer C (1994) Creating expectational assets in the laboratory: Coordination in “weakest-link” games. Strategic Management J. 15(S1):101–119.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kogut B, Zander U (1996) What firms do? Coordination, identity, and learning. Organ. Sci. 7(5):502–518.Link, Google Scholar
• Kor YY, Mahoney JT (2004) Edith Penrose’s (1959) contributions to the resource-based view of strategic management. J. Management Stud. 41(1):183–191.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kor YY, Mahoney JT, Michael SC (2007) Resources, capabilities and entrepreneurial perceptions. J. Management Stud. 44(7):1187–1212.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Le Breton-Miller I, Miller D (2009) Agency vs. stewardship in public family firms: A social embeddedness reconciliation. Entrepreneurship Theory Practice 33(6):1169–1191.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Le Breton-Miller I, Miller D, Lester RH (2011) Stewardship or agency? A social embeddedness reconciliation of conduct and performance in public family businesses. Organ. Sci. 22(3):704–721.Link, Google Scholar
• Lechner M (2010) The estimation of causal effects by difference-in-difference methods. Foundations Trends Econometrics 4(3):165–224.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lee L (1983) Generalized econometric models with selectivity. Econometrica 51(2):507–512.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lee J (2006) Family firm performance: Further evidence. Family Bus. Rev. 19(2):103–114.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Li M (2012) Using the propensity score method to estimate causal effects: A review and practical guide. Organ. Res. Methods 16(2):1–39.Google Scholar
• Lockett A, Wiklund J, Davidsson P, Girma S (2011) Organic and acquisitive growth: Re-examining, testing and extending Penrose’s growth theory. J. Management Stud. 48(1):48–74.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Matzek AE, Gudmunson CG, Danes SM (2010) Spousal capital as a resource for couples starting a business. Family Relations 59(1):60–73.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McGrath RG, MacMillan IC, Venkataraman S (1995) Defining and developing competence: A strategic process paradigm. Strategic Management J. 16(4):251–275.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McHale SM, Updegraff KA, Whiteman SD (2012) Sibling relationships and influences in childhood and adolescence. J. Marriage Family 74(5):913–930.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Miller D, Breton-Miller I, Lester RH (2011) Family and lone founder ownership and strategic behaviour: Social context, identity, and institutional logics. J. Management Stud. 48(1):1–25.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Miller D, Le Breton-Miller I, Lester RH, Cannella AA Jr (2007) Are family firms really superior performers? J. Corporate Finance 13(5):829–858.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Miller D, Lee J, Chang S, Le Breton-Miller I (2009) Filling the institutional void: The social behavior and performance of family vs. non-family technology firms in emerging markets. J. Internat. Bus. Stud. 40(5):802–817.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Milliken FJ, Martins LL (1996) Searching for common threads: Understanding the multiple effects of diversity in organizational groups. Acad. Mangement Rev. 21(2):402–433.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Moody J, White D (2003) Structural cohesion and embeddedness: A hierarchical concept of social groups. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 68(1):103–127.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Moran P (2005) Structural vs. relational embeddedness: Social capital and managerial performance. Strategic Management J. 26(12):1129–1151.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Morgan L, Harding DJ (2006) Matching estimators of causal effects: Prospects and pitfalls in the theory and practice. Sociol. Methods Res. 16(2):1–39.Google Scholar
• Muske G, Fitzgerald MA, Haynes G, Black M, Chin L, MacClure R, Mashburn A (2009) The intermingling of family and business financial resources: Understanding the copreneurial couple. J. Financial Counseling Planning 20(2):27–47.Google Scholar
• Nahapiet J, Ghoshal S (1998) Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Acad. Management Rev. 23(2):242–266.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nock SL (1998) Marriage in Men’s Live (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK).Google Scholar
• O’Boyle EH Jr, Pollack JM, Rutherford MW (2012) Exploring the relation between family involvement and firms’ financial performance: A meta-analysis of main and moderator effects. J. Bus. Venturing 27(1):1–18.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Olson M (2009) The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Parsons T (1949) The social structure of the family. Anshen R, ed. The Family: Its Function and Destiny (Harper & Brothers, New York), 241–274.Google Scholar
• Peng MW, Heath SP (1996) The growth of the firm in planned economies in transition: Institutions, organizations, and strategic choice. Acad. Management Rev. 21(2):492–528.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Peng MW, Wang DY, Jiang Y (2008) An institution-based view of international business strategy: A focus on emerging economies. J. Internat. Bus. Stud. 39(5):920–936.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Penrose E (1952) Biological analogies in theory of the firm. Amer. Econom. Rev. 42(5):804–819.Google Scholar
• Penrose E (1955) Research on the business firm: Limits to the growth and size of firms. Amer. Econom. Rev. 45(2):531–543.Google Scholar
• Penrose E (1959) The Theory of Growth of the Firm (Blackwell, Oxford, UK).Google Scholar
• Pollak AR (2003) Gary Becker’s contributions to family and household economics. Rev. Econom. Household 1(1–2):111–141.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Portes A, Sensenbrenner J (1993) Embeddedness and immigration: Notes on the social determinants of economic action. Amer. J. Sociol. 98(6):1320–1350.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Powell WW, Smith-Doerr L (1994) Networks and economic life. Smelser NJ, Swedberg R, eds. The Handbook of Economic Sociology (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ), 368–402.Google Scholar
• Pratt MG (1998) To be or not to be? Central questions in organizational identification. Whetten DA, Godfrey PC, eds. Identity in Organizations: Building Theory Through Conversations (SAGE Publications, Thousands Oaks, CA), 171–207.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Putnam RD (1993) The prosperous community: Social capital and public life. Amer. Prospect 4(13):35–42.Google Scholar
• Rabe-Hesketh S, Skrondal A (2012) Multilevel and Longitudinal Modeling Using Stata, 3rd ed. (Stata Press, College Station, TX).Google Scholar
• Raffaelli M (1992) Sibling conflict in early adolescence. J. Marriage Family 54(3):652–663.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ridgeway CL (2011) Framed by Gender: How Gender Inequality Persists in the Modern World (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Roberts M, Whited T (2012) Endogeneity in empirical corporate finance. Constantinides M, Harris M, Stulz R, eds. Handbook of the Economics of Finance (Elsevier Science, Amsterdam), 493–572.Google Scholar
• Rodríguez A, Nieto MJ (2016) Does R&D offshoring lead to SME growth? Different governance modes and the mediating role of innovation. Strategic Management J. 37(8):1734–1753.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rosenbaum P, Rubin D (1983) The central role of the propensity score in observational for causal effects. Biometrika 70(1):41–55.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rousseau DM, Sitkin SB, Burt RS, Camerer C (1998) Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust. Acad. Management Rev. 23(3):393–404.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ruef M (2002) Strong ties, weak ties and islands: Structural and cultural predictors of organizational innovation. Indust. Corporate Change 11(3):427–449.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ruef M (2010a) The Entrepreneurial Group: Social Identities, Relations, and Collective Action (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ruef M (2010b) Entrepreneurial groups. Landström H, Lohrke F, eds. Historical Foundations of Entrepreneurship Research (Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK), 205–228.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ruef M, Aldrich H, Carter N (2003) The structure of founding teams: Homophily, strong ties, and isolation among U.S. entrepreneurs. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 68(2):195–222.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schulze WS, Lubatkin MH, Dino RN (2003) Exploring the agency consequences of ownership dispersion among the directors of private family firms. Acad. Management J. 46(2):179–194.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schulze WS, Lubatkin MH, Dino RN, Buchholtz AK (2001) Agency relationships in family firms: Theory and evidence. Organ. Sci. 12(2):99–116.Link, Google Scholar
• Segalen M (1986) The Historical Anthropology of the Family (Cambridge University Press, New York).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shane SA (1996) Hybrid organizational arrangements and their implications for firm growth and survival: A study of new franchisors. Acad. Management J. 39(1):216–234.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shepherd D, Wiklund J (2009) Are we comparing apples with apples or apples with oranges? Appropriateness of knowledge accumulation across growth studies. Entrepreneurship Theory Practice 33(1):105–123.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sirmon D, Hitt M (2003) Managing resources: Linking unique resources, management and wealth creation in family firms. Entrepreneurship Theory Practice 27(4):339–358.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Smith SR, Hamon RR, Ingoldsby BB, Miller JE (2008) Exploring Family Theories (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK).Google Scholar
• Smith KG, Smith KA, Olian JD, Sims HP, O’Bannon DP, Scully JA (1994) Top management team demography and process: The role of social integration and communication. Admin. Sci. Quart. 39(3):412–438.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stam W, Elfring T (2008) Entrepreneurial orientation and new venture performance: The moderating role of intra- and extraindustry social capital. Acad. Management J. 51(1):97–111.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stinchcombe AL (1965) Social structures and organizations. March JG, ed. Handbook of Organizations (Rand McNally, Chicago), 142–193.Google Scholar
• Stuart TE (2000) Interorganizational alliances and the performance of firms: A study of growth and innovation rates in a high-technology industry. Strategic Management J. 21(8):791–811.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sullivan KT, Pasch LA, Johnson MD, Bradbury TN (2012) Social support, problem solving, and the longitudinal course of newly wed marriage. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 98(4):631–644.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sutton J (1997) Gibrat’s legacy. J. Econom. Literature 35(1):40–59.Google Scholar
• Swidler A (2003) Talk of Love: How Culture Matters (University of Chicago Press, Chicago).Google Scholar
• Tsai W, Ghoshal S (1998) Social capital and value creation: The role of intrafirm networks. Acad. Management J. 41(4):464–476.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Uzzi B (1996) The sources and consequences of embeddedness for the economic performance of organizations: The network effect. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 61(4):674–698.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Uzzi B (1997) Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness. Admin. Sci. Quart. 42(1):35–67.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Verver M, Koning J (2017) Toward a kinship perspective on entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory Practice, ePub ahead of print February 6, https://doi.org/10.1111/etap.12274.Google Scholar
• Villalonga B, Amit R (2006) How do family ownership, control and management affect firm value? J. Financial Econom. 80(2):385–417.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Weick KE (1995) Sensemaking in Organizations (SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA).Google Scholar
• Welter F (2011) Contextualizing entrepreneurship—Conceptual challenges and ways forward. Entrepreneurship Theory Practice 35(1):164–184.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wennberg K, Delmar F, McKelvie A (2016) Variable risk preferences in new firm growth and survival. J. Bus. Venturing 31(4):408–427.Crossref, Google Scholar
• White L (2001) Sibling relationships over the life course: A panel analysis. J. Marriage Family 63(2):555–568.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wiersema MF, Bantel KA (1992) Top management team demography and corporate strategic change. Acad. Management J. 35(1):91–121.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wiklund J, Patzelt H, Shepherd D (2009) Building an integrative model of small business growth. Small Bus. Econom. 32(4):351–374.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wiklund J, Nordqvist M, Hellerstedt K, Bird M (2013) Internal versus external ownership transition in family firms: An embeddedness perspective. Entrepreneurship Theory Practice 37(6):1319–1340.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wright M, Stigliani I (2012) Entrepreneurship and growth. Internat. Small Bus. J. 31(1):3–22.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yang T, Aldrich H (2014) Who’s the boss? Explaining gender inequality in entrepreneurial teams. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 79(2):303–327.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zellweger TM (2017) Managing the Family Business: Theory and Practice (Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK).Google Scholar
• Zellweger TM, Nason RS, Nordqvist M (2012a) From longevity of firms to transgenerational entrepreneurship of families introducing family entrepreneurial orientation. Family Bus. Rev. 25(2):136–155.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zellweger TM, Kellermanns FW, Chrisman JJ, Chua JH (2012b) Family control and family firm valuations by family CEOs: The importance of intentions for transgenerational control. Organ. Sci. 23(2):851–868.Link, Google Scholar