enterprising through promoting familipreneurship for sustainable poverty reduction full

of 18

Family Enterprise: Enterprising Through Promoting Familipreneurship for Sustainable Poverty

Reduction, Employment Generation and Economic Growth.

SM Mijanur Rahman

[email protected]

Abstract: This paper proposes Family Enterprise as a means of Enterprising through promoting

Familipreneurship for sustainable Poverty Reduction, Employment Generation and Economic Growth.

FAMILIPRENEURSHIP means the individual and collective power of a family member to combine and

utilize personal and family capitals individually and collectively through their bondage, bridge and

linkage. It means entrepreneurship of a family as an entrepreneurial unit which enables them to

transform their individual and collective scattered capitals into performing capitals to maximize wealth.

Familipreneurship refers to the entrepreneurial spirit running through the family as a whole and not

just confined to a single individual. The promotion of Familipreneurship will create a natural

environment of transferring inherited knowledge, skill and important lesson and experience across the

generations. This courageous collective effort will enable them to be blended together to reach their

goals. Family is the ultimate institution of mankind and is always sustainable as an economic unit.

History started from the family, one has to go back to the family to go back to the future. Family as an

entity is the oldest, largest in number, longest in existence organization of human history. Families are

unique and fundamental unit of our social systems and they are permanent, based more on moral

obligation than contractual agreement. Future generations will carry on their ancestor’s knowledge and

experience of togetherness both culturally and arguably, genetically. Familiness, especially in southern

part of the world, is so powerful, effective and long lasting that family as an organization throughout the

history exists without any oral or written constitution or standard norms. Matrix relations among the

family members enable them to combine and best utilize their personal and collective financial, human,

physical, social, knowledge, cultural, natural and spiritual capital.

This paper proposes Familipreneurship Education for Enterprising and urges continuous study on

Familipreneurship to capture its salient features and dimensionalities for replication.

Key Words: Family Enterprise, Familipreneurship, Enterprising, Poverty reduction, Economic Growth.

mailto:[email protected]

of 18

Introduction

This paper is a conceptual argument based on real-life experiences for creating family enterprise as a

tool for poverty reduction which accelerates employment generation and economic growth. It examines

the special features and strength of a family enterprise in global context to compare their business

performance and urges to promote Familipreneurship as a tool for poverty reduction through

enterprising. The term ‘Familipreneurship’ denotes the distinct attributes of a family which enables them

to combine and best utilize their personal and collective tangible, intangible, natural, social and spiritual

capital to maximize their performing capitals for wealth creation. It refers to entrepreneurship of a

Family as an entrepreneurial unit not just a lone hero. The promotion of Familipreneurship will create a

natural environment of transferring inherited knowledge, skill, important lesson, experience and know-

how across the generations. This courageous collective effort enables them to be blended together to

reach their goals.

Enterprises are the backbone and entrepreneurs are the driving force of global economy. Family

Enterprise literature says that 70 to 80% enterprise of the world is family enterprise. In the European

Union, family enterprises represent, depending on the country, 60–90% of economic activities and are

responsible for two thirds of GDP and workplaces. In the mid-1990s, in the USA, family firms were

over 90% of the total and produced more than half of the goods and services; moreover, a third of the

“Fortune 500” enterprises were controlled by one family or by the founder family that took part in the

business management. Family enterprises, irrespective of scale of operation, legal form, industrial

activity, have been the backbone of socio-economic growth. Historically, family firms are enduring

institutions and families and business have always existed to a large extent in tandem (Morck and

Yeung, 2002; Narva, 2001). Their importance parallels socio-cultural advances and technological

of 18

advances. In market economies family businesses are a fundamental source of job creation. Globally

percentage of enterprises owned or controlled by families is an average around seventy percent.

This paper puts forward the notion that family is the ultimate institution of mankind. It is always a

profitable institution as an economic unit itself which probably made it sustainable throughout the

history. Families are largely based on emotional and moral obligations which are the largest social

capital of mankind as well. Familipreneurship is an interactive and evolving process which strengthen

families’ internal relationships (bonding), relations with other communities (bridging) and relations with

their natural and institutional environment (linkage), these are the largest social capital of mankind

which remains mostly undiscovered, even ignored. Familipreneurship unfolds the opportunities to utilize

social capitals through the matrix relationships of individuals and families with society, nation and the

world. Utilization of social capitals accelerate the process of wealth optimization through maximizing

performing capitals by accumulating scattered, unused and undiscovered resources. It promotes Green

economy to direct the future towards an entrepreneurial planet. Familipreneurship enable us creating

Family Enterprise from a little capital, especially finance capital. Promoting Familipreneurship may the

best way for enterprising. Finally this paper proposes Familipreneurship Education for Enterprising and

urges continuous empirical study on Familipreneurship from the perspective of a family as an

entrepreneurial unit, not just confined to the lone individual hero, and through this way bridges the

knowledge gap in entrepreneurship literature in context of creating Family Enterprise.

Background.

Poverty and less economic growth are both causes and outcomes of unemployment. Ensuring poverty

reduction will enhance all other development process and eliminate many other problems. Poverty

deprives us from enjoying full potentiality of lives which is our basic human right. Despite vigorous

of 18

multidimensional efforts worldwide poverty is still the biggest enemy of mankind. Existence of poverty

degrades quality of lives and paves the way for several consequent problems which affect all sphere of

life. Our experience of overall poverty reduction is very depressing. Poverty, unemployment and

economic growth are integrated, interdependent and correlated socio-economic phenomenon. In many

countries; especially over populated like Bangladesh where prevalence of poverty is increasingly

alarming. Promotion of enterprise is one of the tested and trusted ways for sustainable poverty reduction,

employment generation and economic growth as well as wealth creation for the future generation. Many

countries are doing well adopting this policy in their national economic development agenda. Post-war

Europe and some emerging Asian countries are the brightest example. There are common understanding

that inadequacy of land, labor, capital, technology, knowledge and entrepreneurship are the obstructs for

enterprising. Familipreneurship reduces these obstructs through promoting Familipreneurship where

every single individual of a family singly and collectively achieves the power and capacity to combine,

transform and utilize wealth and scattered resources into performing capitals.

Elaboration of research questions

In these sections of literature review, the relationship among enterprising and the potentialities of family

enterprise as a tool of poverty reduction, employment generation and economic growth and then assert

the dynamics of family and family enterprise were thoroughly examined the two hypotheses:

A. Enterprising is the best way of poverty reduction, employment generation and economic

growth.

B. Family Enterprise is the best form of enterprise in context of resource constrain.

To summarize the intentions of this paper it seeks to unpack the underlying dimensionalities of family in

the establishment of family enterprise to exploring the research questions:

of 18

How to promote Familipreneurship?

Methodology

The family business is a context that enables unscripted temporal performances by founders.

Characteristics of the venture creation experience are examined, and underlying dimensions are

analyzed and empirically investigated. Building on social capital theory, experiences of founders of

family businesses are explored.

This study has been conducted as additional task of professional responsibilities as a banker during the

period of 2003 to 2010 at Dhaka and Chittagong, Bangladesh. Primary data and information collected as

part of professional responsibilities for various purposes and then it is shorted according to the study

needs. Around 5 hundreds new enterprise creation and 1 thousand existing enterprises are observed in

multiple levels as real-life experiences. In-depth interviews were held with the founders of family

enterprise and other members of that family with subsequent follow-up visits. Collected subjective

experiences and data were analyzed objectively and closely monitored enterprise creation process as part

of the process. Long discussion and interaction were held to capture the experiences of family enterprise

creation. A large number of cases were studied. Existing literatures on family, family enterprise and

entrepreneurship reviewed extensively to generate conception in line with the practices.

Given the lack of any comprehensive entrepreneurship theory (Venkataraman, 1997), proximity to the

phenomenon of interest is a way to enrich the field of entrepreneurship (Zahra, 2007). Thus, rather than

using deductive reasoning to formulate hypotheses, explicit aim was to develop insights from proximity

to the entrepreneurs behind creation of enterprises. Indeed, realization of Familipreneurship emerged

inductively through data collection and analysis process. This confirms the appropriateness of

of 18

qualitative research for revealing substantive issues that have rarely been addressed in entrepreneurship

(Gartner & Birley, 2002).

This paper employs a multiple case studies approach which is suitable for “how and why” questions and

for research that involves observations over time (Yin, 1994). To identify appropriate participants

conducted searches within diverse socio-economic setting for start-up and existing enterprises for long

time. Whilst initial data was gathered from official documents of Bangladesh Krishi Bank a large

numbers of case studies were selected. According to theoretical sampling, “extreme” cases enable easier

observation of the phenomenon and facilitate pattern recognition (Eisenhardt & Graebner, 2007). As the

paper seeks to portray the details of the rich and complex setting, a few cases are deemed adequate

(Langley, 1999). These cases where developed by a further round of interviews with the founders and

other family members. Analysis follows an iterative „back and forth‟ approach between data and

existing theories (Van Maanen et al. 2007). This method of comparison (Eisenhardt, 1989) permits

inductive theory building as evidence is accumulated overtime to achieve theoretical replication (Yin,

1994). In line with Charmaz‟s (2006) explanation of the social constructionist approach to theorizing

reality is not considered as singular and concrete, thus insights into what the entrepreneurs believe is real

for them were sought. By focusing on these few cases it becomes possible to provide enough evidence

using both “power and proof” quotes (Pratt, 2008) so the reader can envisage the real-life experiences of

the entrepreneurs in context of family enterprise creation.

Literature review

A. Family enterprise as a form of enterprise

Probably the secret of family firms‟ long lasting resides exactly in the capability of transforming weak

points into strong points, by investing in human capital, developing distinctive competences,

of 18

encouraging long-term investments, following with persistence the mission. The reciprocal relationship

between families and business often evolves from the natural dynamics of both entities being in close

proximity to each other, particularly in the case of the home-based business (Heck et al., 1995). Families

and the family home, in fact, often serve as transparent incubators for the germination of business ideas

and endeavors both in and out of the home as well as the storefront or factory. The birthplace of

entrepreneurial ventures is often in the home. Families and businesses tend to move in parallel, with

success in one leading to success in the other.

So as an enterprise, strength of family enterprise is proven. Recent studies on family entrepreneurship

have only addressed the traditional issues of individual entrepreneurs in the family. Family enterprise

will flourish in future for its inherent qualities. If we can create a family enterprise it will be continued

or diversified by next generation. Creating family enterprise could be an effective strategy for

sustainable poverty reduction, employment generation and economic growth. And this process could be

institutionalized through formal Familipreneurship Education.

B. Family enterprise and entrepreneurship worldwide

Though Family businesses predate recorded history (Colli, 2003), formal educational and research

programs on family-owned firms are recent phenomena (Hoy and Verser, 1994; Wortman, 1994).

Recent growing awareness, made family business studies growing at a rapid pace (Hoy and Sharma,

2006). Family business research draws attention to better understand continuity and succession as well

as expansion of existing business, particularly investigates resource shedding and reconfiguration.

Entrepreneurship literature has focused on the creation of new venture/enterprises, especially through

new endeavor and innovation. But perspectives, features and forms of entrepreneurship in context of

creating new venture/enterprise/venture by family in an economy where inadequacy of resources is

of 18

strongly prevalent are not well studied or missed or ignored. Especially in the case of using family

enterprise as a tool of poverty reduction is remained untested. While sociologists and political scientists

have paid some attention to this question, this is an issue vastly ignored by the economists. Even though

the latter do recognize the role of the family in economic decisions, there is not systematic empirical

evidence isolating the importance of culture, as measured by the strength of family ties, on economic

outcomes (Alesina and Giuliano 2007). In small, isolated primitive societies, the kinship system in itself

can meet most of the basic individual and social needs (Martinson 1970). Family firm pursues both

economic and noneconomic outcomes to sustain the business across future generations (Pearson, Carr,

and Shaw 2008). Family businesses are the engine that drives socio-economic development and wealth

creation around the world, and entrepreneurship is a key driver of family businesses and entrepreneurial

family businesses are a primary source of job creation (Pistrui et al., 2006).

Evidence suggests that over time family firms are often more successful than nonfamily firms (Anderson

& Reeb, 2003; Miller & Le-Breton-Miller, 2005). However, the mechanisms by which family firms

outperform nonfamily firms are still unknown (Stanley 2010). Few researchers have noted the

connections between entrepreneurship and the family (Gartner, 2001; Upton and Heck, 1997) and have

been entirely omitted by most entrepreneurship researchers (Aldrich and Cliff, 2003; Rogoff and Heck,

2003). Moreover, entrepreneurship research literature has given little attention to the interrelatedness of

families and businesses (Davidsson and Wiklund, 2001; Shane and Venkataraman, 2000; Timmons,

1999). Entrepreneurship research, in particular, rarely acknowledges the underlying family dynamics.

Some recent attention has been given to family ownership and its relationship to the ongoing

performance (Anderson and Reeb, 2003). Both entrepreneurship and family business researchers view

the business system as important and examine traditional topics such as strategy, management,

production, labor, performance at business stages such as start-up, growth, maturity and exit (Rogoff and

of 18

Heck, 2003). Moreover, family business research uses family systems theory while entrepreneurship is

rooted in economics, management, strategy, finance, psychology and sociology.

C. Family as an agent of enterprising

Family as an entity is the oldest, largest in number, longest in existence organization of human history.

Families are unique among social systems in that they are permanent, based more on obligation than

contractual agreement, and membership is often determined by biology (Giudice, Peruta, and

Carayannis 2011). Future generations carry on their ancestor‟s knowledge and experience of

togetherness both culturally and arguably, genetically. Familiness, especially in southern part of the

world, is so powerful, effective and long lasting that family as an organization throughout the history

exists without any oral or written constitution or standard norms. Matrix relations among the family

members enable them to combine and best utilize their personal and collective financial, human,

physical, social, knowledge, cultural, natural and spiritual capital. Enterprise skills are not fixed

personality traits but can be learned and developed through experience. Relationships should be a source

of considerable strength in family businesses (Milton, 2008). Relationships play an important role within

most organizations. Within family firms, relationships may be a pivotal, insufficiently recognized,

source of unique competitive resources (Sirmon & Hitt, 2003). In essence, “entrepreneurs are family

products.” The family is now seen as the competitive advantage in long run business success because it

facilitates the development of future leadership and enhances annual shareholder return, return on assets,

annual revenue growth and income growth. Despite these logical keys to superior performance,

surprising little study has been made of the family‟s role. (Heck et al., 2006). More recent

entrepreneurship research places the entrepreneur(s) within a social context that is, in part, the family

(Aldrich and Cliff, 2003) and has more equally focused on both the family and business (Stafford et al.,

of 18

1999). The family is a critical element in the mix of resources that the entrepreneur needs at every stage

of a venture (Rogoff and Heck, 2003).

Therefore, families are not just simply a group of individuals, but these individuals through family

interactions and transactions create unique system or group attributes that are more than the sum of

individuals and their attributes (Heck et al., 2006). These unique interactions make family businesses

different. Both the family and the business are social systems which are purposive and rational. These

two social systems transform available resources and constraints via interpersonal and resource

transactions into achievements. The importance and powerful influence of family in all aspects of

entrepreneurship and business has recently been highlighted (Rogoff and Heck, 2003). Families provide

a sense of personal identity and a basis for a well developed community (Miller, 2001; Shepherd and

Patzelt 2011). Families can be a source of resiliency, adaptability, trust, creativity and stress buffer. The

household can serve as opportunity platform and incubator (Morris H. et. al. 2010). Considering this,

family as an organization of one or more individuals is more capable rather than an individual to create a

new venture/enterprise. Just as individuals have brains and beliefs, families (organizations) have

“cognitive systems and memories . . . world views and ideologies”

Results and discussions

In Bangladesh, Chak Bazar, and Khatunganj, is the two largest wholesale markets in dominated by

„Kuttis‟ and „Sowdagors‟. An indigenous business group of Dhaka and Chittagong are known to local

people as „Kutti‟ and „Sawdagar‟. They are mostly illiterate but uphold strong entrepreneurial

knowledge and skills inherited from their families/ancestors. So they are dominating the context from

generation to generation. Most of them do not have any formal entrepreneurial education or training;

only reason behind their success is Familipreneurship; entrepreneurship gained through family

of 18

environment. Their practical knowledge of enterprise is gathered through „doing‟, although even the

exceptions do not complete their secondary level education, and then starts enterprise or venture with

other family members. In most cases they are successful. In many cases founder of a family enterprise

did not have any formal education let alone enterprise education, but they did very well in their job.

Once a family enterprise is created, the next generation carries this on because of inherent

Familipreneurship. If next generation fails to carry on, then easily they can start their alternatives

because of their entrepreneurial qualities created through Familipreneurship.

Knowledge of Familipreneurship could be captured through study on Enterprise Families. We have to

chalk out those special features of those families that made them successful. Context of

Familipreneurship is unique in nature since it is live and continuous and interactive. It involves the

whole family as a business organisation. Once it is started, it goes on for ever. Knowledge on

Familipreneurship gathered is mostly transferable.

Through Familipreneurship Education an every single individual of a family achieves the power and

capacity to combine, transform and utilize personal and family wealth and scattered resources into

capitals. Knowledge and skills of Familipreneurship is transferable through generation to generation.

Familipreneurship creates a natural environment of generating and transferring indigenous knowledge

and skill to reach their personal and collective goal which will accelerate the whole enterprising process

as well as economic development. Promoting Familipreneurship could be the best solution to create new

family venture/enterprise in a less or under or least developed economy where inadequacy of resources

is strongly prevalent.

To promote Familipreneurship we should focus on some issues like (Not limited to but including):

Create a family business plan following participatory method.

of 18

Passing on entrepreneurial know-how as beneficial for the future wealth of your family.

Spending time with family members to pass on entrepreneurial skills and knowledge.

Being realistic and rational to give them a helping hand to make them self-reliance.

Helping steer family members in the right direction to be a part of business.

Having faith in other family members

Making favorable environment for other family member for being part of the family business.

Talking openly with family members about business and family affair.

Holding regular family meetings.

Teaching children about the business skill from their childhood.

Balancing family life with entrepreneurial life.

Finally this study suggests that Familipreneurship education could be institutionalized through formal

training on issues like:

Assess impact of behavior on family;

Personal and collective resource arrangement, combination and utilization as performing

capitals;

Social capital utilization;

Opportunity recognition;

Affective identification and management;

Assertiveness ;

Anger management;

Conflict-resolution;

Stress-management and

So on.

of 18

Limitations of this paper

This paper does not use any structured method rather it implies a set of methods to capture the dilemma

of enterprise creation in context of Bangladesh. Information was collected from diverse socio-economic

and demographic setup but not tested in multiple countries. A number of enterprise creation processes

were observed for a long time but did not analyze aggregated data.

To gain insight and be able to offer an explanatory model, a qualitative research approach was used

because creation of enterprise is a temporal experience.

Recommendation for Future research and Study

One may have different social, economical or occupational identity, but all are belonging to a family. If

the families are addressed as an intervening point it not only ensure the benefit it will continuously and

increasingly add value to society. As an institution family is contributing maximum benefit to the

society, which is commonly remaining uncounted. Family bonding is highly define and explicit than any

other forms of organization. Family is the first place to learn for individuals and the fundamental unit of

our social construct. Our learning begins from family first. The lessons, learnt from family, are most

influencing and effective for individuals. Our basic life skill and mind set grows from family culture

which have ever lasting and enormous effects on rest of life. Culture of a society mostly depends on

them families' culture of that society, individual characteristics of a person drastically influenced by

other family members‟ character.

If we take the family as a level of analysis and intervention, it would open a new horizon of our

entrepreneurship knowledge. Continuous empirical study is needed to encode and theorize the

dimensionalities of Familipreneurship. It will enhance our understanding to help the practices of family

enterprise. This study shows that Familipreneurship not only contributes during the process of family

of 18

enterprise creation but also contributes later process also. Exploring Familipreneurship may describe the

reasons behind outperforming of family enterprise which is still unknown in a theoretical basis.

This work on individual-level drivers of creating enterprise suggests possible interesting insights for

several areas of literature. This research also moves to expand discussions on the role of family in

entrepreneurship literature more broadly. I believe this finding opens opportunities for further research

into the role of family in creating enterprise. This paper has only looked at the process during the pre-

launch and in the early days of new ventures, it would therefore, be valuable to probe the way in which

they maintain and expand their enterprises in diverse socio-economic contexts.

Conclusions & implications

Creating family enterprise as a means of enterprising for sustainable poverty reduction, employment

generation and economic growth is largely untested. Reviews reveal that family enterprise as a form of

enterprise bears immense potentials which remained unexplored. This paper propose to use family

enterprise as a tool for enterprising which directly affect employment generation and economic growth

of a developing country.

Morris H., et. al. (2010) shows that the venture creation experience involves the interplay among

affective, cognitive, and physiological responses as events are "lived through". Surprisingly little is

known about the early stages of family firms. This study found that knowledge of Familipreneurship is

generated and transferred through family by family. Family members learn enterprising education by

„doing‟ in family environment. One or more individuals take the lead but all other family members are

integral part of it. Familipreneurship enables them to utilize their social capital in enterprising, as a result

they are able to establish and run their enterprise profitably. If we can capture the features of

Familipreneurship it will help us to use it in creating new family enterprise. Familipreneurship

of 18

knowledge does not derive from any formal system rather it’s an indigenous system of learning. It is

completely consistent with Sophocles‟ (400 BC) observation “One must learn by doing the thing, for

though you think you know it – you have no certainty, until you try.”

References:

Aldrich, H.E. and J.E. Cliff (2003), „The pervasive effects of family on entrepreneurship: toward a

family embeddedness perspective‟, Journal of Business Venturing, 18(5), 573–96.

Alesina and Giuliano (2007), in “The Power of the Family”, Harvard Institute of Economic Research

Discussion Paper No. 2132, IZA Discussion Paper No. 2750

Anderson, R. & Reeb, D. (2003). Founding-family ownership and firm performance: Evidence from the

S&P 500. Journal of Finance, 58(3), 1301–1327.

Charmaz, K. (2006) Constructing Grounded Theory, Sage Publications: London.

Colli, A. (2003), The History of Family Business: 1850–2000, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Davidsson, P and J.Wiklund (2001), „Levels of analysis in entrepreneurship research: current research

practice and suggestions for the future‟, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 25(3), 81–99.

Eisenhardt, K. M. and M. E. Graebner (2007). "Theory Building from Cases: Opportunities and

Challenges." Academy of Management Journal 50(1): 25-32.

Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989), “Building Theories from Case Study Research”, Academy of Management

Review, 14(4), 532- 550.

Gartner, W.B. & Birley, S. (2002), “Introduction to the special issue of qualitative methods in

entrepreneurship research”, Journal of Business Venturing, 17(5), 387-395.

Gartner, W.B. (2001), „Is there an elephant in entrepreneurship? Blind assumptions in theory

development‟, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 25(3), 27–39.

of 18

Giudice, Peruta, and Carayannis (2011), Knowledge and the Family Business: The Governance and

Management of Family Firms in the New Knowledge Economy (Innovation, Technology, and

Knowledge Management), Springer New York Dordrecht Heidelberg London

Heck, R.K.Z., A.J. Owen and B.R. Rowe ed. (1995), Home-based Employment and Family Life,

Westport, CT: Auburn House.

Heck et al. (2006), “The family‟s dynamic role within family business entrepreneurship” in Work”

Handbook of Research on Family Business” Ed. Poutziouris, X. Smyrnios, and B. Klein, Cheltenham

and Massachusetts, Edward Elgar Publishing Limited and Edward Elgar Publishing, Inc.

Hoy, and Sharma (2006), “Navigating the family business education maze”, in Work” Handbook of

Research on Family Business” Ed. Poutziouris, X. Smyrnios, and B. Klein, Cheltenham and

Massachusetts, Edward Elgar Publishing Limited and Edward Elgar Publishing, Inc.

Hoy, F. and T.G. Verser (1994), „Emerging, business, emerging field: entrepreneurship and the family

firm‟, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 19(1), 9–23.

Langley, A. (1999) Strategies for Theorizing from Process Data. Academy of Management Review,

24(4): 691-710.

Martinson (1970), in “Family in society”, Dodd, Mead & Company, Inc. New York, USA

Miller, D. & Le-Breton-Miller, I. (2005). Managing for the long run: Lessons in competitive advantage

from great family businesses. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Miller, J. (2001), “Family and community integrity”, Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare, 28, 23–

44.

Milton (2008), Unleashing the Relationship Power of Family Firms: Identity Confirmation as a Catalyst

for Performance Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 32(6), 1063-1081

Morck, R. and B. Yeung (2002), „Family control and the rent-seeking society‟, unpublished paper

presented at the 2002 Theories of the Family Enterprise Conference, Wharton Business School,

Philadelphia, PA.

of 18

H. Morris, A. Allen, F. Kuratko, Brannon (2010), “Experiencing family business creation: differences

between founders, nonfamily managers, and founders of nonfamily firms”, Entrepreneurship Theory and

Practice, 34(6), 1057-1084

Narva, R.L. (2001), „Heritage and tradition in family business: how family-controlled enterprises

connect the experience of their past to the promise of their future‟, in G.K. McCann and N. Upton (eds),

Destroying Myths and Creating Value in Family Business, Deland, FL: Stetson University, pp. 29–38.

Pistrui et al., (2006),” Family and cultural forces: shaping entrepreneurship and SME development in

China”, in Work” Handbook of Research on Family Business” Ed. Poutziouris, X. Smyrnios, and B.

Klein, Cheltenham and Massachusetts, Edward Elgar Publishing Limited and Edward Elgar Publishing,

Inc.

Pratt, M. G., K. W. Rockmann, et al. (2006). "Constructing Professional Identity: The Role of Work and

Identity Learning Cycles in the Customization of Identity Among Medical Residents." Academy of

Management Journal 49(2): 235-262.

Rogoff, E.G. and Heck, R.K.Z. (2003), „Evolving research in entrepreneurship and family business:

recognizing family as the oxygen that feeds the fire of entrepreneurship‟, Journal of Business Venturing,

18(5), 559–66.

Shane, S. and S. Venkataraman (2000), „The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research‟,

Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 217–26.

Shepherd and Patzelt (2011), The New Field of Sustainable Entrepreneurship: Studying Entrepreneurial

Action Linking “What Is to Be Sustained” With “What Is to Be Developed”, Entrepreneurship Theory

and Practice, 35(2),137-163

Simon, D. and M. Hitt (2003), „Managing resources: linking unique resources, management, and wealth

creation in family firms‟, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 27(4), 339–58.

Stafford, K., K.A. Duncan, S.M. Danes and M. Winter (1999), „A research model of sustainable family

businesses‟, Family Business Review, 12(3), 197–208.

of 18

Stanley (2010), "Emotions and Family Business Creation: An Extension and Implications",

Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34(6), 1085–1092

Timmons, J.A.(1999),New Venture Creation, Boston,MA: Irwin McGraw-Hill.

Upton, N.B. and R.K.Z. Heck (1997),"The Family Business Dimension of Entrepreneurship", in D.L

Sexton and R.W. Smilors, ed.Entrepreneurship:2000, Chicago, IL: Upstart, 243-266

Van Maanen, J., S. Rensen, J. B., & Mitchell, T. R. (2007). Introduction to Special Topic Forum: The

Interplay between Theory and Method. Academy of Management Review, 32(4), 1145-1154.

Venkataraman, S. (1997). The distinctive domain of entrepreneurship research: An editor’s perspective.

In J. Katz & R. Brockhaus (Eds.), Advances in entrepreneurship, firm emergence and growth: Vol. 3,

119–138. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Wortman, Jr, M.S. (1994), „Theoretical foundations for family-owned businesses: a conceptual and

research based paradigm‟, Family Business Review, 7(1), 3–27.

Yin, R.K. (1989), Case Study Research: Design and Methods, London: Sage.

Zahra, S.A, (2007), “Contextualizing Theory Building in Entrepreneurship Research”, Journal of

Business Venturing, 22(3), 443- 452.

enterprising through promoting familipreneurship for sustainable poverty reduction full

Economy & Finance