MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Four Bases of Family Business Successor Commitment: Antecedents and Consequences

2004· article· en· W2069406316 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEntrepreneurship Theory and Practice · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFamily Business Performance and Succession
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSuccessor cardinalOrganizational commitmentObligationNormativeConstruct (python library)Social psychologyPsychologyFamily businessMarketingBusinessPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although successor commitment toward family business has been identified as a key desirable attribute, commitment has been treated as a unidimensional construct in family business research. Drawing on the organizational commitment literature, we propose four bases of successor commitment to family firm—affective (based on perceived desire), normative (based on perceived sense of obligation), calculative (based on perceived opportunity costs involved), and imperative (based on perceived need). A model of antecedents and expected behavioral outcomes of each of these bases of commitment is developed. Related propositions are presented, as are the contributions to the literature, research and practical implications.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.302
Threshold uncertainty score0.743

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.004
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.237 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it