MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2791155456 · doi:10.1177/1042258717730025

The Effect of Transgenerational Control Intention on Family-Firm Performance: It Depends Who Pursues It

2017· article· en· W2791155456 on OpenAlexaff
Christian Hoffmann, Peter Jaskiewicz, Torsten Wulf, James G. Combs

Bibliographic record

VenueEntrepreneurship Theory and Practice · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFamily Business Performance and Succession
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransgenerational epigeneticsSocioemotional selectivity theoryHarmControl (management)GermanBusinessCognitionMarketingPsychologyEconomicsSocial psychologyManagementDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Transgenerational control intention (TCI) is a pivotal characteristic of many family firms. Yet, it remains unclear whether TCI benefits family-firm performance by instilling a long-term view, or hurts performance by fueling harmful socioemotional wealth (SEW) goals. We posit that it depends who pursues it. When faced with TCI, family managers are known to suffer from cognitive biases that, we submit, do not similarly apply to nonfamily managers. Thus, only family managers harm performance when pursuing TCI. An empirical investigation of 107 private German family firms supports our theory; the effect of TCI on firm performance depends on who pursues it.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.534
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations35
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEntrepreneurship Theory and PracticeSame topicFamily Business Performance and SuccessionFrench-language works237,207