Strategic Divestments in Family Firms: Role of Family Structure and Community Culture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cycles of creative destruction and of regeneration are necessary for firm success.This examination seeks to understand this process as related to the divestment decision process within family firms.By looking at the influence of both family beliefs and community culture, the speed of a family firm's divestment decisions can be examined.Background information regarding divestment decisions is presented, as are the dimensions of culture that may influence these decisions.Although five dimensions of culture are often cited, this study only looks at the characteristics and influence of individual versus collectivist cultures. The structure of the family can also be quite influential when considering the speed of divestment decisions.Four family types are discussed, including the absolute nuclear family, the egalitarian nuclear family, the authoritarian nuclear family, and the community family.Also presented is the three-stage process from the business leader recognizing the need to divest to the sale and proceeding performance. Only the first two stages of the process are considered here (i.e., the need to divest and the ultimate sale of the business unit).Based on the cultural dimension of the study and the four family types that may be encountered, six propositions regarding the impact of culture and family type upon divestiture speed are proposed.Based on these propositions, several conclusions are made, but no empirical data is presented.The research and practice implications are also discussed. (AKP)
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".