A Unified Systems Perspective of Family Firm Performance: An Extension and Integration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article unified systems perspective of family firm performance by Habbershon and others (2003) is critiqued. The authors have made an important beginning toward a theory of transgenerational by family businesses. A theory of family firm can be developed from their beginning work, with some modifications and extensions. To allow for possibility that family firms may strive to achieve a variety of goals, creation should be should be substituted for wealth creation as ultimate goal of family firm. The essence of family firm should be defined as consisting of: 1) intension to maintain family control of dominant coalition; 2) unique, inseparable and synergistic resource and capabilities arising from family involvement and interactions; 3) a vision held by family for transgenerational family creation; and 4) pursuance of such a vision. With these and other changes, Habbershon's defining function of a family business system can then be restated as the systematic vision of familial coalition that generates distinctive familiness for transgenerational value creation. These modifications and extensions then lead to a set of three law like generalizations' suitable for a theory of family firms. (LMH)
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".