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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".