Contributions to Succession in a Family Business from the Perspective of Global University Entrepreneurial Spirit Students’ Survey (GUESSS)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Relationship between family support and organizational commitment is investigated, in the attitude of succession in a family business, and, this one, in the succession intention. Therefore, the research operationalizes constructs studied by the Global University Entrepreneurial Spirit Students’ Survey, in a survey with 289 university students from the Federal University in Brazil. Structural modeling showed satisfactory adjustment indices to support the seven hypotheses of the study: family support assumes an important explanatory capacity for the variation of affective commitment (R2=38%), as well as of normative commitment (R2=41%); commitment (affective and normative) assumes an important explanatory capacity for the variation in the succession attitude (R2=49%); and, the suggested relationship between the succession attitude and the succession intention (β=0.775; t=22.772, p=0.000), in addition to being supported, demonstrates the greater explanatory capacity of the predictor construct variation (R2=60%). It was concluded, therefore, that prior planning, with actions that mobilize future family members (successors) can result in the achievement of the longevity of these companies.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".