Mapping The Literature of Family Business Management (FBM): Bibliometric Analysis and Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to conduct a Systematic Review and Bibliometric Analysis in the area of Family Business Management. Data was collected from Scopus database, with the help of advance search feature, initially 81 articles were extracted and after filtration finally 43 research articles were considered for this study. MS excel and VOS viewer were used for analysis. This study gave useful insights which can be of scholarly implications in future. After the year 2011 there is a rise in number of research articles published in Scopus database from the domain of Family Business Management, in this study we found that USA, Canada and Spain are the significant contributors of Articles in the domain of FBM. So far most of the articles published in this domain of FBM are based on the key themes of Gender roles, Succession planning, and ownership related issues. This study indicates the future areas of research in the domain of FBM, in future scholars can undertake studies like Effectiveness of various functional areas like Marketing, Finance, HR, Operations and Supply chain in the context of Family owned businesses. Even the usefulness of emerging areas like Fintech, Digital marketing, and HR Analytics can be studied in future.
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 | 0.021 | 0.093 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.182 | 0.131 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".