Corporate Entrepreneurship and Family Business: Learning Across Domains

• Author: Frank Hoy,Nadine Kammerlander,Tommaso Minola,Franz W. Kellermanns
• Published date: 01 January 2021
• Date: 01 January 2021
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12672

© 2020 Society for the Advancement of Management Studies and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Corporate Entrepreneurship and Family Business:

Learning Across Domains

Tommaso Minolaa, Nadine Kammerlanderb,

Franz W. Kellermannsb,c and Frank Hoyd

aUniversity of Bergamo; bWHU – Otto Beisheim School of Management; cUniversity of North Carolina-

Charlotte; dWorcester Polytechnic Institute

ABSTRACT Research at the interface of corporate entrepreneurship (CE) and family firms’

domains has grown steadily based on the premise that family firms’ specific elements uniquely

affect CE antecedents, strategies, and outcomes. However, much remains to be uncovered. In this

article, we offer a theoretical advancement of a corporate entrepreneurship process model for

the case of family firms organized around the categories of ontology (i.e., domain redefinition),

epiphany (i.e., new components and mechanisms), and heterogeneity (i.e., family firm variety and

contingencies). This development paves the way for an agenda for future research and for possible

generalizations to non-family firms.

Keywords: conceptual framework, corporate entrepreneurship, corporate venturing, family

business, research agenda, strategic entrepreneurship

INTRODUCTION

Scholars have been calling for research into corporate entrepreneurship (CE) for de-

cades (Guth and Ginsberg, 1990; Schendel and Hofer, 1979). Early contributions to the

literature proposed recommendations for introducing entrepreneurial and innovative

behaviour into large, complex organizations while acknowledging that successful appli-

cations are the exception rather than the rule (Kanter, 1984; Pinchot, 1985). Although

resistance to innovative behaviour within large organizations can still be found (Vuori

and Quy, 2015), evidence now indicates greater acceptance of entrepreneurship by cor-

porate leaders (Clarysse et al., 2011; Hussinger et al., 2018; Dess and Lumpkin, 2005;

Journal of Man agement Studi es 58:1 January 2021

doi:10. 1111/j om s.1 26 72

Address for reprints: Tommaso Minola, Center for Young and Family Enterprise and Department of

Management, Information and Production Engineering, University of Bergamo, via Pasubio 7b, 24044

Dalmine (BG), Italy (tommaso.minola@unibg.it).

2 T. Minola et al.

© 2020 Society for the Advancement of Management Studies and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Dunlap-Hinkler et al., 2010; Zahra and Covin, 1995). Practitioner acceptance mir-

rors developments in the academic literature. Since resolving initial definitional issues

(Sharma and Chrisman, 1999), interest in CE has grown in many business disciplines

(e.g., Barney et al., 2018; Corbett et al., 2013; Covin and Miles, 2007; Hitt and Ireland,

2000).

Research interest in CE in family firms has also grown from its beginnings (Kellermanns

and Eddleston, 2006) and has emphasized the need to focus on family firms’ specific ele-

ments when investigating CE antecedents, strategies, and outcomes in family businesses

(McKelvie et al., 2014; Minola et al., 2016a; Zahra, 2010). For example, governance sys-

tems, socioemotional endowments embedded in family and non-family relationships, and

the development of resources unique to family businesses are examples of factors that

make management and entrepreneurship processes quite ‘unique’. Additionally, agency

problems – which are important in CE strategy formulation and implementation – are

very different in family and non-family firms (Eddleston et al., 2012). Many other orga-

nizational nuances manifest uniquely in family businesses (Salvato et al., 2019). These

issues, combined with family firm dominance across the world, have stimulated research

at the intersection of CE and family business.

However, even this growing literature on CE in family firms has limitations. First,

there is room to better clarify what CE is and is not. Second, the two research communi-

ties (CE and family business) do not seem to engage with each other with a high degree

of reciprocity. While family business scholars have largely embraced CE as a domain or

perspective, CE scholars do not seem to have so far recognized family business through

a focus on specific elements as a promising and generalizable context. Third, similar to

any emerging field, there has been a call for more rigor in conducting research on CE in

family firms; in particular, by increasing levels of clarity and reciprocity, there are oppor-

tunities to provide research guidance to define methodological paradigms, increase the

comparability of findings and, hence, accumulate knowledge.

To address the above gaps, a special issue was designed. The current introductory

manuscript and special issue articles as a whole intend to start addressing gaps in the

literature. First, the special issue aims to determine the relevance of the research findings

of studies of CE to family businesses and vice versa with the aim of stimulating interest

by a broad readership. Second, the special issue returns to the definitional roots of CE

in family business by taking advantage of the rich, albeit still emergent, literature. Third,

we propose an advancement of the CE framework by including family business-specific

elements, by deriving a research agenda for both family business and CE scholars, and

by indicating possible generalization avenues for the CE framework. As such, the paper

makes contributions to academic research in both the CE and family business fields.

BACK TO THE ROOTS: WHAT IS CE IN FAMILY BUSINESS?

Corporate Entrepreneurship Research

Both scholars and practitioners have long embraced the view that performance and

growth are rooted in sustainable competitive advantage. However, ‘[t]he validity of