Cognitive mapping the topic of family business

Cognitive mapping the topic of family business

Joseph Kim-keung Ho

Independent Trainer

Hong Kong, China

Abstract: The topic of family business in the subject of Business Management is complex. By making use of the cognitive mapping technique to conduct a brief literature review on the family business topic, the writer renders a systemic image on the topic of family business. The result of the study, in the form of a cognitive map on family business, should be useful to those who are interested in the topics of cognitive mapping, literature review and family business.

Key words: Family business, cognitive mapping, literature review

Introduction

As a topic in Business Management, family business is complex. It is thus useful to employ some learning tool to conduct its study, notably for literature review purpose. For a teacher in research methods, systems thinking and management, the writer is specifically interested in finding out how the cognitive mapping technique can be employed to go through a literature review on  family business. This literature review exercise is taken up and reported in this article.

On the cognitive mapping exercise for literature review

Literature review is an important intellectual learning exercise, and not just for doing final year dissertation projects for tertiary education students. On these two topics of intellectual learning and literature review, the writer has compiled some e-learning resources. They are the Managerial intellectual learning Facebook page and the Literature on literature review Facebook page. Conducting literature review with the cognitive mapping technique is not novel in the cognitive mapping literature, see Eden and Simpson (1989), Eden, Jones and Sims (1983), Open University (n.d) and the Literature on cognitive mapping Facebook page. In this article, the specific steps involved in the cognitive mapping exercise are as follows:

Step 1: gather some main points from a number of academic journal articles on Family business. This result in the production of a table (Table 1) with the main points and associated references.

Step 2: consolidate  the main points from Table 1 to come up with a table listing the cognitive map variables (re: Table 2).

Step 3: link up the cognitive  map variables in a plausible way to produce a cognitive map (re: Figure 1) on the topic under review.

The next section applies these three steps to produce a cognitive map on family business.

Descriptions of cognitive map variables on the family business topic

From the reading of some academic articles on Family business, a number of main points (e.g., viewpoints, concepts and empirical findings) were gathered by the  writer. They are shown in Table 1 with explicit referencing on the points.

Table 1: Main points from the family business literature and referencing

Main points from the family business literature	Referencing
Point  1: "It is generally recognized that family firms have received scant attention in the mainstream management literature, particularly with respect to the development of theories of the firm. This neglect is unfortunate because in terms of contributions, and especially numbers, family businesses represent a dominant form of economic organization throughout the world (Beckhard and Dyer, 1983; Shanker and Astrachan, 1996)".	Chrisman, J.J., J.H. Chua and L.P. Steier. 2003. "An introduction to theories  of family business" Journal of Business Venturing 18, Elsevier: 441-448.
Point 2: "...many new ventures are created with family involvement and through the pooling of a family’s financial and human resources. A recent study of new ventures that received assistance from the Small Business Development Center by Chrisman et al. (2002) suggests that approximately 80% of these ventures display the characteristics of family enterprise as defined by Chua et al. (1999)".	Chrisman, J.J., J.H. Chua and L.P. Steier. 2003. "An introduction to theories  of family business" Journal of Business Venturing 18, Elsevier: 441-448.
Point 3: "...family business entrepreneurs are unique in that they seek to build businesses that are also family institutions. How founders of family businesses go about establishing and developing organizations for the purpose of creating enduring family legacies and economic value should be of interest to the field of entrepreneurship".	Chrisman, J.J., J.H. Chua and L.P. Steier. 2003. "An introduction to theories  of family business" Journal of Business Venturing 18, Elsevier: 441-448.
Point 4: "Researchers in family business believe that family involvement makes a family business distinct from a nonfamily business. Unfortunately, our understanding of the nature of this distinction and its impact on firm performance is incomplete. We currently have a limited understanding of how family members interact to affect the visions and goals of a family firm and how they create the unique resources, capabilities, costs, and problems that make a family firm behave and perform differently".	Chua, J.H., J.J. Chrisman and L.P. Steier. 2003. "Extending the Theoretical Horizons  of Family Business Research" Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice Summer: 331-338.
Point 5: "A very popular representation of the complexities of a family firm is the “three-circle model,” which depicts a family firm as having three interactive components: the business, the family, and the owners (cf. Gersick et al., 1997). This representation has been useful in classifying family business issues into those that involve one or more of these components. In terms of theory building, however, it lacks a dependent variable. With this deficiency, it cannot be relied upon to examine the efficacy of family business decisions, actions, organizational structure, strategies, exploitation of resources, and so forth since such efficacy can only be evaluated in terms of achieving the goals and objectives set by the family for the firm".	Chua, J.H., J.J. Chrisman and L.P. Steier. 2003. "Extending the Theoretical Horizons  of Family Business Research" Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice Summer: 331-338.
Point 6: "The RBV [resource-based view] approach has the potential to help us identify the resources and capabilities that distinguish family from nonfamily firms. Aside from helping to improve our understanding of the unique role of family firms in the economy, identification of these distinctive resources and capabilities will help answer a critical question in family business succession, the topic that plays a central role in the family business literature (Wortman, 1994): what resources and capabilities should one generation hand down to give ensuing generations the potential to realize the family firm’s vision?".	Chua, J.H., J.J. Chrisman and L.P. Steier. 2003. "Extending the Theoretical Horizons  of Family Business Research" Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice Summer: 331-338.
Point 7: "For many years, attorneys, accountants, financial planners, insurance agents, management consultants, and therapists have practiced their trade within family businesses with considerable success. Academics have been studying family businesses for decades, often interviewing founders and their successors and recording their responses. These case studies were often archived in the files of professors or graduate students and not shared with the general public. Only in recent times have scholar-practitioners begun to be concerned with cumulating and generalizing these insights through surveys and more sophisticated statistical analysis".	Bird, B., H. Welsch, J.H. Astrachan and D. Pistrui. 2002. "Family Business Research: The Evolution of an Academic Field" Family Business Review XV(4) December: 337-350.
Point 8: "Family-controlled enterprises drove the economic development process in the early phases of the industrialization age (Hall, 1988), as evidenced by the success of the pioneering economic activities of the Vanderbilts, Rockefellers, Astors, Carnegies, and Fords in the United States; the Rothchilds, Zegnas, and Hienekens in Europe; and the Li Ka-Shing, Salim, and Formosa groups in Asia. Individual initiatives driven by opportunity were family rooted in their respective clans".	Bird, B., H. Welsch, J.H. Astrachan and D. Pistrui. 2002. "Family Business Research: The Evolution of an Academic Field" Family Business Review XV(4) December: 337-350.
Point 9: "In the early years of the struggle, family business had to deal with several problems. First, it had to get past the negative connotations that the “small business” label carried, i.e., “buying a job,” lack of growth, lack of innovation, and “ma and pa” image. Second, it had to establish an intellectual rigor beyond the practicalities of transferring assets between generations and among siblings. Third, it had to establish itself as its own field—not one under the mantle of small business or entrepreneurship. This involved achieving recognition for the field as an independent discipline even though there were few distinct criteria that made it unique".	Bird, B., H. Welsch, J.H. Astrachan and D. Pistrui. 2002. "Family Business Research: The Evolution of an Academic Field" Family Business Review XV(4) December: 337-350.
Point 10: "In recent years, the professionals who serve and study family businesses are developing a professional culture via organizations such as the Family Firm Institute (FFI). This professionalization process generally includes the development of a code of ethics and a willingness to sanction members who fail to practice ethical consulting, research, or teaching (Kerr, VonGlinow, & Schriesheim, 1977)".	Bird, B., H. Welsch, J.H. Astrachan and D. Pistrui. 2002. "Family Business Research: The Evolution of an Academic Field" Family Business Review XV(4) December: 337-350.
Point 11: "Currently, family-business research is largely descriptive rather than prescriptive. Most of the literature that has taken a prescriptive approach has done so from the perspective of how to improve family relationships rather than business performance".	Sharma, P., J.J. Chrisman and J.H. Chua. 1997. "Strategic Management of the Family Business: Past Research and Future Challenges" Family Business Review 10(1), Spring, Sage: 1-35.
Point 12: "Following Chua, Sharma, and Chrisman (1996), we define family business as a business governed and/or managed on a sustainable, potentially cross-generational, basis to shape and perhaps pursue the formal or implicit vision of the business held by members of the same family or a small number of families. This definition is important from a strategic management perspective because it implies that there are goals being pursued, a strategy designed to fulfill those goals, and mechanisms in place to implement the strategy and control the firm’s progress toward the achievement of its goals".	Sharma, P., J.J. Chrisman and J.H. Chua. 1997. "Strategic Management of the Family Business: Past Research and Future Challenges" Family Business Review 10(1), Spring, Sage: 1-35.
Point 13: "The basic strategic management processes for both family and non-family firms is similar in the sense that a strategy, whether implicit or explicit, must be formulated, implemented, and controlled in the context of a set of goals. In this sense, even performance is similar, since it should be measured with respect to achieving a set of goals. The differences are in the set of goals, the manner in which the process is carried out, and the participants in the process".	Sharma, P., J.J. Chrisman and J.H. Chua. 1997. "Strategic Management of the Family Business: Past Research and Future Challenges" Family Business Review 10(1), Spring, Sage: 1-35.
Point 14: "Although much qualitative research exists on family-owned businesses, few quantitative studies have been sought to determine their precise cumulative size and economic impact. The lack of substantial data is not surprising. Until recently few academics, governmental agencies, or data gathering enterprises, regarded families in business as characteristically distinct entities (Lansberg, Perrow & Rogolsky, 1988). Most research on family business is less than 10 years old. Another reason that more extensive quantitative research has not been accomplished is the difficulty in defining and identifying family businesses (Handler, 1989)".	Shanker, M.C.and J.H. Astrachan. 1996. "Myths and Realities: Family Businesses' Contribution to the US Economy - A Framework for Assessing Family Business Statistics" Family Business Review 9(2), Summer: 107-123.
Point 15: "While anyone can intuitively recognize a “family business,” even the field’s experts find the task of defining precisely such businesses difficult. Family business scholars lack consensus on which criteria are most important in identifying a family business (Handler, 1989). The criteria used to define family business include: percentage of ownership, voting control, power over strategic direction, involvement of multiple generations, active management by family members, and others".	Shanker, M.C.and J.H. Astrachan. 1996. "Myths and Realities: Family Businesses' Contribution to the US Economy - A Framework for Assessing Family Business Statistics" Family Business Review 9(2), Summer: 107-123.
Point 16: "The broadest and most inclusive definition of a family business consists of all sole proprietorships based on the belief that although only one family member is officially running the business, the family dynamics involved in businesses of this type qualify it as a family business".	Shanker, M.C.and J.H. Astrachan. 1996. "Myths and Realities: Family Businesses' Contribution to the US Economy - A Framework for Assessing Family Business Statistics" Family Business Review 9(2), Summer: 107-123.
Point 17: "The concept of “business owner” is stereotyped as male-gendered, requiring aggressiveness, decisiveness and independence (Ahl, 2006; Eagly et al., 2000; Eddleston and Powell, 2012; Kite et al., 2008). The image of a business owner often emerges as a heroic self-made man (Ahl, 2006). Traits most often viewed as feminine do not fit well with the stereotypic characteristics of a venture capitalist. Further, women’s responsibilities for family care can be a major impediment to their path of being a business owner (Hundley, 2000, 2001; Orser et al., 2006)".	Guo, X. and J.M. Werner. 2013. "Gender, family and business: An empirical study of incorporated self-employed individuals in the US" International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship 8(4), Emerald: 373-401.
Point 18: "Current research on networks in family businesses has approached the topic from a mono-rational perspective where the family, business and social networks are each considered in relative isolation. This paper argues that multi-rational approaches, which accept that the three groups of networks interact and overlap, offer a useful alternative perspective".	Seaman, C., R. McQuaid and M. Pearson. 2014. "Networks in family business: a multi-rational approach" Int Entre Manag J 10: 523-537.
Point 19: "Sharma et al. (1996a) and Chua et al. (1999) identified no less than 34 operating definitions of a family business (Getz et al. 2004), albeit with some common themes. Those common themes included the definition of a business as a profit making operation, at least in intent (Alcorn 1982; Getz et al. 2004 p4), and the construct that one family (composed of related individuals) has a predominant level of control and may also be employed within the business (Getz et al. 2004 pp4–5)".	Seaman, C., R. McQuaid and M. Pearson. 2014. "Networks in family business: a multi-rational approach" Int Entre Manag J 10: 523-537.
Point 20: "A systemic psychology of the family seeks to analyse its structure and functioning dynamic to understand its characteristics better. When applied to family business, this approach can throw light on the interaction between family and business as subsystems embedded in a larger environment. A family that shares both professional and personal life will have to address challenges that result from the interaction of a family and business, the consequences of which will have an impact on family life and the viability of the business in the market".	de Araujo, T.R.P.P., J.S.N.F. Bucher-Maluschke and J.S. Pedroso. 2016. "Systemic Principles in the Study of Family Businesses" Systems Research and Behavioral Science 33: 259-264.
Point 21: "Oliveira (2013) lists some basic characteristics of the family business, namely, strong mutual trust regardless of family ties, strong emotional ties that pattern behaviour and decision-making in the company, valuing seniority as a more important attribute than the requirement to be efficient and competent, dedication, an austere attitude in the form of dress and management of expenditures, loyalty, a blending of the emotional and rational, tending more to the emotional and manipulation of power reflecting more often political skill than administrative competence".	de Araujo, T.R.P.P., J.S.N.F. Bucher-Maluschke and J.S. Pedroso. 2016. "Systemic Principles in the Study of Family Businesses" Systems Research and Behavioral Science 33: 259-264.

With a set of main points collected, the writer produces a set of cognitive map variables. These variables are informed by the set of main points from Table 1. These variables are presented in Table 2.

Table 2: Cognitive map variables based on Table 1

Cognitive map variables	Literature review points
Variable 1: Drivers of interest in family business	Point  1: "It is generally recognized that family firms have received scant attention in the mainstream management literature, particularly with respect to the development of theories of the firm. This neglect is unfortunate because in terms of contributions, and especially numbers, family businesses represent a dominant form of economic organization throughout the world (Beckhard and Dyer, 1983; Shanker and Astrachan, 1996)". Point 2: "...many new ventures are created with family involvement and through the pooling of a family’s financial and human resources. A recent study of new ventures that received assistance from the Small Business Development Center by Chrisman et al. (2002) suggests that approximately 80% of these ventures display the characteristics of family enterprise as defined by Chua et al. (1999)". Point 3: "...family business entrepreneurs are unique in that they seek to build businesses that are also family institutions. How founders of family businesses go about establishing and developing organizations for the purpose of creating enduring family legacies and economic value should be of interest to the field of entrepreneurship". Point 14: "Although much qualitative research exists on family-owned businesses, few quantitative studies have been sought to determine their precise cumulative size and economic impact. The lack of substantial data is not surprising. Until recently few academics, governmental agencies, or data gathering enterprises, regarded families in business as characteristically distinct entities (Lansberg, Perrow & Rogolsky, 1988). Most research on family business is less than 10 years old. Another reason that more extensive quantitative research has not been accomplished is the difficulty in defining and identifying family businesses (Handler, 1989)".
Variable 2: Improve intellectual understanding of family business	Point 5: "A very popular representation of the complexities of a family firm is the “three-circle model,” which depicts a family firm as having three interactive components: the business, the family, and the owners (cf. Gersick et al., 1997). This representation has been useful in classifying family business issues into those that involve one or more of these components. In terms of theory building, however, it lacks a dependent variable. With this deficiency, it cannot be relied upon to examine the efficacy of family business decisions, actions, organizational structure, strategies, exploitation of resources, and so forth since such efficacy can only be evaluated in terms of achieving the goals and objectives set by the family for the firm". Point 6: "The RBV [resource-based view] approach has the potential to help us identify the resources and capabilities that distinguish family from nonfamily firms. Aside from helping to improve our understanding of the unique role of family firms in the economy, identification of these distinctive resources and capabilities will help answer a critical question in family business succession, the topic that plays a central role in the family business literature (Wortman, 1994): what resources and capabilities should one generation hand down to give ensuing generations the potential to realize the family firm’s vision?". Point 11: "Currently, family-business research is largely descriptive rather than prescriptive. Most of the literature that has taken a prescriptive approach has done so from the perspective of how to improve family relationships rather than business performance". Point 12: "Following Chua, Sharma, and Chrisman (1996), we define family business as a business governed and/or managed on a sustainable, potentially cross-generational, basis to shape and perhaps pursue the formal or implicit vision of the business held by members of the same family or a small number of families. This definition is important from a strategic management perspective because it implies that there are goals being pursued, a strategy designed to fulfill those goals, and mechanisms in place to implement the strategy and control the firm’s progress toward the achievement of its goals". Point 15: "While anyone can intuitively recognize a “family business,” even the field’s experts find the task of defining precisely such businesses difficult. Family business scholars lack consensus on which criteria are most important in identifying a family business (Handler, 1989). The criteria used to define family business include: percentage of ownership, voting control, power over strategic direction, involvement of multiple generations, active management by family members, and others". Point 16: "The broadest and most inclusive definition of a family business consists of all sole proprietorships based on the belief that although only one family member is officially running the business, the family dynamics involved in businesses of this type qualify it as a family business". Point 17: "The concept of “business owner” is stereotyped as male-gendered, requiring aggressiveness, decisiveness and independence (Ahl, 2006; Eagly et al., 2000; Eddleston and Powell, 2012; Kite et al., 2008). The image of a business owner often emerges as a heroic self-made man (Ahl, 2006). Traits most often viewed as feminine do not fit well with the stereotypic characteristics of a venture capitalist. Further, women’s responsibilities for family care can be a major impediment to their path of being a business owner (Hundley, 2000, 2001; Orser et al., 2006)". Point 18: "Current research on networks in family businesses has approached the topic from a mono-rational perspective where the family, business and social networks are each considered in relative isolation. This paper argues that multi-rational approaches, which accept that the three groups of networks interact and overlap, offer a useful alternative perspective". Point 19: "Sharma et al. (1996a) and Chua et al. (1999) identified no less than 34 operating definitions of a family business (Getz et al. 2004), albeit with some common themes. Those common themes included the definition of a business as a profit making operation, at least in intent (Alcorn 1982; Getz et al. 2004 p4), and the construct that one family (composed of related individuals) has a predominant level of control and may also be employed within the business (Getz et al. 2004 pp4–5)". Point 21: "Oliveira (2013) lists some basic characteristics of the family business, namely, strong mutual trust regardless of family ties, strong emotional ties that pattern behaviour and decision-making in the company, valuing seniority as a more important attribute than the requirement to be efficient and competent, dedication, an austere attitude in the form of dress and management of expenditures, loyalty, a blending of the emotional and rational, tending more to the emotional and manipulation of power reflecting more often political skill than administrative competence".
Variable 3: Effective family business practices	Point 8: "Family-controlled enterprises drove the economic development process in the early phases of the industrialization age (Hall, 1988), as evidenced by the success of the pioneering economic activities of the Vanderbilts, Rockefellers, Astors, Carnegies, and Fords in the United States; the Rothchilds, Zegnas, and Hienekens in Europe; and the Li Ka-Shing, Salim, and Formosa groups in Asia. Individual initiatives driven by opportunity were family rooted in their respective clans". Point 9: "In the early years of the struggle, family business had to deal with several problems. First, it had to get past the negative connotations that the “small business” label carried, i.e., “buying a job,” lack of growth, lack of innovation, and “ma and pa” image. Second, it had to establish an intellectual rigor beyond the practicalities of transferring assets between generations and among siblings. Third, it had to establish itself as its own field—not one under the mantle of small business or entrepreneurship. This involved achieving recognition for the field as an independent discipline even though there were few distinct criteria that made it unique". Point 10: "In recent years, the professionals who serve and study family businesses are developing a professional culture via organizations such as the Family Firm Institute (FFI). This professionalization process generally includes the development of a code of ethics and a willingness to sanction members who fail to practice ethical consulting, research, or teaching (Kerr, VonGlinow, & Schriesheim, 1977)". Point 13: "The basic strategic management processes for both family and non-family firms is similar in the sense that a strategy, whether implicit or explicit, must be formulated, implemented, and controlled in the context of a set of goals. In this sense, even performance is similar, since it should be measured with respect to achieving a set of goals. The differences are in the set of goals, the manner in which the process is carried out, and the participants in the process". Point 20: "A systemic psychology of the family seeks to analyse its structure and functioning dynamic to understand its characteristics better. When applied to family business, this approach can throw light on the interaction between family and business as subsystems embedded in a larger environment. A family that shares both professional and personal life will have to address challenges that result from the interaction of a family and business, the consequences of which will have an impact on family life and the viability of the business in the market".
Variable 4: Learn from family business practices	Point 4: "Researchers in family business believe that family involvement makes a family business distinct from a nonfamily business. Unfortunately, our understanding of the nature of this distinction and its impact on firm performance is incomplete. We currently have a limited understanding of how family members interact to affect the visions and goals of a family firm and how they create the unique resources, capabilities, costs, and problems that make a family firm behave and perform differently". Point 7: "For many years, attorneys, accountants, financial planners, insurance agents, management consultants, and therapists have practiced their trade within family businesses with considerable success. Academics have been studying family businesses for decades, often interviewing founders and their successors and recording their responses. These case studies were often archived in the files of professors or graduate students and not shared with the general public. Only in recent times have scholar-practitioners begun to be concerned with cumulating and generalizing these insights through surveys and more sophisticated statistical analysis".

The next step is to relate the cognitive map variables to make up a cognitive map on family business. The cognitive map and its explanation are presented in the next section.

A cognitive map on family business and its interpretation

By relating the four variables identified in Table 2, the writer comes up with a cognitive map on family business, as shown in Figure 1.

These cognitive  map variables, four of them altogether, are related to constitute a systemic image of family business. The links in the cognitive map (re: Figure 1) indicate direction of influences between variables. The + sign shows that an increase in one variable leads to an increase in another variable while a -ve sign tells us that in increase in one variable leads to a decrease in another variable.  If there no signs shown on the arrows, that means the influences can be positive or negative.  For further information on family business, readers are referred to the Literature on family business Facebook page.

Concluding remarks

The cognitive mapping exercise captures in one diagram some of the main variables involved in family business. The resultant cognitive map promotes an exploratory way to study family business in a holistic tone. The experience of the cognitive mapping exercise is that it can be a quick, efficient and entertaining way to explore a complex topic such as family business in Business Management. Finally, readers who are interested in cognitive mapping should also find the article informative on this mapping topic.

Bibliography

1.      Bird, B., H. Welsch, J.H. Astrachan and D. Pistrui. 2002. "Family Business Research: The Evolution of an Academic Field" Family Business Review XV(4) December: 337-350.

2.      Chrisman, J.J., J.H. Chua and L.P. Steier. 2003. "An introduction to theories  of family business" Journal of Business Venturing 18, Elsevier: 441-448.

3.      Chua, J.H., J.J. Chrisman and L.P. Steier. 2003. "Extending the Theoretical Horizons  of Family Business Research" Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice Summer: 331-338.

4.      de Araujo, T.R.P.P., J.S.N.F. Bucher-Maluschke and J.S. Pedroso. 2016. "Systemic Principles in the Study of Family Businesses" Systems Research and Behavioral Science 33: 259-264.

5.      Eden, C. and P. Simpson. 1989. "SODA and cognitive mapping in practice", pp. 43-70, in Rosenhead, J. (editor) Rational Analysis for a Problematic World, Wiley, Chichester.

6.      Eden, C., C. Jones and D. Sims. 1983. Messing about in Problems: An informal structured approach to their identification and management, Pergamon Press, Oxford.

7.      Guo, X. and J.M. Werner. 2013. "Gender, family and business: An empirical study of incorporated self-employed individuals in the US" International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship 8(4), Emerald: 373-401.

8.      Literature on cognitive mapping Facebook page, maintained by Joseph, K.K. Ho (url address: https://www.facebook.com/Literature-on-cognitive-mapping-800894476751355/).

9.      Literature on family business Facebook page, maintained by Joseph, K.K. Ho (url address: https://www.facebook.com/Literature-on-family-business-129514844265368/).

10. Literature on literature review Facebook page, maintained by Joseph, K.K. Ho (url address: https://www.facebook.com/literature.literaturereview/).

11. Managerial intellectual learning Facebook page, maintained by Joseph, K.K. Ho (url address: https://www.facebook.com/managerial.intellectual.learning/).

12. Open University. n.d. "Sign graph" Systems Thinking and Practice (T552): Diagramming, Open University, U.K. (url address: http://systems.open.ac.uk/materials/T552/) [visited at April 10, 2017].

13. Seaman, C., R. McQuaid and M. Pearson. 2014. "Networks in family business: a multi-rational approach" Int Entre Manag J 10: 523-537.

14. Shanker, M.C.and J.H. Astrachan. 1996. "Myths and Realities: Family Businesses' Contribution to the US Economy - A Framework for Assessing Family Business Statistics" Family Business Review 9(2), Summer: 107-123.

15. Sharma, P., J.J. Chrisman and J.H. Chua. 1997. "Strategic Management of the Family Business: Past Research and Future Challenges" Family Business Review 10(1), Spring, Sage: 1-35.