Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Understanding Hybrid-Identity Organizations: The Case of Publicly Listed Family Businesses

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Understanding Family Businesses

Part of the book series: International Studies in Entrepreneurship ((ISEN,volume 15))

Abstract

Family businesses are characterized by the combination of two institutions – the family and the business – that are traditionally assumed to be based on different identities (Tagiuri and Davis 1996; Ward 1987). Based on this fundamental feature of family businesses, we develop the idea of the family business as a hybrid-identity organization (Arregle et al. 2007; Foreman and Whetten 2002). Borys and Jemison (1989) define hybrids as “…organizational arrangements that use resources and/or governance structures from more than one existing organization” (p. 235), and Albert and Whetten (1985) define hybrid-identity organizations as “…an organization whose identity is composed of two or more types that would not normally be expected to go together” (p. 95).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Spendrups a Swedish beverage company can be seen as an example: http://www.spendrups.se/lib/SubPage.aspx?id=334.

References

  • Albert, S., & Adams, E. 2002. The hybrid identity of law firms. In B. Moingeon, & G. Soenen (Eds.), Corporate and Organizational Identities: 35–50. London and New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Albert, S., & Whetten, D. A. 1985. Organizational Identity. In L. L. Cummings, & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 8: 263–295. Greenwich, CT, USA: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, R. C., & Reeb, D. M. 2003. Founding-Family Ownership and Firm Performance: Evidence from the S&P 500. The Journal of Finance, LVIII, No. 3(June 2003): 1301–1328.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, R. C., & Reeb, D. M. 2004. Board Composition: Balancing Family Influence in S&P 500 Firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 49(2): 209–237.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arregle, J. -L., Hitt, M. A., Sirmon, D. G., & Very, P. 2007. The Development of Organizational Social Capital: Attributes of Family Firms. Journal of Management Studies, 44(1): 73–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blombäck, A. 2010. The seconding value of family business in corporate branding – a tentative model, 10th Annual IFERA World Family Business Research Conference. Lancaster, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borys, B., & Jemison, D. B. 1989. Hybrid Arrangements as Strategic Alliances: Theoretical Issues in Organizational Combinations. The Academy of Management Review, 14(2): 234–249.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bouchikhi, H., & Kimberly, J. R. 2003. Escaping the Identity Trap. MIT Sloan Management Review, 44(3): 20–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corley, K. G., Harquail, C. V., Pratt, M. G., Glynn, M. A., Fiol, C. M., & Hatch, M. J. 2006. Guiding Organizational Identity Through Aged Adolescence. Journal of Management Inquiry, 15(2): 85–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foreman, P., & Whetten, D. A. 2002. Members’ Identification with Multiple-Identity Organizations. Organization Science, 13(6): 618–635.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gersick, K. E., Davis, J. A., Hampton, M. M., & Lansberg, I. 1997. Generation to Generation: life cycles of the family business. Boston Massachusetts: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gioia, D. A. 1998. From Individual to Organizational Identity. In: D. A. Whetten, & A. Godfrey (Eds.), Identity in Organzations: Building Theory Through Conversations: 17–32. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glynn, M. A. 2000. When Cymbals Become Symbols: Conflict Over Organizational Identity Within a Symphony Orchestra. Organization Science, 11(3): 285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Golden-Biddle, K., & Rao, H. 1997. Breaches in the Boardroom: Organizational Identity and Conflicts of Commitment in a Nonprofit Organization. Organization Science, 8(6): 593–611.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kimberly, J. R., & Bouchikhi, H. 1995. The Dynamics of Organizational Development and Change: How the Past Shapes the Present and Constrains the Future. Organization Science, 6(1): 9–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • La Porta, R., Lopez-De-Silanes, F., & Shleifer, A. 1999. Corporate Ownership around the World. The Journal of Finance, LIV, No. 2(April): 471–517.

    Google Scholar 

  • Melin, L., & Nordqvist, M. 2007. The reflexive dynamics of institutionalization: The case of the family business. Strategic Organization, 5(3): 321–333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morck, R. K. 2005. A history of corporate governance around the world: family business groups to professional managers. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pratt, M. G., & Foreman, P. O. 2000. Classifying Managerial Responses to Multiple Organizational Identities. The Academy of Management Review, 25(1): 18–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pratt, M. G., & Rafaeli, A. 1997. Organizational Dress as a Symbol of Multilayered Social Identities. The Academy of Management Journal, 40(4): 862–898.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reay, T. 2009. Family Business Meta Identity, Institutional Pressures, and Ability to Respond to Entrepreneurial Opportunities. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(6): 1265–1270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schein, E. H. 1983. The role of the founder in creating organizational culture. Organizational Dynamics, 12(Summer): 13–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schein, E. H. 2004. Organizational Culture and Leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, S. G., & Lane, V. R. 2000. A Stakeholder Approach to Organizational Identity. The Academy of Management Review, 25(1): 43–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharma, P., & Nordqvist, M. 2007. Using configurational approach to capture the heterogeneity of family firms. Paper presented at the Academy of Management.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shepherd, D., & Haynie, J. M. 2009. Family Business, Identity Conflict, and an Expedited Entrepreneurial Process: A Process of Resolving Identity Conflict. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(6): 1245–1264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stinchcombe, A. L. 1965. “Social structure and organizations.” Advances in Strategic Management 17: 229–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sundaramurthy, C., & Kreiner, G. 2008. Governing by managing identity boundaries: The case of family businesses. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 32(3): 415–436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tagiuri, R., & Davis, J. 1996. Bivalent Attributes of the Family Firm. Family Business Review, 9(2): 199–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ward, J. L. 1987. Keeping the Family Business Healthy: How to plan for continuing growth, profitability, and family leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Villalonga, B., & Amit, R. 2006. How do family ownership, control and management affect firm value? Journal of Financial Economics, 80(2): 385–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zellweger, T. M., Nason, R. S., Nordqvust, M., Brush, C. G. 2011. Why Do Family Firms Strive for Nonfinancial Goals? An Organizational Identity Perspective. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, pp.1540–6520, Doi 10.1111/j.1540-6520.2011.00466.x.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zellweger, T. M., Eddleston, K. A., & Kellermanns, F. W. 2010. Exploring the concept of familiness: Introducing family firm identity. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 1(1): 54–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zellweger, T. M., & Nason, R. S. 2008. A Stakeholder Perspective on Family Firm Performance. Family Business Review, pp. 203–216 vol. 21.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Entrepreneurship, Strategy, Organization, Leadership (ESOL), Centre for Family Enterprise and Ownership (CeFEO), Jönköping International Business School, 1026, 551 11, Jönköping, Sweden

    Börje Boers

  2. Department of Entrepreneurship, Strategy, Organization, Leadership (ESOL), Centre for Family Enterprise and Ownership (CeFEO), Jönköping International Business School, Jönköping, Sweden

    Mattias Nordqvist

Authors
  1. Börje Boers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mattias Nordqvist
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Börje Boers .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. TED ROGERS SCHOOL OF BUSINESS, TORONTO, M5B 2K3, Ontario, Canada

    ALAN CARSRUD

  2. Dept. Business Administration, Swedish University Abo, Henriksgatan 7, Turku, 20500, Finland

    Malin Brännback

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Boers, B., Nordqvist, M. (2012). Understanding Hybrid-Identity Organizations: The Case of Publicly Listed Family Businesses. In: CARSRUD, A., Brännback, M. (eds) Understanding Family Businesses. International Studies in Entrepreneurship, vol 15. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-0911-3_15

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation