Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Ambidexterity in Family Business Groups

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Palgrave Handbook of Managing Family Business Groups

  • 325 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter introduces an organizational ambidexterity (OA) perspective to explain the development and long-term survivability of family business groups (FGBs). Combining insights from macro and micro perspectives of OA and family business studies, we develop the ‘FBG Ambidexterity Framework,’ which identifies the family conditions that shape the individual and organizational drivers needed to ensure the formation and consolidation of an ambidextrous FBG. The framework aspires to signal core family attributes such as transgenerational intentions, as well as family identity and values as pivotal drivers that augment the ambidextrous capabilities of FBGs. We exemplify our framework through an illustrative case about the formation and consolidation of an ambidextrous Mexican FBG.

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 189.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 249.99
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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Akhter, N., & Ning, E. (2019). Resourcefulness and informal economy: From pluriactivity to portfolio entrepreneurship. In The Family Business Group Phenomenon (pp. 145–174). Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Almeida, H., & Wolfenzon, D. (2006a). Should business groups be dismantled? The equilibrium costs of efficient internal capital markets. Journal of Financial Economics, 79(1), 99–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Almeida, H. V., & Wolfenzon, D. (2006b). A theory of pyramidal ownership and family business groups. The Journal of Finance, 61(6), 2637–2680.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allison, T. H., McKenny, A. F., & Short, J. C. (2014). Integrating time into family business research: Using random coefficient modeling to examine temporal influences on family firm ambidexterity. Family Business Review, 27(1), 20–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alsos, G. A., Carter, S., & Ljunggren, E. (2014). Entrepreneurial families and households (pp. 165–178). The Routledge Companion for Entrepreneurship. Routledge.

    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, 58(3), 1301–1328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arredondo, H., & Cruz, C. (2019). How do owning families ensure the creation of value across generations? A “dual balance” approach. In The Palgrave Handbook of Heterogeneity among Family Firms (pp. 791–819). Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birkinshaw, J., Zimmerman, A., & Raisch, S. (2015). How is ambidexterity initiated? Emergent versus designed processes. Organization Science, 26(4), 1119–1139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cabrera-Suárez, K., De Saá-Pérez, P., & García-Almeida, D. (2001). The succession process from a resource-and knowledge-based view of the family firm. Family Business Review, 14(1), 37–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cannella, A. A., Jr., Jones, C. D., & Withers, M. C. (2015). Family-versus lone-founder-controlled public corporations: Social identity theory and boards of directors. Academy of Management Journal, 58(2), 436–459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carney, M., & Gedajlovic, E. (2002). The co-evolution of institutional environments and organizational strategies: The rise of family business groups in the ASEAN region. Organization Studies, 23(1), 1–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carney, M., Gedajlovic, E. R., Heugens, P. P., Van Essen, M., & Van Oosterhout, J. (2011). Business group affiliation, performance, context, and strategy: A meta-analysis. Academy of Management Journal, 54(3), 437–460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carter, S., & Ram, M. (2003). Reassessing portfolio entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics, 21(4), 371–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chirico, F. (2008). Knowledge accumulation in family firms: Evidence from four case studies. International Small Business Journal, 26(4), 433–462.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chrisman, J. J., & Patel, P. C. (2012). Variations in R&D investments of family and nonfamily firms: Behavioral agency and myopic loss aversion perspectives. Academy of Management Journal, 55(4), 976–997.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chrisman, J. J., Chua, J. H., Pearson, A. W., & Barnett, T. (2012). Family involvement, family influence, and family–centered non–economic goals in small firms. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 36(2), 267–293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corbetta, G., & Salvato, C. (2004). Self–serving or self–actualizing? Models of man and agency costs in different types of family firms: A commentary on “comparing the agency costs of family and non–family firms: Conceptual issues and exploratory evidence.” Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 28(4), 355–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cruz, C., & Justo, R. (2017). Portfolio entrepreneurship as a mixed gamble: A winning bet for family entrepreneurs in SMEs. Journal of Small Business Management, 55(4), 571–593.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cuervo-Cazurra, A. (2006). Business groups and their types. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 23(4), 419–437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Vries, M. F. K. (1993). The dynamics of family-controlled firms: The good and the bad news. Organizational Dynamics, 21(3), 59–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Del Angel, G. A. (2016). The nexus between business groups and banks: Mexico, 1932–1982. Business History, 58(1), 111–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dolz, C., Iborra, M., & Safón, V. (2019). Improving the likelihood of SME survival during financial and economic crises: The importance of TMTs and family ownership for ambidexterity. BRQ Business Research Quarterly, 22(2), 119–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gedajlovic, E., Cao, Q., & Zhang, H. (2012). Corporate shareholdings and organizational ambidexterity in high-tech SMEs: Evidence from a transitional economy. Journal of Business Venturing, 27(6), 652–665.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, C. B., & Birkinshaw, J. (2004). The antecedents, consequences, and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. Academy of Management Journal, 47(2), 209–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goel, S., Ikäheimonen, T., & Rautiainen, M. (2019). Governance in family business groups: Resolving multiple contingencies to sustain entrepreneurial capability. In The Family Business Group Phenomenon (pp. 253–283). Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gómez-Mejía, L. R., Cruz, C., Berrone, P., & De Castro, J. (2011). The bind that ties: Socioemotional wealth preservation in family firms. Academy of Management Annals, 5(1), 653–707.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gómez-Mejía, L. R., Haynes, K. T., Núñez-Nickel, M., Jacobson, K. J., & Moyano-Fuentes, J. (2007). Socioemotional wealth and business risks in family-controlled firms: Evidence from Spanish olive oil mills. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52(1), 106–137.

    Google Scholar 

  • Granovetter, M. (1995). Coase revisited: Business groups in the modern economy. Industrial and Corporate Change, 4(1), 93–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Habbershon, T. G., & Williams, M. L. (1999). A resource-based framework for assessing the strategic advantages of family firms. Family Business Review, 12(1), 1–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Habbershon, T. G., Williams, M., & MacMillan, I. C. (2003). A unified systems perspective of family firm performance. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(4), 451–465.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hiebl, M. R. (2015). Family involvement and organizational ambidexterity in later-generation family businesses. Management Decision.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iacobucci, D., & Rosa, P. (2005). Growth, diversification, and business group formation in entrepreneurial firms. Small Business Economics, 25(1), 65–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iacobucci, D., & Rosa, P. (2019). Managing portfolio entrepreneurship: A case study. In The Family Business Group Phenomenon (pp. 89–110). Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ingram, A. E., Lewis, M. W., Barton, S., & Gartner, W. B. (2016). Paradoxes and innovation in family firms: The role of paradoxical thinking. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 40(1), 161–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kammerlander, N., Burger, D., Fust, A., & Fueglistaller, U. (2015). Exploration and exploitation in established small and medium-sized enterprises: The effect of CEOs’ regulatory focus. Journal of Business Venturing, 30(4), 582–602.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kammerlander, N., Patzelt, H., Behrens, J., & Röhm, C. (2020). Organizational ambidexterity in family-managed firms: The role of family involvement in top management. Family Business Review, 33(4), 393–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kandade, K., Samara, G., Parada, M. J., & Dawson, A. (2021). From family successors to successful business leaders: A qualitative study of how high-quality relationships develop in family businesses. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 12(2), 100334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kauppila, O. P., & Tempelaar, M. P. (2016). The social‐cognitive underpinnings of employees’ ambidextrous behaviour and the supportive role of group managers’ leadership. Journal of Management Studies, 53(6), 1019–1044.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kellermanns, F. W., & Eddleston, K. A. (2004). Feuding families: When conflict does a family firm good. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 28(3), 209–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khanna, T., & Rivkin, J. W. (2001). Estimating the performance effects of business groups in emerging markets. Strategic Management Journal, 22(1), 45–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leff, N. H. (1978). Industrial organization and entrepreneurship in the developing countries: The economic groups. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 26(4), 661–675.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lubatkin, M. H., Simsek, Z., Ling, Y., & Veiga, J. F. (2006). Ambidexterity and performance in small-to medium-sized firms: The pivotal role of top management team behavioral integration. Journal of Management, 32(5), 646–672.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lumpkin, G. T., & Brigham, K. H. (2011). Long–term orientation and intertemporal choice in family firms. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 35(6), 1149–1169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Masulis, R. W., Pham, P. K., & Zein, J. (2011). Family business groups around the world: Financing advantages, control motivations, and organizational choices. The Review of Financial Studies, 24(11), 3556–3600.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mazzelli, A., De Massis, A., Petruzzelli, A. M., Del Giudice, M., & Khan, Z. (2019). Behind ambidextrous search: The microfoundations of search in family and non-family firms. Long Range Planning, 101882.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGrath, R. G. (1999). Falling forward: Real options reasoning and entrepreneurial failure. Academy of Management Review, 24(1), 13–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McMullen, J. S., & Shepherd, D. A. (2006). Entrepreneurial action and the role of uncertainty in the theory of the entrepreneur. Academy of Management Review, 31(1), 132–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D., & Le Breton-Miller, I. (2006). The best of both worlds: Exploitation and exploration in successful family businesses. Advances in Strategic Management, 23(3), 215–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miron-Spektor, E., Ingram, A., Keller, J., Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W. (2018). Microfoundations of organizational paradox: The problem is how we think about the problem. Academy of Management Journal, 61(1), 26–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mom, T. J., Van Den Bosch, F. A., & Volberda, H. W. (2007). Investigating managers’ exploration and exploitation activities: The influence of top-down, bottom-up, and horizontal knowledge inflows. Journal of Management Studies, 44(6), 910–931.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mom, T. J., Van Den Bosch, F. A., & Volberda, H. W. (2009b). Understanding variation in managers’ ambidexterity: Investigating direct and interaction effects of formal structural and personal coordination mechanisms. Organization Science, 20(4), 812–828.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moss, T. W., Payne, G. T., & Moore, C. B. (2014). Strategic consistency of exploration and exploitation in family businesses. Family Business Review, 27(1), 51–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mustakallio, M., Autio, E., & Zahra, S. A. (2002). Relational and contractual governance in family firms: Effects on strategic decision making. Family Business Review, 15(3), 205–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nordqvist, M., & Melin, L. (2010). Entrepreneurial families and family firms. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 22(3–4), 211–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nosella, A., Cantarello, S., & Filippini, R. (2012). The intellectual structure of organizational ambidexterity: A bibliometric investigation into the state of the art. Strategic Organization, 10, 450–465.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Reilly, C. A., III., & Tushman, M. L. (2004). The ambidextrous organization. Harvard Business Review, 82(4), 74.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Reilly, C. A., III., & Tushman, M. L. (2013). Organizational ambidexterity: Past, present, and future. Academy of Management Perspectives, 27(4), 324–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Papachroni, A., & Heracleous, L. (2020). Ambidexterity as practice: Individual ambidexterity through paradoxical practices. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 56(2), 143–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parada, M. J., & Dawson, A. (2017). Building family business identity through transgenerational narratives. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 30(3), 344–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parada, M. J., & Viladàs, H. (2010). Narratives: A powerful device for values transmission in family businesses. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 23(2), 166–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pertusa-Ortega, E. M., Molina-Azorín, J. F., Tarí, J. J., Pereira-Moliner, J., & López-Gamero, M. D. (2020). The microfoundations of organizational ambidexterity: A systematic review of individual ambidexterity through a multilevel framework. BRQ Business Research Quarterly, 2340944420929711.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raisch, S., Birkinshaw, J., Probst, G., & Tushman, M. L. (2009). Organizational ambidexterity: Balancing exploitation and exploration for sustained performance. Organization Science, 20(4), 685–695.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rautiainen, M., & Pihkala, T. (2019). The emergence of a family business group: The role of portfolio entrepreneurship. In The Family Business Group Phenomenon (pp. 65–87). Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rautiainen, M., Rosa, P., Pihkala, T., Parada, M. J., & Cruz, A. D. (2019). The family business group phenomenon. Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Robson, G., Gallagher, C., & Daly, M. (1993). Diversification strategy and practice in small firms. International Small Business Journal, 11(2).

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosa, P., & Pihkala, T. (2019). Theoretical insights into the nature, diversity and persistence of business groups. In The Family Business Group Phenomenon (pp. 17–35). Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosa, P., Howorth, C., & Cruz, A. D. (2014). Habitual and portfolio entrepreneurship and the family in business. The Sage Handbook of Family Business, 364–382.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosa, P., Rautiainen, M., Pihkala, T., Parada, M. J., & Cruz, A. D. (2019). Conclusions: Researching Family Business Groups: Lessons learned and avenues for further research. In The Family Business Group Phenomenon (pp. 387–395). Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanchez-Famoso, V., Akhter, N., Iturralde, T., Chirico, F., & Maseda, A. (2015). Is non-family social capital also (or especially) important for family firm performance? Human Relations, 68(11), 1713–1743.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schuman, A., Stutz, S., & Ward, J. (2010). Family business as paradox. Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sirmon, D. G., & Hitt, M. A. (2003). Managing resources: Linking unique resources, management, and wealth creation in family firms. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 27(4), 339–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W. (2011). Toward a theory of paradox: A dynamic equilibrium model of organizing. Academy of Management Review, 36(2), 381–403.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stubner, S., Blarr, W. H., Brands, C., & Wulf, T. (2012). Organizational ambidexterity and family firm performance. Journal of Small Business and Entrepreneurship, 25(2), 217–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sundaramurthy, C., & Kreiner, G. E. (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 

  • Trevinyo‐Rodríguez, R. N. & Bontis, N. (2010). Family ties and emotions: a missing piece in the knowledge transfer puzzle. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tushman, M., & Euchner, J. (2015). The challenges of ambidextrous leadership. Research-Technology Management, 58(3), 16–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ucbasaran, D., Wright, M., & Westhead, P. (2003). A longitudinal study of habitual entrepreneurs: Starters and acquirers. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 15(3), 207–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Veider, V., & Matzler, K. (2016). The ability and willingness of family-controlled firms to arrive at organizational ambidexterity. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 7(2), 105–116.

    Article  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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webb, J. W., Ketchen, D. J., Jr., & Ireland, R. D. (2010). Strategic entrepreneurship within family-controlled firms: Opportunities and challenges. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 1(2), 67–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westhead, P., Ucbasaran, D., & Wright, M. 2003. Differences between private firms owned by novice, serial and portfolio entrepreneurs: Implications for policy makers and practitioners. Regional Studies, 37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zellweger, T. M., Kellermanns, F. W., Chrisman, J. J., & Chua, J. H. (2012). Family control and family firm valuation by family CEOs: The importance of intentions for transgenerational control. Organization Science, 23(3), 851–868.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. IE University, Madrid, Spain

    Salvador Cerón de la Torre & Cristina Cruz

  2. Department of Strategy and General Management, ESADE Business School, Sant Cugat del Vallès, Spain

    Maria José Parada

Authors
  1. Salvador Cerón de la Torre
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Cristina Cruz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Maria José Parada
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Salvador Cerón de la Torre .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of Engineering Science, LUT University, Lahti, Finland

    Marita Rautiainen

  2. Department of Strategy and General Management, ESADE Business School, Sant Cugat del Vallès, Spain

    Maria José Parada

  3. School of Engineering Science, LUT University, Lahti, Finland

    Timo Pihkala

  4. Jönköping International Business School (JIBS), Jönköping, Sweden

    Naveed Akhter

  5. Department of Entrepreneurship and Strategy, Lancaster University Management School, Lancaster, UK

    Allan Discua Cruz

  6. Department of Organisation Behavior and Human Resources Management, Indian Institute of Management Indore (IIM), Indore, India

    Kajari Mukherjee

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Cerón de la Torre, S., Cruz, C., Parada, M.J. (2023). Ambidexterity in Family Business Groups. In: Rautiainen, M., Parada, M.J., Pihkala, T., Akhter, N., Discua Cruz, A., Mukherjee, K. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Managing Family Business Groups. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-13206-3_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation