Advertisement

Group Decision and Negotiation

, Volume 27, Issue 3, pp 445–465 | Cite as

Women Entrepreneurs and Family Firm Heterogeneity: Evidence from an Emerging Economy

  • Dianne H. B. WelshEmail author
  • Eugene Kaciak
  • Silvana Trimi
  • Emerson Wagner Mainardes
Article

Abstract

Family firms add to the economic and social well-being of countries. While research on heterogeneity of family firms is gaining momentum, it has mostly been gender-neutral. The study fills this gap by examining heterogeneity of family firms owned and managed by women, in the context of a developing country—Brazil. The study draws upon the resource-based view of the firm to investigate the relationships between firm performance, family involvement, and financial resources at the start-up phase. An inductive analysis reveals two patterns. First, family firms that are started with the family achieve better performance than firms that are launched without the family and later evolve into a family business. Second, family firms that are funded with women entrepreneur’s own savings achieve worse performance than family firms that are started with borrowed funds. The results are useful for strategic decision making in fostering family businesses headed by women and proactive public policies for future innovation to enhance the success of women entrepreneurs.

Keywords

Family firm Women entrepreneurship Innovation Heterogeneity Performance Brazil 

References

  1. Agier I, Szafarz A (2013) Subjectivity in credit allocation to micro-entrepreneurs: evidence from Brazil. Small Bus Econ 41(1):263–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aldrich H, Cliff J (2003) The pervasive effects of family on entrepreneurship: Toward a family embeddedness perspective. J Bus Ventur 18(5):573–596CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Allison P (1999) Logistic regression using the SAS system: theory and application. SAS Institute Inc, CaryGoogle Scholar
  4. Berrone P, Cruz C, Gomez-Mejia L (2012) Socioemotional wealth in family firms: theoretical dimensions, assessment approaches, and agenda for future research. Fam Bus Rev 25(3):258–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brislin R (1980) Handbook of cross-cultural psychology, vol 2. Methodology. Allyn Bacon, Boston, pp 389–444Google Scholar
  6. Bulgacov Y, De Camargo D, De Meza M, Da Cunha S (2014) Conditions for female and young Brazilian entrepreneurs: common aspects for guiding public policies for innovative ventures. Afr J Bus Manag 8(3):89–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chang E, Memili E, Chrisman J, Kellermanns F, Chua J (2009) Family social capital, venture preparedness, and start-up decisions. Fam Bus Rev 22(3):279–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chiu T, Fang D, Chen J, Wang Y, Jeris A (2001) A robust and scalable clustering algorithm for mixed type attributes in large database environment. In: Proceedings of the 7th ACM SIGKDD international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining, pp 263–268Google Scholar
  9. Chrisman J, Patel P (2012) Variations in R&D investment in family and non-family firms: behavioral agency and myopic loss aversion perspectives. Acad Manag J 55(4):976–997CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chrisman J, Chua J, Sharma P (2005) Trends and directions in the development of a strategic management theory of the firm. Entrep. Theory Pract. 29(5):555–576CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chrisman J, Sharma P, Taggar S (2007) Family influences on firms: an introduction. J Bus Res 60(10):1005–1011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chrisman J, Sharma P, Steier L, Chua J (2013) The influence of family goals, governance, and resources on firm outcomes. Entrep Theory Pract 37(6):1249–1261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cooper D, Saral K (2013) Entrepreneurship and team participation: an experimental study. Eur Econ Rev 59(C):126–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cruz C, Justo R, De Castro J (2012) Does family employment enhance MSEs performance? Integrating socioemotional wealth and family embeddedness perspectives. J Bus Ventur 27(1):62–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Curimbaba F (2002) The dynamics of women’s roles as family business managers. Fam Bus Rev 15(3):239–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dana L-P, Dana T (2005) Expanding the scope of methodologies used in entrepreneurship research. Int J Entrep Small Bus 2(1):79–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dana L-P, Dumez H (2015) Qualitative research revisited: epistemology of a comprehensive approach. Int J Entrep Small Bus 26(2):154–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Diaz-Garcia C, Brush C (2012) Gender and business ownership: questioning what and why. Int J Entrep Behav Res 1(1):4–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dyer G, Dyer J, Gardner R (2012) Should my spouse be my partner? Preliminary evidence from the panel study of income dynamics. Fam Bus Rev 26(1):68–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Figueira J (1986) O modern eo arcaicao, na nova familia brazileira, notas sobsre o dimensao invisivel da mundacaco social (The new family, invisible social changes). In: Figueira S (ed) Uma nova familia. Jorge Zahar, Rio de JaneiroGoogle Scholar
  21. GEDI (2014) Gender-GEDI executive report 2014. Global Entrepreneurship and Development Institute, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  22. Habbershon T, Williams M (1999) A resource-based framework for assessing the strategic advantages of family firms. Fam Bus Rev 12(1):1–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hair J, Black W, Babin B, Anderson R (2010) Multivariate data analysis, 7th edn. Pearson Education Inc, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  24. Hisrich R, Bowser K, Smarsh L (2006) Women entrepreneurs in Ukraine. Int J Entrep Small Bus 3(2):207–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hofstede G (2001) Culture’s consequences: international differences in work-related values, 2nd edn. Sage, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  26. Howorth C, Rose M, Hamilton E (2010) Family firm diversity and development: an introduction. Int Small Bus J 28(5):437–451CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Huber P (1967) The behavior of maximum likelihood estimates under nonstandard conditions. In: Proceedings of the fifth Berkeley symposium on mathematical statistics and probability, 1, 221–233. Berkeley, CA: University of California PressGoogle Scholar
  28. Hughes K, Jennings J, Brush C, Carter S, Welter F (2012) Extending women’s entrepreneurship research in new directions. Entrep Theory Pract 36(3):429–442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Jimenez R (2009) Research on women in family firms’ current status and future directions. Fam Bus Rev 22(1):53–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kelly D, Brush C, Geeene P, Litovsky Y (2013) Global entrepreneurship monitor-2012 women’s report. Babson College, WellesleyGoogle Scholar
  31. Kim Y, Gao F (2013) Does family involvement increase business performance? Family-longevity goals’ moderating role in Chinese family firms. J Bus Res 66(2):265–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Klyver K (2007) Shifting family involvement during the entrepreneurial process. Int J Entrep Behav Res 13(5):258–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kobeissi N (2010) Gender factors and female entrepreneurship: international evidence and policy implications. J Int Entrep 8(1):1–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kuha J (2004) AIC and BIC: comparison of assumptions and performance. Soc Methods Res 33(2):188–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Leahy J (2015) Brazil’s currency woes and worsening recession deal blow to growth hopes. Financial Times European edn, May 26 2015, no. 38,863, p 6Google Scholar
  36. Lee S (2015) The age of quality innovation. Int J Qual Innov 1(1):1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lee S, Trimi S (2017) Innovation for creating a smart future. J Innov Knowl (forthcoming)Google Scholar
  38. Lindell M, Whitney D (2001) Accounting for common method variance in cross-sectional research designs. J Appl Psychol 86(1):114–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Locke E (2007) The case for inductive theory building. J Manag 33(6):867–890Google Scholar
  40. Long J, Ervin L (2000) Using heteroscedasticity consistent standard errors in the linear regression model. Am Stat 54:217–224Google Scholar
  41. Lussier R, Sonfield M (2010) A six-country study of first-, second-, and third-generation family businesses. Int J Entrep Behav Res 16(5):414–436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Manolova T, Carter N, Manev I, Gyoshev B (2007) The differential effect of men and women entrepreneurs’ human capital and networking on growth expectancies in Bulgaria. Entrep Theory Pract 31(3):407–426CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Mari M, Poggesi S, De Vita L (2016) Family embeddedness and business performance: evidences from women-owned firms. Manag Decis 54(2):476–500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Mas-Tur A, Pinazo P, Tur-Porcar A, Sánchez-Masferrer M (2015) What to avoid to succeed as an entrepreneur? J Bus Res 68(11):2279–2284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. McClelland E, Swail J, Bell J, Ibbotson P (2005) Following the pathway of female entrepreneurs: a six-country investigation. Int J Entrep Behav Res 11(2):84–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. McGuire J, Dow S, Ibrahim B (2012) All in the family? Social performance and corporate governance in the family firm. J Bus Res 65(11):1643–1650CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Nassif V, Andreassi T, Tonelli M, Fleury M (2012) Women entrepreneurs: discussion about their competencies. Afr J Bus Manag 6(26):76–94Google Scholar
  48. OECD (2012) Education at a glance 2012: OECD indicators Brazil. www.oecd.org/edu/eag2012. Accessed 22 Sept 2016
  49. OECD (2014). Education at a glance 2014: OECD indicators Brazil. www.oecd.org/edu/eag2014. Accessed 22 Sept 2016
  50. Pathak S, Goltz S, Buche W (2013) Influences of gendered institutions on women’s entry into entrepreneurship. Int J Entrep Behav Res 19(5):478–502CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Pearson A, Carr J, Shaw J (2008) Toward a theory of familiness: a social capital perspective. Entrep Theory Pract 32(6):949–969CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Podsakoff P, MacKenzie S, Lee J-Y, Podsakoff N (2003) Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J Appl Psychol 88(5):879–903CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Powell G, Eddleston K (2013) Linking family-to-business enrichment and support to entrepreneurial success: do female and male entrepreneurs experience different outcomes? J Bus Ventur 28:261–280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Prasad V, Naidu G, Murthy B, Winkel D, Ehrhardt K (2013) Women entrepreneurs and business venture growth: an examination of the influence of human and social capital resources in an Indian context. J Small Bus Entrep 26(4):341–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Ramadani V, Hoy F (2015) Context and Uniqueness of family businesses. In: Dana L-P, Ramadani V (eds) Family businesses in transition economies. Springer, Cham, pp 9–37Google Scholar
  56. Ramadani V, Gërguri S, Dana L-P, Tašaminova T (2013) Women entrepreneurs in the Republic of Macedonia: waiting for directions. Int J Entrep Small Bus 19(1):95–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Ramadani V, Hisrich R, Gërguri-Rashiti S (2015a) Female entrepreneurs in transition economies: insights from Albania, Macedonia and Kosovo. World Rev Entrep Manag Sustain Dev 11(4):391–413Google Scholar
  58. Ramadani V, Rexhepi G, Abazi-Alili H, Beqiri B, Thaçi A (2015b) A look at female entrepreneurship in Kosovo: an exploratory study. J Enterp Communities: People Places Glob Econ 9(3):277–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Rey-Marti A, Porcar A, Mas-Tur A (2015) Linking female entrepreneurs’ motivation to business survival. J Bus Res 68(4):810–814CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Rivera J (2007) An ex-post comparative analysis of SME formation in Brazil and Mexico: towards a research agenda. Int J Emerg Mark 2(2):144–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Rogers D (2016) The digital transformation playbook. Columbia University Press, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Sharma P (2008) Commentary: familiness: capital stocks and flows between family and business. Entrep Theory Pract 32(6):971–977CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Sharma P, Irving P (2005) Four bases of family business successor commitment: antecedents and consequences. Entrep Theory Pract 29(1):13–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Smith-Hunter A, Leone J (2010) Evidence on the characteristics of women entrepreneurs in Brazil: an empirical analysis. Int J Manag Mark Res 3(1):85–100Google Scholar
  65. Trading Economics (2013) www.tradingeconomics.com/brazil/wages Accessed June 30 2016
  66. Verheul I, Stel A, Thurik R (2006) Explaining female and male entrepreneurship at the country level. Entrep Reg Dev 18(2):151–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Welsh DHB, Kim G, Memili E, Kaciak E (2014) The influence of family moral support and personal problems on firm performance: the case of Korean women entrepreneurs. J Dev Entrep 19(3):1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Westhead P (1997) Ambitions, external environment and strategic factor differences between family and non-family companies. Entrep Reg Dev 9(2):127–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Westhead P, Howorth C (2007) Types of private family firms: an exploratory conceptual and empirical analysis. Entrep Reg Dev 19(5):405–431CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. White H (1980) A heteroskedasticity-consistent covariance-matrix estimator and a direct test for heteroscedasticity. Econometrica 48(4):817–838CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Williams C, Youssef Y (2013) Evaluating the gender variations in informal sector entrepreneurship: some lessons from Brazil. J Dev Entrep 18(1):1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Wooldridge J (2003) Introductory econometrics: A modern approach (2e). South-Western, Mason, OHGoogle Scholar
  73. World Bank (2014) Doing business 2015: going beyond efficiency. Economy profile 2015 Brazil. Washington: World Bank Publications. doi: 10.1596/978-1-4648-0351-2
  74. Zhang T, Ramakrishnon R, Livny M (1997) BIRCH: a new data clustering algorithm and its applications. Data Min Knowl Disc 1(2):141–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dianne H. B. Welsh
    • 1
    Email author
  • Eugene Kaciak
    • 2
    • 3
  • Silvana Trimi
    • 4
  • Emerson Wagner Mainardes
    • 5
  1. 1.Hayes Distinguished Professor of Entrepreneurship, 441 Bryan School of Business and EconomicsThe University of North Carolina at GreensboroGreensboroUSA
  2. 2.Goodman School of BusinessBrock UniversitySt. CatharinesCanada
  3. 3.Department of Quantitative Methods and Information TechnologyKozminski UniversityWarsawPoland
  4. 4.Supply Chain and Data Analytics Department, College of Business AdministrationUniversity of Nebraska – LincolnLincolnUSA
  5. 5.FUCAPE Business SchoolVitóriaBrazil

Personalised recommendations