Abstract
This paper is about the transition of ownership of shares in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) within the family (i.e. from parents to children). In spite of the fact that such successions are rather prevalent among SMEs, there are no explanations in the literature as to why transitions are preferred to outright sale.
In this paper we assume that the decisive factor in the choice of succession mode is the desire for efficiency expressed as the highest possible firm value. A firm should stay in the family if this is the most profitable transition alternative. One reason for intergenerational succession to be the most profitable alternative is knowledge idiosyncrasy.
However, the benefits of knowledge idiosyncrasy cannot be reaped without an institutional framework that constrains human activities in a proper way. A part of an institutional framework are the laws that act as constraints in successions. Do these laws foster or prevent efficient transition of family firms? This question is addressed in a study of the Swedish inheritance and inheritance tax laws in the light of the policy recommendations on succession made by the European Commission.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ackerlof, G. A., 1970, ‘The Market for “Lemons”: Qualitative Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism’, Quarterly Journal of Economics 84, 488-500.
Axelrod, R., 1984, The Evolution of Cooperation, New York: Basic Books.
Becattini, G., 1990, ‘The Marshallian Industrial District as a Socio-Economic Notion’, in Pyke, Becattini and Sengenberger (eds.), Industrial District and Inter-Firm Cooperation In Italy, Geneva: International Institute for Labour Studies.
Brunåker, S., 1996, Introducing Second Generation Family Members into the Family Operated Business — A Constructionist Approach (Dissertation), Uppsala: SLU.
Bjuggren, P-O. and L-G. Sund, ‘Organisation of Successions of Small and Medium Sized Enterprises within the Family’, Paper presented at the 45th World Conference of ICSB, Brisbane, Australia, 2000.
Buchanan, J. M., 1983, ‘Rent-Seeking, Noncompensated Transfers and Laws of Succession’, Journal of Law and Economics 23, 71-85.
Davidsson, P., L. Lindmark and C. Olofson, 1996, Näringslivsdynamik under 90-talet, Stockholm: NUTEK.
Davis, L. E. and D. C. North, Institutional Change and American Economic Growth, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dyer, Jr., W. G. and W. Handler, 1994, ‘Entrepreneurship and Family Business: Exploring the Connections’, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice (Fall), 71-83.
Eggertsson, T., 1996, ‘A Note on the Economics of Institutions’, in L. J. Alston, T. Eggertsson and D. C. North (eds.), Empirical Studies in Institutional Change, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Eriksson, S. and J. Falkäng, 1997, Gnosjö och ‘Tredje Italien': jämförelser av industriella distrikt i utveckling, working paper, Jönköping International Business School.
European Commission, 1994, December 31, Commission recommendation of 7 December 1994 on the transfer of small and medium sized enterprises. Official Journal of the European Communities L, Legislation, Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. (O.J. n L 385).
European Commission, 1994, July 23, Communication of the Commission on the transfer of enterprises, Actions for SMEs, Official Journal of the European Communities, C, Information and Notices, Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities (Background to 94/C 400/01.)
European Observatory for Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises, 1966, The European Observatory for SMEs, Fourth Annual Report, Zoetermeer: EIM Small Business Research and Consultancy.
European Observatory for Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises, 2000, The European Observatory for SMEs, Sixth Report, Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
Garofoli, G., 1991, ‘Local Networks, Innovation and Policy in Italian Industrial Districts’, in E. Bergman, G. Maier and F. Tödtling (eds.), Regions Reconsidered: Economic Networks, Innovation, and Local Development in Industrialized Countries, London: Mansell.
Goodman, E., 1989, ‘Introduction: The Political Economy of the Small Firm in Italy’, in E. Goodman, J. Bamford and P. Saynor (eds.), Small Firms and Industrial Districts in Italy, London: Routledge.
Greenwald, M. and Associates, 1993, Major Findings of the Mass Mutal Family Business Survey. Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Co., Springfield, MA.
Handler, W. C., 1989, ‘Methodological Issues and Considerations in Studying Family Businesses’, Family Business Review 2, 257-276.
Handler, W. C., 1994, ‘Succession in Family Business: A Review of the Research’, Family Business Review 7, 133-157.
Jensen, M. and W. Meckling, 1976, ‘Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs, and Capital Structure’, Journal of Financial Economics 3, 305-360.
Johannisson, B., 1984, ‘A Cultural Perspective on Small Business-Local Business Climate’, International Small Business Journal 2, 32-43.
Johannisson, B., O. Alexanderson, K. Nowicki and K. Senneseth, 1994, ‘Beyond Anarchy and Organization: Entrepreneurs in Contextual Networks’, Entrepreneurship and Regional Development 6, 329-356.
Karlsson, C. and J. Klaesson, 1998, Success in Manufacturing Employment in an Industrial District-Higher Productivity or Lower Wages?, Working Paper, Jönköping International Business School.
Karlsson, C. and J. Wiklund, 1994, ‘Flexible Companies in Industrial District-The Case of the Gnosjö Region in Sweden’, in J. M. Vecania (ed.), SMEs: Internationalisation, Networks and Strategy, Aldershot: Avebury.
Kirby, D. A. and T. J. Lee, 1996, ‘Research Note: Succession Management in Family Firms in the North East of England’, Family Business Review, 75-85.
Kreps, D. M., 1990, A Course in Microeconomic Theory, New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Longenecker, J. G. and J. E. Schoen, 1978, ‘Management Succession in the Family Business’, Journal of Small Business Management 16, 1-6.
Marshall, A., 1920, Principles of Economics, 8th ed., New York: Macmillan.
Morck, R., A. Shleifer and R. W. Vishny, 1989, ‘Alternative Mechanisms for Corporate Control’, American Economic Review 79, 842-852.
North, D. C., 1990, Institutions, Institutional Change, and Economic Performance, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Polanyi, M., 1962, Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy, New York: Harper & Row.
Pollak, R., 1985, ‘A Transaction Cost Approach to Families and Households’, Journal of Economic Literature 23, 58---x03C0;-608.
Rabellotti, R., 1997, External Economies and Cooperation in Industrial Districts: A Comparison of Italy and Mexico, London: Macmillan.
Schulze, W. S. and R. N. Dino, 1996, Survival of the Family Business, International Council for Small Businesses. 41 I.C.S.B. World Conference 1996. Proceedings, Volume 3, pp. 187-207. Stockholm: ICSB.
Scranton, P., 1986, ‘Learning Manufacture: Education and Shop-Floor Schooling in the Family Firm’, Technology and Culture 27, 40-62.
Sisk, D. E., 1985, ‘Rent-seeking, Non Compensated Transfers, and the Laws of Succession. A Property Rights View’, Public Choice 75, 95-102.
Stoy Hayward Consulting in association with the London Business School, 1989, Staying the Course: Survival Characteristics of the Family Owned Business, London: Stoy Hayward.
Williamson, O. E., 1975, Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications, New York: Free Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bjuggren, PO., Sund, LG. A Transition Cost Rationale for Transition of the Firm within the Family. Small Business Economics 19, 123–133 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016289106477
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016289106477