La acumulación de conocimiento en la empresa familiarun análisis empírico

  1. Barros Contreras, Ismael 1
  2. Hernangómez Barahona, Juan 2
  3. Martín Cruz, Natalia 2
  1. 1 Universidad Austral de Chile
    info

    Universidad Austral de Chile

    Valdivia, Chile

    ROR https://ror.org/029ycp228

  2. 2 Universidad de Valladolid - España
Revista:
Neumann Business Review

ISSN: 2412-3730

Año de publicación: 2017

Título del ejemplar: July - December

Volumen: 3

Número: 2

Páginas: 76-112

Tipo: Artículo

DOI: 10.22451/3002.NBR2017.VOL3.2.10012 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR

Otras publicaciones en: Neumann Business Review

Resumen

El conocimiento es la fuente más importante de ventaja competitiva sostenible de una empresa. La acumulación de conocimiento es la base del proceso de gestión del conocimiento y un mecanismo de aprendizaje organizacional fundamental. Promueve el desarrollo de las rutinas organizativas, proporcionando los fundamentos para la generación de capacidades dinámicas y la efectividad organizativa. Este proceso en la empresa familiar está fuertemente influenciado por la historia común, la confianza y apego emocional de los miembros familiares, que favorecen su comunicación y el desarrollo de procesos de gestión del conocimiento y aprendizaje idiosincrásicos. Este estudio se centra en el estudio de la relación entre los recursos familiares (familiness), acumulación de conocimiento y la efectividad organizativa. Con el objetivo de verificar esta relación utilizamos una muestra de 102 empresas familiares españolas que no cotizan en bolsa. Los datos fueron evaluamos mediante Partial Least Squares (PLS). Los resultados sugieren que los componentes de participación y esencia tienen distintos efectos sobre el proceso de acumulación de conocimiento. Además, proponen una relación directa y positiva entre la acumulación de conocimiento y la efectividad organizativa en la empresa familiar.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Adler, P. y Kwon, S.-W. (2002). Social capital: Prospects for a new concept. Academy Management Review, 27(1), 17-40.
  • Astrachan, J. H. (2010). Strategy in family business: Toward a multidimensional research agenda. Journal of Family Bunisess Strategy, 1(1), 6-14.
  • Astrachan, J. H., Klein, S. B. y Smyrnios, K. X. (2002). The F-PEC scale of family influence: A proposal for solving the family business definition problem. Family Business Review, 15(1), 45-58.
  • Barach, J. A. y Ganitsky, J. B. (1995). Successful succession in family business. Family Business Review, 8(2), 131-155.
  • Baron, R. M. y Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of personality and social psychology, 51(6), 1173-1182.
  • Barros, I., Hernangómez, J. y Martin-Cruz, N. (2016). A theoretical model of strategic management of family firms. A dynamic capabilities approach. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 7(3), 149-159.
  • Basco, R. (2013). The family's effect on family firm performance: A model testing the demographic and essence approaches. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 4(1), 42-66.
  • Basco, R. y Pérez Rodríguez, M. J. (2011). Ideal types of family business management: Horizontal fit between family and business decisions and the relationship with family business performance. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 2(3), 151-165.
  • Cabrera-Suárez, K., De Saá-Pérez, P. y García-Almeida, D. (2001). The succession process from a resource- and knowledge-based view of the family firm. Family Business Review, 14(1), 37-46.
  • Carlock, R. S. y Ward, J. L. (2001). Strategic planning for the family business: Parallel planning to unify the family and business. Houndsmill, NY, USA.: Palgrave.
  • Carmines, E. G. y Zeller, R. A. (1979). Reliability and validity assessment (Vol. 17): Sage.
  • Carnes, C. M. y Ireland, R. D. (2013). Familiness and Innovation: Resource Bundling as the Missing Link. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice, 37(6), 1399-1419.
  • Casado, F. y Rodríguez, M. Á. (2009). La RSE en la gran empresa familiar española (Vol. Documento 155). Madrid, España.
  • Cepeda, G. y Roldán, J. L. (2004). Aplicando en la práctica la técnica PLS en la administración de empresas. Conocimiento y Competitividad. XIV Congreso Nacional ACEDE. Murcia, España.
  • Cepeda, G. y Vera, D. (2005). Knowledge management and firm performance: examining the mediating link of dynamic capabilities. 4th International Meeting of the Iberoamerican Academy of Management,. Lisboa, Portugal.
  • Claver, E., Rienda, L. y Quer, D. (2009). Family firms' international commitment. Family Business Review, 22(2), 125-135.
  • Cruz, C. y Nordqvist, M. (2012). Entrepreneurial orientation in family firms: A generational perspective. Small Business Economics, 38(1), 33-49.
  • Cruz, C. C., Gómez-Mejia, L. R. y Becerra, M. (2010). Perceptions of benevolence and the design of agency contracts: CEO - TMT relationships in family firms. Academy of Management Journal, 53(1), 69-89.
  • Chandler, G. N. y Hanks, S. H. (1994). Market attractiveness, resource-based capabilities, venture strategies, and venture performance. Journal of Business Venturing, 9(4), 331-349.
  • Chin, W. W. (1998). The partial least squares approach for structural equation modeling. In M. GA (Ed.), Modern methods for business research (pp. 295 - 336). Mahwah, NJ, USA: Lawrence Erlbaun Associates.
  • Chirico, F. (2007). The accumulation process of knowledge in family firms. Electronic Journal of Family Business Studies, 1(1), 62-90.
  • Chirico, F. (2008). Knowledge accumulation in family firms: Evidence from four case studies. International Small Business Journal, 26(4), 433-462.
  • Chirico, F. y Nordqvist, M. (2010). Dynamic capabilities and trans-generational value creation in family firms: The role of organizational culture. International Small Business Journal, 28(5), 487-504.
  • Chirico, F., Nordqvist, M., Colombo, G. y Mollona, E. (2012). Simulating dynamic capabilities and value creation in family firms: Is paternalism an 'asset' or 'liability'? Family Business Review, 25(3), 318-338.
  • Chirico, F. y Salvato, C. (2008). Knowledge integration and dynamic organizational adaptation in family firms. Family Business Review, 21(2), 169-181.
  • Chirico, F. y Salvato, C. (2016). Knowledge internalization and product development in family firms: When relational and affective factors matter. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 40(1), 201-229.
  • Chrisman, J. J., Chua, J. H. y Kellermanns, F. (2009). Priorities, resource stocks, and performance in family and nonfamily firms. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 33(3), 739-760.
  • Chrisman, J. J., Chua, J. H. y Litz, R. A. (2004). Comparing the agency costs of family and non-family firms: Conceptual issues and exploratory evidence. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 28(4), 335-354.
  • Chrisman, J. J., Chua, J. H., Pearson, A. W. y Barnett, T. (2012). Family involvement, family influence, and family-centered non-economic goals in small firms. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 36(2), 267-293.
  • Chrisman, J. J., Chua, J. H. y Sharma, P. (2005). Trends and directions in the development of a strategic management theory of the family firm. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 29(5), 555-576.
  • Chua, J. H., Chrisman, J. J. y Sharma, P. (1999). Defining the family business by behavior. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 23(4), 19-39.
  • Chua, J. H., Chrisman, J. J., Steier, L. P. y Rau, S. B. (2012). Sources of heterogeneity in family firms: An introduction. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 36(6), 1103-1113.
  • Diamantopoulos, A. y Winklhofer, H. M. (2001). Index construction with formative indicators: an alternative to scale development. Journal of Marketing Research, 38(2), 269-277.
  • Donnelley, R. G. (1988). The family business. Family Business Review, 1(4), 427 - 445.
  • Doty, D. H. y Glick, W. H. (1998). Common methods bias: Does common methods variance really bias results? Organizational Research Methods, 1(4), 374-406.
  • Easterby-Smith, M. y Prieto, I. M. (2008). Dynamic capabilities and knowledge management: An integrative role for learning? British Journal of Management, 19(3), 235-249.
  • Eddleston, K. A., Kellermanns, F. W. y Sarathy, R. (2008). Resource configuration in family firms: Linking resources, strategic planning and technological opportunities to performance. Journal of Management Studies, 45(1), 26-50.
  • Eisenhardt, K. M. y Martin, J. A. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: What are they? Strategic Management Journal, 21(10-11), 1105-1121.
  • Fornell, C. y Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50.
  • Gersick, K. E., Davis, J. A., McCollom, M. y Lansberg, I. (1997). Generation to generation life cycles of the family business. Boston MA, USA: Harvard Business School Press.
  • Gold, A. H., Malhotra, A. y Segars, A. H. (2001). Knowledge management: An organizational capabilities perspective. J. of Management Information Systems, 18(1), 185-214.
  • Gómez-Mejía, L., Hoskisson, R., Makri, M., Sirmon, D. y Campbell, J. (2011). Innovation and the preservation of socioemotional wealth: The paradox of R&D investment in family controlled high technology firms. Unpublished paper, Management Department, Texas A&M University. Management Department, Texas A&M University, Texas, USA.
  • Gómez-Mejía, L. R., Cruz, C., Berrone, P. y De Castro, J. (2011). The bind that ties: Socioemotional wealth preservation in family firms. The Academy of Management Annals, 5(1), 653-707.
  • Gómez-Mejía, L. R., Haynes, K. T., Núñez-Nickel, M., Jacobson, K. J. L. y 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.
  • Grant, R. M. (1996). Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17(s2), 109-122.
  • Grote, J. (2003). Conflicting generations: A new theory of family business rivalry. Family Business Review, 16(2), 113-124.
  • Habbershon, T. G. y Williams, M. L. (1999). A resource-based framework for assessing the strategic advantages of family firms. Family Business Review, 12(1), 1-25.
  • Habbershon, T. G., Williams, M. L. y MacMillan, I. (2003). Aunified systems perspective of family firm performance. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(4), 451-465.
  • Helfat, C. E., Finkelstein, S., Mitchell, W., Peteraf, M. A., Sing, H., Teece, D. J. y Winter, S. G. (2007). Dynamic capabilities: Understanding strategic change in organizations. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
  • Henseler, J., Ringle, C. y Sinkovics, R. (2009). The use of partial least squares path modeling in international marketing. Advances in International Marketing (AIM), 20, 277-320.
  • Holt, D. T., Rutherford, M. W. y Kuratko, D. F. (2010). Advancing the field of family business research: Further testing the measurement properties of the F-PEC. Family Business Review, 23(1), 76-88.
  • Hulland, J. (1999). Use of partial least squares (PLS) in strategic management research: A review of four recent studies. Strategic Management Journal, 20(2), 195-204.
  • Jaffe, D. T. y Lane, S. H. (2004). Sustaining a family dynasty: Key issues facing complex multigenerational business and investment owning families. Family Business Review, 17(1), 81-98.
  • Kellermanns, F., Eddleston, K., Sarathy, R. y Murphy, F. (2012). Innovativeness in family firms: A family influence perspective. Small Business Economics, 38(1), 85-101.
  • Kellermanns, F. W. y Eddleston, K. A. (2004). Feuding families: When conflict does a family firm good. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 28(3), 209-228.
  • Kets de Vries, M. F. R. (1993). The dynamics of family controlled firms: The good and the bad news. Organizational Dynamics, 21(3), 59-71.
  • Klein, S. B., Astrachan, J. H. y Smyrnios, K. X. (2005). The F-PEC scale of family influence: Construction, validation, and further implication for theory. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 29(3), 321-339.
  • Kleinbaum, D., Kupper, L. y Muller, K. (1988). Applied regression analysis and other multivariate analysis methods. Boston, USA: PWS-Kent Publishing Company.
  • Kotey, B. y Folker, C. (2007). Employee training in SMEs: Effect of size and firm type—family and non-family. Journal of Small Business Management, 45(2), 214-238.
  • Kusunoki, K., Nonaka, I. y Nagata, A. (1998). Organizational capabilities in product development of japanese firms: A conceptual framework and empirical findings. Organization Science, 9(6), 699-718.
  • Kyu Kim, K., Yul Ryoo, S. y Dug Jung, M. (2011). Inter-organizational information systems visibility in buyer–supplier relationships: The case of telecommunication equipment component manufacturing industry. Omega, 39(6), 667-676.
  • Lindow, C. M., Stubner, S. y Wulf, T. (2010). Strategic fit within family firms: The role of family influence and the effect on performance. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 1(3), 167-178.
  • Litz, R. A. (1995). The family business: Toward definitional clarity. Family Business Review, 8(2), 71-81.
  • Nielsen, A. P. (2006). Understanding dynamic capabilities through knowledge management. Journal of Knowledge Management, 10(4), 59-71.
  • Nonaka, I. (1994). A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization Science, 5(1), 14-37.
  • Nonaka, I. y Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation: Oxford University Press, USA.
  • Nonaka, I., Toyama, R. y Nagata, A. (2000). A firm as a knowledge-creating entity: A new perspective on the theory of the firm. Industrial and Corporate Change, 9(1), 1-20.
  • Nunnally, J. C. (2010). Psychometric Theory 3E: Tata McGraw-Hill Education.
  • Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y. y Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Phycology, 88(5), 879-903.
  • Premkumar, G. y Bhattacherjee, A. (2008). Explaining information technology usage: A test of competing models. Omega, 36(1), 64-75.
  • Roldán, J. L. y Leal, A. (2003). A validation test of an adaptation of the DeLone and McLean’s model in the Spanish EIS field. Critical reflections on information systems. A systemic approach, 66-84.
  • Rutherford, M. W., Kuratko, D. F. y Holt, D. T. (2008). Examining the link between 'familiness' and performance: Can the F-PEC untangle the family business theory jungle? Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 32(6), 1089-1109.
  • Sharma, P. y Carney, M. (2012). Value creation and performance in private family firms: Measurement and methodological issues. Family Business Review, 25(3), 233-242.
  • Sirmon, D. G. y Hitt, M. A. (2003). Managing resources: Linking unique resources, management, and wealth creation in family firms Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 27(4), 339-358.
  • Spender, J.-C. (1996). Making knowledge the basis of a dynamic theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17(s2), 45-62.
  • Tagiuri, R. y Davis, J. (1996). Bivalent attributes of the family firm. Family Business Review, 9(2), 199-208.
  • Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1319-1350.
  • Teece, D. J., Pisano, G. y Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509-533.
  • Thomas, J. (2001). Effective processes in the family business to provide for ownership transfer or exit. Paper presented at the FBN 12th Annual World Conference. The role of family business: Research forum proceedings.
  • Vallejo, M. C. (2009). Analytical model of leadership in family firms under transformational theoretical approach. Family Business Review, 22(2), 136-150.
  • Ward, J. L. (1987). Keeping the family business healthy: How to plan for continuing growth, profitability, and family leadership. San Francisco, California, Estados Unidos: Jossey Bass Inc.
  • Wold, H. (1982). Systems under indirect observation using PLS. In F. C. (Ed.), A second generation of multivariate analysis, Vol. I Method (pp. 325-347). New York, USA: Praeger.
  • Zellweger, T. M. y Astrachan, J. H. (2008). On the emotional value of owning a firm. Family Business Review, 21(4), 347-363.
  • Zellweger, T. M., Kellermanns, F. W., Chrisman, J. J. y 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.
  • Zheng, W., Yang, B. y McLean, G. N. (2010). Linking organizational culture, structure, strategy, and organizational effectiveness: Mediating role of knowledge management. Journal of Business Research, 63(7), 763-771.
  • Zollo, M. y Winter, S. G. (2002). Deliberate learning and the evolution of dynamic capabilities. Organization Science, 13(3), 339-351.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet