La "familiaridad dinámica" de las empresas familiares. El caso del Grupo Yllera

  1. Natalia Martin Cruz
  2. Ismael Barros Contreras
  3. Juan Hernangomez Barahona
Revista:
Universia Business Review

ISSN: 1698-5117

Año de publicación: 2014

Número: 42

Páginas: 88-109

Tipo: Artículo

DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

Otras publicaciones en: Universia Business Review

Resumen

En este trabajo, aplicando la teoría de las capacidades dinámicas al estudio de la empresa familiar, introducimos el concepto de ‘familiaridad dinámica’ para poner en evidencia la capacidad de una empresa familiar para crear a propósito, prorrogar o modificar su conjunto único de recursos, derivados de la interacción entre la familia, sus miembros individuales y la empresa. Nuestro objetivo es aportar evidencia sobre cómo se produce la generación y reconfiguración de recursos en la empresa familiar que permite su adaptación evolutiva y supervivencia a lo largo de las generaciones. Para lograr el objetivo, aplicamos un estudio de caso al Grupo Yllera, una empresa representativa del colectivo de empresas familiares en España.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Allen, N. J. y Meyer, J. P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63(1), 1-18.
  • Arregle, J.-L., Hitt, M. A., Sirmon, D. G. y Very, P. (2007). The development of organizational social capital: Attributes of family firms, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 44, no. 1, p. 73-95.
  • 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.
  • Berrone, P., Cruz, C. y Gómez-Mejía, L. R. (2012). Socioemotional wealth in family firms: Theoretical dimensions, assessment approaches, and agenda for future research. Family Business Review, 25(3), 258-279.
  • 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. y Salvato, C. (2008). Knowledge integration and dynamic organizational adaptation in family firms. Family Business Review, 21(2), 169-181.
  • 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 and Practice, 36(2), 267-293.
  • Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. The Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532-550.
  • Eisenhardt, K. M. y Martin, J. A. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: What are they? Strategic Management Journal, 21(10-11), 1105-1121.
  • Feldman, M. S. y Pentland, B. T. (2003). Reconceptualizing organizational routines as a source of flexibility and change. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(1), 94-118.
  • 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.
  • 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. Willey- Blackwell Australia.
  • 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.
  • Jehn, K. A. (1995). A multimethod examination of the benefits and detriments of intragroup conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(2), 256-282.
  • Leana, C. R. y Pil, F. K. (2006). Social capital and organizational performance: Evidence from urban public schools. Organization Science, 17(3), 353-366.
  • Peris, B. (2013). Análisis del sector del vino en España, Ojeando la Agenda (Vol. 21).
  • Sorenson, R. L. (2000). The contribution of leadership style and practices to family and business success. Family Business Review, 13(3), 183-200.
  • Tagiuri, R. y Davis, J. (1982). Bivalent attributes of the family firm. Working Paper, Harvard Business School. Reimpreso (1996): Family Business Review, 9(2), 199-208.
  • Tápies, J. (2011). Family business: an interdisciplinary approach. Universia Business Review (32), 12-25.
  • Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1319-1350.
  • Yin, R. K. (2003). Case studies research: Design and methods. Sage Publications, Inc. (Tercera ed.) CA.
  • 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