An Integrative Conceptual Framework for Sustainable Successions in Family Businesses: The Case of Taiwan
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
2.1. Family Business Development, Governance and Succession
2.2. Analysis of the Key Factors Influencing Family Business Inheritance
3. Methodology
3.1. Grounded Theory and a Decisive Factor Analysis Framework of Succession
3.2. Evaluation Methods and Operational Procedure
4. Empirical Analysis of the Key Influential Factors in Family Business Succession
4.1. Results of the DEMATEL
4.2. Analysis of the Relationships between Dimensions and Criteria
4.3. Using DANP for Computing the Weights of the Criteria
4.4. Sustainability Performance Evaluation Obtained Using VIKOR
4.5. Discussion and Implications
5. Conclusions and Limitations
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Oudah, M.; Jabeen, F.; Dixon, C. Determinants Linked to Family Business Sustainability in the UAE: An AHP Approach. Sustainability 2018, 10, 246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chrisman, J.J.; Chua, J.H.; Sharma, P. Important attributes of successors in family businesses: An exploratory study. Fam. Bus. Rev. 1998, 11, 19–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- DeMassis, A.; Chua, J.; Chrisman, J. Factors preventing intra–family succession. Fam. Bus. Rev. 2008, 21, 183–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dumas, C.A. Preparing the new CEO: Managing the father-daughter succession process in family businesses. Fam. Bus. Rev. 1990, 3, 169–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Beckhard, R.; Dyer, W.G. Managing Change in the Family Firm-Issues and Strategies. Sloan Manag. Rev. 1983, 22, 59–65. [Google Scholar]
- Molly, V.; Laveren, E.; Deloof, M. Family business succession and its impact on financial structure and performance. Fam. Bus. Rev. 2010, 23, 131–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hamrouni, A.D.; Mnasser, K. Basics factors of success in family-owned businesses from second to third generation. Int. J. Entrep. Small Bus. 2013, 18, 57–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stavrou, E.T. A four factor model: A guide to planning next generation involvement in the family firm. Fam. Bus. Rev. 1998, 11, 135–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Astrachan, J.; Klein, S.; Smyrnios, K. The F-PEC scale of family influence: A proposal for solving the family business definition problem. Fam. Bus. Rev. 2002, 15, 45–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Handler, W.C. Succession in family firms: A mutual role adjustment between entrepreneur and next-generation family members. Entrep. Theory Pract. 1990, 15, 37–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Longenecker, J.G.; Schoen, J.E. Management succession in the family business. J. Small Bus. Manag. 1979, 16, 1–6. [Google Scholar]
- Núñez-Cacho, P.; Molina-Moreno, V.; Corpas-Iglesias, F.A.; Cortés-García, F.J. Family Businesses Transitioning to a Circular Economy Model: The Case of “Mercadona”. Sustainability 2018, 10, 537. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Le Breton-Miller, I.; Miller, D.; Steier, L.P. Toward an integrative model of effective FOB succession. Entrep. Theory Pract. 2004, 28, 305–328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lansberg, I.; Astrachan, J.H. Influence of family relationships on succession planning and training: The importance of mediating factors. Fam. Bus. Rev. 1994, 7, 39–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dyer, W.G. Cultural Change in Family Firms; Jossey-Bass: San Francisco, CA, USA, 1986. [Google Scholar]
- Churchill, N.C.; Hatten, K.J. Non-Market-Based Transfers of Wealth and Power: A Research Framework for Family Businesses. Am. J. Small Bus. 1987, 11, 51–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- O’Leary, S.; Swaffin-Smith, C. Organic Model to Reflect the Transitional Nature of Family Firms; Regent’s Working Papers in Business & Management, Working Paper 1501: RWPBM1501; REGENT’S University: London, UK, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Gersick, K.E.; Lansberg, I.; Desjardins, M.; Dunn, B. Stages and transitions: Managing change in the family business. Fam. Bus. Rev. 1999, 12, 287–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ramadani, V.; Bexheti, A.; Rexhepi, G.; Ratten, V.; Ibraimi, S. Succession issues in Albanian family businesses: An exploratory research. J. Balk. Near East. Stud. 2017, 19, 294–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mayer, R.; Davis, J.; Schoorman, D. An integrative model of organizational trust. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1995, 20, 709–734. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Matthews, C.H.; Moore, T.W.; Fialko, A.S. Succession in the family firm: A cognitive categorization perspective. Fam. Bus. Rev. 1999, 12, 159–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barach, J.A.; Gantisky, J.; Carson, J.A.; Doochin, B.A. Entry of the next generation: Strategic challenge for family business. J. Small Bus. Manag. 1988, 26, 49–56. [Google Scholar]
- Evert, R.E.; Martin, J.A.; McLeod, M.; Payne, G.T. Empirics in family business research: Progress, challenges, and the path ahead. Fam. Bus. Rev. 2016, 29, 17–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Holt, D.T.; Madison, K.; Kellermanns, F.W. Variance in family members’ assessments: The importance of dispersion modeling in family firm research. Fam. Bus. Rev. 2017, 30, 61–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schein, E.H. The role of the founder in creating organizational culture. Organ. Dyn. 1983, 12, 13–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Olson, P.D.; Zuiker, V.S.; Danes, S.M.; Stafford, K.; Heck, R.K.Z.; Duncan, K.A. The impact of the family and business on family business sustainability. J. Bus. Ventur. 2003, 18, 639–666. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Anglin, A.H.; Reid, S.W.; Short, J.C.; Zachary, M.A.; Rutherford, M.W. An archival approach to measuring family influence: An organizational identity perspective. Fam. Bus. Rev. 2017, 30, 19–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Handler, W. Succession in family business: A review of the research. Fam. Bus. Rev. 1994, 7, 273–286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barach, J.A.; Ganitsky, J.B. Successful succession in family business. Fam. Bus. Rev. 1995, 8, 131–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Denis, D.J.; Denis, D.K.; Sarin, A. Ownership structure and top executive turnover. J. Financ. Econ. 1997, 45, 193–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Madison, K.; Holt, D.T.; Kellermanns, F.W.; Ranft, A. Viewing family firm behavior and governance through the lens of agency and stewardship theories. Fam. Bus. Rev. 2015, 28, 312–331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chirico, F.; Nordqvist, M. Dynamic capabilities and trans-generational value creation in family firms: The role of organizational culture. Int. Small Bus. J. 2010, 28, 487–504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kelly, L.M.; Athanassiou, N.; Crittenden, W.F. Founder centrality and strategic behavior in family-owned firm. Entrep. Theory Pract. 2000, 25, 27–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kotlar, J.; De Massis, A. Goal setting in family firms: Goal diversity, social interactions, and collective commitment to family-centered goals. Entrep. Theory Pract. 2013, 37, 1263–1288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Cabrera-Suarez, K. Leadership transfer and the successor’s development in the family firm. Leadersh. Q. 2005, 16, 71–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boyne, G.A.; James, O.; John, P.; Petrovsky, N. Leadership succession and organizational success: When do chief executives make a difference? Public Money Manag. 2011, 31, 339–346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sharma, P.; Chrisman, J.J.; Pablo, A.L.; Chua, J.H. Determinants of initial satisfaction with the succession process in family firms: A conceptual model. Entrep. Theory Pract. 2001, 25, 17–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cater, J.J.; Kidwell, R.E.; Camp, K.M. Successor team dynamics in family firms. Fam. Bus. Rev. 2016, 29, 301–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chrisman, J.J.; Sharma, P.; Taggar, S. Family influences on firms: An introduction. J. Bus. Res. 2007, 60, 1005–1011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ali, Z.; Sun, H.; Ali, M. The Impact of Managerial and Adaptive Capabilities to Stimulate Organizational Innovation in SMEs: A Complementary PLS–SEM Approach. Sustainability 2017, 9, 2157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sardeshimukh, S.; Corbett, A. The duality of internal and external development of successors: Opportunity recognition in family firms. Fam. Bus. Rev. 2011, 24, 111–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McGivern, C. The dynamics of management succession: A model of chief executive succession in the small family firm. Manag. Decis. 1978, 16, 32–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Feltham, T.S.; Feltham, G.; Barnett, J.J. The dependence of family businesses on a single decision-maker. J. Small Bus. Manag. 2005, 43, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stanley, L.J.; Kellermanns, F.W.; Zellweger, T. Latent profile analysis: Understanding family firm profiles. Fam. Bus. Rev. 2017, 30, 84–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Daspit, J.J.; Holt, D.T.; Chrisman, J.J.; Long, R.G. Examining family firm succession from a social exchange perspective. Fam. Bus. Rev. 2016, 29, 44–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Danes, S.M.; Stafford, K.; Haynes, G.; Amarapurkar, S. Family capital of family firms bridging human, social, and financial capital. Fam. Bus. Rev. 2009, 22, 199–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ahn, S.Y. Founder Succession, The Imprint of Founders’ Legacies, and Long-Term Corporate Survival. Sustainability 2018, 10, 1485. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cadieux, I. Succession in small and medium-sized family businesses: Toward a typology of predecessor roles during and after instatement of the successor. Fam. Bus. Rev. 2007, 20, 95–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dyer, W.G.; Handler, W. Entrepreneurship and family business: Exploring the connection. Entrep. Theory Pract. 1994, 19, 71–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sharma, P.; Irving, G. Four bases of family business successor commitment: Antecedents and consequences. Entrep. Theory Pract. 2005, 29, 13–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Datta, D.K.; Guthrie, J.P. Executive succession: Organizational antecedents of CEO characteristics. Strat. Manag. J. 1994, 15, 569–577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Corbin, J.; Strauss, A. Grounded Theory Research: Procedures, Canons, and Evaluative Criteria. Qual. Sociol. 1990, 13, 3–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Saaty, T.L. Theory and Applications of the Analytic Network Process; RWS Publications: Pittsburgh, PA, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Liu, J.Y. An internal control system that includes corporate social responsibility for social sustainability in the new era. Sustainability 2018, 10, 3382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tsai, W.H.; Chou, W.C.; Hsu, W. The sustainability balanced scorecard as a framework for selecting socially responsible investment: An effective MCDM model. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 2009, 60, 1396–1410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hu, K.H.; Lin, S.J.; Liu, J.Y.; Chen, F.H. The Influences of CSR’s Multi-dimensional Characteristics on Firm Value Determination by a Fusion Approach. Sustainability 2018, in press. [Google Scholar]
- Opricovic, S.; Tzeng, G.H. Extended VIKOR method in comparison with outranking methods. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2007, 178, 514–529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Davis, P.; Harveston, P.D. The influence of family on the family business succession process: A multi-generational perspective. Entrep. Theory Pract. 1998, 22, 31–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Madjid, T.; Debora, D.C.; Francisco, J.S.A. An extended stochastic VIKOR model with decision maker’s attitude towards risk. Inf. Sci. 2018, 432, 301–318. [Google Scholar]
Dimension | Criteria | Description | References |
---|---|---|---|
A Corporate Attribute | a1 Industrial Trait | The external environmental factors that family businesses face in order to survive, such as economic, social, legal, technical and environmental protection. | [12,22,23,24,25,26,27] |
a2 Corporate Style | In order to manage the enterprise, the ownership structure is designed by the family business during the process of development. The governance mode for this ownership structure is shown by how ownership, management and control are separated. | ||
a3 Business Scale | According to different classification standards (such as the number of employees, production capacity, fixed asset value, etc.), family businesses can be divided into large enterprises, medium enterprises and small enterprises. | ||
B Governance Variables | b1 Equity Structure | The proportion of different types of shares and their interrelationships, such as the degree of concentration or dispersion of equity in the shareholding structure. | [14,28,29,30,31,32,33,34] |
b2 Governance Culture | The degree of capital socialization and management socialization in family businesses, such as the centralization of family interests and the socialization of family interests. | ||
C Management Concern | c1 Leadership Style | Leadership styles displayed in family businesses can include totalitarian authoritative leadership, decentralized professional leadership or group consensus collective leadership. | [20,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43] |
c2 Employment Philosophy | The mechanisms and practices for managing human resources in family businesses, such as relationship oriented, technology oriented or professional oriented. | ||
c3 Communication Mode | The arbitrariness or democratic nature of family business decision-making; the mode of horizontal or vertical communication; the standard of performance appraisal and job promotion | ||
D Family Capital | d1 Family Structure | The tangible types of interpersonal relationships within the family structure, such as social relationships between members of different hierarchical levels, pedigree, primogeniture | [13,27,44,45,46,47,48,49] |
d2 Family Tradition | The tradition of the family is usually reflected in the family beliefs or customs that family members share and abide by, such as the customs, conventions and family rules or family constitutions. | ||
d3 Affection relationship | Intangible interpersonal relationships in the family structure, such as family affection or obedience, unity and cohesion | ||
E Niche Inheritance | d1 Succession Planning | The company develops and builds a high-potential successor tracking and developing mechanism that is closely integrated with the company’s overall business strategy. | [8,34,39,50,51] |
d2 Requirement profiles | The requirements of the predecessors and the expected skills of the successor, both explicit and implicit requirements such as soft and hard skills. |
Part I: Basic Information | |
---|---|
1. Family business background | (a) Industry |
(b) Year of establishment | |
(c) Education level | |
2. Inheriting generations | (a) Currently operated by the first generation |
(b) Currently operated by the second generation | |
(c) Currently operated by the third generation or later | |
Part II: Factors Affecting the Succession of Family Businesses | |
1. Corporate Attribute | (a) How do you see the impact of the corporate attributes on the succession of authority in the family business? |
(b) What factors do you think will affect family succession in terms of family business traits? | |
2. Governance Pattern | (a) What is the impact of the governance pattern on succession in the family business? |
(b) What factors do you think will affect family succession in terms of the family governance pattern? | |
3. Management Mode | (a) What is the impact of the management mode on succession in the family business? |
(b) What factors do you think will affect family succession in terms of the family management mode? | |
4. Family Capital | (a) What is the impact of family capital on succession in the family business? |
(b) What factors do you think will affect family succession in terms of family capital? | |
5. Inheritance Condition | (a) What is the impact of the inheritance conditions on succession in the family business? |
(b) What factors do you think will affect family succession in terms of family inheritance? |
Category | Content | N | Percentage |
---|---|---|---|
Generation | First-generation owners | 60 | 50.8% |
Second-generation owners | 52 | 44.1% | |
Third generation of owners | 6 | 5.1% | |
Sex | Male | 86 | 72.9% |
Female | 32 | 27.1% | |
Education level | Doctorate | 4 | 3.3% |
Master’s | 42 | 35.6% | |
Undergraduate | 63 | 53.4% | |
High School and Below | 9 | 7.7% | |
Industry | Primary industrial sectors | 8 | 6.7% |
Secondary industrial sectors | 62 | 52.5% | |
Tertiary industrial sectors | 48 | 40.8% |
Criteria | a1 | a2 | a3 | b1 | b2 | c1 | c2 | c3 | d1 | d2 | d3 | e1 | e2 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
a1 | 0.014 | 0.152 | 0.151 | 0.145 | 0.157 | 0.151 | 0.125 | 0.114 | 0.030 | 0.126 | 0.112 | 0.154 | 0.149 |
a2 | 0.019 | 0.057 | 0.148 | 0.132 | 0.146 | 0.158 | 0.147 | 0.137 | 0.047 | 0.114 | 0.101 | 0.136 | 0.138 |
a3 | 0.015 | 0.089 | 0.052 | 0.088 | 0.105 | 0.137 | 0.125 | 0.119 | 0.044 | 0.098 | 0.076 | 0.112 | 0.146 |
b1 | 0.018 | 0.092 | 0.118 | 0.053 | 0.136 | 0.175 | 0.172 | 0.148 | 0.030 | 0.093 | 0.082 | 0.126 | 0.122 |
b2 | 0.020 | 0.077 | 0.102 | 0.101 | 0.063 | 0.151 | 0.163 | 0.134 | 0.022 | 0.080 | 0.081 | 0.111 | 0.108 |
c1 | 0.030 | 0.059 | 0.069 | 0.070 | 0.110 | 0.073 | 0.160 | 0.171 | 0.026 | 0.099 | 0.090 | 0.126 | 0.103 |
c2 | 0.034 | 0.063 | 0.055 | 0.045 | 0.090 | 0.116 | 0.059 | 0.122 | 0.022 | 0.080 | 0.074 | 0.104 | 0.088 |
c3 | 0.017 | 0.033 | 0.050 | 0.054 | 0.072 | 0.079 | 0.077 | 0.044 | 0.018 | 0.058 | 0.059 | 0.071 | 0.093 |
d1 | 0.013 | 0.059 | 0.065 | 0.078 | 0.088 | 0.093 | 0.106 | 0.110 | 0.014 | 0.068 | 0.060 | 0.111 | 0.108 |
d2 | 0.029 | 0.165 | 0.162 | 0.148 | 0.212 | 0.226 | 0.217 | 0.217 | 0.094 | 0.092 | 0.182 | 0.223 | 0.228 |
d3 | 0.022 | 0.145 | 0.137 | 0.120 | 0.155 | 0.182 | 0.177 | 0.176 | 0.057 | 0.129 | 0.066 | 0.160 | 0.184 |
e1 | 0.020 | 0.106 | 0.124 | 0.125 | 0.140 | 0.166 | 0.161 | 0.160 | 0.025 | 0.117 | 0.058 | 0.079 | 0.157 |
e2 | 0.010 | 0.061 | 0.066 | 0.057 | 0.062 | 0.073 | 0.081 | 0.072 | 0.025 | 0.061 | 0.072 | 0.101 | 0.047 |
Dimensions | A | B | C | D | E |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Corporate Attributes (A) | 0.462 | 0.777 | 0.865 | 0.690 | 0.621 |
Governance Variables (B) | 0.373 | 0.332 | 0.667 | 0.370 | 0.375 |
Management Concerns (C) | 0.273 | 0.267 | 0.241 | 0.216 | 0.205 |
Family Capital (D) | 0.721 | 0.881 | 0.990 | 0.531 | 0.760 |
Niche Inheritance (E) | 0.547 | 0.658 | 0.786 | 0.605 | 0.405 |
Dimensions and Criteria (i) | Row Sum (di) | Column Sum (ri) | Ranking | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Corporate Attributes (A) | 3.414 | 2.376 | 5.790 | 1.038 | |
a1 Industrial Traits | 1.580 | 0.260 | 1.840 | 1.320 | 1 |
a2 Corporate Style | 1.480 | 1.158 | 2.638 | 0.321 | 2 |
a3 Business Scale | 1.207 | 1.298 | 2.504 | −0.091 | 3 |
Governance Variables (B) | 2.117 | 2.915 | 5.032 | −0.798 | |
b1 Equity Structure | 1.366 | 1.216 | 2.582 | 0.150 | 1 |
b2 Governance Culture | 1.213 | 1.537 | 2.750 | −0.324 | 2 |
Management Concerns (C) | 1.202 | 3.548 | 4.751 | −2.346 | |
c1 Leadership Style | 1.186 | 1.779 | 2.964 | −0.593 | 1 |
c2 Employment Philosophy | 0.950 | 1.770 | 2.720 | −0.819 | 2 |
c3 Communication Mode | 0.723 | 1.723 | 2.446 | −1.000 | 3 |
Family Capital (D) | 3.883 | 2.413 | 6.296 | 1.471 | |
d1 Member Structure | 0.972 | 0.455 | 1.427 | 0.516 | 3 |
d2 Family Traditions | 2.195 | 1.216 | 3.411 | 0.979 | 1 |
d3 Family Affection Relationships | 1.710 | 1.112 | 2.822 | 0.597 | 2 |
Niche Inheritance (E) | 3.000 | 2.366 | 5.367 | 0.634 | |
e1 Successor Planning | 1.438 | 1.613 | 3.050 | −0.175 | 1 |
e2 Requirement profiles | 0.787 | 1.670 | 2.457 | −0.882 | 2 |
Dimension | Criteria | Weight | Rank |
---|---|---|---|
A Corporate Attributes | a1 Industrial Trait | 0.172694 | 2 |
a2 Corporate Style | 0.089596 | 5 | |
a3 Business Scale | 0.073425 | 6 | |
B Governance Pattern | b1 Equity Structure | 0.042153 | 9 |
b2 Governance Culture | 0.032147 | 10 | |
C Management Concerns | c1 Leadership Style | 0.024949 | 11 |
c2 Employment Philosophy | 0.019127 | 12 | |
c3 Communication Concerns | 0.015658 | 13 | |
D Family Capital | d1 Member Structure | 0.090343 | 4 |
d2 Family Tradition | 0.186620 | 1 | |
d3 Family Affection Relationships | 0.136879 | 3 | |
E Inheritance Condition | e1 Successor Planning | 0.069079 | 7 |
e2 Requirement profiles | 0.047330 | 8 |
Dimension | Criteria | Global Weight (by DANP) | Three Years Ago | Current Year | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
A | Corporate Attributes | a1 | Industrial Environment | 0.173 | 0.024 | 0.082 | 0.140 | 0.043 | 0.147 | 0.250 |
a2 | Corporate Style | 0.090 | 0.027 | 0.163 | 0.300 | 0.027 | 0.163 | 0.300 | ||
a3 | Business Scale | 0.073 | 0.029 | 0.215 | 0.400 | 0.029 | 0.215 | 0.400 | ||
B | Governance Variables | b1 | Equity Structure | 0.042 | 0.021 | 0.261 | 0.500 | 0.021 | 0.261 | 0.500 |
b2 | Governance Culture | 0.032 | 0.018 | 0.284 | 0.550 | 0.018 | 0.284 | 0.550 | ||
C | Management Concerns | c1 | Leadership Style | 0.025 | 0.014 | 0.282 | 0.550 | 0.014 | 0.282 | 0.550 |
c2 | Employment Philosophy | 0.019 | 0.011 | 0.285 | 0.560 | 0.011 | 0.285 | 0.560 | ||
c3 | Communication Mode | 0.016 | 0.009 | 0.305 | 0.600 | 0.009 | 0.305 | 0.600 | ||
D | Family Capital | d1 | Member Structure | 0.090 | 0.036 | 0.218 | 0.400 | 0.036 | 0.218 | 0.400 |
d2 | Family Tradition | 0.187 | 0.019 | 0.059 | 0.100 | 0.019 | 0.059 | 0.100 | ||
d3 | Family Affection Relationships | 0.137 | 0.022 | 0.091 | 0.160 | 0.027 | 0.114 | 0.200 | ||
E | Inheritance Conditions | e1 | Successor Planning | 0.069 | 0.024 | 0.187 | 0.350 | 0.017 | 0.134 | 0.250 |
e2 | Requirement profiles | 0.047 | 0.024 | 0.262 | 0.500 | 0.019 | 0.209 | 0.400 |
Method | Priority for Improvement |
---|---|
Relational influence of dimensions’ network (per DEMATEL) | D → A → E → B → C |
Inter-dimensional influence of individual criteria (per DEMATEL) | A: → (a1) → (a2) → (a3) (a2) → (a3) |
B: (b1) → (b2) | |
C: → (c1) → (c2) → (c3) (c2) → (c3) | |
D: → (d2) → (d3) → (d1) (d3) → (d1) | |
E: → (e1) → (e2) |
© 2018 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Liu, J.Y. An Integrative Conceptual Framework for Sustainable Successions in Family Businesses: The Case of Taiwan. Sustainability 2018, 10, 3656. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10103656
Liu JY. An Integrative Conceptual Framework for Sustainable Successions in Family Businesses: The Case of Taiwan. Sustainability. 2018; 10(10):3656. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10103656
Chicago/Turabian StyleLiu, Jau Yang. 2018. "An Integrative Conceptual Framework for Sustainable Successions in Family Businesses: The Case of Taiwan" Sustainability 10, no. 10: 3656. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10103656
APA StyleLiu, J. Y. (2018). An Integrative Conceptual Framework for Sustainable Successions in Family Businesses: The Case of Taiwan. Sustainability, 10(10), 3656. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10103656