Managing Knowledge, Dynamic Capabilities, Innovative Performance, and Creating Sustainable Competitive Advantage in Family Companies: A Case Study of a Family Company in Indonesia
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Theoretical Background
2.1. Family Company
2.2. Manage Knowledge
2.3. Entrepreneurship Orientation
3. Research Methods
3.1. Case Study
3.2. Data Collection
3.3. Data Analysis
4. Result
4.1. Bundling Knowledge
As the second generation, we endeavor to provide adequate knowledge to the third generation to boost their level of experience.(IID: fourth son of the second generation)
I encourage them to learn from external professionals to increase their level of knowledge.(IIIB2: the eldest son of the third generation)
… at that time, my elder brother “Koko” arguably released me after mentoring me on the strategies used to negotiate with suppliers and assessing raw materials. Sometimes, I also learnt from Mr. IIC, IID, and IIA.(IIIB3: third-generation family members)
The third sons of the second generation are placed in the factory by IIC to learn of the problems that exist in the company and determine the best way to resolve these problems, other than staying at home talking and playing.(Professional R: production manager in the SSU3 business unit)
…my children, every year I have to go to Germany to participate in foreign exhibitions.(IIC: third son of the second generation)
…we are mandated to master fashion … therefore, we adopt the strategies used by other cultures… furthermore, our overseas offices of raw material resources in China inspires us …(IID: the fourth son of the second generation)
… The advancement in technology has positively improved our capabilities enabling us to read from the internet, newspapers, and join exhibitions(IIIB2: third-generation eldest son)
I also have external mentors, experienced in determining customers’ need… that tends to open my horizons, conduct market surveys and exhibitions.(IIIB3: third-generation family members)
… I studied outside through IIIB2 … holding a Focus Group Discussion before “launching” a product. We also conducted an FGD where we determined the average number of cities, using hundreds of respondents. … Whenever we enter a new market, we study the terrain… External professionals carry out the FGD … and once the results are good, we launch the product with more confidence(IIIC3: third-generation family members)
The third generation sons of IIC survey the market create a relationship with the marketing community, and attend exhibitions on exported footwear… there are family members responsible for exhibitions, therefore, they are assigned to determine the prices and model of the products.(Professional D: production manager in SSU1 & SSU2 business units)
… I make decisions based on IIIB2 strategies, which encourages me.(IIIC3: third-generation family members)
…therefore, the third generation is also faced with a situation that enables them to make a decision, with their experience and knowledge used to determine its success… they are also trained to be courageous in making decisions.(IIIB2: third-generation eldest son)
…they (sons of IIC) make their own decisions and are accountable to the IIC.(Professional D: production manager in SSU1 and SSU2 business units)
4.2. Knowledge Mobilization
… Honesty, competency, and responsibly are the significant conditions of picking a person to lead a family business unit(IIIB3: third-generation family members)
We cannot make any family member without the adequate abilities and knowledge a unit manager….(IIIB2: third-generation eldest son, WA3 business unit manager)
Before IIIC3 controlled the product, the IIC failed to realize the need to lead the SSU3 business unit(Professional R: production manager in SSU3 business unit)
4.3. Innovative Performance
Since 2018, our varied models have increased with thousands of colors… the last category is in JawaPos, Mr.Jokowi, our president, is currently in possession of our basketball shoes … our category is quite complete, and each shoe increases in accordance with HR expertise…there is a yearly expansion of our marketing unit through online distributors, e-commerce … global market.(IIIB2: third-generation eldest son, WA3 business unit manager)
Every year we always develop more models … this is in a bid to ensure the company’s continuous existence(IIIC1: third-generation family members)
We aim to produce more varied models next year because the current market consists of numerous fashion models.(IIIB3: third-generation family members)
…examine the exhibitions in China and determine the extent the technology can be applied in our factory.(IIIC3: third-generation family members)
… (I) furthermore, Nike’s machine in its product is different and can act as a reference in Ardiles…(IIIB3: third-generation family members)
… It is essential to participate in exhibitions overseas to acquire more knowledge on exportation, to raise the shoe business to exportation standard(IIC: third son of the second generation)
…the second generation provides the right knowledge to the third… in terms of model competition, design, and development strategies.(IID: fourth son of the second generation, WA1 business unit manager)
We have a target, and experience producing numerous footwear; however, it cannot be of various models to avoid saturation. Furthermore, the market has to create a better one every year, and the modeling process is very fast… globally, this family company has a significantly growing business unit of sandals, similar to the development oftechnology and in the direction of products such as “Nike” and “Reebok.”(Professional D: production manager in business unit SSU1, SSU2)
We did not collaborate with private companies in Taiwan to expand our knowledge on footwear because they are experts and due to the raw materials, technology, and marketing networks …(IIA: the first son of the second generation)
We worked with an online shoe distribution network, external marketing consultants, and government agencies to market our products.(IIIB2: third-generation eldest son)
5. Discussion
6. Conclusions and Implication
6.1. Conclusions
- Family members can obtain internal learning through social interactions within the company, which involves the transfer of implicit knowledge, information, and experience of each family member and professionals involved.
- External learning can be obtained by family members through social interaction with other companies, which involves obtaining information from consumers, competitors/global products, market prices, market surveys, and through participation in local/international exhibitions.
- Increase in managerial cognition of family members in making decisions based on the knowledge possessed and through past experiences implemented in family companies.
6.2. Theoretical Implication
6.3. Managerial Implication
6.4. Future Limitation and Research
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Vries Kets, M.F.R. The Dynamics of Family Controlled Firms: The Good and The Bad News. Organ. Dyn. 1993, 21, 59–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eddleston, K.A.; Kellermanns, F.W.; Sarathy, R. Resource Configuration in family Firms: Linking Resources, Strategic Planning & Technological Opportunities to Performance. J. Manag. Stud. 2008, 45, 1. [Google Scholar]
- Chua, J.H.; Chrisman, J.J.; Chang, E.P.C. Are Family Firms Born or Made? An Exploratory Investigation? Fam. Bus. Rev. 2004, 17, 37–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chirico, F.; Nordqvist, M. Dynamic Capabilities and Transgenerational Value Creation in Family Firms: The Role of Organizational Culture. Int. Small Bus. J. 2010, 28, 487–504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Miller, D.; Steier, L.; Le Breton-Miller, I. Lost in Time: Intergenerational Succession, Change, and Failure in Family Business. J. Bus. Ventur. 2003, 18, 513–531. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ibrahim, A.B.; Soufani, K.; Lam, J. A Study of Succession in a Family Firm. Fam. Bus. Rev. 2011, 14, 245–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sharma, A.; Dave, S. Small Scale Family Business Succesion and Sustainability: A Study in Chattisgarh. SDMIMD J. Manag. 2013, 4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eddleston, K.A.; Morgan, R.M. Trust, Commitment and Relationship in Family Business: Challenging Conventional Wisdom. J. Fam. Bus. Strategy 2014, 5, 213–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cabrera-Suarez, K.; De Saa-Perez, P.; Garcia-Almeida, D. The Succession Process from a Resource-and Knowledge-Based View of the Family Firm. Family Bus Rev. 2001, 14, 37–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Naldi, L.; Nordqvist, M.; Sjoberg, K.; Wiklund, J. Entrepreneurial Orientation, Risk Taking, and Performance in Family Firms. Fam. Bus. Rev. 2007, 20, 33–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chrisman, J.J.; Chua, J.H.; De Massis, A.; Frattini, F.; Wright, M. The Ability and Willingness Paradox in Family Firms Innovation. J. Prod. Innov. Manag. 2015, 32, 310–318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zahra, S.A.; Neubaum, D.O.; Larraneta, B. Knowledge Sharing and Technological Capabilities: The Moderating Role of Family Involvement. J. Bus. Res. 2007, 60, 1070–1079. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gibb, A.; Webb, T. Policy Issues in Small Business Research; Saxon House: London, UK, 1980. [Google Scholar]
- Rohde, S. Knowledge Orchestration for Sustained Competitive Advantage. Hawaii Int. Conf. Syst. Sci. 2011, 11, 1530–1605. [Google Scholar]
- Song, J.H.; Kolb, J.A.; Lee, U.H.; Kim, H.K. Role of Transformational Leadership in Effective Organizational Knowledge. Creation Practices: Mediating Effects of Employees Work Engagement. Hum. Resour. Dev. Q. 2012, 23, 65–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Saunila, M.; Ukko, J.; Rantanen, H. Innovation Capability and Its Measurement in Finnish SMEs. In Practice-Based Innovation: Insights, Applications and Policy Implications; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 2012; pp. 417–435. [Google Scholar]
- Alonso, A.D.; Kok, S.; O’Shea, M. The Family Business, Adversity and Change: A Dynamic Capabilities and Knowledge-Based Approach. J. Gen. Manag. 2019, 44, 96–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Casprini, E.; De Massis, A.; Di Minin, A.; Frattini, F.; Piccalnga, A. How Family Firms Execute Open Innovation Strategies: The Loccioni Case. J. Knowl. Manag. 2007, 21, 1459–1485. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rogoff, E.G.; Heck, R.K.Z. Evolving Research in Entrepreneurship and Family Business: Recognizing Family as The Oxygen that Feeds The Fire of Entrepreneurship. J. Bus. Ventur. 2003, 18, 559–566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sirmon, D.G.; Arregle, J.L.; Hitt, M.A.; Webb, J.W. The Role of Family Influence in Firms’ Strategic Response to Competitive Threat of Imitation. Entrep. Theory Pract. 2008, 32, 979–998. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aldrich, H.E.; Cliff, J.E. The Pervasive Effects of Family on Entrepreneurship Toward a Family Embeddedness Perspective. J. Bus. Ventur. 2003, 18, 573–596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zachary, R.K. The Importance of the Family System in Family Business. J. Fam. Bus. Manag. 2011, 1, 22–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kellermanns, F.W.; Eddleston, K.A. Feuding Families: When conflict does a Family Firm Good. Entrep. Theory Pract. 2004, 28, 209–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jaffe, D.T. Strategic Planning for the Family in Business. J. Financ. Plan. 2005, 18, 50–56. [Google Scholar]
- Shepherd, D.; Haynie, J.M. Family Business, Identity Conflict, and an Expedited Entrepreneurial Process: A Process of Resolving Identity Conflict. Entrep. Theory Pract. 2009, 33, 1245–1264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gomez-Mejia, L.R.; Haynes, K.T.; Nunez-Nickel, M.; Jacobson, K.J.L.; Moyano-Fuentes, J. Socioemotional Wealth and Business Risks in Family-Controlled Firms: Evidence from Spanish Olive Oil Mills. Adm. Sci. Q. 2007, 52, 106–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Sharma, P.; Irving, P.G. Four Bases of Family Business Successor Commitment: Antecedents and Consequences. Entrep. Theory Pract. 2005, 29, 13–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Trevinyo-Rodriguez, R.N.; Bontis, W. Family Ties & Emotions: A Missing Piece in The Knowledge Transfer Puzzle. J. Small Bus. Enterp. Dev. 2010, 17, 418–436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Massis, A.; Chua, J.H.; Chrisman, J.J. Factors Preventing Intra-Family Succession. Fam. Bus. Rev. 2008, 21, 183–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ahmad, S.; Omar, R.; Quoquab, F. Family Firm’s Sustainable Longevity: The Role of Family Involvement in Business and Innovation Capability. J. Fam. Bus. Manag. 2020. Available online: https://www.emerald.com/insight/2043-6238.htm (accessed on 22 June 2020).
- Zahra, S.A. Entrepreneurial Risk Taking in Family Firms. Fam. Bus. Rev. 2005, 8, 23–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kellermanns, F.W.; Eddleston, K.A.; Barnett, T.; Pearson, A. An Exploratory Study of Family Member Characteristics and Involvement: Effects on Entrepreneurial Behavior in Family Firms. Fam. Bus. Rev. 2008, 21, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kellermanns, F.W.; Eddleston, K.A. Corporate Entrepreneurship in Family Firms: A Family Perspective. Entrep. Theory Pract. 2006, 30, 809–830. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zahra, S.A.; Hayton, J.C.; Salvato, C. Entrepreneurship in Family vs. Non-Family Firms: A Resource-Based Analysis of the Effect of Organizational Culture. Entrep. Theory Pract. 2004, 28, 363–381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kellermanns, F.W.; Eddleston, K.A.; Sarathy, R.; Murphy, F. Innovativeness in Family Firms: a Family Influence Perspective. Small Bus Econ. 2012, 38, 85–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chirico, F.; Salvato, C. Knowledge Integration Adaption in Family Firms. Fam. Bus. Rev. 2008, 21, 169–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Postrel, S. Island of shared knowledge: Specialization and mutual understanding in problem-solving teams. Org. Sci. 2002, 13, 303–320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nonaka, I. The Knowledge—Creating Company. Harv. Bus. Rev. 1991, 69, 162–171. [Google Scholar]
- Nonaka, I.; Takeuchi, H. The Knowledge-Creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 1995. [Google Scholar]
- Chirico, F. Knowledge Accumulation in Family Firms: Evidence from Four Case Studies. Int. Small Bus. J. 2008, 26, 433–462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Woodfield, P.; Husted, K. Intergenerational Knowledge Sharing in Family Firms: Case-based Evidence From the New Zealand Wine Industry. J. Fam. Bus. Strategy 2017, 8, 57–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cohen, M.W.; Levinthal, D.A. Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning & Innovation. Adm. Sci. Q. 1990, 35, 128–152. [Google Scholar]
- Zahra, S.A.; George, G. Absorptive Capacity: A Review Reconceptualization & Extension. Acad. Manag. Rev. 2002, 27, 185–203. [Google Scholar]
- March, J.G. Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning. Org. Sci. 1991, 2, 71–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gupta, A.K.; Smith, K.G.; Shalley, C.E. The Interplay between Exploration and Exploitation. Acad. Manag. J. 2006, 49, 693–706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lane, P.J.; Koka, B.R. The Reification of Absorptive Capacity: A Critical Review and Rejuvenation of the Construct. Acad. Manag. Rev. 2006, 31, 833–863. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vera, D.; Crossan, M. Strategic Leadership and Organizational Learning. Acad. Manag. Rev. 2004, 28, 222–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Birasnav, M.; Rangnekar, S.; Dalpati, A. Transformational Leadership and Human Capital Benefits: The Role of Knowledge Management. Leadersh. Org. Dev. J. 2011, 32, 106–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eisenhardt, K.M.; Martin, J.A. Dynamic Capabilities: What Are They? Strateg. Manag. J. 2000, 21, 1105–1121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jones, O.; Ghobadian, A.; O’regan, N.; Antcliff, V. Dynamic Capabilities in a Sixth-Generation Family Firm: Entrepreneurship and the Bibby Line. Bus. Hist. 2013, 55, 910–941. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Helfat, C.E.; Finkelstein, S.; Mitchell, W. Dynamic Capabilities: Understanding Strategic Change in Organizations; Blackwell: Malden, MA, USA, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Adner, R.; Helfat, C.E. Corporate Effects and Dynamic Managerial Capabilities. Strateg. Manag. J. 2003, 24, 1011–1025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sirmon, D.G.; Hitt, M.A.; Ireland, R.D. Managing Firm Resources in Dynamic Environments to Create Value: Looking Inside the Black Box. Acad. Manag. Rev. 2007, 32, 273–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kor, Y.Y.; Mesko, A. Research Notes and Commentaries Dynamic Managerial Capabilities: Configuration & Orchestration of Top Executives Capabilities & The Firm’s Dominant Logic. Strateg. Manag. J. 2013, 34, 233–244. [Google Scholar]
- Arregle, J.L.; Hitt, M.A.; Sirmon, D.G. The Development of Organizational Social: Capital Attributes of Family Firms. J. Manag. 2007, 44, 73–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Woodfield, P.; Woods, C.; Shepherd, D. Sustainable Entrepreneurship Another Avenue for Family Business Scholarship? J. Fam. Bus. Manag. 2017, 7, 122–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zellweger, T.M.; Nason, R.S.; Nordqvist, M. From Longevity of Firms to Transgenerational Entrepreneurship of Families: Introducing Family Entrepreneurial Orientation. Fam. Bus. Rev. 2012, 25, 136–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hayton, J.C.; Kelley, D.J. A Competency-Based Framework for Promoting Corporate Entrepreneurship. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2006, 45, 407–427. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rondi, E.; De Massis, A.; Kotlar, J. Unlocking Innovation Potential: A Typology of Family Business Innovation Postures and The Critical Role of The Family System. J. Fam. Bus. Strategy 2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chirico, F.; Sirmon, D.G.; Sciascia, S.; Mazzola, P. Resource Orchestration in Family Firms: Investigating How Entrepreneurial Orientation, Generational Involvement and Participative Strategy Affect Performance. Strateg. Entrep. J. 2011, 5, 307–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Miller, D. The Correlates of Entrepreneurship in Three Types of Firms. Manag. Sci. 1983, 29, 770–779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lumpkin, G.T.; Dess, G.G. Clarifying the Entrepreneurial Orientation Construct and Linking it to performance. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1996, 21, 135–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zahra, S.A.; Covin, J.G. Contextual influences on the corporate entrepreneurship-performance Relationship: A longitudinal analysis. J. Bus. Ventur. 1995, 10, 43–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lumpkin, G.T.; Dess, G.G. Linking Two Dimensions of Entrepreneurial Orientation to Firm Performance: The Moderating Role of Environment and Industry Life Cycle. J. Bus. Ventur. 2001, 16, 429–451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Davenport, T.H.; Prusak, L. Working Knowledge: How Organizations Manage what they Know; Harvard Business School Press: Boston, MA, USA, 1998. [Google Scholar]
- Leonidou, E.; Christofi, M.; Vrontis, D.; Thrasson, A. An integrative Framework of Stakeholder Engagement for Innovation Management and Entrepreneurship Development. J. Bus. Res. 2018, in press. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xiaohua, Q.; Yongping, G. Research on the Integration Mechanism and Development Path of “Culture-Tourism” in The Three Provinces of Guangxi, Yunnan and Guizhou. Reform Strategy 2014, 30, 73–76. [Google Scholar]
- Leppäaho, T.; Plakoyi, E.; Dimitratos, P. The Case Study in Family Business: An Analysis of Current Research Practices and Recommedations. Fam. Bus. Rev. 2015, 29, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Sharma, P.; Chrisman, J.J.; Chua, J.H. Predictors of Satisfaction with the Succession Process in Family Firms. J. Bus. Ventur. 2003, 18, 667–687. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cisneros, L.; Genin, E.; Peerally, J. Family, Business and Power: Illustrating Three Extreme Cases. J. Fam. Bus. Manag. 2012, 2, 40–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Creswell, J.W. Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approach, 3rd ed.; SAGE: Los Angeles, CA, USA; London, UK; New Delhi, India; Singapore; Washington, DC, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Salvato, C.; Chirico, F.; Sharma, P. A Farewell to the Business: Championing Exit and Continuity in Entrepreneurial Family Firms. Entrep. Reg. Dev. 2010, 22, 321–348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eddleston, K.A.; Kellermanns, F.W. Destructive and Productive Family Relationships: A Stewardship Theory Perspective. J. Bus. Ventur. 2007, 22, 545–565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cohen, D.; Crabtree, B. Qualitative Research Guidelines Project. 2006. Available online: http://www.qualres.org (accessed on 22 June 2014).
- Yin, R.K. Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 5th ed.; SAGE Publications, Inc.: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Eisenhardt, K.M.; Graebner, M.E. Theory Building from Cases: Opportunities and Challenges. Acad. Manag. J. 2007, 50, 25–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eisenhardt, K.M. Building Theories from Case Study Research. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1989, 14, 532–550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lincoln, Y.S.; Guba, E.G. Naturalistic Inquiry; Sage: Beverly Hills, CA, USA; Thousand Oaks, CA, USA; New Delhi, India; London, UK; Singapore, 1985. [Google Scholar]
- Gioia, D.A.; Price, K.N.; Hamilton, A.L.; Thomas, J.B. Forging an Identity: An Insider-outsider Study of Processes Involved in the Formation of Organizational Identity. Adm. Sci. Q. 2010, 55, 1–46. [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]
- Diaz-Diaz, N.L.; de Saa Perez, P. The Interaction Between External and Internal Knowledge Sources: An Open Innovation View. J. Knowl. Manag. 2014, 18, 430–446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Podgórska, M.; Pichlak, M. Analysis of Project Managers Leadership Competencies of Polish Project Leaders? Int. J. Manag. Prog. Bus. 2019, 12, 869–887. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chesbrough, H. The Logic of Open Innovation Managing Intellectual Property. Calif. Manag. Rev. 2003, 45, 33–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Karagouni, G. Production Technologies and Low-Technology Knowledge-Intensive Venturing. EuroMed J. Bus. 2018, 13, 75–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Minjeong, O.; Choi, S. The Competence of Project Team Members and Success Factors with Open Innovation. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2020, 6, 51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhou, A.; Yang, Q.; Dong, J.K. An Empirical Study on Coupling Coordination Between The Cultural Industry and Tourism Industry in Ethnic Minority Areas. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2020, 6, 65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hitt, M.A.; Ireland, R.D.; Hoskisson, R.E. Strategic Management: Competitiveness and Globalization, 9th ed.; Thomson South-Western: Mason, OH, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Lichtenthaler, U.; Lichtenthaler, E. A Capability-Based Framework for Open Innovation Complementing Absorptive Capacity. J. Manag. Stud. 2009, 46, 1315–1338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Data Company | History Year in Business | Business Units | History Year in Business | Business Fields | Information |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
VIC home industry | 1942–1986 | - | - | Footwear home industry and marketing |
|
WA enterprise | 1986–now |
| 1986–now 1995–now 1996–now 2007–now | Footwear industry and footwear raw material distributor Footwear industry Footwear development and marketing Footwear industry |
|
SSU enterprise | 1988–now |
| 1988–now 1985–now 2008–now 2013–now | Footwear industry and footwear raw material industry Footwear raw material industry Footwear industry Footwear industry | |
ODE enterprise | 2009–now | ODE | 2009–now | Footwear industry and footwear raw material industry |
Business Units | Shareowner and Generations | Manager of Business Units and Generations | Other Family Members Involved and Generations | Roles of Family Members Involved |
---|---|---|---|---|
WA1 | IIA (first son of the second generation) IIB * (second son of the second generation) IIC (third son of the second generation) IID (fourth son of the second generation) | II D (fourth son of the second generation) | - | - |
WA 2 | IIA, IIB *, IIC, IID | II A (first son of the second generation) | IIIB1 (first daughter of the third generation, first daughter of IIB *) | Operation manager |
WA 3 | IIA, IIB *, IIC, IID | IIIB2 (first son of the third generation, first son of IIB *) | - | - |
WA 4 | IIA, IIB *, IIC, IID | IIIB3 (family member of the third generation, second son of IIB *) | - | - |
SSU 1 | IIA, IIB *, IIC, IID | IIC (third son of the second generation) | - | - |
SSU 2 | IIA, IIB *, IIC, IID | IIC (third son of the second generation) | IIIC2 (Husband of the first daughter of IIC, the third generation) | Deputy manager |
SSU 3 | IIA, IIB *, IIC, IID | IIC (third son of the second generation) | IIIC3 (family member of the third generation, second son of IIC) | Deputy manager |
SSU 4 | IIA, IIB *, IIC, IID | IIC (third son of the second generation) | IIIC1 (family member of the third generation, first son of IIC) IIIC2 (Husband of the first daughter of IIC, the third generation) | Deputy manager Marketing manager |
ODE | IIA, IIB *, IIC, IID | IIA (first son of the second generation) | IIIA1 (husband of the first daughter of IIA, family member of the third generation) IIIA2 (second daughter of IIA, a family member of the third generation) | Deputy manager Financial manager |
Participant | Generation/Outside Professional | Age Range | Roles |
---|---|---|---|
IIA ** IIC ** IID ** IIIB2 ** | The first son of the second generation Third son of the second generation Fourth son of the second generation The first son of the third generation, first son of IIB * | ±75 ±69 ±60 ±44 |
|
IIIB3 IIIC1 IIIC3 | Second son of IIB *, a family member of the third generation The first son of IIC, a family member of the third generation Second son of IIC, a family member of the third generation | ±35 ±38 ±35 |
|
D R | Professionals outside family members Professionals outside family members | ±50 ±50 |
|
Generation I | IA♀ * + IB♂ * | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Generation II | IIA♂ (1943) Shareholder | IIB♂ * (1945–2013) Shareholder | IIC♂ (1949) Shareholder | IID (1958) Shareholder |
Generation III | IIIA1♀ (1972) IIIA2♀ (1982) | IIIB1♀ (1972) IIIB2♂ (1974) IIIB3♂ (1983) | IIIC1♂ (1980) IIIC2♀ (1982) IIIC3♂ (1983) | IIID1♀ ** IIID2♂ ** |
© 2020 by the authors. 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
Koentjoro, S.; Gunawan, S. Managing Knowledge, Dynamic Capabilities, Innovative Performance, and Creating Sustainable Competitive Advantage in Family Companies: A Case Study of a Family Company in Indonesia. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2020, 6, 90. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc6030090
Koentjoro S, Gunawan S. Managing Knowledge, Dynamic Capabilities, Innovative Performance, and Creating Sustainable Competitive Advantage in Family Companies: A Case Study of a Family Company in Indonesia. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity. 2020; 6(3):90. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc6030090
Chicago/Turabian StyleKoentjoro, Sugiarto, and Sri Gunawan. 2020. "Managing Knowledge, Dynamic Capabilities, Innovative Performance, and Creating Sustainable Competitive Advantage in Family Companies: A Case Study of a Family Company in Indonesia" Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity 6, no. 3: 90. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc6030090