Family and Lone Founder Ownership and Strategic Behaviour: Social Context, Identity, and Institutional Logics
研究指出，家族所有者与独立创始人的不同社会背景导致其战略优先级的差异，家族所有者倾向于保守战略，而独立创始人则追求增长战略，该观点在财富1000强公司研究中得到支持。
There is controversy in the literature about the effects of ownership on strategy and performance. Some scholars have taken agency explanations as definitive, arguing that closely held firms outperform. Empirical studies, however, show conflicting findings for firms with concentrated ownership: lone founder firms outperform, family firms do not. Such conflicts may be due to the failure of agency theory to distinguish between the social contexts of these different types of owners. We argue that explanations of performance must take into account not simply ownership, but who are the owners or executives and how their social contexts may influence their strategic priorities. Family owners and CEOs, influenced by family stakeholders in the business, are argued to assume the role identities and logics of family nurturers and thus strategies of conservation. By contrast, lone founders, influenced by a wider set of market-oriented stakeholders, are argued to embrace the identities and logics of entrepreneurs and strategies of growth. Family founders and founder-executives are held to blend both orientations. These notions are supported in a study of Fortune 1000 companies.