Special Issue on the Navigation of the Paradoxical Landscape of the Family Business
该专刊探讨家族企业如何应对家庭与商业系统交织产生的独特悖论，如传统与变革、流动性增长等，对研究家族企业管理的学者有参考价值。
Navigation of the Paradoxical Landscape of the Family BusinessWithin the family business domain, there is increasing acknowledgment that family businesses are organizations driven by paradoxes (Casprini, 2017;Garcia et al., 2019;Konopaski et al., 2015); with the negotiating of complex paradoxes or "two desirable (and seemingly opposing) options" (Shuman et al., 2010: 1), an imperative to successfully managing a family business.The paradoxical tensions in family businesses originate from the juxtaposition of competing yet complementary systems of family and business (Basco & Perez-Rodriguez, 2009).Family business entities represent a unique context, whereby familial ties (Zellweger et al., 2010), family goals and values (Kotlar and De Massis, 2013), differing family business governance approaches (Neubaum et al. 2017), family dynamics influencing the business succession (Helin and Jabri, 2016; Hytti et al., 2016;Lam, 2011) and non-rational decision making (Davis & Tagiuri, 1989) intersect.Moores and Barrett (2002: 32) argue "having to deal with an additional layer of complexity created by the family means that the tasks and priorities involved in learning to manage a family business lead to specific and enduring paradoxes".As such, family businesses are inherently paradoxical, and tensions, such as tradition versus change, family liquidity versus business growth, and founder control versus successor autonomy, can both inhibit and foster sustainability, performance and entrepreneurial behaviour (Ingram et al., 2016).Indeed, Chrisman et al. (2015) has noted the presence of the ability and willingness paradox in regard to family firm innovation.Furthermore, Zellweger (2013) theorized about the importance of the controlling family collective mindfulness (i.e., the ability to use paradoxical thinking in order to find synergies between the business and the family) in understanding the consequences of family involvement.In another study, it was indicated that professionalization in small medium family firms can increase risk-taking activity that fosters greater financial performance results, yet these structures may hinder the entrepreneurial efforts that lead to such risky opportunities (Naldi et al., 2007).In addition, as suggested by Gómez-Mejía et al. (2007), family firms are committed to preserving their socioemotional wealth even if their preservation efforts threaten poor performance.Marshall et al., (2006) found a number of paradoxes with reference to family firm CEOs and succession planning.There also exists learning paradoxes that are characterised by "a struggle between the comfort of the past and the uncertainty of the future" (Lewis, 2000).Unlearning is a paradox in itself when "out of such unlearning, real knowledge does develop and grow" (Brew, 1993: 88).Indeed, many strategies for change fail because family businesses are unable to manage the paradoxical tensions that exist between exploring novel ways of business and exploiting long held assurances (Gabriel Cegarra-Navarro et al., 2011).Accordingly, gaining a more nuanced understanding of how paradoxes work in family businesses, a context rich in tensions and competing forces is of paramount importance (Covin and Slevin, 1989).While all businesses must learn to cope with conflicting situations, family-owned businesses face unique paradoxes that must be managed carefully so that business success is not jeopardised (Moores and Barrett, 2002).In fact, the management and navigation of such paradoxes is critical for the long-term survival and longevity of family businesses.