Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
A R T I C L E I N F O
A B S T R A C T
Article history:
Available online 17 November 2015
Theoretically grounded research is important for the continued development and growth of the family
business eld. This article identies some recurring problems observed in theory building and testing in
family business research and how to best avoid them. The discussion highlights the importance of
understanding theories assumptions, propositions and boundaries as well as the need to contextualize
arguments, designs, analysis and interpretations.
2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords:
Theory building
Family business research
Context
Engaged scholarship
1. Introduction
Family business research has grown rapidly over the past two
decades, showing greater diversity in the topics examined,
questions asked, settings explored, and methods used. Researchers
have also shown considerable attention to grounding their
research in good theory.1 To do so, family business researchers
have imported theories from anthropology, economics, sociology,
psychology, organizational theory, organization behavior, entrepreneurship, and strategic management. Borrowing and importing
theories from other elds is a common strategy to expedite and
improve the quality of research in a young eld (Zahra & Newey,
2009). Researchers have also made some progress in improving
measures of the theories key constructs (Pearson & Lumpkin,
2011). This attention to better theory building has helped to
advance family business research and highlight its cumulative
impact.
Developing sound theory-based research is a creative but
challenging process (Weick, 1995). It is a process that requires
$
Portions of this article were presented in the doctoral consortia of the
entrepreneurship division, Academy of Management, Association of Administrative
Sciences of Canada as well as workshops at Ghent University and Twente University.
I appreciate the helpful comments of Giuseppe Criaco, Michel Erengahrd and
Patricia H. Zahra on earlier drafts.
E-mail address: zahra004@umn.edu (S.A. Zahra).
1
Several authors have examined the state of theory in family business research.
Examples include: Bird, Welsch, Astrachan, and Pistrui (2002), Dyer and Sanchez
(1998), Sharma (2004), Sharma, Salvato, and Reay (2014), and Zahra and Sharma
(2004).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jfbs.2015.10.004
1877-8585/ 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Van de Ven, A. H. (2007). Engaged scholarship: a guide for organizational and social
research. New York: Oxford University Press.
Whetten, D. A. (1989). What constitutes a theoretical contribution? Academy of
Management Review, 14, 490495.
Weick, K. (1995). What theory is not, theorizing is. Administrative Science Quarterly,
40, 385390.
Zahra, S. (2007). Contextualizing theory building in entrepreneurship research.
Journal of Business Venturing, 22(3), 443452.
Zahra, S. (2010). Harvesting family rms organizational social capital: a relational
perspective. Journal of Management Studies, 47(2), 345366 (special issue).
Zahra, S. A., & Newey, L. R. (2009). Maximizing the impact of organization science:
theory-building at the intersection of disciplines and/or elds. Journal of
Management Studies, 46(6), 10591075.
Zahra, S., & Sharma, P. (2004). Family business research: a strategic reection. Family
Business Review, 17(4), 331346.
Zahra, S., & Wright, M. (2011). Entrepreneurships next act. Academy of Management
Perspectives, 25(4), 6783.