This commentary extends Hillier, Martínez, Patel, Pindado, and Requejo (2018) by placing their insights within a wider context of the debate between the agency theory and stewardship theory. To reconcile the conflicts between the two theories, we propose a family-value perspective to incorporate the intrinsic heterogeneity of family firms. We highlight how different family values may lead to different strategic behavior and how various theoretical perspectives may be best used to describe the behavior of family firms with certain specific values.
AldrichH. E.CliffJ. E. (2003) The pervasive effects of family on entrepreneurship: Toward a family embeddedness perspective. Journal of Business Venturing18(5): 573–596.
2.
AstrachanJ. H.KleinS. B.SmyrniosK. X. (2002) The F-PEC scale of family influence: A proposal for solving the family business definition problem1. Family Business Review15(1): 45–58.
3.
BanalievaE. R.EddlestonK. A. (2011) Home-region focus and performance of family firms: The role of family vs non-family leaders. Journal of International Business Studies42(8): 1060–1072.
4.
BertrandM.SchoarA. (2006) The role of family in family firms. Journal of Economic Perspectives20(2): 73–96.
5.
BoubakriN.GuedhamiO.MishraD. (2010) Family control and the implied cost of equity: Evidence before and after the Asian financial crisis. Journal of International Business Studies41(3): 451–474.
6.
ChrismanJ. J.ChuaJ. H.KellermannsF. W.ChangE. P. (2007) Are family managers agents or stewards? An exploratory study in privately held family firms. Journal of Business Research60(10): 1030–1038.
7.
ChuaJ. H.ChrismanJ. J.KellermannsF.WuZ. (2011) Family involvement and new venture debt financing. Journal of Business Venturing26(4): 472–488.
8.
ChuaJ. H.ChrismanJ. J.SteierL. P.RauS. B. (2012) Sources of heterogeneity in family firms: An introduction. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice36(6): 1103–1113.
9.
ChuiA. C. W.LloydA. E.KwokC. C. Y. (2002) The determination of capital structure: Is national culture a missing piece to the puzzle?Journal of International Business Studies33(1): 99–127.
10.
DavisJ. H.SchoormanF. D.DonaldsonL. (1997) Toward a stewardship theory of management. Academy of Management Review22(1): 20–47.
11.
GarcíaE.LópezJ. (2001) A taxonomy of founders based on values: The root of family business heterogeneity. Family Business Review14(3): 209–230.
12.
Gómez-MejíaL. R.CruzC.BerroneP.De CastroJ. (2011) The bind that ties: Socioemotional wealth preservation in family firms. Academy of Management Annals5(1): 653–707.
13.
Hillier, D., Martínez, B., Patel, P. C., Pindado, J., & Requejo, I. (2018). Pound of flesh? Debt contract strictness and family firms. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 42(2), 259–282.
14.
HofstedeG. (1980) Motivation, leadership, and organization: Do American theories apply abroad?Organizational Dynamics9(1): 42–63.
15.
JensenM. C.MecklingW. H. (1976) Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics3(4): 305–360.
16.
Le Breton-MillerI.MillerD.LesterR. H. (2011) Stewardship or agency? A social embeddedness reconciliation of conduct and performance in public family businesses. Organization Science22(3): 704–721.
17.
LyonsS. T.DuxburyL.HigginsC. (2007) An empirical assessment of generational differences in basic human values. Psychological Reports101(2): 339–352.
18.
MatthewsC. H.VasudevanD. P.BartonS. L.ApanaR. (1994) Capital structure decision making in privately held firms: Beyond the finance paradigm. Family Business Review7(4): 349–367.
19.
MillerD.Le Breton-MillerI.ScholnickB. (2008) Stewardship vs. stagnation: An empirical comparison of small family and non-family businesses. Journal of Management Studies45(1): 51–78.
20.
PulfreyC.ButeraF. (2013) Why neoliberal values of self-enhancement lead to cheating in higher education: A motivational account. Psychological Science24(11): 2153–2162.
21.
SchwartzS. H. (1992) Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. In: ZannaM. (ed.) Advances in experimental social psychologyVol. 25, New York, NY: Academic Press, pp. 1–65.
22.
SchwartzS. H.CieciuchJ.VecchioneM.DavidovE.FischerR.BeierleinC.KontyM. (2012) Refining the theory of basic individual values. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology103(4): 663–688.
23.
SchwartzS. H.RubelT. (2005) Sex differences in value priorities: Cross-cultural and multimethod studies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology89(6): 1010–1028.
24.
SchulzeW. S.LubatkinM. H.DinoR. N.BuchholtzA. K. (2001) Agency relationships in family firms: Theory and evidence. Organization Science12(2): 99–116.
25.
VerbekeA.KanoL. (2012) The transaction cost economics theory of the family firm: Family-based human asset specificity and the bifurcation bias. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice36(6): 1183–1205.
