Casey, C E (2013) Defining success in family firms using configurational fit: A quantitative study of family-owned construction firms. PhD thesis, Capella University, USA.
Abstract
This research focused on deepening the understanding of how family firm leaders define and measure success. Family firms are a significant component of the U.S. economy, in terms of revenues, employment and number of establishments. However, neither scholarly researchers nor family firm practitioners have yet to reach consensus on how best to define and measure success for family firm leaders. This research quantitatively analyzed a series of hypotheses to determine if success as measured by the multidimensional configurational fit model could overcome weaknesses previously associated with measuring success using one-dimensional metrics commonly applied to non-family firms. Based on the findings, this research partially supports the configurational fit model as a superior approach for defining and measuring success among family firm leaders. However, the present research also identified challenges associated with family firm research, which suggest several fruitful avenues for additional research.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Walker, T |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction firms; revenues; employment |
| Index terms: | revenue, construction firm, practitioner, employment |
| Subjects: | management, organization, practitioner, economic analysis |
| Topics: | Roles and Professions, Business Strategy, Human Resources |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here