USING FAMILY FIRM BOUNDARY MANAGEMENT THEORY TO EXPLAIN THE IMPACT OF PRIVACY ISSUES ON FAMILY FIRM RESEARCH

INTRODUCTION While the family firm is the most prevailing type of organization in the United States and throughout the world (Shanker & Astrachan; Dyer, 2003), the number of studies conducted on family firms is relatively few. This is especially true for topics relating to internal operations such as business priorities versus family priorities, strategic and financial decision-making processes, and human resource issues that may lead to questions about perceived promises, trust, and fairness. The issue of privacy among family firms has been addressed in the literature, with the overall conclusion being that, in the minds of family business members, disclosing firm-specific information is virtually indistinguishable from disclosing family-specific information (Hoy & Vesper, 1994). The contribution of this paper is the introduction of Family Firm Boundary Management Theory (FFBM) to help researchers understand why family firms have such a noted penchant for privacy. FFBM is based on Communication Boundary Management Theory (CBM), which is from the family psychology literature. This theory offers an explanation of how communication barriers are established to regulate ownership of private information (Petronio, 1991; 2000). There are four interrelated dimensions of FFBM, which include ownership, control, permeability, and levels. By understanding these dimensions and other aspects of FFBM, researchers can better plan their approach to collect information, select accessible topics for research, and deepen their understanding of family firms' preference for privacy. Family firms are as much, if not more, about the family as they are about the business. Looking to the family psychology literature is an important step in family firm research to enhance our knowledge base and deepen our understanding of how family firms operate and interact with outside entities. According to Dyer (2003), the family firm is the most dominant organizational form in the world, and it is estimated that 90 percent of all businesses in the United States are family businesses (Shanker & Astrachan, 1996). However, in relation to these numbers, very few studies have been done regarding family firms (Dyer 2003). According to Litz (1997), this is due to informational constraints that limit both the quality and quantity of family firm research. This forces one to consider why these informational constraints are so prevalent. We address the issue in this paper by introducing Communication Boundary Management Theory (CBM), from the family psychology literature, and offer a new theoretical perspective to the family firm literature called Family Firm Boundary Management Theory (FFBM). A literature review is presented that outlines difficulty in collecting data for family firm research. A case in point is offered as a concrete example of the difficulties that exist. Next, Communication Boundary Management Theory is introduced from the family psychology literature, which is the basis for our theory on Family Firm Boundary Management. The four dimensions and two components of FFBM are presented, followed by conclusions. LITERATURE REVIEW There is an interesting story in the family firm literature that focuses on a unique exercise conducted by a management consultant. The consultant asks the attendees to describe their businesses as if they were automobiles. One business owner compared his business to a sports car, because of its innovative marketing strategies. A second attendee said that her firm is analogous to a station wagon because of its conservative history and conventional product lines. The third business owner compared his firm to an armored car. When asked to explain the parallel, he responded that unlike the other two, his is a family business: no one gets in; no one gets out (Litz, 1997). The purpose of this paper is to offer one plausible explanation why it is so difficult for academic researchers to "get in" and collect the data needed to further our understanding of family firms. …