Barrett, M &amp; Moores, K. Supplemental Appendix: Systematic literature review results for 'The What and How of Family Business Paradoxes: Literature Inspired Distillations and Directions', International Small Business Journal (2019, Epub ahead of print)
Creators: name: Barrett, Mary
name: Moores, Ken
Publisher: name: figshare
Year: 2019
Subjects: subject: 159999 Commerce, Management, Tourism and Services not elsewhere classified
subject: FOS: Economics and business
subject: FOS: Economics and business

description: OVERVIEW The document presents in tabular form the results of a literature review on the concept of paradox in family firms since publication of Moores and Barrett's book Learning family business: Paradoxes and pathways (2002). For each of 203 items, the table presents an abbreviated citation, an indication of its basic method, its geographic focus (helpful for interpreting the results), and a brief description of the item's findings about paradox. METHOD Following Tranfield et al. (2003) we first defined the topic and corresponding keywords. Articles and other items were sought where ‘family business*’, ‘family control*’, ‘family firm*’, ‘family led’ or ‘family own*’ appeared in the title, abstract, keywords, or references. These terms were combined with ‘paradox*’ or ‘contradict*’ (related constructs, often used synonymously) and ‘learn*’ appearing anywhere in the text. Adding asterisks to the search terms caught variations such as ‘family owned’ and ‘family businesses’. We sought peer-reviewed items, including articles, research notes, working papers, books, conference papers, and full papers. We also wanted to see how non-academic sources such as the business media and management blogs have treated paradox, so we added these source types. We achieved a broad search by applying this protocol to the Proquest Central database, which searches six different databases, and the Sage database which covers several journals important for family business research not covered by Proquest Central, including Family Business Review and Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice. Items in languages other than English and duplicate items were excluded. Each item’s abstract and full text were read to ascertain their topic fit. Their references were also checked and promising items read (Fink 2005). We included results from 2003 onwards, and also sought out the most recent research by checking the citations of key articles and researchers’ publication lists (Booth et al. 2011; Fink 2005). The first author evaluated all the items, sending the other author a written summary of each including a justification for including or excluding the item. We discussed any disagreements and negotiated a consensus. REFERENCES Booth A, Sutton A, and Papaioannou D (2012) Systematic approaches to a successful literature review. London: Sage. Fink A (2005) Conducting research literature reviews: From the internet to paper. 2nd ed. London: Sage. Tranfield D, Denyer D, and Smart P (2003) Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. British Journal of Management 14: 207-222. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.00375<br>Sage, the publisher of 'International Small Business Journal', has been advised that this data has been archived on Figshare.