Gender in family firms: a literature review
Year: 2012

The study aims at conducting a thorough literature review to explore and outline how gender issues are tackled in family business research. A total of 170 family business articles were identified in the selected journals in 2000 2011. Our study demonstrates that most of the studies give no information on the gender, but implicitly focus only or primarily on men and the women are invisible in the studies. The articles were then categorized based on the identified 'research strategies' with different emphasis on gender issues. The findings demonstrate the division of roles and responsibilities in the household and the business, and related decision making processes. We argue that family business research faces methodological problems of focusing primarily on firms with male owner managers as informants and the gendered processes as well as the core of family business research, i.e. the notion of 'familiness' remain neglected. The research implications are also discussed.  Recently, there has been a growing concern about the significant gender imbalances in entrepreneurial activity. Women are less likely to start new businesses and their experiences from entrepreneurship may differ from that of men ( 2002; Minniti et al. 2005) However, most of these studies assume a gender neutral perspective (Marlow et al. 2009) and it is suggested that these differences need to be interpreted from the gender theory perspective (Lansky, 2000) as a necessary means to understand how entrepreneurial activity and experiences of entrepreneurship may vary. Despite a growing interest on gender in new venture activity, gender is largely unexplored in family firms (Sonfield and Lussier, 2009) This may be linked to the unit of analysis: the family firm is put at the heart of the research rather than the individuals. In the studies that investigate the individual, emphasis is placed on the owner manager (Hamilton, 2006) even if family business research generally acknowledges the different roles an individual may occupy in the family business (business, ownership or family) (Taguiri and Davis, 1996) There have been methodological calls within family business research to investigate the complex and interconnected relationships between the family, individual members and the business 2 (Habbershon, Williams and MacMillan, 2003) This study focuses on one particular aspect gender. There is a need for a thorough literature review to explore and outline how gender issues are tackled in family business research. By analysing gender we are able to discuss the division of roles and responsibilities in the household and the business, and related decision making process. We are also able to suggest gaps and areas for further research in the area.  The research material is conducted by analyzing all "family business" (or "family firm" articles published in major entrepreneurship journals between the years 2000 and 2011 (Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice,  This list was adopted from the Grade Four and Three Journals in the most recent ABS (Association of Business School) Academic Journal Quality Guide. The selection was supported by Chrisman et al. (2008) who evaluated and ranked management journals as outlets for family business. In the next phase the review will be extended to cover also "Family Business Review" (Grade Two) due to its specific focus in family businesses. All the family business articles identified were screened in order find out how gender issues are tackled in family business research. This process resulted in 170 articles identified of which 44 articles included at least some information on gender. In the analysis, the particular strategy towards gender and the main results of the study were recorded. This process was split between two researchers.  In the following we discuss the findings of our screening and analysis based on the 44 articles identified and focus on variety of ways how gender is tackled in the studies. Our categorisation of the studies is not exclusive and some studies are exemplary for a number of 'research strategies' discussed below. 3 Narrow view on family business Overall, it seems that in the majority of the studies, the unit of analysis is the family firm and relatively little research is conducted from the perspectives of the individuals in the business or in the family. Most studies on family firms seem to rely on quantitative surveys sent to one single decision maker (typically CEO/owner manager) It is not atypical that the informant is not even specified. Also other more general level problems can be identified: the definition of family firm varies a lot and is sometimes weak affecting research findings (Dyer 2003) For example in a study by Carlson et al. (2006) they define family firms as those where the CEO or CEO's family own more than 50% of stock. Respectively, Ensley and Pearson (2005) define family business as privately held firms with a significant proportion of the top managers as founders or substantial (over 10% stakeholders. Westhead and Cowling (1998) discovered that in the sample of 427 firms the share of family firms varied from 78.5% to only 15% depending on the definition used having considerable influence on the findings. Loose and diversified definitions danger the possibility to replicate and compare findings with prior research (Dyer 2003) Hence, the studies view the family firm through the eyes of the single person typically the family or non family CEO and the other influential persons in the family firm (in particular those without the official role) remain hidden. This single informant problem as well as the lack of information on respondents (Dyer 2003) are identified but it seems that little is done to overcome the challenges. While this can be considered to be a challenge in business research in general, it seems particularly so in case of family firms. Family firms are conceptualised as tri partite systems involving the business, ownership and family spheres and individuals that inhabit one or more of these spheres (Tagiuri and Davis 1996, also Vallejo 2011) Furthermore, there is research evidence that individuals without any visible or formal decision making role in the business do influence or are involved also in the business decisions (Bhalla et al. 2009) Regarding certain topics, such as succession, family involvement or mentoring, it is important to determine applicable family relationships father son, father daughter, mother son, mother daughter, unclenephew, and so forth (Dyer 2003) More importantly, it seems that there is a reason to expect that the family firms are researched also in ways that enable the inclusion of these different views, in 4 particular with regard to topics that by definition involve different parties and have consequences beyond the immediate concerns of the family firms. Attempts have been made to capture the notion of 'familiness' and family influence and to acknowledge the varying degrees of it (Astrachan et al. 2002) but still the contextual factors which may create unique opportunities to ascertain the 'familiness' of an organisational setting remain unexploited (Dyer 2003) Interestingly, many studies were conceptual studies or commentary pinpointing the need to further research the very core of family firms indicating gaps in the previous (empirical) research. Gender measured but not analysed In some studies the gender (sex) of the research participants is reported but not applied in the study, such as Sciascia et al. (2010) focusing on effect of family ownership on internationalisation. In the study 76% of the respondents were men. Based on the review of the literature on variables used in studying family business succession Le Breton Miller et al. (2004) found out that gender of the incumbent is measured in less than 10% of the empirical studies. Roughly the same holds for measuring the spouse/mom leadership. Niehm et al. (2008) explore the antecendents and consequences of community social responsibility (CSR) for family firms operating in small and rural markets. Business manager gender is reported but not applied. Miller et al. (2001) examine the managerial strategies employed in very small family businesses operating in small communities across the US and report the demographic profile of their respondents (73.7% men and 26.3% women) Oswald et al. (2009) examine the relationship between family control and financial performance of the firm. Gender is applied to compare the sample to a previous study. Marshall et al. (2006) investigate how age and organisational behaviour (leadership style) affect succession processes and plans. The study includes 81% men as participants. Interestingly, the study does not include gender as a control variable even if previous studies suggest differences between female and male directors in their leadership styles (Cruz et al. 2012) Similarly, Ensely and Person (2005) studied whether there are behavioural differences of the top management teams across three levels of 'familiness' of new venture firms: parental, familial, and nonfamily firms. Approximately 90% of the respondents were male, but 5 gender was not controlled nor discussed in the study. The same Inc. 500 survey setting was used in the commentary of Ensley (2006) on the linkage between CEO tenure, strategic persistence, and firm performance in family business context. Again gender was not focused. Eddleston et al. (2008) examine how participative decision making and generational ownership dispersion affect conflict. Gender is applied in the study to compare the survey sample to two other studies and it is applied as a control. However, no gender differences w