, 2, 3
10237 
8014The research on innovation in family firms has become more in-depth. However, the research conclusion of family firms’ innovation is not clear. Although existing studies have shown that inheritance is an important factor affecting innovation in family firms, the conclusions of incorporating inheritance into innovation research in family firms are still conflict. The contradiction of existing research has put forward higher requirements for exploring the innovation mechanism of family firms in the context of intergenerational inheritance. This paper focuses on the different sources of CEO successors in family firms. We hold the opinion that the identity difference of CEO successors in family firms is an important contingency factor influencing the firms’ innovation decision in the context of intergenerational inheritance. This paper tries to focus on the influence of CEO successors on the innovation input in family firms based on the perspective of the lack of legitimacy due to different sources of CEO successors in the succession period, and to explore the influence of the primary evaluator of legitimacy further, that is, to explore the difference in innovation input caused by the strategic difference between second-generation CEOs and professional manager CEOs seeking legitimacy in different types of family firms.Based on the empirical tests of 526 listed family firms from 2004 to 2015, the results show that: （1） Compared with the first-generation of founder CEOs, the second-generation of family CEOs and professional manager CEOs would reduce innovation input. （2） On the one hand, the lower innovation input caused by the lack of legitimacy of second-generation CEOs has been exacerbated in the family firms controlled by multiple founders; on the other hand, the lower innovation input caused by the lack of legitimacy of professional manager CEOs has been exacerbated in the family firms controlled by the single founder. In the further analysis of the succession context, for second-generation CEOs, when first-generation CEOs still stay on as the chairmen of the board, it intensifies their negative commitment to innovation input. For professional managers, when there is no second-generation CEO in family firms, it intensifies their negative commitment to innovation input. This study deepens the research on family firms’ innovation in the context of intergenerational inheritance, which has a certain theoretical significance. Firstly, the research conclusion finds that CEO successors’ need for identity legitimacy is closely related to their innovation input decision in family firms, and second-generation CEOs and professional manager CEOs would lead to the decrease of innovation input in family firms due to the pressure of identity legitimacy during the succession period. Secondly, this paper constructs the mechanism between the legitimacy of different CEO successors and their innovation input behavior, indicating that the legitimacy pressure of second-generation CEOs comes from the family system, and professional manager CEOs are more concerned with their career legitimacy. Finally, this paper makes up for the deficiency that previous research on family firms’ innovation is limited to family homogeneity. This study is also of some practical significance, which has a strong reference value for the managers in family firms to motivate the commitment of innovation input of different CEO successors.
/ Journals / Foreign Economics & Management
Foreign Economics & Management
LiZengquan, Editor-in-Chief
ZhengChunrong, Vice Executive Editor-in-Chief
YinHuifang HeXiaogang LiuJianguo, Vice Editor-in-Chief
A Research on the Identity Difference of CEO Successors and Innovation Input in Family Firms: Based on the Perspective of Legitimacy
Foreign Economics & Management Vol. 41, Issue 03, pp. 126 - 140 (2019) DOI:10.16538/j.cnki.fem.2019.03.009
Summary
References
Summary
[1] Chen Jianlin, Feng Xinjun, Li Ruiqin. Do family firms promote or hinder innovation? Debate and integration[J]. Foreign Economics&Management, 2018, (4): 140-152.
[2] He Xiaogang, Li Xinchun, Lian Yanling. Power concentration among family agents and firm performance: An empirical study in China[J]. Journal of Management Sciences in China, 2011, (5): 86-96.
[3] Huang Haijie, Lü Changjiang, Zhu Xiaowen. Second generation involvement and corporate innovation: Evidence from China[J]. Nankai Business Review, 2018, (1): 6-16.
[4] Li Xinchun, Han Jian, Li Weiwen. Is it succession of the family business or creating other field?: The construction of the authority legitimacy of the second generation succession of the family business[J]. Management World, 2015, (6): 110-124.
[5] Liang Qiang, Zhou Li, Zou Likai. Autonomy of the second generations and diversification strategy of family firms: Moderating effect of capability endowments[J]. Foreign Economics & Management, 2016, (7): 24-40.
[6] Zhao Jing, Meng Weixuan. The impact of successor’s social capital on enterprises’ innovation around family succession[J]. Journal of Renmin University of China, 2016, (3): 91-105.
[7] Zhu Hang, Kushins Eric, Zhou Yinghui. Does social emotional wealth inhibit the innovation of Chinese family business?[J]. Management World, 2016, (3): 99-114．
[8] Zhu Jianan, Chen Ling, Wu Bingde. Hiring a family CEO or a non-family CEO? Research on the CEO successor choice based on heterogeneous goals of controlling families[J]. Foreign Economics & Management, 2016, (12): 3-18.
[9] Alexiev A S, Jansen J J, Van den Bosch F A, et al. Top management team advice seeking and exploratory innovation: The moderating role of TMT heterogeneity[J]. Journal of Management Studies,2010,47(7):1343-1364.
[10] Beck L, Janssens W, Debruyne M, et al. A study of the relationships between generation, market orientation, and innovation in family firms[J]. Family Business Review,2011,24(3):252-272.
[11] Block J H. R&D investments in family and founder firms: An agency perspective[J]. Journal of Business Venturing,2012,27(2):248-265.
[12] Blumentritt T P, Keyt A D, Astrachan J H. Creating an environment for successful nonfamily CEOs: An exploratory study of good principals[J]. Family Business Review,2007,20(4):321-335.
[13] Carney M. Corporate governance and competitive advantage in family-controlled firms[J]. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice,2005,29(3):249-265.
[14] Chrisman J J, Chua J H, Pearson A W, et al. Family involvement, family influence, and family-centered non-economic goals in small firms[J]. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice,2012,36(2):267-293.
[15] Cruz C, Nordqvist M. Entrepreneurial orientation in family firms: a generational perspective[J]. Small Business Economics,2012,38(1SI):33-49.
[16] De Massis A, Frattini F, Lichtenthaler U. Research on technological innovation in family firms: Present debates and future directions[J]. Family Business Review,2013,26(1):10-31.
[17] De Massis A, Kotlar J, Chua J H, et al. Ability and willingness as sufficiency conditions for family-oriented particularistic behavior: Implications for theory and empirical studies[J]. Journal of Small Business Management,2014,52(2):344-364.
[18] Gómez-Mejía L R, Haynes K T, Núñez-Nickel M, et al. Socioemotional wealth and business risks in family-controlled firms: Evidence from Spanish olive oil mills[J]. Administrative Science Quarterly,2007,52(1):106-137.
[19] He L. Do founders matter? A study of executive compensation, governance structure and firm performance[J]. Journal of Business Venturing,2008,23(3):257-279.
[20] Hogg M A, Terry D J, White K M. A tale of two theories: A critical comparison of identity theory with social identity theory[J]. Social Psychology Quarterly,1995:255-269.
[21] Kotlar J, De Massis A. Goal setting in family firms: Goal diversity, social interactions, and collective commitment to family-centered goals[J]. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice,2013,37(6):1263-1288.
[22] Kraiczy N D, Hack A, Kellermanns F W. What makes a family firm innovative? CEO risk-taking propensity and the organizational context of family firms[J]. Journal of Product Innovation Management,2015,32(3):334-348.
[23] Miller D, Le Breton-Miller I, Lester R H. Family and lone founder ownership and strategic behaviour: Social context, identity, and institutional logics[J]. Journal of Management Studies,2011,48(1):1-25.
[24] Miller D, Le Breton-Miller I, Minichilli A, et al. When do non-family CEOs outperform in family firms? Agency and behavioural agency perspectives[J]. Journal of Management Studies,2014,51(4):547-572.
[25] Sundaramurthy C, Kreiner G E. Governing by managing identity boundaries: The case of family businesses[J]. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice,2008,32(3):415-436.
[26] Zahra S A. Entrepreneurial Risk Taking in Family Firms[J]. Family Business Review,2005.
Cite this article
Zou Likai, Wang Bo, Liang Qiang. A Research on the Identity Difference of CEO Successors and Innovation Input in Family Firms: Based on the Perspective of Legitimacy[J]. Foreign Economics & Management, 2019, 41(3): 126-140.
Export Citations as:
For
ISSUE COVER
RELATED ARTICLES
