Mbad 641 - Proposal Word

ifera-Research Proposal-2009.
doc 1
DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT AND
INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS
Owen G Glenn Building
12 Grafton Road
Auckland, New Zealand
Telephone 64 9 373 7599
Facsimile 64 9 373 7477
The University of Auckland
Private Bag 92019
Auckland, New Zealand
PhD Research Proposal

Entrepreneurial Succession: Intergenerational
Entrepreneurship in Family Business
Paul J. Woodfield, PhD Candidate
The University of Auckland Business School
12 Grafton Road
Auckland
New Zealand
Ph: +6421809894
Email: p.woodfield@auckland.ac.nz
ifera-Research Proposal-2009.doc 2
CONTENTS
RESEARCH AIMS AND OBJECTIVES .......................................................... 3
LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................................... 4
Background ............................................................................................................................................ 4
Rationale ................................................................................................................................................ 5
Questions ................................................................................................................................................ 8
METHOD ......................................................................................................... 9
Philosophical Context Domain ............................................................................................................ 11
Methodical Content Domain................................................................................................................ 13
Methodical Clusters (Research Strategy) ........................................................................................... 13
Data Collection Techniques ............................................................................................................... 17
Data Analysis Techniques ................................................................................................................. 20
Research Contribution ......................................................................................................................... 21
ETHICAL REQUIREMENTS ......................................................................... 22
TIMELINE ...................................................................................................... 23
REFERENCES .............................................................................................. 24
RESEARCH AIMS AND OBJECTIVES
The aim of the proposed research is to examine how family businesses ensure that
entrepreneurial activity continues across generations. The intergenerational transfer
of the
vision and purpose of a family business and the extent this translates into
entrepreneurship
in subsequent generations will be critically examined.
Figure 1 will guide the research in terms of the overlapping constructs and the nexus
culminated in the intersection of entrepreneurship, family business, and succession.
Figure 1: Family business, entrepreneurship and succession nexus (Woodfield, 2008)
In each of the primary areas of interest (entrepreneurship, family business, and
succession), there is relatively extensive literature. The overlaps, however, are
disproportionate. The entrepreneurship/family business overlap (4) and the family
business/succession overlap (5) have been gaining ground in the literature, but the
Entrepreneurship
(1)
Family Business
(2)
Succession
(3)
E/FB
overlap
(4)
FB/S
overlap
(5)
E/FB/S
nexus
(7)
E/S overlap
(6)
entrepreneurship/succession overlap (6) is not spoken for to any large extent, and
the
entrepreneurship/family business/succession nexus (7) is representative of
significant
literature in the primary areas of interest, but the combination is virgin. The literature
review
will provide more background to these constructs and overlaps.
LITERATURE REVIEW
The review will be in three parts. First, a brief background of family business
research,
second, some rationale to the gaps being investigated, third, questions that will be
explored.
Background
The accepted influences of entrepreneurial businesses involve the initiative of an
individual(s) or a family that have a common goal and usually possess similar
values. In
the case of a family business the literature indicates that values are inherently similar
and
can be less of a stumbling block than building a team out of individuals with different
ideals.
However, the influence of the founder or pioneer may determine how much they will
allow
‘outsiders’ to be involved in the business (Kets de Vries, 1993), while Westhead and
Cowling (1998) state that family businesses can become retarded if the family’s
management is reluctant to raise external funds because it fears it will result in a loss
of
family control.
Although there are many positives in having a family business, there is evidence of
threats
to the model. Lansberg (1999) identifies a common theme to be dreams not being
congruent between spouses, siblings and other family members. This can lead to
intense
feelings that can bubble to the surface and present as resentment, bickering and
deep
regrets. Ownership statistics of family businesses from generation to generation also
identifies threats. The following table gives examples of reports that suggest there is
a
decline in family involvement from generation to generation. This poor scorecard for
family
businesses is a concern, and in essence disappointing given that the main threat to
the
business may be the family members.
Table 1: Family involvement
Source Finding
Smyrnios & Dana (2007) 70% of businesses surveyed are family businesses
with the larger proportion being first generation
(57%), subsequently halving in the second
generation (30%) and halving again to the third
generation (13%).
Ward, 1987, as cited in
Astrachan & Shanker (2003,
p.216)
Approximately one-third of post-start-up family
businesses survive and reach the second
generation of ownership; 12% will still be viable into
the third generation, with 3% of all family
businesses operating at the fourth-generation level
and beyond
Kets de Vries (1993) About 3 out of 10 family businesses make it past the
first generation and only 1 in 10 make it through the
third generation.
Rationale
The research will explore the body of emerging family research and extrapolate
findings in
succession research. Several articles have identified issues that arise when a
business is
transferred from a family business founder to the next generation. Brockhaus (1994)
clarified the need for further research into succession issues, particularly
entrepreneurial
succession, and the strategic planning and management of the process.
Entrepreneurial
succession has been interpreted as the continuation of innovation and
entrepreneurial
behaviour from one generation to the next (Woodfield, 2007b). This can be
manifested in a
founder translating their vision through the succession process to the next
generation, with
respect to the successors own vision for the future of the business. Brockhaus was
echoed
by Hoy & Verser (1994, p.19) who further emphasised the need for further research
into the
transfer of the “founder’s vision to other family members.” These insights were reflected
upon by Fletcher (2004, p.36) who observed that the “relationship, intercept or overlap
of
entrepreneurial and family domains in the context of small and/or family businesses is an
important, yet underdeveloped, area of research”.
Davis (1968) can be credited as being the first to bring into light “entrepreneurial
succession.” Davis takes the entrepreneur as an important person who not only has
an
ability to take risks and innovate, but sees that the newly formed organization is
operating
successfully where the management function can be “transmitted” to others. It is no
wonder
Davis honed in on family businesses to study the problem of entrepreneurial
succession as
he viewed the extended family as “the most basic and stable unit of social organization
in
traditional society.” It is this combination of family business, entrepreneurship and
succession that brings us to the nexus of this study
The intersection between entrepreneurship and family business becomes interesting
when
viewed in the context of a succession process. One of the many challenges of any
business
is recreating its competitive advantage to overcome retardation or demise. One of
the key
concerns for family businesses is to retain the entrepreneurial spirit across
generations.
Entrepreneurship and vision become synonymous based on the creative and
imaginative
aspects of each. According to Schwass (2005), the grooming of next generation
leaders
needs to be adopted as both a mindset and an objective that is implemented over
time. The
rationale is that families grow over time increasing the number of
stakeholders/owners and
changing market conditions require continual adaptation and renewal. The business
vision
needs to be developed and implemented and potentially altogether changed by
successive
generations to provide growth and give a sense of ownership to the business
(Schwass,
2005).
“The next generation leaders need to be seen and recognized as
entrepreneurs, in their own right, and as a really powerful engine for
business growth in the family business.” (Schwass, 2005, p.30)
Schwass (2005) broke down the family business into three archetypes. First, the
“ephemeral family business” is a single-generation business of a business that fails
early in
the second generation. An example would be a business that is centred on the
entrepreneur and lacks a transition from an “individualistic” business to a
“collective” family
business - in other words, a business that lacks sustainable, value-based vision.
Second,
there is the “preserving family business” which lasts several generations but suffers
from
retarded, or indeed no growth. There are many examples of this phenomenon in
farms and
vineyards. Third, and most relevant to this research, is the “entrepreneurial family
business”. Unlike the aforementioned family businesses, the entrepreneurial family
business has more complexity due to an underlying vision that family members
benefit from
keeping the business together. Schwass describes the entrepreneurial family
business
archetype as “[an] answer to those critics who see no future for family businesses.”
Entrepreneurship literature tends to focus on business start-up and neglects the
proposition
that the entrepreneur inevitably faces retirement and needs to transfer the business
to a
successor. There is a need in the literature for an understanding of the complex and
dynamic nature of an active “entrepreneurial family business succession” (Woodfield,
2007a). Equally there is a need to understand the changes in the founder, the family
and
the business itself over time (Handler, 1994). In summary, family businesses are
unique, at
times idiosyncratic, and possess unique succession processes. While there is a body
of
literature on succession issues, as outlined earlier, there is a lack of integration of
family
business and entrepreneurial endeavour in the research literature. From Davis’
studies we
learn that family businesses have a “positive impetus to entrepreneurial activity.” Davis
does point out, however, that there can be a problem when “social function” takes
over from
“economic profit,” or, putting it differently “enterprise stability” and “perpetuity” which
can
lead to conflict with “new economic goals of sustained investment and expansion.” Family
business research will be strengthened by further analysis and discussion.
Questions
The proposed research will contribute at both the theoretical and empirical levels to
the
enhanced understanding of the linkages between family businesses and the
entrepreneurial
activity across generations. The main reason for choosing aspects of family
businesses to
observe is that a majority of independent businesses are family owned (Westhead &
Cowling, 1998). The questions in Table 2 have been raised as a result of notable
gaps in
the literature relating to family business.
Table 2: Research questions versus form of questioning
Question Form of questioning
Are business founders finding a suitable
successor(s) from within their family?
If yes, how and why?
If no, how so and why?
Have alternative exit strategies taken precedence
over maintaining a family legacy?
How? Why?
Have family members neglected to capture the
founder’s vision?
Why?
Is the founders’ vision and purpose important to next
generation successors?
If no, why?
How do family businesses ensure entrepreneurial How?
activity continues across generations?
How does entrepreneurship succeed from one
generation to the next?
How?
Do the second and third generations have more
entrepreneurial vision than the founding generation?
If no, why?
Are there potential threats to the current leaders if
incumbent generations are more entrepreneurial?
If no, why?
How can we learn from the positive experiences of
existing family businesses that have gone through
the succession process?
How?
These questions all possess a lean toward a family business succession inquiry.
Apart
from the final question, the focus of the questions is on vision, purpose and
entrepreneurship and the importance of each. The final question emphasises the
approach
one may take in learning about the succession process. A review of the literature
emphasises problems, conflict and issues in family businesses, rarely reviewing the
appreciative and positive aspects of family business.
METHOD
The research process, will be framed using the canonical development approach
presented
by Hindle (2004). This approach is compared with the research process presented
by
Denzin and Lincoln (2005a), which is well known in qualitative research and provides
a
good foundation to measure the sustainability of developmental canonical research
approaches.
First of all, Figure 2 illustrates Hindles’ framework for selecting qualitative methods
specifically in the entrepreneurship field. In a less diagrammatic way, Denzin and
Lincoln
(2005a) use ‘phases’ to define the process of qualitative research. This contrasts
with
Hindle’s approach whose framework is broken down into ‘domains’. Hindles’
‘domains’
(research question, philosophical context, and methodical content domains) provide
a
framework for discussing the chosen area of research, the relevance of qualitative
research, and the chosen research methodology.
Figure 2: A canonical development framework for choosing qualitative research
methods (Source: Hindle, 2004)
Table 3 compares the two processes (or frameworks) using Denzin and Lincoln as
the
control process. In Figure 2 the ‘research question domain’ is central to the
framework – or
as Hindle (2004, p.590) states “has centrality and primacy and is the heart of the matter”.
When compared, Hindle’s model fits with the Denzin and Lincoln model only in that
the
‘research question domain’ is identified in the first and fifth phases. This is due to the
relationship the research question has with ‘established research’ and ‘new
perspectives’.
Table 3: Denzin and Lincolns phases versus Hindle’s domains
Phase Denzin and Lincoln Hindle
1 The researcher as a
multicultural subject
The research question
domain (the established
research canon)
2 Theoretical paradigms and
perspectives
The philosophical
context domain
3 Research strategies The methodical content
domain (methodical
clusters)
4 Methods of collection and
analysis
The methodical content
domain (data collection,
data analysis techniques)
5 The art, practices, and
politics of interpretation
and evaluation
The research question
domain (research new
perspectives)
Philosophical Context Domain
Philosophically the research will be interpretivist. A qualitative approach is well suited
to
family business and entrepreneurship research at a paradigmatic and
methodological level.
Hindle (2004) suggests that there has been an explosion of qualitative research in
the
social sciences but “demonstrably underrepresented” in entrepreneurship research. This
sentiment can also be related to family business research. Hindle’s approach is an
answer
to the urgent need for a greater use of qualitative methods in entrepreneurship
research.
The lack of qualitative methods in entrepreneurship research is demonstrated by a
review
carried out by Low and MacMillan (1988), where they stated that “there has been
disappointingly slow progress in research that addresses issues of causality, perhaps
reflecting the elusiveness of the entrepreneurial phenomenon”. Low and MacMillan
suggested that the “model research and future challenges” of entrepreneurship research
would be methodology which is “theory driven, a priori hypotheses, multiple methods and
explanatory”. Conversely they suggested that methodology in past research has been
“case
studies, cross sectional surveys, single method, descriptive”.
Qualitative research emphasises interpretive perspectives where the research is
described
as being bricoleur, that is, learning how to borrow from different disciplines. Other
analogies
given to the qualitative researcher are that they are a ‘maker of quilts’, a ‘filmmaker
or
person assembles images into ‘montages’ (Denzin & Lincoln, 2005b). In contrast,
quantitative research holds the positivist worldview of facts, figures and
measurements and
is objective rather than subjective in approach. It is fair to add that some objectivity
may be
presumed in qualitative research, although there is a propensity for the researcher to
be
more involved with the subject, providing a lack of objectivity.
Entrepreneurial succession is a dynamic process and requires an interpretive inquiry
to
reveal the depth in such a process. As outlined in Figure 1, there are overlapping
intersections to be explored that borrow from other disciplines including
entrepreneurship/family business, family business/succession, and
entrepreneurship/succession. A major part of the inquiry is the manner in which the
research will be conducted. As mentioned earlier, the literature and tradition
suggests
problems, conflicts and issues in family businesses being researched as opposed to
inquiries into what is going well. This has led to the chosen mode of inquiry being an
“appreciative inquiry”. Appreciative Inquiry (AI) is a forward-thinking process for the
evaluation of organisations. The assumption is made that every organisation has
strengths
and areas that work well, and that positive change can be created in an organisation
through this form of inquiry (Cooperrider, Whitney, & Stavros, 2003). In the
“methodical
content domain” the strategies to be used in the inquiry will be discussed.
Methodical Content Domain
Methodical Clusters (Research Strategy)
The choice of research strategy has been centered on the form of the research
question. At
this point, the working title “Entrepreneurial Succession: Intergenerational
Entrepreneurship
in Family Business” is not in the form of a question. The questions outlined earlier do,
however, recognize what is being investigated and provide enough information to
identify
an applicable strategy. These questions beg answers to the ‘how, why’ form of
questioning.
Yin (2003) provides a table of relevant situations for the various research strategies
available. There are three prominent strategies that answer ‘how and why’ questions.
They
are experiment, history and case study (Table 4).
Table 4: Relevant situations for different research strategies (Source: Yin, 2003, p.5)
However, only two of the strategies are options for qualitative research and require
no
control of behavioural events - history and case study. The other important factor is
that
history and case study have differing foci when it comes to contemporary events. It is
logical that history does not concentrate on contemporary events. Case studies as a
research strategy can be in part reflective of historic events while predominantly
concentrating on contemporary events. Merriam (1998) suggests that the elements
of
historical research and case study often merge. Yin (1994, p.8) suggests that “each
case
study relies on many of the same techniques as history, but it adds two sources of evidence
not usually included in the historians repertoire: direct observation and systematic
interviewing”. In summary, the chosen strategies for researching “Entrepreneurial
Succession: Intergenerational Entrepreneurship in Family Business” are both the case
study approach and historical approach.
Case Study
Eisenhardt (1989, p.534) defined case study “as a research strategy that focuses on the
dynamics present within a single setting”. According to Eisenhardt there are three ways
case studies could be used to accomplish the researcher’s aims - case studies
provide
description whilst testing and/or generating theory. The proposed research using
case
studies will provide description and potentially generate specific theory. Objectivity,
however, may be reduced with the researcher having a background in family
business and
entrepreneurship research and experience. This reflexivity will be clearly outlined to
provide
an understanding of the researchers’ personal background, values and beliefs that
may
influence the research conclusions. Any attempt to build a theory from a clean slate
would
be tainted by this knowledge and bias. Testing theory is another option, however, it
would
be difficult to test a theory with the constructs being used. This is mainly because the
research that brings family business and entrepreneurship together is relatively
immature
and lacking. When this is considered with succession and the intergenerational
transfer of a
business, there is need for further description of this scenario rather than applying a
theory
which would demonstrate putting a square peg in a round hole.
There are contrasting views regarding the approach for case study research. There
is
argument about whether multiple or single case studies are appropriate for creating
good
theory. On one side, Eisenhardt (1989) took the stance that “while there is no ideal
number
of cases, a number between 4 and 10 usually works well”. On the other hand, this is
challenged with a critique by Dyer and Wilkins (1991) who had a view that single in-
depth
case studies can have more validity than multiple case studies. The essential
argument is
that Eisenhardt’s method focuses on “surface data rather than deeper social dynamics,”
(Dyer & Wilkins, 1991, p.615). The argument carried on with an answer by
Eisenhardt
(1991) who conceded some of Dyer and Wilkin’s critique but equally took resolve in
her
original stance that multiple case studies provided a good theoretical base for
research.
In addition to the ‘number of cases’ debate, there needs to be a determination of
whether
the phenomenon being studied is sufficiently bounded. Merriam (1998) suggests that
boundedness can be assessed by establishing how finite the data collection would
be.
Merriam goes on to add that there would need to be a limit to the number of people
involved, whether through observation, interview or focus groups. The limitation or
boundedness of the proposed research would be confined to the chosen family
business.
Another consideration is the industry in which the research will be situated. Family
businesses are prevalent in most industries, especially those in the horticultural
(including
viticulture) and agricultural industries. The current research will concentrate on the
wine
industry because of its diversity and its natural cross over into so many industries
(manufacturing, fabrication, service, distribution).
In summary, there are some issues surrounding case study research and emphasise
the
importance of a good research design to validate the data, whether for building
theory,
testing theory or providing description. For research into “Entrepreneurial Succession:
Intergenerational Entrepreneurship in Family Business”, three case sites will be chosen
in
the wine industry. The rationale being that good depth can be accomplished with a
smaller
concentration of cases without relying on one case to provide all of the insights (see
Research Design).
Historical
In support of the case study strategy, it has been resolved that history plays an
important
role in supporting the contemporary focus that case studies represent. It is
necessary to
explore the history of the family and the previous relationships and intergenerational
transfers (if any), to crystallize what issues, dilemmas or crisis occurred, and make
sense of
these.
History was defined by Collingwood (1976) to be an attempt to reconstruct rationality
through a narrative based on identified primary documentary sources. Hindle (2004)
recognized historical research as providing good illumination and understanding of
phenomena within the field of entrepreneurship. Historical research was observed
with
respect to both the psychological complexities and the circumstantial complexities of
the
range of time-construed environments (Hindle, 2004). When this is applied to the
questions
presented, the psychological complexities will be the founder’s vision and
entrepreneurial
fervour; alongside the circumstantial complexities as a result of needing to find an
appropriate successor(s); in a time-construed environment such as a generation.
The proposed study will consist of three site case studies from which the researcher
gathers qualitative data for interpretation and analysis. The research issues will
emerge
from the literature and will be interpreted through a sensemaking focus of inquiry
(elaborated on under ‘Data Collection Techniques’) during observation, interviews
and
focus groups. There will be continual interaction between the literature and field
work.
Data Collection Techniques
Case study data can come from a variety of sources. Stake (1995) identified six
sources
from which qualitative research data are collected for case studies. First, the nature
of the
case, particularly its activity and functioning, second, its historical background, third,
its
physical setting, fourth, other contexts, such as economic, political, legal, and
aesthetic;
fifth, other cases through which the case is recognized; and sixth, those informants
through
whom the case can be known. In the present study the methods of extracting data
from
these sources will comprise of in-depth interviews, focus groups and observation.
Because
the social unit being studied is a family business, it is considered that there is
sufficient
evidence to assume the study will be sufficiently bounded, as outlined earlier.
An analogy that best encapsulates the richness of qualitative research data
collection is the
term crystallization. Richardson (1998, p.358) explained that the crystal “combines
symmetry and substance with the infinite variety of shapes, substances, transmutations,
multidimensionalities, and angles of approach. Crystals grow, change, alter, but are not
amorphous” (lacking definite form). With recognition of this perspective “sensemaking”
will
be employed as a perspective or focus of inquiry, as data collection proceeds. Weick
(1995a) described sensemaking as a concept as opposed to a theory and identified
the
central questions of a person interested in sensemaking as being “how they [people]
construct what they [people] construct, why, and with what effects”. Sensemaking, is
“making something sensible” (Weick, 1995a, p.16). Table 5 presents some of the
characteristics that will assist with the focus of inquiry.
Table 5: Characteristics of ambiguous, Changing Situations (Source: An abbreviated
version of McCaskey (1982). The Executive Challenge: Managing change and
ambiguity. As cited in Weick (1995a, p.93))
Characteristic Description and Comments Current research
Multiple, conflicting
interpretations
For those data that do exist, players
develop multiple, and sometimes
conflicting interpretations. The facts
and their significance can be read
several different ways.
Conflicting
interpretations
between founder,
next generation, and
employees.
Different value
orientations,
political/emotional
clashes
Without objective criteria, players rely
more on personal and/or professional
values to make sense of the situation.
The clash of different values often
politically and emotionally changes the
situation.
Differing values
between founder
and successive
generations.
Roles are vague,
responsibilities are
unclear
Players do not have a clearly defined
set of activities they are expected to
perform. On important issues, the
locus of decision making and other
responsibilities is vague or in dispute.
Family and business
roles cross over and
can be a source of
conflict.
Participation in
decision-making
fluid
Who the key decision makers and
influence holders are changes as
players enter and leave the decision
arena.
During the
succession process
there will be a shift
in influence.
Interviews
Interviews are an important source of case study information. Yin (2003) identifies
two jobs
that need to be carried out in the interview process. First, there is a need to follow a
line of
inquiry – in this case an “appreciative inquiry”, second, ask the actual questions in an
unbiased manner serving the needs of the line of inquiry. The questions in the
interviews
will be open-ended and encourage unsolicited discussion. The strengths of data
collection
through interviews is that it focuses directly on the case study topic and is insightful,
however, the downside is that, unless the questions are well constructed, there could
be
bias, or inaccuracies due to poor recall, or simply the interviewee gives the
interviewer what
he/she wants to hear (Cohen, Manion, & Morrison, 2001, p.271; Yin, 2003, p.86).
Historical
data will also be gathered through the interview process, particularly for finding out
the
founder(s) and business(es) history. The interviews are carried out with key people
in the
business such as the founder or potential successors. The interviews will make the
main
contribution to the study.
Focus groups
Focus groups are an efficient way of gathering information in a short amount of time
because of their synergistic nature and the fact that they capitalize on group
dynamics
(Kamberelis & Dimitriadis, 2005). The questions proposed in a focus group are
important in
acquiring feedback about the business being studied and involve those in lower
positions in
the organisation. The focus groups will provide an objective non-family view of the
business
and will be used to correlate data provided through the interviews.
Observation
Sensemaking, (Weick, 1995b) provides distinctive interpretation, allowing
examination and
interpretation beyond empirical data, whilst identifying underlying structures and
mechanisms. Field notes will be important to capture the essence of what is being
observed. This means writing down whatever impressions occur, which is more
reactive, as
opposed to sifting through what may seem to be important. It can be difficult to know
whether what is being observed is useful or not in the future (Eisenhardt, 1989). The
strengths of data collection through observation is that it covers events in real time
which
captures the context of an event, however, the downside is that observation is time
consuming and events may proceed differently because it is being observed (Yin,
2003,
p.86). There will be less emphasis on observation as a strategy, however, it will play
a role
in the study.
Documentation and archival evidence
Documentation can span a long span of time and is useful for obtaining historical
data that
may not be otherwise accessible through observation or interviews. One weakness
of
documentation and archival evidence is that there tends to be a bias towards that of
the
author and access can sometimes be a problem due to privacy reasons. However,
documentation such as annual reports will provide secondary data on the growth of
the
business and its fiscal standing. Archival evidence such as history books and
newspaper
articles can provide a significant part of the study storyline from the perspective on
an
“outsider”.
Data Analysis Techniques
Qualitative data analysis follows three steps once the data is gathered. There is data
reduction (selecting, focusing, simplifying, abstracting, transforming) data display
(organized, compressed), and conclusion drawing/verification (noting irregularities,
patterns, explanations, possible configurations, propositions) (Miles & Huberman,
1994).
Hindle (2004, p.594) identifies data analysis techniques as “methods for analyzing data
irrespective of either the methodical cluster within which the technique is applied or the
methods used to collect the data”. With this in mind, data will follow a process of
transcription, coding, analysis and presentation of results.
The process will include collecting data (observation, interviews, etc.) which will be
coded
(reduced) and then presented as an integrative diagram (organized), drawing out
themes
and concepts (patterns). The relationship between the themes will be identified and
collated
into a thematic conceptual matrix (Miles & Huberman, 1994, p.131-132). Each data
collection method can benefit from content analysis, and either manual or computer
assisted codification (for example NVivo).
Research Contribution
The foreseeable contributions of this research are:
Academic
The overlap of the constructs is demonstrated as an indicitive estimate of how
established
the overlaps are in the literature (Table 6).
Table 6: Construct establishment in literature
Entrepreneurship
Family
business
Succession
Entrepreneurship (E)
Family business (F) 3
Succession (S) 2 4
Wine industry (W) 2 3 3
1 = Less established in literature
5 = More established in literature
(Combination EFSW = 1)
It is clear that there is a contribution to be made when researching entrepreneurship
with
family business and succession. The output of this research will be targeting the
Family
Business Review; Entrepreneurship, Theory and Practice; Journal of Business
Venturing;
Journal of Small Business Management; Academy of Management Journal. There
are
some industry related journals such as the International Journal of Wine Business
Research that will also be targeted.
Practical
The practical contributions include:
• Providing a framework for sustainable family business
• Further research into the area of family businesses and the entrepreneurship and
succession overlaps
• Recommendations into succession and estate planning
• Understanding the dynamics of an entrepreneurial family business
ETHICAL REQUIREMENTS
Interviews are insightful for the data collection process. However, there is a
downside when
it comes to researcher bias and inaccuracies due to poor recall. Interviews and focus
groups have a similar process of consent, although there is a different dynamic when
the
process is facilitated. The consent will be formalized through a written agreement
identifying
the boundaries and extent of the permission to interview people. I would also get
consent
for audio and/or video recording of participants.
The research into family businesses will be carried out based on four guidelines
(Christians,
2005). First, informed consent from subjects who must voluntarily agree to participate
based on full and open information; second, a basic moral principle is that deception
and
misrepresentation are no longer credible means to extract information from
participants;
third, privacy and confidentiality needs to be respected, however, privacy protection
can be
meaningless if “there is no consensus or unanimity on what is public and private”, (Punch,
1994, p.94 as cited in Christians, 2005); fourth, there needs to be an assurance that
data is
accurate without fabrications, fraudulent materials and omissions. As it stands, these
four
guidelines are just as applicable to observation techniques and the collection of data
via
documentation and archival evidence. For example, on site observation tends to be
more
interpretive with no script, and relies on data captured by way of field notes and
regular
diary notes. This is where accuracy can be an issue especially as real time events
are not
noted immediately. An example for documentation and archival evidence would be
the
need to adhere to copyright and issues to do with ‘what is public and what is private’.
The
minutiae of ethical requirements including consent forms, participant information
sheets,
and schedule of questions will be addressed in the ethics proposal.
TIMELINE
Activity Words Duration (Months)
Full proposal 7000 3 Months
Literature review 20,000 6 months
Methodology 15,000 6 months
Data gathering 12 months (overlapping
with methodology)
Data analysis 20,000 8 months
Conclusion and
implications
15,000 4 months
Introduction 5,000 2 months
Amendments and
revisions
2 months
Total (excl. proposal) 75,000 (approx. 190 pages) 36 months (3 years)
REFERENCES
Astrachan, J. H., & Shanker, M. C. (2003). Family businesses' contribution to the
U.S.
economy: A closer look. Family Business Review, 16(3), 211.
Brockhaus, R. H. (1994). Entrepreneurship and family business research:
Comparisons,
critique, and lessons. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice, 19(1), 14.
Christians, C. G. (2005). Ethics and politics in qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin &
Y. S.
Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 131-164).
Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2001). Research methods in education (5th ed.).
New York: RoutledgeFalmer.
Collingwood, R. G. (1976). Essays in the philosophy of essays. Austin: University of
Texas
Press.
Cooperrider, D. L., Whitney, D., & Stavros, J. M. (2003). Appreciative Inquiry
Handbook:
The first in a series of AI workbooks for leaders of change. Bedford Heights:
Lakeshore Publishers.
Davis, S. M. (1968). Entrepreneurial succession. Administrative Science Quarterly,
13(3),
15.
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005a). Introduction. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln
(Eds.),
The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 1-32). Thousand Oaks:
Sage.
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (2005b). The Sage handbook of qualitative
research
(3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Dyer, W. G., & Wilkins, A. L. (1991). Better stories, not better constructs, to generate
better
theory: A rejoiner to Eisenhardt. Academy of Management Review, p. 613,
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of
Management Review, 14(4), 532-550.
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1991). Better stories and better constructs: The case for rigor and
comparative logic. Academy of Management Review, 16(3), 620.
Fletcher, D. (2004). Organisational (re)emergance and entrepreneurial development
in a
second-generation family firm. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour &
Research, 10(1/2), 34-48.
Handler, W. C. (1994). Succession in Family Business: A Review of the Research
Family
Business Review, 7(2), 25.
Hindle, K. (2004). Choosing qualitative methods for entrepreneurial cognition
research: A
canonical development approach. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 28(6), 575-
607.
Hoy, F., & Verser, T. G. (1994). Emerging business, emerging field:
entrepreneurship and
the family firm. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice, 19(1), 15.
Kamberelis, G., & Dimitriadis, G. (2005). The Sage handbook of qualitative research.
In N.
K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), (3rd ed., pp. 887-907). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Kets de Vries, M. F. R. (1993). The dynamics of family controlled firms: The good
and the
bad news. Organizational Dynamics, 21(3), 59-71.
Lansberg, I. (1999). Succeeding Generations: Realizing the dream of families in business.
Boston: Harvard.
Low, M. B., & MacMillan, I. C. (1988). Entrepreneurship: Past research and future
challenges. Journal of Management, 14(2), 139-161.
Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Miles, M., & Huberman, A. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Richardson, L. (1998). Writing: A method of inquiry. In N. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln
(Eds.),
Collecting and interpreting qualitative materials (pp. 354-371). Thousand Oaks:
Sage.
Schwass, J. (2005). Wise growth strategies in leading family businesses. Hampshire:
Palgrave MacMillan.
Smyrnios, K., & Dana, L. E. (2007). MGI New Zealand Family and Private Business
Survey.
New Zealand: MGI and RMITo. Document Number)
Stake, R. (1995). Art of case study research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Weick, K. (1995a). Sensemaking in organisations. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Weick, K. (1995b). What theory is not, theorizing is. Administrative Science Quarterly,
40(3), 385-390.
Westhead, P., & Cowling, M. (1998). Family firm research: The need for a
methodological
rethink. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice, 23(1), 31-56.
Woodfield, P. J. (2007a, 21 June). Entrepreneurial succession: Intergenerational
entrepreneurship in family business. Paper presented at the IFERA Conference
(Unpublished), European Business School, Oestrich-Winkel, Germany.
Woodfield, P. J. (2007b). Family business, entrepreneurship and succession nexus.
The
University of Auckland.
Woodfield, P. J. (2008, 8 February). Intergenerational entrepreneurship in family
business.
Paper presented at the 5th AGSE International Research Exchange Conference,
Australian Graduate School of Business, Swinburne University of Technology,
Melbourne, Australia.
Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks:
Sage.
Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks:
Sage.

Mbad 641 - Proposal Word

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Mbad 641 - Proposal Word

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Mbad 641 - Proposal Word

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ifera-Research Proposal-2009.

PhD Research Proposal

You might also like