The Uniplex Third: Enabling Single-domain Role Transitions in Multiplex Relationships

Abstract

Actors in a multiplex relationship—one crossing multiple domains—can struggle to transition into new roles in one domain without disrupting existing interactions and the role hierarchy in another. Via an inductive study of intergenerational leadership successions in seven Chinese family firms, we examine how actors can complete such a single-domain role transition. We find that a succession between the founder/father and the successor/son is successful when the mother (i.e., the founder’s wife) is active in the family but not the firm, acting as a trustworthy third party to the founder and successor in the family while staying nonpartisan to their business disagreements. Limiting her involvement to the family allows the mother to help the founder and successor maintain their existing family roles and interactions while transitioning into new roles in the firm. A mother involved in both firm and family could not stay nonpartisan between the founder and successor, which compromised their trust in her and prevented her from legislating over their multiplex relationship and facilitating the succession. We conceptualize the position of the uniplex third: the network position an actor occupies when she or he is connected in only one domain to two actors who have a multiplex dyadic relationship. Our cases reveal that the uniplex third position grants an actor authority via establishing trustworthiness and nonpartisanship relative to a multiplex dyadic relationship. The uniplex third party can thus facilitate change in one domain and maintain stability in another. We also observe how the mother is inhibited from occupying the uniplex third position when her kin are involved in the firm’s top management. If conflicts exist in the firm between the mother’s nuclear family and her kin, we find the mother disengages from succession-aiding activities in both family and firm domains.

Tie Dissolution in Market Networks: A Theory of Vicarious Performance Feedback

“…We validate the basic notion that strong performance makes an agent more likely to retain network ties, with the caveat that the agent's perception of performance is relative to its aspiration level. Moreover, we find that performance outside the focal dyad can impact that dyad's stability, which paints a more complicated picture and suggests that network evolution studies that focus narrowly on dyads may miss important interactions between the dyad and elements of its network neighborhood (see also, e.g., Hallen, Katila, and Rosenberger, 2014;Hernandez, Sanders, and Tuschke, 2015;Li and Piezunka, 2019).…”

What is the Eisenhardt Method, really?

“…In contrast, Zuzul and Tripsas (2020) use four cases to explore of inertia and identity. Hannah and Eisenhardt (2018) examine 5 ventures in studying ecosystem strategies, Li and Piezunka (2020) examine the CEO succession process of 7 Chinese family firms, Martin and Eisenhardt (2010) explore 12 cross-business unit collaborations, and Baker and Nelson (2005) study bricolage processes in 29 small businesses.…”

Uncovering Implicit Assumptions: Reviewing the Work–Family Interface in Family Business and Offering Opportunities for Future Research

“…Lee, 2006); general management (e.g., stewardship theory, boundary theory; Cooper et al, 2013; Memili et al, 2015); organizational behavior (e.g., person–environment fit; Halbesleben & Wheeler, 2007); and psychology (e.g., role theory; Bjursell & Bäckvall, 2011; Helmle et al, 2014). In borrowing theoretical frameworks from mainstream WFI research, scholars describe the juxtaposition of multiple life roles in terms of WFC, balance, and spillover, and highlight the challenges and benefits of role multiplexity (Li & Piezunka, 2019). They inquire into strategies used by individuals and organizations to better control their WFI, manage work and family lives, and strive to identify elements critical to successfully integrating work and family roles.…”

“…Role theory is the most common theory used in these studies. Authors draw on role theory to explain and explore concepts such as conflict (Fitzgerald et al, 2001), tensions (Carr & Hmieleski, 2015), transitions (Li & Piezunka, 2019), satisfaction (Danes, 1998), and expectations within and between work and family roles (Boles, 1996). Several insightful studies by Danes and colleagues rely on the promising concept of resource exchange (Danes, 2006; Danes et al, 2008; Danes & Morgan, 2004; Olson et al, 2003).…”

“…This isolated stream has caused FB scholars to develop their own language and additional, implicit assumptions by fostering discrete definitions (e.g., divergent definitions of work and family) and drawing on distinct theories (e.g., the sustainable family business model [SFBM] or fundamental interpersonal relationship orientation [FIRO]), with little communication between the FB WFI and wider literatures. Moreover, FB scholars have studied the WFI under varying names and guises, including work-family conflict (WFC; e.g., Amarapurkar & Danes, 2005), work-family roles (e.g., Li & Piezunka, 2019), gender (e.g., Otten-Pappas, 2013), and work-family characteristics (e.g., Cooper et al, 2013), among others.…”