The Varying Effects of Family Relationships in Entrepreneurial Teams

Abstract

A majority of entrepreneurial teams contain family relations but little is known about the implications of such family relationships in the formative stages of new venture creation. We examine two distinct types of family relationships in these teams; romantic couples and biologically linked teams and how such relationships influence the probability of ever achieving first sales. Relying on social identity theory, and a longitudinal sample of 295 nascent teams, we find that these relationships matter in important ways. Our conceptualizations and results have implications for the entrepreneurial teams and family business literatures.

Family entrepreneurship as a field of research: Exploring its contours and contents

“…are more likely to achieve first sales, a central milestone for a start-up success (Brannon, et al, 2013). These authors offer an explanation related to role conflict: families related by blood are more likely to suffer from role conflict due to the existing family roles, whereas a cohabiting couple can develop synergizing identities at work and at home, using their relationship to build a competitive advantage.…”

“…Research is progressively coming to admit that situations can be socially constructed. This is reflected, for example in the structural versus transactional view of the family for family entrepreneurship (Brannon, et al, 2013;Koerner & Fitzpatrick, 2004). It is reflected in the entrepreneurship debate: are opportunities identified/discovered or are the (co)created (Alvarez & Barney, 2007)?…”

“…Pertinent levels of analysis include the individual, the family (Uhlaner, et al, 2012;, the firm, the project, the household (Baines & Wheelock, 1998;Carter, 2011;Rodriguez, Tuggle, & Hackett, 2009) the couple (Brannon, et al, 2013), but also the job spell (Carroll & Mosakowski, 1987), the FET (Discua Cruz, et al, 2012) or entrepreneurial behaviors (Bird & Schjoedt, 2009) for example. We believe that interesting research in the future should be able to multiply levels of analysis in order to go beyond the classical focus of the firm (McKelvie, et al, 2014;Sciascia & Bettinelli, in press;Yu, et al, 2012) 29…”

“…These couples, who share a home as well as a workplace, will have greater flexibility in their roles and structures: they have greater control to decide, which leads to greater satisfaction in both spheres (Brannon, Wiklund, & Haynie, 2013;Fitzgerald & Muske, 2002) find that cohabiting couples starting a venture (as opposed to family members linked by blood ties)…”

Women and power: a theoretical approach using the example of copreneurial businesses

“…Not only would this benefit from changing attitudes and recognition of the role of women in the labour market (Maas and Diederichs, 2007;Stewart-Gross and Gross, 2007), it would also encourage gender equality/ the role of women by helping to reconcile work and family life. In practice, the copreneurship is thought to offer a rare degree of organizational freedom (Smith, 2000;StewartGross and Gross, 2007;Brannon et al, 2013;Dahl et al, 2014) that makes it possible to achieve the sought-after balance between individual, family and career aspirations (Jaffe, 1990;Smith, 2000;Charles, 2006;Maas and Diederichs, 2007;Millman and Martin, 2007;Harris et al, 2010). It offers a level of flexibility that is impossible to achieve in any other form of entrepreneurial organization (Brannon et al, 2013).…”