Entrepreneurial networks and family firm researchers are testing the limits of current understanding by investigating relationships in a variety of non–Western contexts. We extend Khayesi, George, and Antonakis's model of resource accumulation to include the relational dimension of an entrepreneur's social capital network to elaborate more fully entrepreneurial kinship network types. The propensity for moral hazard associated with each network type is explicated, and mechanisms for mitigating the cost/benefit of such dysfunctions are addressed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ArregleJ., HittM.A., SirmonD.G., & VeryP. (2007). The development of organizational social capital: Attributes of family firms. Journal of Management Studies, 44(1), 73–95.
2.
BirleyS. (2001). Owner–manager attitudes to family and business issues: A 16 study country study. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 26(2), 63–76.
3.
ColemanJ.S. (1986). Social theory, social research, and a theory of action. American Journal of Sociology, 91, 1309–1335.
4.
GedajlovicE., HonigB., MooreC.B., PayneG.T., & WrightM. (2013). Social capital and entrepreneurship: A schema and research agenda. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 37(3), 455–478.
5.
GranovetterM.S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78, 1360–1380.
6.
HechterM. (1987). Principles of group solidarity. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
7.
KhavulS., BrutonG.D., & WoodE. (2009). Informal family business in Africa. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(6), 1219–1238.
8.
KhayesiJ.N.O., GeorgeG., & AntonakisJ. (2014). Kinship in entrepreneur networks: Performance effects of resource assembly in Africa. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 38(6), 1323–1342.
9.
MehrotraV., MorckR., ShimJ., & WiwattanakantangY. (2011). Must love kill the family firm? Some exploratory evidence. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 35(6), 1121–1148.
10.
NahapietJ. & GhoshalS. (1998). Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 242–266.
11.
OliverC. (1991). Strategic responses to institutional processes. Academy of Management Review, 16(1), 145–179.
12.
PearsonA.W., CarrJ.C., & ShawJ.C. (2008). Toward a theory of familiness: A social capital perspective. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 32(6), 949–969.
13.
SharmaP. & ManikuttyS. (2005). Strategic divestments in family firms: Role of family structure and community culture. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(3), 293–311.
14.
StewartA. (1990). The Bigman metaphor for entrepreneurship: A “library tale” with morals on alternatives for future research. Organization Science, 1(2), 143–159.
15.
StewartA. (2003). Help one another, use one another: Toward an anthropology of family business. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 27(4), 383–396.
16.
VerbekeA. & KanoL. (2012). The transaction cost economics theory of the family firm: Family–based human asset specificity and the bifurcation bias. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 36(6), 1183–1205.
17.
WilliamsonO.E. (1975). Markets and hierarchies: Analysis and antitrust implications, a study in the economics of internal organization. New York: Free Press.
