«VOLUM E 1 1, N UM B E R 1 I S SN 2 1 6 8 - 0 6 1 2 F L ASH DR I V E I S SN 1 9 4 1 - 9 5 8 9 ON L I N E T h e In s t it ut e f o r Bu s i n e s s an ...»
Hair, J. (1999). Análisis Multivariante. España: Pearson Education.
GCBF ♦ Vol. 11 ♦ No. 1 ♦ 2016 ♦ ISSN 1941-9589 ONLINE & ISSN 2168-0612 USB Flash Drive 275 Global Conference on Business and Finance Proceedings ♦ Volume 11 ♦ Number 1 Millán, A. (13 de Febrero de 2013). Un académico alertó sobre la saturación de los puertos y la oportunidad de nuevos nodos para el transporte de mercancías provenientes de Asia Pacífico. Recuperado el 02 de Julio de 2015, de http://www.impulsobaires.com.ar/nota.php?id=41959 PND. (2013). Plan Nacional de Desarrollo (2013-2018). México: Gobierno de la República Mexicana.
Porter, M. (1998). Clusters and the New Economics of Competition. Harvard Business Review.
Rodríguez, A., & et al. (2014). Diagnóstico de la viabilidad geoestratégica de México y Panamá para la instalación de la plataforma logística de América en base a un estudio comparativo de factores ponderados. Puebla: Universidad Popular Autónoma del Estado de Puebla.
SDE. (2009-2015). Secretaría de Desarrollo Económico. San Luis Potosí.
Sheffi, Y. (2012). Clústeres Logísticos: brindando valor e impulsando el crecimiento. Cambridge:
Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Fernando Orue-Carrasco, is a business consultant and a partial time professor at Centro Interdisciplinario de Posgrados (CIP) at Universidad Popular Autónoma del Estado de Puebla (UPAEP). He can be contacted at CIP, at UPAEP, 21 Sur 1103 Col. Santiago C.P. 72410, Puebla, Puebla, México.
José Luis Martínez-Flores, is a full time professor and Coordinator of Logistics and Supply Chain Management Doctorate at Centro Interdisciplinario de Posgrados (CIP) at Universidad Popular Autónoma del Estado de Puebla (UPAEP). He can be contacted at CIP, at UPAEP, 21 sur 1103 Col. Santiago C.P.
72410, Puebla, Puebla, México.
Patricia Cano Olivos, is a full time professor of Logistics and Supply Chain Management at Centro Interdisciplinario de Posgrados (CIP) at Universidad Popular Autónoma del Estado de Puebla (UPAEP).
She can be contacted at CIP, at UPAEP, 21 sur 1103 Col. Santiago C.P. 72410, Puebla, Puebla, México.
GCBF ♦ Vol. 11 ♦ No. 1 ♦ 2016 ♦ ISSN 1941-9589 ONLINE & ISSN 2168-0612 USB Flash Drive 276 Global Conference on Business and Finance Proceedings ♦ Volume 11 ♦ Number 1
FAMILY BUSINESS PROTOCOL: CURRENT STATE OF
KNOWLEDGEBertha Martínez-Cisneros, Universidad Autónoma de Baja California Loreto María Bravo Zanoguera, Universidad Autónoma de Baja California
The present study examines the current state of knowledge for Family Business Protocol. The objective of this research is to construct a theoretical framework and outline the trends of Family Business Protocol literature. Towards this aim, this investigation analyses the content of the articles focused on family business protocol published from 1990, when the term protocol appeared in the business family literature, to 2015 in any journal of the following categories: business, family business and management. The articles were selected by a systematic review criteria in the most relevant databases for social sciences research, such as Social Science Citation Index and Latindex. This research was conducted by bibliometric methods used to provide a quantitative analysis of the literature for instance the growth of publication activity, the most representative contributors, among others. Similarly, a qualitative analysis of the content of the articles was completed to identify the main themes researched. The results showed a need to continue studying the family business protocol from an empirical standpoint and the requirement for a family business protocol definition and its implications. This study identified possible venues for future research that could be significant to advance in the consolidation of this field of study.
JEL: M1,M10,M100 KEYWORDS: Family Business, Protocol And Literature Review
INTRODUCTIONIn recent years, interest in studying family businesses (EF) has grown substantially Largely by its dominant presence in the economies of most countries. It is estimated that in the world most of the companies are EF, between 65% and 85% of companies in developed countries are familiar (Bigné, 1999) and although there is no accurate estimate for Latin America, it is estimated that between 90 and 95% of the companies are family own/operated (Belausteguigoitia, 2003).Family businesses generate approximately between 70% and 90% of gross domestic product globally each year (Family Firm Institute, 2014) and employ half the workforce in the world (Morck and Yeung, 2003), which It is leading to a growing concern given its role as a source of jobs and economic development (Ibrahim, Parsa and Angelidis, 2008). Nevertheless, family businesses face a high mortality rate, only 30% of family businesses survive into the second generation and only 13% to the third (Ward, 1994). The average life expectancy of a family business in Mexico is 25 years, while institutionally managed live on average 50 years (KPMG, 2013). Most family businesses arise in order to satisfy basic needs of the family and not with a vision of development and competitiveness, so that these companies have no plans for growth in the medium and long term (Anzola, 2002).
The lack of a business plan, a control structure and management aligned with the strategy of the company are almost always the explanation for the high mortality of family businesses; only 13% of companies have a succession plan outlined (KPMG, 2013), this is a scenario that threatens the fate of the family business to the permanence of the founder. The conflicts that arise in family businesses are mostly related to the lack of family protocol (Arenas and Rico, 2014). Research in the field of family business have identified many problems that affect them, but the most challenging is to ensure its continued survival and succession. One of the mechanisms that can help resolve this situation is the establishment of a family protocol (Barbeito, Crespo Martinez and Guillen, 2008). In some countries it has even acknowledged that the culture of the GCBF ♦ Vol. 11 ♦ No. 1 ♦ 2016 ♦ ISSN 1941-9589 ONLINE & ISSN 2168-0612 USB Flash Drive 277 Global Conference on Business and Finance Proceedings ♦ Volume 11 ♦ Number 1 family protocol, is considered an additional guarantee for third party investors and creditors, in addition to the partners themselves, to provide predictability generational change in society (BOE, 2007). Research has become apparent that these organizations have a uniqueness and own face challenges resulting from the company-family interaction: the selection and preparation of a successor, training and promotion of the family in the company, incorporation or no political family business (Palacios, Linares and Iglesias, 2012).
As the family business grows, the tendency to disperse ownership increases, so the succession and management process is critical to continue maintaining family ties and control of the company. The continuity of the business may be a problem, especially when the founder dies, and has no time to delegate to his heirs, or when there are marital breakdown and the company is in marital regime (Saiz -Alvarez, 2012).
The term Family Protocol was first introduced in the nineties (Ward and Gallo, 1992), when family businesses recognize that relations between family and business should be regulated through a set of norms and standards of operation. Studies conducted on strategic planning in family business during this time were the base of its conception. Most recently the family protocol concept is included in research on corporate governance in family businesses ( Poutziouris, Smyrnios and Klein, 2006).
The family protocol is commonly regarded by academics and family business advisors as an extremely valuable tool that serves not only to govern the relationship between the family and the family business, but also as a facilitator of coexistence in the family. As a result, the family protocol has the purpose of maintaining and strengthening through the generations, family unity and commitment to business success.
(Gallo and Tomaselli, 2006). In drafting the family protocol, the family should attempt to identify and make explicit and transferable to future generations, the sense and purpose of the business, its traditions, vision, mission and values that inspired it and its philosophy (Tapeis, 2011).
Although, there is no consent in how to define the family protocol, some experts describe it as a set of objectives for the family and the business, rules governing the relationship between people. In view of the known model of the three circle (family, property and business) an its subsystems that coexist in a family business (owners, executives, managers and family members and not members). The essence of the family protocol is an agreement on the goals and rules, combined with the commitment to implement them. The ultimate goal of the protocol is successful survival of the family business in the long term (Gallo, 2000).
The establishment of a family protocol should be aimed to family and non-family members within the organization and it is necessary to allocate positions according to the merits and not just relations. It should include the development of strategic business planning and designing career plans for family and nonfamily executives. This process of institutionalization in the family business aims to ensure its continuity, making it stronger and more profitable and less vulnerable to family events (KPMG, 2013).
REFERENCESAnzola, S. (2002). Administración de Pequeñas Empresas. Mc Graw Hill. México, D.F.
Belausteguigoitia, I. (2010). El campo de las empresas familiares en Latinoamérica: nuevas perspectivas.
Gestión & Sociedad, 3(1), 13-25.
BOE (2007). Nº 65 : Real Decreto 171/2007, 16 Marzo de 2007, pp. 11254-11257.
Family Firm Institute (2014). Global data points. Recuperado de: http://www.ffi.org/?page=Gl Gallo, M.A. and Tomaselli, S. (2006). Protocolo familiar: sus resultados. Family Business Consulting Group Españam Fundación Rafael Escolá: España.
GCBF ♦ Vol. 11 ♦ No. 1 ♦ 2016 ♦ ISSN 1941-9589 ONLINE & ISSN 2168-0612 USB Flash Drive 278 Global Conference on Business and Finance Proceedings ♦ Volume 11 ♦ Number 1 Gilding,M., Gregory, S. and Cosson, B. (2013). Motives and Outcomes in Family Business Succession
Planning. Research Center for Entrepreneurship and Innovation Accountancy & Finance. Retrieved from:
http://hdl.handle.net/1942/13822 Ibrahim, N.A., Angelidis, J.P. y Parsa, F. (2008). Strategic management of family businesses: Current findings and directions for future research. International Journal of Management, 25 (1), 95-110.
Joshi, M. and Srivastava, A. (2013). Connecting Family Business & Generations: A Case of Hafizia Art & Crafts Pvt. Ltd. Retrieved from: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers. cfm?abstract_id=2184614 KPMG (2013). Empresas familiares en México: el desafío de crecer, madurar y permanecer. Recuperado de: http://www.kpmg.com/mx/es/issuesandinsights/articlespublications/pag inas/de-empresasfamiliares.aspx Saiz-Álvarez, J. (2012). Capital intelectual, protocolo y empresa familiar. Anuario Jurídico y Económico Escurialense, (42), 377-388.
Poutziouris, P.X., Smyrnios, K.X. and Klein, S.B. (2006). Handbook of research on family business.
Cheltenham, Reino Unido, Edwar Elgar.
Tagiuri, R. y Davis, J. (1996). Bivalent attributes of the family firm. Family Business Review, IX (2):
Tapies, J. (2011). El protocolo familiar: ¿solo un documento o un proceso de mejora?. IESE Business School.
Ward, J.L. and Gallo, M.A. (1992). Protocolo familiar. IESE Business School-Universidad de Navarra
BIOGRAPHYBertha Martinez-Cisneros is a doctoral student at the Universidad Autonoma de Baja California. She can be reached at Doctorado en Ciencias Administrativas, Universidad Autónoma de Baja California, Blvd. Río Nuevo y Eje Central s/n, Mexicali, B.C., México - C.P. 21330. Tel: + 52 (686) 582 3377.
Loreto María Bravo Zanoguera is a full time profesor at the Universidad Autonoma de Baja California. She can be reached at Doctorado en Ciencias Administrativas, Universidad Autónoma de Baja California, Blvd.
Río Nuevo y Eje Central s/n, Mexicali, B.C., México - C.P. 21330. Tel: + 52 (686) 582 3377.
GCBF ♦ Vol. 11 ♦ No. 1 ♦ 2016 ♦ ISSN 1941-9589 ONLINE & ISSN 2168-0612 USB Flash Drive 279 Global Conference on Business and Finance Proceedings ♦ Volume 11 ♦ Number 1
One primary challenge for many Western European companies is to innovate and stay competitively advanced continuously, while at the same time organizations are increasingly expected by the public to contribute to society and the environment. Therefore, it is the purpose of this paper to show the benefits of ethical and socially responsible management with regard to innovation performance. The approach shown in this paper is a thorough literature review and analysis of recent research. The paper reveals a very strong linkage between creating value for the company and for other stakeholders in terms of innovations.
One of the limitations is that it does not include empirical research yet, though. Rather it makes an original approach to build a strong conceptual fundament for the development of specific research questions and hypotheses that are recommended for future scientific research.
JEL: F61, L22, M00, M10, M14, O30, O31, O35 KEYWORDS: Management Ethics, Corporate Social Responsibility, Sustainability, Innovation