Family firms can be thought of as heterogeneous configurations where ownership, governance, management and succession components are often intertwined. Previous works have typically used definitions of family firm based on one or more of these components. In this empirical work we seek to clarify the relationships among the components of family involvement in family firms by using a set-theoretic methodology (fs/QCA). Applying this methodology to a sample of 6611 publicly listed and major unlisted companies from 46 countries, we identified the most frequent configurations of family firms based on the components of family involvement. We present the most frequent configurations and discuss implications for empirical research and theory building on family firms.

Prior empirical research has found positive, negative and neutral relationships between family involvement in business and firm performance. These inconsistent findings may be partly explained by the different levels of family involvement. Family firms are not homogeneous entities; there are family-owned, family-governed and family-managed firms. These variations lead to different configurations based on the components of family involvement which can be captured by using set-theoretic methods. Applying this method to an international sample of 6,611 firms, we identify seven configurations in firms that lead to superior financial performance.

The stakeholder view of the firm has been justified under instrumental and normative bases. Whereas the instrumental basis argues that "enlightened stakeholder management" is a necessary precondition to seek shareholders' value maximization, the normative basis relies on the observance of ethical norms by managers and the notion that the stakeholders should be treated as "ends." Some scholars argue that both views actually converge. However, this article provides empirical evidence of the negative effects of stakeholder management in shareholders' value in the short run and the positive effects over the long run, using a longitudinal database of 658 U. S. firms. Given the difficulties of anticipating the instrumental long-term financial effects of short-run decisions affecting the different stakeholders, the authors' findings support the view of the normative basis for stakeholder theory based on ethics, norms, and heuristic criteria as a way to solve conflicts among the claims of different stakeholders.

We show that evaluating the sustained competitive advantage (SCA) of a firm according exclusively to superior economic performance sustained for a given period of time hides, in fact, alternative manifestations of SCA. We suggest that SCA is a multidimensional construct that may be subject to different, complementary operationalizations in empirical tests. We propose an untapped dimension of SCA related to the degree of autonomy of a firm relative to its industry rivals and present a new measure, inspired in the CAPM (capital asset pricing model), to capture it. This measure reflects the resilience of a firm against economic recessions and industry turmoil. We show the benefits of the proposed alternative measure of SCA based on firm autonomy through its application to the position of Southwest Airlines in relation to the US airline industry (1982-2003).