Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Knowledge integration in family SMEs: an extension of the 4I model

  • Published:
Journal of Management & Governance Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article explores the process of learning and strategic change in small and medium-sized family firms (family SMEs). Organizational learning theory posits that knowledge must be integrated throughout the firm to facilitate strategic renewal. This process occurs in a particular way in family SMEs, according to their specific characteristics. In such firms the family’s role, the company size and the lack of formal procedures and systems strongly affect the process of learning and change. The study applies the 4I model of organizational learning to three case studies and offers empirical support for this model. The article has theoretical implications for variants of the 4I model as applied to family SMEs, and implications for practice related to the family’s role in starting and perpetuating the process of learning and change.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The substitutes "Alfa", "Beta", and "Gamma" were used as the company names for reasons of confidentiality.

References

  • Alavi, M., & Tiwana, D. E. (2002). Knowledge integration in virtual teams: The potential role of KMS. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53(12), 1029–1037.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amin, A., & Cohendet, P. (2000). Organizational learning and governance through embedded practices. Journal of Management and Governance, 4, 93–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arregle, L., Hitt, M., Sirmon, D., & Very, P. (2007). The development of organizational social capital: Attributes of family firms. Journal of Management Studies, 44(1), 73–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beckhard, R., & Dyer, G. W. (1983). SMR forum: Managing change in the family firm—issues and strategies. Sloan Management Review, 24(3), 59–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berthoin-Antal, A., Lenhardt, U., & Rosenbrock, R. (2003). Barriers to organizational learning. In M. Dierkes, A. B. Berthoin-Antal, J. Child, & I. Nonaka (Eds.), Handbook of organizational learning and knowledge (pp. 865–885). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cabrera-Suarez, K., De Saa-Perez, P., & Garcia-Almeida, D. (2001). The succession process from a resource and knowledge-based view of the family firm. Family Business Review, 14(1), 37–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calabrò, A., & Mussolino, D. (2011). How do boards of directors contribute to family SME export intensity? The role of formal and informal governance mechanisms. Journal of Management and Governance, Published on line: 22 May 2011.

  • Cater, J., & Schwab, A. (2008). Turnaround strategies in established small family firms. Family Business Review, 21(1), 31–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chirico, F., & Nordqvist, M. (2010). Dynamic capabilities and trans-generational value creation in family firms: The role of organizational culture. International Small Business Journal, 28(5), 487–504.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chirico, F., & Salvato, C. (2008). Knowledge integration and dynamic organizational adaptation in family firms. Family Business Review, 21(2), 169–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chrisman, J. J., Chua, J. H., Kellermanns, F. W., & Chang, E. P. C. (2007). Are family managers agents or stewards? An exploratory study in privately held family firms. Journal of Business Research, 60, 1030–1038.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chua, J. H., Chrisman, J. J., & Sharma, P. (1999). Defining the family business by behavior. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 23(4), 19–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cross, R., Borgatti, S. P., & Parker, A. (2002). Making invisible work visible: Using social network analysis to support strategic collaboration. California Management Review, 44(2), 25–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cross, R., Laseter, T., Parker, A., & Velasquez, G. (2006). Using social network analysis to improve communities of practice. California Management Review, 49(1), 32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cross, R., Parker, A., Prusak, L., & Borgatti, S. P. (2001). Knowing what we know: Supporting knowledge creation and sharing in social networks. Organizational Dynamics, 30(2), 100–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crossan, M. M., & Berdrow, I. (2003). Organizational learning and strategic renewal. Strategic Management Journal, 24, 1087–1105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crossan, M. M., Lane, H. W., & White, R. E. (1999). An organizational learning framework: From intuition to institution. The Academy of Management Review, 24(3), 522–537.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, J., & Tagiuri, R. (1996). Life stages and father-son work relationships. In C. E. Aronoff, H. Astrachnan, & J. L. Ward (Eds.), Family business sourcebook II (pp. 421–432). Marietta, GA: Business Owner Resources.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dyer W. G., Jr. (1989). Integrating professional management into a family owned business. Family Business Review, 2(3), 221–235.

    Google Scholar 

  • Demsetz, H. (1991). The theory of the firm revisited. In W. Williamson (Ed.), The nature of the firm (pp. 159–178). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dyer, W. G. (1986). Cultural change in family firms: Anticipating and managing business and family transitions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dyer, W. G. (1994). Potential contributions of organizational behavior to the study of family-owned business. Family Business Review, 7(2), 109–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dyer, W. G. (2006). Examining the “family effect” on firm performance. Family Business Review, 19(4), 253–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eddleston, C. A., Kellermanns, F. W., & Sarathy, R. (2008). Resource configuration in family firms: Linking resources, strategic planning and technological opportunities to performance. Journal of Management Studies, 45, 26–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M., & Graebner, M. E. (2007). Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 25–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, M. S., & Rafaeli, A. (2002). Organizational routines as sources of connections and understandings. Journal of Management Studies, 39(3), 309–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gersick, K. E., Davis, J. A., McCollom, M., & Lannsberg, I. (1997). Generation to generation: Life cycles of the family business. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grant, R. M. (1996). Prospering in dynamically-competitive environments: organizational capability as knowledge integration. Organization Science, 7(4), 375–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Habbershon, T. G., & Williams, M. L. (1999). A resource-based framework for assessing the strategic advantages of family firms. Family Business Review, 12(1), 1–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, A., Melin, L., & Nordqvist, M. (2001). Entrepreneurship as radical change in the family business: Exploring the role of cultural patterns. Family Business Review, 14, 193–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Handler, W. C. (1989). Methodological issues and considerations in studying family business. Family Business Review, 2(3), 257–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, D., Martinez, J. I., & Ward, J. L. (1994). Is strategy different for the family owned business? Family Business Review, 7(2), 159–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, M., & Evans, R. E. (1994). Family business and multiple levels of conflict. Family Business Review, 7(4), 331–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herscovitch, L., & Meyer, J. P. (2002). Commitment to organizational change: Extension of a three-component model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(3), 474–487.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirschman, E. C. (1986). Humanistic inquiry in marketing research: Philosophy, method, and criteria. Journal of Marketing Research, 23(August), 237–249.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holmqvist, M. (2003). A dynamic model of intra- and interorganizational learning. Organization Studies, 24(1), 95–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huber, G. P. (1991). Organizational learning: The contributing processes and the literatures. Organization Science, 2(1), 88–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, R. (2003). Tradition is double-edged sword in family business. Journal of Corporate Renewal 16(6), 8–10, 24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, O., & Macpherson, A. (2006). Inter-organizational learning and strategic renewal in SMEs, extending the 4I framework. Long Range Planning, 39, 155–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kellermans, F. W., & Eddleston, K. A. (2004). Feuding families: When conflict does a family firm good. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 28(3), 209–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelliher, F., & Henderson, J. B. (2006). A learning framework for the small business environment. Journal of European Industrial Training, 30(7), 512–528.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kets de Vries, M. F. R. (1996). Family business: Human dilemmas in family firms. London: International Thompson Business Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, T. B., Mauws, M., & Dyck, B. (2005). The politics of organizational learning: Integrating power into the 4I framework. Academy of Management Review, 30(1), 180–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lumpkin, G., & Lichtenstein, B. B. (2005). The role of organizational learning in the opportunity-recognition process. Entrepreneurship, Theory and Practice, 29(4), 451–472.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lumpkin, G. T., Martin, W., & Vaughn, M. (2008). Family orientation: individual level influences on family firm outcomes. Family Business Review, 21, 127–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lussier, R. N., & Sonfield, M. C. (2010). A six-country study of first-, second-, and third-generation family businesses. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 16(5), 414–436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacKenzie, J. E. (2002). Downsizing family business: Family dynamics increase challenges. Journal of Corporate Renewal, 15(5), 18–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organizational Science, 2, 71–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nahapiet, J., & Goshal, S. (1998). Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 242–266.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pawlowsky, P. (2001). The treatment of organizational learning in management science. In M. Dierkes, A. BerthoinAntal, J. Child, & I. Nonaka (Eds.), Handbook of organizational learning & knowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothwell, R. (1992). Successful innovation: Critical factors for the 1990s. R&D Management, 22(3), 221–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salvato, C., Chirico, F., & Sharma, P. (2010). A farewell to the business: Championing exit and continuity in entrepreneurial family firms. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development: An International Journal, 22(3–4), 321–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salvato, C., & Melin, L. (2008). Creating value across generations in family-controlled businesses: The role of family social capital. Family Business Review, 21(3), 259–276.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharma, P. (2004). An overview of the field of family business studies: Current status and directions for the future. Family Business Review, 17(1), 1–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharma, P., Chrisman, J. J., & Chua, J. H. (1997). Strategic management of the family business: Past research and future challenges. Family Business Review, 10, 1–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharma, P., & Irving, P. G. (2005). Four bases of family business successor commitment: Antecedents and consequences. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(1), 13–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shilling, J., & Kluge, A. (2009). Barriers to organizational learning: An integration of theory and research. International Journal of Management Reviews, 11(3), 337–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sirmon, D. G., & Hitt, M. A. (2003). Managing resources: Linking unique resources, management and wealth creation in family firms. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 27(4), 339–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sirmon, D. G., Hitt, M. A., & Ireland, R. D. (2007). Managing firm resources in dynamic environments to create value: Looking inside the black box. Academy of Management Review, 32(1), 273–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spender, J. C. (1992). Limits to learning from the West: How Western management advice may prove limited in Eastern Europe. International Executive, 3(5), 389–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stopford, J. M., & Baden-Fuller, C. W. F. (1994). Creating corporate entrepreneurship. Strategic Management Journal, 15, 521–536.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tiesessen, I., Lane, H., Crossan, M., & Inkpen, A. (1997). Knowledge management in international joint ventures. In P. W. Beamish & P. Killing (Eds.), Cooperative strategies: North American perspectives. San Francisco: Jossey BassWiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tiwana, A., & McLean, E. (2005). Expertise integration and creativity in information systems development. Journal of Management Information Systems, 22(1), 13–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tokarczyk, L., Hansen, E., Green, M., & Down, J. (2007). A resource-based view and market orientation theory examination of the role of “Familiness” in family business success. Family Business Review, 20(1), 17–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vera, D., & Crossan, M. (2004). Strategic leadership and organizational learning. Academy of Management Review, 29(2), 222–240.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vossen, R. W. (1998). Relative strengths and weaknesses of small firms in innovation. International Small Business Journal, 16(3), 88–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westhead, P., & Howorth, C. (2007). Types of private family firms: An exploratory conceptual and empirical analysis. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 19, 405–431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiklund, J., & Shepherd, D. (2003). Knowledge based resources, entrepreneurial orientation and the performance of small and medium-size business. Strategic Management Journal, 24, 1307–1314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, C. L., & Wei, S. T. (2010). Modelling the performance of CoP in knowledge management. Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, 21(10), 1033–1045.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A., & George, G. (2002). Absorptive capacity: A review, reconceptualization and extension. Academy of Management Review, 27(2), 185–203.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A., Neubaum, D. O., & Larraneta, B. (2007). Knowledge sharing and technological capabilities: The moderating role of family involvement. Journal of Business Research, 60, 1070–1079.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Business Administration, University of Verona, via dell’Artigliere, 19, 37129, Verona, Italy

    Andrea Lionzo & Francesca Rossignoli

Authors
  1. Andrea Lionzo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Francesca Rossignoli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrea Lionzo.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lionzo, A., Rossignoli, F. Knowledge integration in family SMEs: an extension of the 4I model. J Manag Gov 17, 583–608 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-011-9197-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-011-9197-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation