Whirlpool Case Study - Organizational Behavior

Example Paper with In-Text Cita�ons & Reference List On the other hand, a number of studies have found few or no differences between family and non-family firms on dimensions such as sources of debt financing (Coleman & Carsky, 1999), strategic orientation (Gudmunson, Hartman, & Tower, 1999), management and governance characteristics (Westhead, Cowling, & Howorth, 2001), and problems and assistance needs (Welsch, Gerald, & Hoy, 1995). Therefore, the extent and nature of the differences between the two types of firms require much additional research.

Habbershon et al. (2003) contribute another part with their characterization of familiness as unique, inseparable, and synergistic resources and capabilities arising from family involvement and interactions. As suggested by Sharma (1996), stakeholder theory fits the needs of family business research well. In this respect, advances such as Mitchell, Agle, and Wood’s (1997) stakeholder salience theory has the potential to explain how formulating organizational goals and strategies cause resources to be acquired and agency costs to be eliminated or amplified. This stakeholder approach is important to consider as different stakeholders have varying interests and needs that they want satisfied by the organization (Daft, 2016). Management teams using stakeholder theory must take into account the wishes, preferences, and expectations of a great number of people (Matteson & Metivier, 2016).

References

Coleman, S., & Carsky, M. (1999). Sources of capital for small family owned businesses: Evidence from the national survey of small business finances. Family Business Review, 12(1), 73-85. Daft, R. (2016). Organization theory and design (12th ed.). Boston, MA: Cengage Learning. Gudmundson, D., Hartman, E., & Tower, C. (1999). Strategic orientation: Differences between family and non-family firms. Family Business Review, 12(1), 27-39. Habbershon, T. G., Williams, M., MacMillan, I. C., Melin, L., Hall, H.R., & Nordqvist, M. (2003). A unified systems perspective of family firm performance. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(4), 451-465. Matteson, M. & Metivier, C. (2016). Freeman's stakeholder theory. Greensboro, NC: University of North Carolina at Greensboro. Retrieved from http://philosophia.uncg.edu/phi361-metivier/module-2-why-does-business-need-ethics/freemans-stakeholder-theory/ Mitchell, R., Agle, B., & Wood, D. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 853-886. Sharma, P., Chrisman, J.J., & Chua, J.H. (1996). A review and annotated bibliography of family business studies. Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Welsch, H., Gerald, H., & Hoy, F. (1995). Family impacts on emerging ventures in Poland. Family Business Review, 8(4), 293-300. Westhead, P., Cowling, M., & Howroth, C. (2001). The development of family companies: Management and ownership imperatives. Family Business Review, 14(4), 369-385.