Introduction to the Research Topic and Formulation of Primary Hypothesis

Established for about 40-years, the research in the decidedly challenging field of family firms provided a plentiful influential literature on the subject of succession effectiveness (Acero & Alcalde, 2016; Benavides-Velasco et al., 2013; Bizri, 2016; Garcia-Ramos et al., 2017; Heinrichs, 2014; Huber et al., 2015; Jaskiewicz et al., 2015; Maco et al., 2016; Miller & Le-Breton-Miller, 2014; Rautamaki & Romer- Paakkanen, 2016). From the earlier Gephart’s (1978), and Longenecker and Schoen’s (1978) ethno-methodological approaches in researching family business succession, to the contemporary outcomes of Jaskiewics’s et al. (2015), and Ward and Zsolnay’s (2017) assertions on family commercial logics and socio-emotional wealth (Garcia- Ramos’s et al., 2017; Maco & Heidrich, 2016), the relevant theory developed has looked at the key factors and variables that are believed to foster effective succession

26

(Acero & Alcalde, 2016; Aronnof & Ward, 2010; Benavides-Velasco et al., 2013; Boeker & Goodstein, 1993; Canella & Lubatkin, 1993; Dalton & Kesner, 1985; Dyck et al., 2002; Hnatek, 2015; Hambrick & Fukutomi, 1991; Heinrichs, 2014; Huber et al., 2015; Jaskiewicz et al., 2015; Klein & Bell, 2007; Le Breton-Miller et al., 2004; Maco et al., 2016; Miller et al., 2003; Miller & Le-Breton-Miller, 2014; Osborne, 1991; Pavel, 2013; Poza & Messer, 2001; Rautamaki & Romer-Paakkanen, 2016; Schwartz & Menon, 1985; Sharma et al., 2000; Shepherd & Zacharakis, 2000). That substantial empirical examination of succession particular enablers carried out by distinguished scholars on the subject and mentioned in the literature, has led to a reflective bilateral outcome (Gilding et al., 2015; Heinrichs, 2014; Klein & Bell, 2007; Le Breton-Miller et al., 2004; Maco & Heidrich, 2016; Mora, 2006; Mowle & Merrilees, 2005; Miller, 1993; Miller & Le-Breton-Miller, 2014; Ocasio, 1999; Pitcher et al., 2000; Sharma et al., 2003; Sonnenfeld & Spence, 1989). Firstly, specific factors commonly named as “Process Factors” have a leading operational role to succession as a long, ongoing and multidimensional process (Benavides-Velasco et al., 2013; Chalus-Sauvannet et al., 2015;Heinrichs, 2014; Miller & Le-Breton-Miller, 2014). These procedural elements of succession are subject to a more or less judicious management by the incumbent and other executives of the family business (Aronnof & Eckrich, 1999; Astrachan & Adams, 2005; Benavides-Velasco et al., 2013; Fischetti, 1997; Fleming, 2000; Garcia-Ramos et al., 2017; Heinrichs, 2014; Huber et al., 2015; Le Breton-Miller et al., 2004; Malone, 1989; Miller & Le-Breton-Miller, 2014; Morris et al., 1997; Osborne, 1991; Potts et al, 2001b; Rautamaki & Romer- Paakkanen, 2016).

Secondly, the greatest purpose of Hammond et al., (2016), Le Breton-Miller et al. (2004), and Miller and Le-Breton-Miller (2014) experimentations in expanding theoretical knowledge on intergenerational succession, and other identical research work from Garcia-Ramos et al. (2017), Heinrichs (2014), Maco and Heidrich (2016), Miller et al. (2003), and Rautamaki and Romer-Paakkanen (2016) has identified additional configurations that are conventionally defined as “Context Factors”. These correlates of success in family business transitions have been connected to the peripheral aspects of succession that are influenced by the socio-political distinctiveness of a given owning family and the external business environment

27

(Astrachan & Adams, 2005; Canella & Lubatkin, 1993; Garcia-Ramos et al., 2017; Heinrichs, 2014; Hytti et al., 2016; Maco et al., 2016; Miller & Le-Breton-Miller, 2014; Morris et al., 1997). Despite that during succession, the context factors are less controllable than the process factors due to their much volatile nature, they are yet considered extremely vital to the concluding organizational configurations of success, cohesion, change, prediction or failure (Barach & Gantisky, 1995; Birley, 1986; Carr et al., 2016; Danco, 1982; Garcia-Ramos et al., 2017; Heinrichs, 2014; Maco et al., 2016; Malone, 1989; Miller, 1990; Miller et al., 2003; Miller & Le-Breton-Miller, 2014; Mora, 2006; Morris et al., 1997; Mowele & Merrillees, 2005; Osborne, 1991; Ward & Zsolnay, 2017).

It is therefore understandable that the endevour of trans-generational succession is taking place under the prism of critical individual decisions and implicit family preferences as expressed by the incumbent, influential family members, controlling shareholders and independent directors in the board (Acero & Alcalde, 2016; Barbera, et al., 2015; Garcia-Ramos et al., 2017; Heinrichs, 2014). Evidently, succession context elements are equally subjective to positive or negative externalities emmerged from the broader business environment (Cater et al., 2016; Chrisman et al., 1998; Danco, 1982; Emley, 1999; Heinrichs, 2014; Huber & Finger, 2015; Hunt & Hundler, 1999; Kimhi, 1997; Klein & Bell, 2007; Lansberg, 1988; Lansberg, 1999; Rautamaki & Romer-Paakkanen, 2016; Rossie et al., 2012; Shepherd et al., 2000). In the light of the aforesaid perspective, fourteen most common “Process” and “Context” factors are identified in the literature and believed critical for succession effectiveness as follows:

1. The Incumbent Characteristics and Qualities; 2. The Successor Skills and Attributes;

3. The Succession Ground Rules;

4. The Successor Training and Development; 5. The Successor Origin;

6. The Incumbent Tenure;

28 8. The Family Dynamics;

9. The Board of Directors;

10. The Incumbent-Successor Pre-contractual Expectations; 11. The Organizational Performance;

12. The Transfer of Capital; 13. The Organizational Size, and; 14. The Organizational Age.

According to Popper’s philosophical developments in defense of science and rationality (Caldwell, 1991; Milkov, 2012; Watkins, 1997), which are clarified in brief in section 2.9.2, the researcher put forward a Primary Hypothesis (PH) with a negative rational (Popper, 1994) with the aim to empirically examine this in the Cypriot family wineries:

PH: In the organizational context of family wineries in Cyprus, succession effectiveness is not related to a set of process and context factors.

The empirical examination of the primary hypothesis will reveal whether the preliminary conceptual framework, which is developed through deduction from the systematic literature review, is additionally validated for the scope of effective family winery succession.