Content uploaded by Krzysztof Wach
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Krzysztof Wach on Feb 24, 2014
Content may be subject to copyright.
CHAPTER 4.
Succession Planning in Polish Family Businesses.
An Exploratory Investigation
Aleksander Surdej and Krzysztof Wach
4.1. Introduction
Family rms have become a topic of the utmost interest both for academ-
ic researchers and policy makers. Researchers have started to investigate the
distinctiveness of family rms, their functioning and efciency outcomes.
Policy makers have been reacting to the problems of economic development
arising from the domination of family owned and family controlled rms in
many economies.
Most of the research projects on the succession process in family rms has
been conducted in Western countries and there is a lack of understanding of
the succession process and its determinants in family rms in Central and
Eastern Europe, that is why we decided to conduct the research survey in Po-
land1, which seems to be a pioneering project as far as the country – Poland
– is concerned2.
The research sample includes 496 family enterprises, among them 85,
which accomplished the succession process and 147 family rms, which are
going to face the succession issue. The paper includes research results of the
1 Research project “Succession Scenarios in First Generation of Polish Entrepre-
neurs” conducted in the years 2008–2010 by Aleksander Surdej and Krzysztof Wach
was nanced by Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education (Project no. 1326/B/
H03/2008/34).
2 Currently a large research project is run by the market research rm PENTOR, con-
tracted and funded by Polish Agency for Enterprise Development (PARP).
63
Chapter 4. Succession Planning in Polish Family Businesses...
one studied group, that is enterprises planning to implement the succession
process3.
The succession issue has been identied as one of crucial factors for the
functioning and growth of family rms. It is reported, what seems like cross-
national regularity, that only 30% of family rms survives in the second gen-
eration, while less than 14% functions in third generation as still family rms
(Fleming, 1997, p. 246; Matthews, Moore, Fialko, 1999, p. 159).
From the theoretical point of view the succession in family rms is relat-
ed with the dilemma how to preserve (and possibly increase) family wealth,
while transforming the company. Is it better to keep family control over the
company, but possibly harm its growth perspectives, or rather to transform it
by diminishing the family control (or even eliminate it altogether).
Thus, there might be different types of succession. First type might be
called a defensive succession, in which family tries to preserve the control over
enterprise at all costs. Second type might be called a transformatory succession,
in which the company is transformed so as to maximize the wealth of family
even at the cost of reducing the family control.
It seems that the rst type of the succession dominates among SMEs (Mi-
cro-, Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises) as they operate undiversied
business and the rm’s success depends very much on the use of idiosyncrat-
ic knowledge – tacit and informal knowledge which has been acquired over
long time and their use is of limited application elsewhere. This might ex-
plain why small rms try to nd the successor among family members, rela-
tives or close friends. This explains also why a career path in such small rms
is of limited value to outsiders. The conjunction of these two factors creates
the peculiarity of succession in small family rms4. Holmstrom and Milgrom
have suggested that this type of family rm can be analyzed as a “multi-
target unit” (Holmstrom, Milgrom, 1991), whose members contribute to the
generation of income and prots, but at the same time they are a community
of organizational and entrepreneurial knowledge, and not the least, of emo-
3 For research results on accomplished succession processes among Polish family
businesses see (Surdej and Wach, 2009).
4 Using the criteria differentiating family rms we see that these rms are character-
ized by strong overlapping of family ownership, management control and involvement
in day to day functioning.
Part I. Exploring innovativE and EntrEprEnEurial managEmEnt
64
tional support. Thus, in family rms key people are renumerated for all the
functions they full.
But, a different succession is needed when a family rm has grown or
has been set to grow. A growing rm requires an access to external nance,
if external nancing comes in the form of equity, a rm governing structure
has to change in order to accommodate outside investors. In addition, such
a growing family rm has to hire external managers as it has no possibility to
ll all posts of responsibility with qualied family members. These remarks
support the statement that in a context of a family rm’s growth a succession
happens most likely before the owner founder reaches the age of retirement
or physical incapacity. A growth oriented family rm will reach the thresh-
old of succession as ownership, management and organizational transfor-
mation earlier than survival oriented family rms. In such growth oriented
family rms succession means the introduction of formal rules that reduce
the importance of personal relations and the introduction of accounting pro-
cedures which would increase the transparency of rm’s nancial operations
to outside investors. A transformatory succession leads to the implementa-
tion of governance standards which would not differentiate family control-
led companies from other publicly quoted companies. More, family control-
led companies, may as it is shown by research of Ashiq Ali, Tai-Yuan Chen
and Suresh Radhakrishnan (2007) on a sample of family controlled compa-
nies quoted at NYSE, perform better than non-family controlled companies
in terms of the quality of nancial reports, voluntary disclosure of negative
information and voluntary information about internal corporate practices.
Contemporary academic literature converges in a conclusion that busi-
nesses often begin by taking advantage of small (relatively) networks sup-
port,5 and that network relationships play a key role in facilitating exchange
in developing economies such as sub-Saharan Africa and that „These rela-
tionship differ from pure market exchange in that they perform economic
functions other than trade itself, such as information sharing, informal en-
forcement of contracts, and interlinking” (Fafchamps, 2004, p. 294). But, the
exclusive reliance on informal networks limits the efciency of market ex-
change and business growth. If an institutional environment does not pro-
5 A study of over 14,000 Mexican small enterprises shows that owners chiey used
their own savings (61%) or those of their family and friends (14%) to start their own rms
(Hernando–Trillo, Pagan, Paxton, 2005) conrming the relevance of what jokingly be-
came known as “the 3F source – meaning Family, Friends and Fools”.
65
Chapter 4. Succession Planning in Polish Family Businesses...
vide formal instruments to substitute for informal ones, the economy suffers
from unexploited efciency gains and growth potential.
Family rms can be analyzed as rms whose foundation and functioning
depends on a particular network – family. It is a network whose borders are
dened by pre-existing bonds of kinship – that is why it is closed and its en-
largement proceeds by births or marriages. Larger similar networks are also
traced by pre-existing bonds of tribal or ethnic origins. Larger a network is,
there is more gains to be achieved from trade or cooperation, but its expan-
sion might increase the difculty in triggering joint action (for instance en-
tering exchange, completing transaction). Thus, a factor such as the strenght
of family ties might which might be productive to initiate a rm, can prove
detrimental to its growth. The quality of institutional environment seems to
act as a factor determining the likelihood with which family rms implement
growth oriented succession transformation.
There is a growing amount of economic literature devoted to the relation-
ship between institutional factors and economic performance of rms6 and
more generally between institutions and economic development7.
Scholars point out many factors inuencing the succession process. The
institutional environment plays an important role in the succession determi-
nants (Surdej, 2009; Wach, 2010). It is stressed that three variable such as the
development of capital markets; the minority ownership protection and the
legal contracts enforcements, are of special importance in this regard.
The depth and institutional diversity of capital markets broadens the
scope of succession methods in growth oriented family rms. Thus, for in-
stance, the existence of venture capital funds allows family rms to get exter-
nal nancing from sources (nancial institutions) which monitor them, but
do not aspire to management control and it allows to draw on their experi-
ence in preparing the company for „going public”8. The existance and the size
of the stock exchange allows a company to „leverage its capital” and to ac-
6 See especially the articles in the Journal of Financial Economics (various issues).
7 For a useful summary of the current stage of discussion see (Tabellini, 2008).
8 These are not theoretical possibilities, but solutions implemented in such diverse
countries like Poland (Zielona Budka – family rm producing ice-creams accepted ven-
ture fund nancing, reduced its control, went public and withdrew from the public quot-
ed company, but Mr. Grycan – the founder of Zielona Budka, started a new ice-cream
producing rm called after his name Grycan, when due period of abstention from com-
peting activities has expired – see: J. Cieński, The Ice-Cream King of Poland, in “Financial
Times”, 22 July 2009.
Part I. Exploring innovativE and EntrEprEnEurial managEmEnt
66
celerate the development9. The data gathered by the World Bank shows that
advanced economies are characterizied by a higher level of stock market cap-
italization, which conrms a hypothesis that in such countries a family rm
can be more easily transformed into a public, but family controlled, rm.
The question of the strength of minority ownership protections is directly
related to the growth oriented succession. A growing family rm is likely to
acquire other (non-family) shareholders. By this family ceases to remain the
sole owner, but it might remain the majority shareholder. But to get an exter-
nal investor the family has to credibly signal among other that it will not get
involved in self-dealing and in extracting private benets of the rm´s con-
trol. Unless legal regulations reduce the threat of self-dealing, including the
extraction of private prots through the transaction between related compa-
nies, external investors not related to the family, will not have trust in invest-
ing in them (Djankov, La Porta, Lopez-de-Silanes, Shleifer, 2008). Although
Djankow, La Porta, Lopez-de-Silanes and Shleifer seem to link the strength
of anti-self dealing regulations with the legal origin (according to them com-
mon law countries provide stronger protection than the Continental Europe
Law Countries), it seems that in general the level of minority owners pro-
tection varies with the level of economic development and that developing
economies are characterized by a weaker minority ownership protections re-
gardless of the origin of the inherited law.
The recognition of the importance of formal contract enforcement mecha-
nisms comes from the observation that many economic transactions are not
of instant and simultaneous character. A quid happens rst and there might
be uncertainty about quo. A promise to deliver quo needs to be backed by
an enforcement mechanism. Subsequent reports of the World Bank10 try to
measure the quality of enforcing contracts in all countries. The data provid-
ing by the World Bank point at a positive correlation between the easiness of
enforcing contracts and the level of country’s economic development: Devel-
oped economies (with notable exception of Latvia) score better in the ranking
of contracts enforcement.
9 Family focused nature of business is perceived as one of principal obstacles facing the
private equity nancing, BUT Private Equity Financing might be ‘help for family members to
evolve beyond founders’ [Eid, 2006].
10 The series “Doing Business” with the most recent report: Doing Business 2009 by
the World Bank.
67
Chapter 4. Succession Planning in Polish Family Businesses...
4.3. Methodological Assumptions
The research was conducted within the project “Succession Scenarios in
the First Generation of Family Firms in Poland” 11.
The main aim of this empirical research was to identify the succession
modes of the rst generation of Polish entrepreneurs. In order to investigate
the research problem we have conducted the empirical survey and have an-
alysed the collected data in order to identify the dominant succession mode
in Polish family rms, and to dene the determinants of the choice of a given
succession strategy.
57
Figure 4.1. Research Model: Determinants of Succession in Family Firms
Based upon existing literature we have tentatively indicated the following groups of
determinants which are likely to influence the choice of succession mode (three internal and
two external forces):
- structural parameters of an entrepreneur’s family;
- demographic parameters of the company;
- individual entrepreneurial history of an owner/founder;
- parameters of the organizational and legal environment in which a company functions;
- basic parameters of the sector in which a company functions.
It can be supposed that these factors determine the choice of the succession mode and the
choice of the preferred control level of family over the company). Figure 4.1 and table 4.1
summarize also the factors that determine the choice of succession methods in general. With
reference to the discussion developed so far it should be stressed that the relative weight of
factors changes depending on the type of succession. A defensive succession depends much on
the family’s structural parameters and on intra-family relationships (conflicts, emotions). A
11 The research project was conducted at Cracow University of Economics – Faculty
of Economics and International Relations in the years 2008–2010. The research project
was fully nanced by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of Poland.
Part I. Exploring innovativE and EntrEprEnEurial managEmEnt
68
Based upon existing literature we have tentatively indicated the following
groups of determinants which are likely to inuence the choice of succession
mode (three internal and two external forces):
▪ structural parameters of an entrepreneur’s family;
▪ demographic parameters of the company;
▪ individual entrepreneurial history of an owner/founder;
▪ parameters of the organizational and legal environment in which a com-
pany functions;
▪ basic parameters of the sector in which a company functions.
It can be supposed that these factors determine the choice of the succes-
sion mode and the choice of the preferred control level of family over the
company). Figure 4.1 and table 4.1 summarize also the factors that determine
the choice of succession methods in general. With reference to the discus-
sion developed so far it should be stressed that the relative weight of factors
changes depending on the type of succession. A defensive succession depends
much on the family’s structural parameters and on intra-family relationships
(conicts, emotions). A transformatory succession depends on the existence of
institutional instruments which help to solve the conict between the growth
orientation of a rm and the founder/owner interests in preserving/increas-
ing family wealth.
Table 4.1. Variables of the Implemented Research Model
Factors Variables
structural parameters of a family the size of the family
generation spread
sex of the rst child,
relationship within the family
▪
▪
▪
▪
demographic parameters of an enterprise age
size
scope
the branch of the industry
▪
▪
▪
▪
biographical parameters of an owner age
sex
level of education
entrepreneurial attitude
history of earlier entrepreneurial activities
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪
branch parameters innovativeness level within the branch
competitiveness degree within the branch
▪
▪
69
Chapter 4. Succession Planning in Polish Family Businesses...
Factors Variables
legal parameters rules of corporate governance
development of capital markets
minority ownership protections
legal contracts enforcement
▪
▪
▪
▪
family control level family absolute control
family majority control
family minority control
▪
▪
▪
succession method passing the family business to the heir
selling the whole family business
selling the part of the family business
quoting on the stock exchange
▪
▪
▪
▪
Manager perception was chosen as an operationalization method, thus it
assures the acceptable correctness and the reliability, and rst of all tops other
methods in relation to practical usage, what is more it is applied in analogous
research very often (Lyon, Lumpki, Dess, 2000, p. 1055–1085). This method
was applied for all qualitative variables. Thus a survey (proceeded with a di-
agnostic pre-survey) was applied as a main investigative technique, replen-
ished with technique of observation. Each area was veried by asking from 5
to 7 questions. For quantitative variables as operationalization method data
analysis was applied. In support of received and accepted variables the ques-
tionnaire of inquiry was constructed as a basic investigative tool. Qualitative
approach in an inquiry was applied mainly, which is the most often applied
approach in analogous investigations. Thus, for evaluation of variables 5-de-
gree Likert scale with qualitative answers was applied.
4.4. Empirical Findings
Research survey was conducted on a random sample of 496 family enter-
prises in rst quarter of 2009 (table 4.2 and gure 4.2). The companies were
divided into three groups:
▪ 85 family rms which were sold or transferred (17.13%),
▪ 147 family rms which plan to face the choice of succession (29.64%),
▪ 264 family rms which are not interested in succession planning
(53.23%).
While grouping the studied family businesses, the family structure and
history of the research sample seems to be quite interesting:
Part I. Exploring innovativE and EntrEprEnEurial managEmEnt
70
▪ 376 studied family rms were initiated by a current owner – so called rst
generation family business (75.80%),
▪ 76 studied family rms were initiated by a previous owner – so called sec-
ond generation family business (15.32%),
▪ 36 studied family rms are multigenerational with long traditions (7.25%),
the oldest one was established in 1869.
Firm Sector:
Agriculture 2.22% (11 cases)
Manufacturing 13.91% (69 cases)
Services and Trade 86.66% (4210 cases)
Business Scope of Operation:
Local 36.50% (181 cases)
Regional 24.20% (120 cases)
Domestic 22.98% (114 cases)
European 9.27% (46 cases)
International 6.85% (34 cases)
Firm age:
0–5 years 17.22% (82 cases)
6–10 years 17.65% (84 cases)
11 and more years 65.12% (310 cases)
Business Legal Form:
Sole Proprietorship 70.56% (350 cases)
Unlimited partnership 12.30% (61 cases)
Limited partnership 7.46% (37 cases)
Limited company 9.07% (45 cases)
Others 0.6% (3 cases)
59
Figure 4.2. Characteristics of the sample firms according to their size (N = 496)
The analyzed group of family enterprises, which plan to carry out the succession in
the future, includes 147 units. The sample is interesting as far as the age of the studied family
firms are concerned. The youngest firm is 1 and the oldest is 60 years old, but only one fourth
of the studies firms are older than 19 (lower quartile Q
1
= 11, upper quartile Q
3
= 19). The
arithmetic mean for the age variable is 16, nevertheless the standard deviation is 8, which is
quite a wide range. The value separating the higher half of a sample is M
e
= 15.
The studied population can be divided into two groups. The first one includes 25% of
the research sample. They are the firms that plan to carry out the succession process within a
couple of forthcoming years (not longer than in 5 years’ time). Three fourth of the research
sample have plans concerning the succession of ownership and control, but in longer
perspective (more than in 5 years’ time).
Majority of the responders declares that the firm will be still a family business, what is
more the detailed distributions of answers are as follow:
- 110 cases (74.8%) definitely yes,
- 34 cases (23.1%) rather yes,
- 2 cases (1.4%) not obvious yet,
- 1 case (0.7%) no.
The analyzed group of family enterprises, which plan to carry out the suc-
cession in the future, includes 147 units. The sample is interesting as far as the
71
Chapter 4. Succession Planning in Polish Family Businesses...
age of the studied family rms are concerned. The youngest rm is 1 and the
oldest is 60 years old, but only one fourth of the studies rms are older than
19 (lower quartile Q1 = 11, upper quartile Q3 = 19). The arithmetic mean for
the age variable is 16, nevertheless the standard deviation is 8, which is quite
a wide range. The value separating the higher half of a sample is Me = 15.
The studied population can be divided into two groups. The rst one in-
cludes 25% of the research sample. They are the rms that plan to carry out
the succession process within a couple of forthcoming years (not longer than
in 5 years’ time). Three fourth of the research sample have plans concern-
ing the succession of ownership and control, but in longer perspective (more
than in 5 years’ time).
Majority of the responders declares that the rm will be still a family busi-
ness, what is more the detailed distributions of answers are as follow:
▪ 110 cases (74.8%) denitely yes,
▪ 34 cases (23.1%) rather yes,
▪ 2 cases (1.4%) not obvious yet,
▪ 1 case (0.7%) no.
The level of the family control over the family business is quite interesting
(table 4.3). Both, at present at after the planning succession, the family abso-
lute or majority share is declared by 119 family rms, however the percent-
age of rms declaring the family absolute share is much higher at present.
Family Control Level At present After the planning
succession
Family absolute share 112 101
76.2% 68.7%
Family majority share 7 18
4.8% 12.2%
Family minority share 26 24
17.7% 16.3%
No answer 2 4
1.3% 2.7%
In the studied population there were only three ways of planning succes-
sion observed. The most popular way of succession is going to be the passing
Part I. Exploring innovativE and EntrEprEnEurial managEmEnt
72
to the heir (95.9% in 141 cases), other forms of transfer control and ownership
were not so popular, among them selling the whole business (1.4% in 2 cases)
and selling the part of the business share (1.4% in 2 cases).
The plans for the forthcoming succession will be prepared – according
to responders’ declaration – in 76 out of 147 cases (51.7%), which is quite
a satisfying gure comparing to the accomplished succession research results
(Surdej and Wach, 2009), but unfortunately it is still a low gure. The number
of issues in the forthcoming succession plan differs from 1 to 6 (1 issue in
33 cases, 2 issues in 29 cases, 3 issues in 4 cases, 4 issues in 8 cases and 6 is-
sues in 2 cases).
Considered elements of the forthcoming succession plan are as follows:
▪ the identity of the successor in 43 cases (29.25%),
▪ the preparation of the successor in 38 cases (25.85%),
▪ the division of shares in 29 cases (19.73%),
▪ taxation issues in 20 cases (13.60%),
▪ sale and purchase of shares in 14 cases (9.52%),
▪ external shareholders in 4 cases (2.72%). .
Only in one fourth of cases the forthcoming successor is going to be a fe-
male (versus 72.1% of male). The younger forthcoming successor within the
family will be 20 and the oldest will be 52 years old, however only 31.9% of
the declared age answers exceed 30 years old, which proves that the second
generation of Polish enterprises are going to be extremely actively involved
in currently run family businesses (most of them are currently involved in
the family rms, both passively and actively). While planning the succes-
sion process, the potential successor plays the important role, however al-
most a one third of the initial founders takes only one criterion into consid-
eration, but two criteria are applied by another one third of responders (three
criteria by 27.21% and ve criteria only by 1.36% of responders). In the stud-
ied rms the following issues are going to be taken into account in the suc-
cession planning process:
▪ family reasons (in 118 out of 147 cases),
▪ qualications of the successor (88 cases),
▪ motivation of the successor (65 cases),
▪ personal reasons (5 cases)
▪ other reasons (7 cases).
73
Chapter 4. Succession Planning in Polish Family Businesses...
4.5. Conclusions and Implications
Ownership and control succession in family rms is a topic of both theo-
retical and empirical interest as it helps to bridge the gap between economics
and management sciences. Until recently succession in family rms has been
predominantly studied by management scholars, while family rms efcien-
cy properties has been analyzed by economists. Fortunately, more and more
scholars try to bridge this divide and, as it has been shown by John Roberts
in his inuential “Modern Firm” (2004), they apply assumptions, approaches
and models which show an ability to develop a uniform approach to study-
ing social and economic phenomena. Succession in family rms is a choice of
a model of organization transformation with signicant implication for the
efciency of markets and modern economies. Thus, they share a broader the-
oretical perspective integrating economic and management research.
The analysis of the succession in family rms should be transformed from
a rather narrow perspective of identifying, educating and nominating a suc-
cessor in order to keep the control of the rm in the hands of the family to
a problem of analyzing succession choices in growth oriented companies as
such a succession requires a deeper transformation of the enterprise organi-
zational structure and corporate practices.
In our study the sample of 496 family rms was surveyed, but only in
85 cases the succession process was found accomplished and in 147 cases the
initial founders of family businesses are planning the forthcoming succession.
The research results allow to formulate the following tentative conclusions:
▪ The most popular way of succession in the studied group is the passing to
the heir (95.9%).
▪ After 20 years of economic transformation, founders of new enterprises,
who are the rst generation of Polish capitalists, have started to initiate
the process of the transfer of ownership and/or control over their enter-
prises. One fourth of the studies rms accomplished the succession not
earlier than 2 years ago, and the half not earlier than 6 years ago.
The research conducted by us has been inspired by theoretical questions.
But due to the lack of reliable data we could test theoretical hypotheses in the
context of transitional economy. Instead we have described the important
economic phenomenon and have formulated several exploratory hypothesis
which would guide our future research.
Part I. Exploring innovativE and EntrEprEnEurial managEmEnt
74
References
Ali A., Chen T.Y., Radhakrishnan S. (2007): Corporate disclosures by family rms, in Jour-
nal of Accounting and Economics, vol. 44, p. 238–286.
Cieński J. (2009): The Ice-Cream King of Poland, in “Financial Times”, July 22.
Djankov S., La Porta R., Lopez-de-Silanes F., Shleifer A. (2008): The law and economics of
self-dealing, in Journal of Financial Economics 88.
Eid F. (2006): Private Equity Finance as a Growth Engine: What It Means for Emerging
Markets, in Business Economics, April.
Fafchamps M. (2004): Market Institutions in Sub-Saharan Africa, MIT Press, Cambridge.
Fleming, P. D. (1997): Case study—Helping business owners prepare for the future, “Journal of
Accountancy”, May.
Hernando-Trillo F., Pagan J., Paxton J.(2005): Start up Capital, Microentreprises and Tech-
nical Efciency in Mexico, Review of Development Economics, vol. 9, nr 3.
Holmstrom B., Milgrom P. (1991): Multitask Principal-Agent Analyses: Incentive Con-
tracts, Asset Ownership, and Job Design,” in Journal of Law, Economics and Organiza-
tion, vol. 7(0), pages 24–52, Special I.
Lyon D.W., Lumpkin G.T., Dess G.G., (2000): Enhancing Entrepreneurial Orientation Re-
search: Operationalizing and Measuring a Key Strategic Decision Making Process, “Journal
of Management”, vol. 26, no. 5
Matthews C. H., Moore T. W., Fialko, A. S. (1999): Succession in the family rm: A cognitive
categorization perspective, “Family Business Review”, 12(2), 159–169.
Roberts J. (2004): The Modern Firm. Organizational Design for Performance and Growth,
Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Surdej A. (2009): Succession in Family Firms: Development Economics Perspectives, Working
Report, United Nations University – World Institute for Development Economics Re-
search, Helsinki (mimeo).
Surdej A., Wach K. (2009): Succession Scenarios in Polish Family Firms. An Empirical Study
(chapter 8) in: Managing Ownership and Succession in Family Firms, eds. A. Surdej and
K. Wach, Scholar Publishing House, Cracow–Warsaw.
Tabellini G. (2008): Institutions and Culture, in Journal of the European Economic Associa-
tion, April–May 2008.
Wach K., (2010): Polityka Unii Europejskiej w zakresie sukcesji przedsiębiorstw (Europe-
an Union Policy in the Field of Enterprise Succession), „Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu
Ekonomicznego w Krakowie”, Kraków.
Ward J.L., (2004): Perpetuating the Family Business, Palgrave Macmillan, New York.
