In this article, we examine the impact of cluster externalities on the economic performance of firms. Specifically, we focus on how the utilization of these externalities by firms is affected by the macroeconomic instability caused by the recessionary shock of 2008/2009 and on how the impact of the crisis affects firms with different combinative capabilities. Using data from more than 16,000 manufacturing and business service firms located in 390 German regions, we employ within-firm regression techniques to estimate the impact of cross-level interactions between firm- and cluster-level determinants on phase-related differences in firm performance between a pre-crisis (2004–2007) and a crisis period (2009–2011). Our empirical results suggest that firms particularly benefit from the interaction of broad combinative capabilities and variety-driven cluster externalities, thereby implying that externalities are effectively utilized by firms. Furthermore, the results indicate that both strength and direction of these cross-level interactions strongly depend on the prevailing macroeconomic cycle: while the utilization of cluster externalities works best within a stable macroeconomic environment (2004–2007), it is seemingly interrupted when being exposed to economic turmoil (2009–2011). Yet, the crisis-induced interruption of the utilization is mainly restricted to the national recession in 2009. As soon as the macroeconomic pressure diminishes (2010–2011), we observe a reversion of the utilization mechanisms to the pre-crisis level.

Family firms are increasingly recognized as a heterogeneous group of businesses with specific strengths and weaknesses that make them either superior or inferior to non-family firms. Recent research has therefore started shifting away from comparisons between family firms and non-family firms to comparisons between family firms. This study investigates the influence of two key paramete rs of 'familiness' - the generation in control and the (non-family) management diversity - on family firm innovation. While agency-based arguments stress the liabilities of these two parameters of family influence, resource-based arguments highlight their benefits. Conflicting effect hypotheses are derived and tested in the context of German family firms. The empirical results imply that family firms' generational development and higher management diversity influence their innovation positively and that their benefits outweigh their liabilities in the context of German family firms.

In this paper, we examine the macro-to-micro-transition of cluster externalities to firms and how it is affected by the macroeconomic instability caused by the recessionary shock of 2008/2009. Using data from 16,166 manufacturing and business services firms nested in 390 German regions, we employ within-firm regression techniques to estimate the impact of cross level interactions between firm- and cluster-level determinants on phase-related differences in firm performance between a pre-crisis (2004-2007) and a crisis period (2009-2011).The empirical results validate the existence of a macro-to-micro-transition that evolves best in the case of broad firm-level capabilities and variety-driven externalities. Furthermore, the results indicate that the transition strongly depends on the macroeconomic cycle. While the transition particularly benefits from a stable macroeconomic environment (2004-2007), its mechanisms are interrupted when being exposed to economic turmoil (2009-2011). Yet, the crisis induced interruption of the transition is mainly restricted to the national recession in 2009. As soon as the macroeconomic pressure diminishes (2010-2011), we observe a reversion of the transmission mechanisms to the pre-crisis level.Our study contributes to the existing literature by corroborating previous findings that the economic performance of firms depends on a working macro-to-micro transition of external resources, which presupposes sufficient cluster externalities and adequate firm-level combinative capabilities. In contrast to previous studies on this topic, the transition mechanism is not modeled as time-invariant. Instead, it is coupled to the prevailing macroeconomic regime.

In the context of turnaround management, key performance indicators (KPIs) are needed to illustrate the effects of measures taken during the turnaround process. These KPIs are usually scattered over different data sources in the company. This paper describes a pattern construct conceived to relate KPIs to both their data source and the measure effects they are supposed to document. The pattern may serve as a basis for generally relating corporate KPIs to their data sources.

PurposeResearch disputes whether family businesses are more or less innovative than their nonfamily counterparts. So far, no consistent results have been achieved. The recently introduced willingness and ability framework suggest that idiosyncratic behavior is only to be expected if both sufficiency conditions – willingness and ability – are fulfilled. The purpose of this paper is to test this hypothesis empirically.Design/methodology/approachA large cross-sectional sample of German small- and medium-sized enterprises is used. The sample offers – alongside numerous moderators commonly used in innovation research – several family firm definitions. Given the censored nature of the endogenous variable chosen, a Tobit model is used.FindingsDrawing upon agency theory and the ability and willingness paradox in family firm innovation, it finds family firms to be less innovative only if both willingness and ability conditions are fulfilled.Originality/valueTo the best of the knowledge, the study provides the first attempt to test the willingness and ability theorem. Therefore, the commonly used family firm-specific measures (self-assessment-, ownership-, and management criterion) are operationalized to better understand what drives innovativeness in family firms. The findings thus add to the ongoing discussion on what really drives family impact on firm-level decisions.

Research disputes whether family businesses are more or less innovative than their nonfamily counterparts. So far no consistent results have been achieved. The manifold attempts to investigate the matter foremost concentrated on R&D expenditures, often sampled publically listed (large) companies, used varying definitions for family firms, and frequently lacked key moderators to explain innovation. This study follows the Oslo Manual and uses product innovation output as a measurement for innovativeness instead. The data are a large cross sectional sample offering – next to numerous moderators commonly used in innovation research – several family firm definitions. Drawing upon the resource based view, agency theory, and the ability and willingness paradox in family firm innovation, it finds able and willing family firms to be less innovative.

Despite the inherent differences between family and non-family firms and heterogeneity among family companies, family involvement is under-researched in organizational studies, which limits the generalization of findings and leads to theoretical ambiguity. However, we do not know enough about the family firm specific determinants of inter-firm cooperation and how this may affect firm performance. Thus, we examine formal and informal cooperative strategies of family firms in the tourism and hospitality sector in the metropolitan area of Hamburg (Germany) by drawing upon networks and social capital theories and the extant family firm literature. Since cooperation is a strategic action which can be influenced by outsiders' perceptions, we do not solely focus on family firm owners' attitude towards collaboration. Instead, we develop propositions about family firms' cooperative behavior derived from an initially conducted online survey with tourism experts. We find support for our propositions that tourism experts expect family involvement to drive firms' cooperative behavior which in turn can influence firm performance. Thereby, personal attributes of the cooperation partner seem to be more salient in family firms than in non-family firms. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.