Adapts family business frameworks to reflect the evolving structures and dynamics of contemporary families, indicating important shifts in ownership and management.
Purpose Families are becoming increasingly diverse; however, this development is only partially reflected in the family business literature. The majority of the existing research still draws on assumptions aligned with traditional family structures and therefore, may not fully capture the contemporary dynamics of business families. These developments change the mechanisms through which families influence ownership distribution, managerial roles and the family business lifecycle. Design/methodology/approach We apply the theory adaptation perspective by Jaakkola (2020), problematizing the assumptions of a core family that shape both the three-circle model and the lifecycle model. Drawing on family science, family business and entrepreneurship theories, we illustrate multilevel shifts that shape the zeitgeist of business families, broadening the conceptual scope of the two frameworks to better capture such timely developments. Findings First, we adapt the three-circle model (Tagiuri and Davis, 1996) by integrating a multilevel framework that specifies the mechanisms through which contemporary family structures reshape ownership, management and the business family. Second, we propose two additional tiers that extend the lifecycle framework of Gersick et al. (1999): the Contemporary perspective and the Frontiers perspective. Together, these two tiers preserve the strengths of the classic model while providing an update to the conceptual baseline for the analyses of family businesses. Originality/value Current family business literature concentrating on the business family mainly assumes the business family has a stable core family structure. This paper adapts both the three-circle model and the lifecycle framework to encompass contemporary family realities and specifies how they reshape development across business, ownership and the business family.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Felden et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: