外文翻譯--家族企業(yè)戰(zhàn)略管理過去的研究和未來的挑戰(zhàn)（節(jié)選）

1、<p><b>　　外文翻譯：</b></p><p>　　家族企業(yè)戰(zhàn)略管理：過去的研究和未來的挑戰(zhàn)（節(jié)選）</p><p>　　原文來源： CALIS外文期刊網(wǎng)</p><p><b>　　譯文正文：</b></p><p><b>　　包含家庭成員 </b><

2、;/p><p>　　在戰(zhàn)略實(shí)施過程中,家族企業(yè)有選擇使用家族或非家族成員的自由。 蘭茲伯格(1983)建議給所有的親戚提供學(xué)習(xí)的機(jī)會(huì),但公司只能錄用那些最有能力的人。 從戰(zhàn)略管理的角度來看可以作為一個(gè)起點(diǎn)，但也應(yīng)考慮家庭成員納入或排除在政治方面的事務(wù)(麥克米蘭和瓊斯,1986)。</p><p>　　總的來說,研究發(fā)現(xiàn)家庭成員是比非家族成員有更多的產(chǎn)出(羅森布萊特,deMik、安德森、和約翰遜

3、,1985分;基爾和基爾,1987)。 然而,在勞動(dòng)補(bǔ)償?shù)膯栴}上,羅森布萊特得出這樣的結(jié)論:家庭成員相信他們更勞累,薪酬較低。然而基爾確認(rèn)為家庭成員能得到更高的工資和額外的補(bǔ)貼。 這一問題矛盾還值得進(jìn)一步研究,因?yàn)槿绻荒芤庾R(shí)到和處理好認(rèn)知與現(xiàn)實(shí)之間的明顯差異，可能會(huì)導(dǎo)致戰(zhàn)略實(shí)施出現(xiàn)問題。</p><p>　　相反，在基于家的企業(yè)工作者的研究中， 赫克和沃克 (1993)發(fā)現(xiàn)家庭成員和無關(guān)的工作者比相關(guān)的工作者(

4、即，表兄弟)有更好的績(jī)效。他們提醒說通過家庭關(guān)系而就業(yè)的親戚可能是最不能干的。 雖然它提供了家業(yè)企業(yè)的一個(gè)聘用戰(zhàn)略，這樣研究還有待于在大家庭企業(yè)中去證實(shí)。我們也知道否認(rèn)親屬就業(yè)機(jī)會(huì)導(dǎo)致的后果。因?yàn)檎衅笡Q定是一個(gè)公司人力資源決策中最重要的部分，為了公司的業(yè)績(jī)，進(jìn)一步研究這個(gè)問題，顯然需要的。</p><p>　　從一個(gè)戰(zhàn)略管理方面，對(duì)于家族中婦女的研究是另一個(gè)卓有成效的區(qū)域。 各種各樣的研究報(bào)告認(rèn)為婦女不適合被考慮

5、成為家族企業(yè)的首席執(zhí)行官。 其他研究員建議，女性成員作為家庭生活的看守者比男性成員對(duì)家業(yè)的有更好的效果。對(duì)于婦女自己來說，就應(yīng)該獲得適當(dāng)?shù)钠髽I(yè)技能、訓(xùn)練和經(jīng)驗(yàn)。 如何最好地訓(xùn)練和部署家庭女性成員的商業(yè)、政治影響以及職業(yè)發(fā)展機(jī)會(huì)和對(duì)家族企業(yè)績(jī)效的影響,在這些領(lǐng)域都值得關(guān)注。</p><p><b>　　代際問題</b></p><p>　　雖然他們是密切的繼承關(guān)系，但我

6、們已列為戰(zhàn)略實(shí)施的一部分，而不是因?yàn)樗麄儗?duì)公司日常的日常運(yùn)作的潛在影響戰(zhàn)略制定的代際問題。許多在這方面所做的研究一直是父親和兒子之間的關(guān)系，明顯是片面的。研究人員報(bào)告說，創(chuàng)始人是一般的專制、不愿分享權(quán)力）和戰(zhàn)略保守的。另一方面，兒子一般不耐煩戰(zhàn)略轉(zhuǎn)變，個(gè)人獨(dú)立性，并希望有機(jī)會(huì)證明自己的價(jià)值。絕大多數(shù)的家族文獻(xiàn)似乎認(rèn)為，沖突是有害的，破壞性的。這可能是真的。然而，沖突也可以驅(qū)動(dòng)改變的力量。判決之前的研究，從戰(zhàn)略管理的角度研究的程度和類型的

7、沖突發(fā)生在雙方家庭和商業(yè)情況。更重要的是，這種研究可以探討沖突影響戰(zhàn)略的實(shí)施與企業(yè)績(jī)效。</p><p>　　杜馬（1989）得出結(jié)論認(rèn)為，父子關(guān)系，不能一概而論，還要推廣到父女關(guān)系。她建議，父女關(guān)系更加和諧和性質(zhì)不同。女兒愿意承擔(dān)起照顧父親責(zé)任的作用。因此，他們不太可能像兒子一樣在與父親的沖突中出現(xiàn)權(quán)力和控制的問題。這是非常重要的，因?yàn)樗峁┝艘粋€(gè)基礎(chǔ)比較研究代際關(guān)系的基礎(chǔ)。在什么樣的背景下考慮戰(zhàn)略的實(shí)施？通過

8、仔細(xì)匹配父子、父女情況類似的企業(yè)，研究可以回答這樣的問題。</p><p>　　當(dāng)一個(gè)領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者離開時(shí)，離開風(fēng)格可能有所不同。索南費(fèi)爾德和斯彭斯（ 1989）確定了四個(gè)領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人的出發(fā)風(fēng)格：君主，將軍，省長(zhǎng)和大使。他們認(rèn)為，一個(gè)家族企業(yè)的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者最佳離開方式是大使風(fēng)格，誰領(lǐng)導(dǎo)的組織中等水平的增長(zhǎng)，認(rèn)識(shí)到下臺(tái)的時(shí)間，并保持與組織的顧問接觸。大使風(fēng)格雖然可以出現(xiàn)概念優(yōu)越，這并沒有被經(jīng)驗(yàn)證明。無論是或不是，現(xiàn)有的文獻(xiàn)提供了作為離

9、境領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人如何可以說服遵循適當(dāng)離境的風(fēng)格，或繼承人可以減少一個(gè)誰也不能這樣說服領(lǐng)導(dǎo)的有害影響的一些線索。</p><p><b>　　兄弟姐妹的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)</b></p><p>　　弗里德曼（1991）認(rèn)為，盡管競(jìng)爭(zhēng)是針對(duì)于父母的愛和關(guān)注的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)。這是父母的反應(yīng)，主要影響子女之間的相互關(guān)系。建議解決不和諧的兄弟關(guān)系，包括鼓勵(lì)開放溝通和討論關(guān)于他們的對(duì)手，并讓他們學(xué)會(huì)換位思考，

10、并鼓勵(lì)他們重新確定目前相互之間的關(guān)系。從家族企業(yè)的觀念出發(fā)，然而，我們并不知道是否或者何時(shí)，在家族業(yè)務(wù)中兄弟姐妹的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)是不和諧的。研究人員認(rèn)為，什么是好的，家庭和諧是很好的業(yè)務(wù)，但這不一定是事實(shí)。同時(shí)了解什么是良好的家庭是重要的，家族企業(yè)也需要了解權(quán)衡參與維持家庭和諧。這是戰(zhàn)略管理的角度來說。例如，萊文森（1971）建議，如果孩子們提供的每個(gè)操作導(dǎo)致兄弟姐妹的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)可以減弱。這可能會(huì)或可能無法正常工作，因?yàn)槊總€(gè)操作的成功或失敗取決于家庭是

11、否和睦。例如，如果位置是成功的關(guān)鍵，兄弟姐妹的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)可以增加競(jìng)爭(zhēng)的結(jié)果作為一個(gè)負(fù)責(zé)操作的最佳地點(diǎn)。操作和控制決定一個(gè)家族企業(yè)的多元化，也影響了公司的盈利能力和競(jìng)爭(zhēng)力。</p><p>　　研究表明，家族企業(yè)是不水平分化的，而且比非家族企業(yè)更依賴于非正式的控制。因此，家族企業(yè)要更成功就需要一個(gè)精簡(jiǎn)和明確的結(jié)構(gòu)。大多數(shù)的研究主要是家族企業(yè)的組</p><p>　　結(jié)構(gòu)演變和變化，然而，與專業(yè)管理

12、的轉(zhuǎn)型有關(guān)。</p><p>　　霍蘭德和埃曼通過制定進(jìn)化模型找出了三種不同的方法。第一種方法涉及公司的發(fā)展階段和家族的代際傳承。第二個(gè)側(cè)重于企業(yè)的需求和公司的關(guān)鍵個(gè)人的生命周期之間的相互作用。第三種觀點(diǎn)是企業(yè)、家庭和關(guān)鍵個(gè)人三者之間之間的相互作用。在41家企業(yè)的實(shí)證研究中，霍蘭和奧利弗找到由Ward提出的三階段模型的支持。在所有這些模型的基本主題是非家庭成員的責(zé)任和權(quán)力的委派在不同階段的顯著變化。</p&

13、gt;<p>　　一個(gè)家族企業(yè)，因?yàn)榻?jīng)濟(jì)的增長(zhǎng)，在家族內(nèi)缺乏管理技能，準(zhǔn)備繼承、或變更業(yè)務(wù)的規(guī)范和價(jià)值觀，可能需要專業(yè)化和委托權(quán)威。但是，業(yè)主經(jīng)理人可能不愿因缺乏正規(guī)訓(xùn)練和管理技術(shù)知識(shí)不足以及昂貴的開銷，害怕失去控制或認(rèn)為專業(yè)化是不必要的。從戰(zhàn)略管理的其他研究角度和途徑來看，可能會(huì)導(dǎo)致其他的問題。例如，如果一些家族企業(yè)缺乏管理技能，希望能成功地轉(zhuǎn)型到專業(yè)化的管理，他們應(yīng)該嘗試這樣做嗎？是否有其他的替代辦法？如果有的話，是什

14、么？此外，當(dāng)業(yè)務(wù)需求和家族的欲望沖突時(shí)，公司的短期和長(zhǎng)期業(yè)績(jī)哪個(gè)更重要？</p><p><b>　　綜述</b></p><p>　　正如上述討論清楚地表明，家族企業(yè)的文化中描述了戰(zhàn)略的實(shí)施以及家族對(duì)它的影響。但是，不幸的是，它并不能顯示出一個(gè)特定家庭因素是如何阻礙或者幫助企業(yè)實(shí)現(xiàn)其目標(biāo)和宗旨的。例如，我們不知道，是否家族企業(yè)與外部董事會(huì)成員能夠做出與其他人不同的、

15、更好的戰(zhàn)略決策。因?yàn)樯芷谀Ｐ筒⒉贿m用于每個(gè)企業(yè)。我們需要了解，在影響家族企業(yè)發(fā)展的因素中，哪些對(duì)組織績(jī)效的影響最大。研究表明如果有性別差異，還需要直接知道，如果有性別差異，從商業(yè)的角度，如何采用有效的策略在事實(shí)上干預(yù)和改善兄弟之間的關(guān)系。盡管在大多數(shù)文獻(xiàn)的內(nèi)容中，我們?nèi)匀粚?duì)家族成員如何影響企業(yè)中的非家族成員，或者是否這些困擾是作為策略有效實(shí)施的促成因素還是是阻礙因素知之甚少。記載的專制制度的創(chuàng)始人管理的家族企業(yè)的研究表明，如果他們還

16、能向我們展示出專制制度在有效或失調(diào)時(shí)，這些家族企業(yè)和非家族企業(yè)的實(shí)際情況是否是不同的，那就能作出更重大的貢獻(xiàn)?？傊?，在我們知道在任何情況下，什么樣的組織結(jié)構(gòu)、系統(tǒng)和流程在家族企業(yè)中是最有效的之前，都需要做很多的工作。</p><p><b>　　原文正文：</b></p><p>　　Strategic Management of the Family Busines

17、s: Past Research and Future Challenges（節(jié)選）</p><p>　　Pramodita Sharma, James J. Chrisman, Jess H. Chua</p><p>　　Inclusion of family members. </p><p>　　In implementing strategy, a fam

18、ily firm has the choice of using family or non-family members. Lansberg (1983) advises that all relatives be given opportunities to learn, but only the most competent should be taken into the firm. A strategic management

19、 perspective could take this as a starting point, but should also consider the political aspects of the inclusion or exclusion of family members in the business (MacMillan and Jones,1986).</p><p>　　In genera

20、l, research has found that family members are more productive than non-family members (Rosenblatt, deMik, Anderson, and Johnson, 1985; Kirchhoff and Kirchhoff, 1987). However, in examining compensation practices, Rosenbl

21、att et al. conclude that family members believe they are overworked and underpaid, while Kirchhoff and Kirchhoff suggests that family members are given higher salaries and perquisites. This contradiction deserves more st

22、udy, because if not recognized and dealt with, the </p><p>　　By contrast, in a study of home-based business workers, Heck and Walker (1993) discover that family members and unrelated workers are more product

23、ive than related workers (e.g., cousins). They warn that relatives who depend on family ties for employment could be the least competent. Although it suggests a hiring strategy for family businesses, such research has ye

24、t to be replicated in larger family businesses. We also know little about the political ramifications of denying relatives employment </p><p>　　From a strategic management perspective, the study of women in

25、family businesses is another fruitful area for research. Various studies report that women are not generally considered for the job of chief executive in family businesses (Hollander and Bukowitz, 1990; Salganicoff, 1990

26、; Upton and Sexton, 1987). Other researchers suggest that female members’ positions as the</p><p>　　caretakers of family concerns can give them a better understanding of the family business than the male mem

27、bers have (Hollander and Bukowitz, 1990).Women, for their part, have been advised to acquire appropriate business skills,training, and experience (Salganicoff, 1990). How best to train and deploy female family members in

28、 the business, the political implications of their inclusion,exclusion, and career opportunities, and the impact of all this on the performance of family firm, are areas tha</p><p>　　Intergenerational issues

29、. </p><p>　　Although they are closely akin to succession, we have classified intergenerational issues as part of strategy implementation rather than strategy formulation because of their potential impact on

30、the day-to-day operations of the firm. Much of the research done in this area has been on relationships between fathers and sons, which Levinson (1971) observes is ambivalent at best. Researchers report that founders are

31、 generally authoritarian, unwilling to share power (Birley, 1986; Donckels and Frohli</p><p>　　This may be true. However, conflict can also be a driving force for change. Before passing judgment, research fr

32、om a strategic management perspective could examine the extent and types of conflicts that occur in the context of both family and business situations. More importantly, such research could investigate the impact of conf

33、licts on strategy implementation and firm performance.</p><p>　　Dumas (1989) concludes that the father-son relationship cannot be generalized to the father-daughter dyad. She suggests that the father-daughte

34、r relationship is more harmonious and different in nature. Daughters willingly assume the role of caretakers, both of the father and the business. As a consequence, they are less likely than sons to be in conflict with t

35、heir fathers over</p><p>　　the issues of power and control. This insight is very important because it provides a basis for comparative research on intergenerational relationships. Is—or when is—conflict or a

36、ccommodation preferable in the context of strategy implementation? By careful matching father-son and father-daughter situations in similar businesses, research may be able to answer such questions. </p><p>

37、　　When a leader does let go, departure styles may vary. Sonnenfeld and Spence (1989) identify four departure styles of leaders: monarchs, generals, governors, and ambassadors. They suggest that the best departure style f

38、or a family business leader is that of the ambassador, who leads the organization to moderate levels of growth, recognizes the time to step down, and maintains contact with the organization as advisor. While the ambassad

39、or style can appear to be conceptually superior, this has not </p><p>　　so persuaded.</p><p>　　Sibling rivalry. </p><p>　　Friedman (1991) argues that although competition for parent

40、al love and attention spurs sibling rivalry, it is the parents’ response that is the major influence on the children’s relationships with one another. Suggestions to resolve dysfunctional sibling relationships include en

41、couraging open communication and discussions among the siblings about the roots of their rivalries, establishing empathy by inviting them to imagine their roles reversed,</p><p>　　and encouraging them to red

42、efine current relationships (Friedman, 1991; Lundberg, 1994). From the point of view of a family’s business, however, we do not know if or when sibling rivalry is dysfunctional for the family business. Researchers have a

43、ssumed that what is good for family harmony is good for the business, but this is not necessarily the case. While understanding what is good for the family is important, family businesses also need to understand the trad

44、e-offs involved in maintaining fa</p><p>　　Organizational structure, evolution, and change. </p><p>　　Research suggests that the family business is less horizontally differentiated and more reli

45、ant on informal controls than non-family firms (Daily and Dollinger, 1992; Geeraerts,1984). As a result, the family firm can be more successful in businesses that require a lean and responsive structure (Harris, Martinez

46、, and Ward, 1994).Most of the studies on the family firm’s organizational structure, evolution,and change, however, are concerned with the transition to professional management.</p><p>　　Hollander and Elman

47、(1988) identify three different approaches adopted by researchers to formulate evolutionary models. The first approach relates the firm’s developmental stages to the family’s generational progression (e.g.,Barnes and Her

48、shon, 1976). The second focuses on the interaction between the firm’s needs and the life stages of individuals crucial to the firm (Danco,1975; Davis and Tagiuri, 1989; McGivern, 1989). The third views the interaction of

49、 three sets of life cycles: firm, family</p><p>　　A family business could need to professionalize and delegate authority because of growth, lack of management skills within the family, preparation for succes

50、sion, or to change the norms and values of the business (Matthews,1984; Dyer, 1989). However, owner-managers could be reluctant to delegate control because of a lack of formal training, insufficient knowledge of manageme

51、nt techniques (Dyer, 1989), fear of losing control (Perrigo, 1975), or a belief that professionalization is an unnecessary,</p><p><b>　　Summary. </b></p><p>　　As the discussion above

52、 clearly illustrates, the family-business literature describes the influences of family on strategy implementation. Unfortunately,however, it stops short of showing how a particular family influence helps or hinders the

53、 firm’s achievement of its goals and objectives. For example, we do not know if family firms with outside board members actually make better—or even different—strategic decisions than those without them.Since experience