Q Academy of Management Learning & Education, 2015, Vol. 14, No. 3, 386–399. http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/amle.2014.

0131

........................................................................................................................................................................

Learning Stewardship in Family

Firms:
For Family, by Family, Across the
Life Cycle
ISABELLE LE BRETON-MILLER
DANNY MILLER
HEC Montreal and University of Alberta

We argue that learning by younger family members who are to be involved as steward-like
owners, board members, or managers of their firms is a process that occurs in large part via
senior family members over a significant fraction of the human life cycle, beginning in early
childhood and enduring until well into a career. The object of such learning is to develop in
young family members attitudes and capabilities that are of singular advantage to successful
family firms: long-term stewardship and the resources it cultivates. We build on a typology of
learning to provide insight into the learning experiences that can foster these stewardship
attitudes and capabilities at different stages and ages, as well as for different stewardship roles.
........................................................................................................................................................................

The family businesses that perform best are those
whose owners and managers embrace profound
ideals and talents of stewardship; therefore, we dis-
cuss the learning experiences and their sources and
venues that over the life- and career cycles, help young
family members of family firms become good stew-
ards. These experiences begin in early childhood,
endure until well into a career, and can be fostered
by the learning and education environment pro-
vided by family members. We focus on the educa-
tional roles senior family members play, often for
the next generation, and in so doing build on a typol-
ogy of learning to provide insight into the learning
experiences that promote stewardship at different
ages and career stages, and for different stewardship
roles. Our analysis is based on our work with family
firms over the past several decades, our qualitative
research on over 40 family businesses (Miller & Le
Breton-Miller, 2005),1 the work of others on governing
and conducting successful and struggling family
We thank Editors Carlo Salvato, Pramodita Sharma, Mike Wright, and
several anonymous reviewers for their most helpful comments. We
are also grateful to Kenneth C. Craddock for his useful comments.
1
Where examples are given without citation, they are derived
from this source and the research behind it.
businesses, and on the related literature on learning
and education. Our intended audiences are those
who manage and govern family firms, those who
help to train them, and those who wish to research
the learning processes we propose.
THE NATURE OF OUR FAMILY FIRMS
We define family businesses as those in which there
are multiple members of the same family who serve
jointly as owners and managers (Miller & Le Breton-
Miller, 2005). Certainly, there are many types of family
firms; however, to keep our presentation focused, we
concentrate on those with complexity and scale,
within which the family plays a major management
and ownership role, and where there is an intention to
keep the firm in the family.2
Their internal dynamics suggest that family firms
are unique in their learning opportunities and ed-
ucational needs for a variety of reasons. First is the
lengthy time span of a family’s involvement in the
2
Given their different nature, our concern here is not with pub-
licly traded firms in which family members control only a small
fraction of votes and do not manage the company.

386
Copyright of the Academy of Management, all rights reserved. Contents may not be copied, emailed, posted to a listserv, or otherwise transmitted without the copyright holder’s
express written permission. Users may print, download, or email articles for individual use only.
2015 Le Breton-Miller and Miller
business. Where there are expectations of including
later generations in the firm, training can start in
early childhood and encompass many roles (Kets de
Vries & Carlock, 2008).
Second, the participating parties of these families
have different interests and roles to play—both in
the firm and the family—all of which are vital to the
functioning of the business. They may serve as family
owners, board members, managers or workers, as
well as parents at home. Each of these parties has
unique skill requirements and learning needs (Gersick,
Davis, Hampton, & Lansberg, 1997; Lansberg, 1999).
Third, where members of the same family work
together, they may experience powerful emotions—
from filial love and parental altruism, to personal
animosity stemming from early sibling rivalries. This
makes it essential that training extends beyond the
technical to encompass the social and psychological
(Kets de Vries & Carlock, 2008; Lubatkin, Ling, &
Schulze, 2007). Due to their closeness, parental family
members may be in a good position to understand and
harness this emotional context in educating offspring.
A fourth distinction is the nonfinancial nature of some
family business objectives. Family firms often have
stewardship goals, such as preserving the business for
the long run through long-term relationships, generous
investments, and cohesive corporate cultures (Arregle,
Hitt, Sirmon, & Berry 2007; Kotlar & De Massis, 2013).
Older family members who live out these stewardship
goals have the credibility to impart them to offspring.
Given the above distinctions, there exist many
kinds of learning and education that can foster
stewardship in different contexts, from multiple
sources, and throughout the life cycle. As we shall
argue, the family members themselves create the
learning environment and may constitute the most
valuable educational resource, as they teach off-
spring discipline and humility, impart social skills
and ethics, and provide a healthy environment for
assuming a robust identity that fosters personal de-
velopment and continual learning (Patterson, 1975).
FAMILY BUSINESS STEWARDSHIP AND ITS
LEARNING DEMANDS
Much of the research on family firms has shown that
those that are successful in the long run have de-
veloped an unusual capacity for stewardship, an attri-
bute that nonfamily firms, due to their more pecuniary,
short-term orientations, often find difficult to imi-
tate (Arregle et al., 2007; Miller & Le Breton-Miller,
2005; Miller, Le Breton-Miller, & Scholnick, 2008). In
essence, stewardship theory contrasts stewards
387
who view a business as a cherished entity serving
a social purpose for all stakeholders, with managerial
agents, who are more opportunistic and financially
driven (Davis, Schoorman & Donaldson, 1997; Donaldson
& Davis, 1991). Stewardship motivations go beyond
self-interest, involve personal sacrifice and service to
others, and include rewards that encompass the social
and spiritual (Block, 1993). Miller and Le Breton-Miller
(2006) have argued that a desire to pass on a healthy
business and its reputation to heirs motivates execu-
tives of successful family firms to be good stewards.
“Stewardship motivations go beyond self-
interest, involve personal sacrifice and
service to others, and include rewards
that encompass the social and spiritual
(Block, 1993).”
Many successful family firm owners view their firm
as vital to family psychological, social, and economic
well-being across generations, and so bring to the task
a strong sense of commitment (Miller & Le Breton-Miller,
2006). Firms are seen not as mere sources of profit but
rather as encompassing socioemotional benefits such
as prestige in the community, career fulfillment, and
rewards for later generations (Gomez-Mejia, Cruz,
Berrone, & De Castro, 2011). Thus, many family firms
manage for the long run, investing in stakeholders and
farsighted initiatives that sustain a robust business
(James, 1999). Such stewardship priorities may garner
resource advantages wrought by a vibrant culture,
win–win relationships with stakeholders, long-term
investment horizons, and abundant social capital
(Habbershon & Williams, 1999; Sirmon & Hitt, 2003).
Of course, not all family firms embrace attitudes
of stewardship, and within those enterprises,
common problems arise, such as family conflicts
(Eddleston & Kellermanns, 2007); nepotism, execu-
tive entrenchment, and spoiled heirs (Bertrand &
Schoar, 2006); and unrequited parental altruism
(Schulze, Lubatkin, & Dino, 2003; Lubatkin et al., 2007).
Addressing the learning demands and educational le-
vers of stewardship will often reduce such challenges.
Developing the attitudes and capabilities that un-
derlie stewardship involves a process of learning and
education that begins very early in life in the family
home or “hearth,” continues by way of more formal
family gatherings and schooling, becomes more spe-
cific with apprenticeships and roles in ownership,
and extends to on-the-job educational experiences,
as family members take on managerial roles.
388 Academy of Management Learning & Education
However, multiple kinds of learning and educa-
tion must take place during these phases. Given
the broad array of learning modes that resonate
with the needs of family firms, we employ Miller’s
(1996) typology of learning to illustrate the types of
learning experiences that can be fostered to en-
courage stewardship in each of these life stages
and roles. We distinguish learning from education
in that the latter is intentional and involves con-
scious efforts at instruction or establishing a learn-
ing environment (Ormrod & Davis, 2004), whereas
the former is a result of a broad array of experiences
and need not be a consequence of purposeful edu-
cational effort (Bandura, 1977; Skinner, 1953). In-
deed, the knowledge, skills, and attitudes acquired
may be tacit and unconscious (Collins, Brown, &
Holum, 1991), thus our analysis spans both educa-
tion and learning, with an emphasis on the latter.
Types of Learning and Stewardship in
Family Firms
Although Miller (1996) proposes six types of learning
that managers and firms engage in, his typology is
sufficiently flexible to encompass learning that takes
place by family members at all stages of their life and
career cycles, as well as across several roles. Each
type can develop knowledge, skills, and attitudes
that foster stewardship. These types range from so-
cial learning that occurs from observation of and re-
flection about people, behavior, and events (Bandura,
1963, 1977; Ormrod & Davis, 2004), to more active learn-
ing from action (Schank, Berman, & Macpherson, 1999),
interaction (Crain, 2011; Patterson, 1975; Smith, Cowie, &
Blades, 2010), and trial and error (Bruner & Austin, 1986),
and from behavioral reinforcement (Skinner, 1953).3
Given the array of learning opportunities that occur
over a life cycle and the numerous learning demands of
effective stewardship, focusing on a single type of
learning or learning theory would be overly restrictive.
First, stewardship demands moral values—the
profound belief that ethical behavior toward stake-
holders is required to sustain complementary and
harmonious relationships in the long run (Davis,
Schoorman, & Donaldson, 1997). In fact, Miller and
Le Breton-Miller (2005) have shown that many long-
lived family firms are distinguished by their ethical
behavior—some to preserve the honor of the family,
others as a reflection of religious values, and others
still, to provide a healthy business environment for
3
Thus learning is to a large degree a product of personal and
environmental influences (Bandura, 1977).
September
offspring. Without such values, reputation is more
vulnerable, as are relations with stakeholders, and
ultimately, the health and even survival of the or-
ganization. Miller (1996) designates the learning of
values institutional learning, which is largely
accompanied by indoctrination. This can happen
early in life and by example within the family
hearth (Piaget, 1997), and through schooling and
apprenticeships (Spiecker, 1987).
Just as important to stewardship is personal
discipline—a willingness to delay rewards and work
hard and consistently (James, 1999). Although some
family firms suffer when heirs are spoiled and have
a sense of entitlement (Bertrand & Schoar, 2006; Kets
de Vries & Carlock, 2008), those that survive for the
long run tend to be owned and run by disciplined
individuals who sacrifice personal rewards and work
diligently to be good stewards for the benefit of
the organization (Miller & Le Breton-Miller, 2005).
Patterson (1975) has argued that such discipline comes
from the home environment early in life. Miller (1996)
writes of structural learning to supply such discipline,
often via delayed rewards, rules of conduct, and mo-
tivating incentives (see also Crain, 2011; Shaffer, 2009).
Firms are social groups, and harmony within
them can best be sustained by actors who have de-
veloped ample social and political skills (Davis
et al., 1997). Here, a strong sense of personal identity
and a secure ego aids in the ability to interact in
a positive and confident way, making stewardship
a product not simply of an individual but of a group
(Davis et al., 1997). Whether it is to handle family
conflict, or to ensure a vibrant corporate culture,
these skills are fostered by what Miller (1996) calls
interactive learning. This occurs as interacting with
others reinforces positive personal characteristics
(Skinner, 1953) and provides clues as to what con-
tributes to enhancing (or eroding) the quality of in-
terpersonal relationships (Bandura, 1963, 1977). The
development of these skills also begins early in life
and continues through a variety of domestic, edu-
cational, and organizational experiences (Heimann
& Pittenger, 1996; Smith et al., 2010).
Stewards administering family firms for long-term
robustness must adapt to a constantly evolving en-
vironment: Stagnation kills too many family firms
(Miller, Steier, & Le Breton-Miller 2003). Firm renewal
demands curiosity and a willingness to try new ways
of doing things. In the process, one learns about one’s
environment and also new crafts and skills relating
to discovery. Miller’s (1996) experimental learning, in
which people learn by doing and experimenting,
can be vital in this regard. Parents may encourage
2015 Le Breton-Miller and Miller
experimentation to have offspring learn about their
environment and their own abilities (see also Fuller &
Unwin, 2003; Gott, 1988; Schank et al., 1999).
Stewardship also involves having enough techni-
cal and business knowledge and information to run
a business in a sustainable way (James, 1999). That
is the province of Miller’s (1996) analytic learning,
which takes place by gathering and analyzing in-
formation. This activity begins during one’s earliest
years and endures until late in life (Smith et al., 2010).
Such learning provides individuals with the store of
knowledge required to be informed citizens and also
knowledgeable specialists and managers.
Last, stewardship requires insight and reflection—
an ability to understand how all the elements of an
enterprise and all the interests of its stakeholders fit
together; that is, align and complement one another
(Miller & Le Breton-Miller, 2005). Unless those in
charge understand the core of “what makes the firm
tick,” they risk losing its essence and endangering its
survival. Miller’s (1996) synthetic learning—learning
how to think deeply and reflectively—deals with this
challenge. Such learning is essential to convert in-
formation into practical, contextualized knowledge
(Bruner & Austin, 1986; Dalley & Hamilton, 2000),
and this can be fostered by parents interpreting
and exchanging facts concerning the business with
offspring (Collins et al., 1991).
As we shall see, these types of learning apply at
multiple stages in the life of a prospective family
firm owner and manager. We articulate these in a
sequence driven simultaneously by (1) temporality
(age), and (2) the next generation’s increasing degrees
of professional responsibility for the family business.
We begin with the family and the early years before
there is any formal involvement in the business, pro-
ceed through the years of formal education and ap-
prenticeship, and conclude with direct involvement
in the business as major owners, board members,
and managers, respectively. Table 1, partly based
on Miller’s (1996) categorization, summarizes the
learning modes and experiences that may be ben-
eficial to foster stewardship attitudes and skills in
each of these stages and contexts. They are to be
taken as suggestive and representative, not de-
finitive or exhaustive.
THE FAMILY: EARLY YEARS OF LIFE
Family Hearth
Disciplined, socially adept, and ethical individuals
form the basis of stewardship (Block, 1993; Davis
389
et al., 1997). Education helps to produce such people.
Whether or not they wish to join the family business,
the family hearth—the family home environment—is
a good place to begin to inculcate offspring in the
discipline, social skills, and values required for
stewardship (Piaget, 1997; Patterson, 1975; Smith
et al., 2010). Indeed, the foundation for creating
psychological maturity, interpersonal harmony,
and moral character often rests on early formative
and educational experiences found within the
family (Gersick et al., 1997). Some have argued that
this is the most critical venue and time for learn-
ing these attitudes and talents, which would be use-
ful to individuals no matter where their careers
ultimately take them (Crain, 2011; Patterson, 1975;
Piaget, 1997).
Experiences early in life also can shape personal
identity, instill inspiration and confidence, and de-
lineate limitations. Family homes where parents
spend time with their children, where there is love
and discipline, and where conflicts are settled with
maturity, serve as a preeminent foundation in cre-
ating well-adjusted people. It is the latter who will
bolster family solidarity and support other family
members in the business, from within or outside the
firm.
Patterson (1975) in a classic work on interactive
learning claims that preadolescent childhood is
the most critical time for learning appropriate in-
terpersonal skills, ethics, and discipline. To that
end, he argues that parents must devote a good deal
of time and effort to interacting with their children in
a patient and concentrated way, being diligent in
monitoring and supervising their behavior, and
avoiding any inconsistencies in providing rewards
and punishments. He argues that parents must
provide guidance without being harsh, punish ag-
gressive and coercive behavior, and allocate re-
wards to reinforce positive conduct whenever it
occurs. Given the “spoilt child” syndrome of many
heirs of family firms, these are important lessons to
be taken into account early in life (the Patterson
classic is well worth reading). Moreover, because of
the busy and often aggressive nature of many en-
trepreneurs, it will take a good deal of effort on the
part of family members other than the busy patri-
arch or matriarch to be involved in raising persons
of character (Gersick et al., 1997).
Institutional learning, through indoctrination and
role models, also may play a vital role in promoting
attitudes of stewardship in the family hearth
(Smith et al., 2010; Spiecker, 1987). While we at-
tended a family dinner with one business family,
 TABLE 1 390
Varieties of Family Learning at Different Stages and for Different Roles

Analytic (learning
Primary learning by gathering and Experimental Structural (learning Synthetic Interactive Institutional
modes (and analyzing (learning by trying by following (learning (learning via (learning via
vehicles) information) things out) procedure) by reflection) interaction) indoctrination)

Primary learning Information Craft & skills Procedures; rules Insight Social and political Values
needs skills
Learning foci: About the material How to do things To be disciplined How to think Identity and To behave ethically
world interaction
Early youth: Hearth: Learning about one’s Skills from playing Discipline from Assuming a Learning social Assimilating human
The nuclear context; its rewards; with toys; siblings chores; routine personal identity skills via parental values
family limits responsibilities interaction
Youth: Gatherings: Learning one’s likes, Manners Assuming a social Learning to deal with Assimilating family
The extended limits, and identity relatives & who to values
family interacting trust
with siblings
Early adulthood: Learning about the Learning about Assimilating
Family councils: business and its family priorities business
Mature extended routines values
family
Schooling Learning facts and Learning to solve Learning to learn Learning to form Learning to form Assimilating social
theories problems through study and use concepts peer relationships values
Apprenticeships Learning about the Learning to work or Learning by Learning how to Embracing the
business manage following routines behave in the ethics of the firm
business
Family owners and board members

Adulthood Acquiring information Developing craft Assimilating good Reflecting to divine Learning Assimilating values
about the business from different procedures by key challenges comportment from seniors and
assignments following them and opportunities by engaging with firm history
and jobs seniors
Academy of Management Learning & Education

Stewardship roles Family managers

Building Discerning the Apprenticing Following Learning who and Absorbing values
relationships drivers of critical relationships protocols how to trust of generosity
relationships
Preserving social Discovering Experimenting with Learning from
capital stakeholder social initiatives examples of
interests ethical behavior
Nurturing Learning the levers Experimenting with Rituals and Meeting to Assimilating values
corporate culture of culture roles ceremonies experience at the job
to embed values cohesion
Mastering Analyzing Performing Assimilating Conceptualizing
long-term opportunities initiatives investment opportunities
investment and threats in different jobs protocols via reflection

Note. Adapted from Miller (1996). Cells on the table represent general tendencies and suggestive examples, and are by no means universal or exhaustive.
September
2015 Le Breton-Miller and Miller
the patriarch—a billionaire in his 70s—arrived
from work after 7 p.m., in shirt sleeves, still wearing
his employee badge. He spoke in fine-grained de-
tail and with remarkable insight of events at the
business and engaged in rapt conversation with
his grandchildren about their curiosities. The les-
sons to the younger generations at the table were
writ large by his example: Hard work, with little
pretention, were signal values, and expertise was
the standard for admission to the business.
A distinct socializing influence—again, to foster
institutional indoctrination and interactive learning—
may come from an older family member, sometimes
someone not directly involved in running the firm, who
serves as a repository of the history of the family and
the business and helps to pass on lore regarding the
values of the family and their role in the company. At
the New York Times, matriarch Iphigene Sulzberger—
wife of the late founder—constantly reminded young
family members of the heroic history of the paper, its
social contributions, and the family’s responsibilities
to it and to the community.4 This sense of responsi-
bility to be good stewards of the business and indeed
of its stakeholders was palpable among the young
family members, even from their earliest ages.
Structural learning to teach discipline through
rules of conduct and chorelike routines can also be
useful to foster stewardship attitudes, combating
the resource threats from unrequited family altru-
ism (Lubatkin et al., 2007). In our study of enduring
family businesses, children even in wealthy fami-
lies were given chores and other routines to follow
on a daily basis. Rigorous moral instruction at home
was quite common (Miller & Le Breton-Miller, 2005).
Indeed, we found many of the families we studied to
be religious, value driven, modest, and frugal. At
brewer Coors, for example, family members with
enormous net worth had to get approval from the
family to purchase a modest home, as most of their
fortune was tied up in the business. Open displays
of wealth were considered bad form. But charitable
giving in money and time were central to many of
the families we studied.
Last, as noted, the family hearth is a place
where interactive learning to socialize and engage
constructively can prevent the challenges to stew-
ardship posed by family conflict (Eddleston et al.
2008; Smith et al., 2010). When a child has poor
4
Matriarchs often also serve as arbitrators of conflict, wise
counsels, and buffers between the often pre-occupied founder-
entrepreneurs or leaders, and the upcoming generation (Kets de
Vries, & Carlock, 2008).
391
relationships with one or both parents or with sib-
lings, the residual damage of those associations can
come to haunt a family business. Indeed, conflict in
family business and failed successions often can be
traced back rather directly to problems in the family
(Kets de Vries & Carlock, 2008).5
In short, the social and moral climate and family
values inculcated at home via institutional, inter-
active, and structural learning may provide a foun-
dation for disciplined, responsible behavior in a
business—and in society.
Extended-Family Gatherings
Attitudes of stewardship over the family and the
business may also be developed by getting family
members to learn about and form bonds with each
other. Here, beginning in childhood, interactive and
experimental learning may be helpful in enhancing
interpersonal knowledge and promoting social and
emotional connections among family members
(Crain, 2011; Smith et al., 2010). The result can be
a cohesive family culture within which members
work together in harmony and synergy and are
willing to sacrifice for each other and for their firm:
hallmarks of stewardship.
A family that we know in the financial industry put
on annual summer camps for all the grandchildren
and younger cousins. Extended-family members
bunked together and played team-building games,
and the children were instructed in the rudiments of
saving, investment, and economics—often through
simulations and role playing. The camp fulfilled sev-
eral objectives: It was a bonding experience for family
members who got to know each other better and form
relationships that might prove useful later in business
life. It allowed the adults to assess the personalities
and abilities of the children. And it introduced the
children to the business in a nonthreatening, engag-
ing way—one that might allow them to begin to judge
whether to join the family firm.
Although a dedicated summer camp is beyond
the reach of most families, periodic family get-
togethers that provide the opportunity for interac-
tion and early instruction can serve the same
purpose. Several generations of the family at Estee
Lauder learned about the business at the dinner
5
Other research has suggested that founders of enduring busi-
nesses tend to have strong personalities: high needs for
achievement, unusual independence, and an overwhelming fo-
cus on work. Those attributes can make them less than ideal
parents (Kets de Vries & Carlock, 2008).
392 Academy of Management Learning & Education
table every Friday evening. The youngsters heard
their elders discussing the firm, its challenges and
plans, and were invited to join in the discussion
and propose suggestions, even at a very early age
(Miller & Le Breton-Miller, 2005). This process de-
veloped both knowledge of and sentimental at-
tachment to the business and what it stands for. It
also reminded the children of the family’s charita-
ble obligations.
In short, extended-family gatherings, by encour-
aging interactive, institutional, and experimental
learning, provide a constructive venue for fostering
positive attitudes toward the business, interpersonal
family cohesion, and character and identity devel-
opment (Patterson, 1975; Crain, 2011).
Family Councils and Constitution
Once family members enter their teen years, they
are in a position to learn more about the business
and its governance, and this can begin to occur in
a family council (Gersick et al., 1997). Such a council
typically convenes family members who interact to
discuss issues relating to their ownership of the
business, its broad values and policies, and the use
of family wealth derived from the business for pri-
vate purposes. Although not present in all owning-
families, family councils can be a useful vehicle for
getting teenage and young adult family members
involved to appreciate the family business and its
values (institutional learning); to learn about family
rights and responsibilities regarding their firm
(structural learning); and to learn more about how
their relatives interact and how they can participate
in such interactions in a context related to the
business (interactive learning). The ethical atti-
tudes, procedural knowledge, and social skills ac-
quired can greatly enhance their efficacy and
confidence in any subsequent stewardship roles
they will play in sustaining a robust and responsi-
ble business (Ward, 2011).
The family council can also circulate a family
constitution—a written statement of a family’s
values and ambitions for its members and a mis-
sion statement regarding their achievement.6 This
can help to train younger family members about the
values and policies of the business, the responsi-
bilities of ownership, and the criteria for joining the
business at the board and managerial levels. In-
deed, one of the council’s important functions is to
6
See http://www.taylorwessing.com/fileadmin/files/docs/Family_
Constitution_Guide.pdf.
September
educate future family owners and directors of the
firm. Senior family members who understand the
juniors’ needs are often best positioned to provide
this tailored instruction (Dalley & Hamilton, 2000).
Their efforts may be complemented by family retreats
and joint attendance at educational events (McCann,
DeMoss, Dascher, & Barnett, 2003). Councils also may
inform family members of the projects and progress of
their business, and hold training sessions for topics of
interest (Pendergast, Ward, & de Pontet, 2011).
One strength of the council is the interactive na-
ture of much of the learning that takes place there.
Although experts may be brought in to provide in-
formation, it will be of little use unless family
members are present to question it and probe its
utility for the business and the family (Dalley &
Hamilton, 2000). In short, the council provides scope
for analytical as well as synthetic and interactive
learning, all required to make information useful.
Formal Education
Prospective family managers also need formal ed-
ucation. Here too, family members play a special
role—not so much in providing direct guidance as
in allowing offspring the latitude to reflect and
learn about their talents and interests and choose
a suitable program. A temptation among some se-
nior family business members is to truncate their
juniors’ formal education in favor of joining the firm
early, or to force their offspring to take courses di-
rectly related to the business. These attitudes can
be dangerous because they give younger family
members insufficient scope to mature independently,
and so curb their stewardship capacities and in-
centives. Although we have emphasized the role
played by senior family members in training their
young, such training will work best when the latter
have developed their own informed points of view
and can embed and adapt family-based learning in
a critical intellectual framework (Gersick et al., 1997).
Ignorance and social ineptitude are equally en-
emies of stewardship, and both can be combatted by
a good education. Formal education conveys pri-
marily analytic and synthetic forms of learning,
with clear institutional and interactive components.
The emphasis is on acquiring knowledge and re-
flective capabilities, although significant benefits
often come in the form of social skills and relation-
ships and a more nuanced system of values (Crain,
2011). A growing consensus suggests that the quality
of an undergraduate education, as well as the
depth and breadth of experiences for interaction
2015 Le Breton-Miller and Miller
and reflection it offers, is more important in the
development of talent than the actual field of spe-
cialization chosen (Miller, Xu, & Mehrotra, 2015).
Given the criticism to which many business pro-
grams have been subjected (Mintzberg, 2004; Pfeffer
& Fong, 2002), it may be that training in the humanities
and sciences can provide better opportunities for
personal and analytical development, a more ac-
curate moral compass, and more opportunity for
reflection and knowledge synthesis (Miller, Xu, &
Mehrotra, 2015). Nonetheless, graduate courses in
business, particularly those eliciting reflection
and synthetic learning by way of theory and case
studies, may be constructive in bringing family
members closer to the commercial realities of their
firms.7
Apprenticeships
Apprenticeships provide an opportunity to learn
about and develop the stewardship capabilities
of family members. Combining experimental,
interactive, and institutional learning to hone
talents, social skills, and values, respectively
(Fuller & Unwin, 2003; Gott, 1988), they also
constitute an intimate and company-relevant
way of training potential family managers in
various roles during summer jobs or after uni-
versity. Many of the most successful firms we
studied employed such devices—having even the
scions of a very wealthy family serve in a series of
low-level positions in the company. Senior family
managers in the firm arrange for the younger ones
to rotate through a variety of jobs, using exemplary
employees as mentors, as well as doing much of
the mentoring themselves (Heimann & Pittenger,
1996).
Apprenticeships may also take place in busi-
nesses other than those owned or controlled by the
family. Sometimes senior family members arrange
for younger members to work with their business
associates in a different enterprise. That can be
a useful experience for those in early career, as it
presents alternative ways of functioning to those
who will join the family firm. Such variety is in-
structive in two ways: First, it broadens the range of
7
The formal educational experience also gives family members
a chance to learn more about their interests and talents and
hence whether or not they want to join the family business. Fre-
quently, a transformative educational experience can guide the
student to choose an alternative career. In the long run, that can
benefit both the person and the company, as talent and motiva-
tion are required of stewards.
393
knowledge and develops social skills. Also, it may
surface instructive contrasts with the family firm,
both positive and negative, that allow younger
members to appreciate both the peculiar advan-
tages and potential shortcomings of their own
business.
ROLES WITHIN THE FAMILY BUSINESS
Thus far we have focused on the learning oppor-
tunities that take place early in the life cycle of
family members, outside the formal roles of the
business. But for stewardship to flourish, training
must continue throughout one’s career, and in its
different roles. We now deal with ownership and
board roles before turning to how learning oppor-
tunities for managers can facilitate specific stew-
ardship attitudes and outcomes, specifically those
relating to corporate culture, sustained relation-
ships, social capital, and long-term time horizons.
Again we focus on the learning contributions of
family members rather than outside consultants
(for the latter, see, e.g., Salvato & Melin, 2008).
Moreover, we deal first with modest requirements
for family ownership and board service roles that
may arise even relatively early in life, and then
progress to managerial roles that may require
more intensive involvement and greater skills and
maturity.
Family Ownership and Board Apprenticeship
If stewardship resources such as psychological
ownership, commitment to an organization, and
talent are formed within a family environment,
they can be honed by way of oversight activity on
the board of directors. It is at the board level that
family firm agency advantages are achieved
(Anderson & Reeb, 2004; Ward, 2011). There, the
temptation to misuse voting power or managerial
influence must be combatted. Also there, discre-
tion to be stewards is granted—to invest gener-
ously in stakeholders and in the long-term future of
the enterprise (James, 1999; Miller & Le Breton-
Miller, 2005). Thus early apprenticeship on a board
or committee in which vigilant oversight and
stewardship policies are enforced can be enor-
mously instructive to the most capable young
family members, particularly if they are tutored by
senior, more experienced relatives who un-
derstand them and whom they trust. The more able
apprentices, with time, will assume more formal
board responsibilities.
394 Academy of Management Learning & Education
“Thus early apprenticeship on a board or
committee in which vigilant oversight
and stewardship policies are enforced can
be enormously instructive to the most
capable young family members,
particularly if they are tutored by senior,
more experienced relatives who
understand them and whom they trust.”
At the board and ownership levels, initiates may
engage in analytic learning by absorbing information
about the business and the responsibilities of mem-
bership, in structural learning by helping to practice
the routines of good governance, and in interactive
learning by engaging with peers regarding the chal-
lenges facing the firm (Cheraskin & Campion, 1996;
Schank et al., 1999). Institutional learning may also
occur as decisions are made that reinforce the values
of the firm and the importance of stewardship (Spieker,
1987), and that guard against the common curses of
entrenchment, unwarranted nepotism, and oppor-
tunism (Bertrand & Schoar, 2006).
Given the major responsibilities of a board and
the talent required to carry them out, an important
educational resource for many family boards will
be experienced members from outside the family
(Corbetta & Salvato, 2004). Boards must monitor the
performance of the firm and its managers, decide on
executive compensation, approve major capital al-
location decisions, and preside over succession
(Ward, 2011). Thus, independent directors with long
and diverse experience in governance and industry
practices may be especially useful in training
young family business board members and owners
in all of these functions—particularly in conjunction
with more senior family board members (see be-
low). Where there are disputes among owners,
these directors also may provide instruction that
facilitates compromise (Pendergast et al., 2011).
However, once again, the more senior family
members serving on the board provide a context for
helping the younger members learn from these
outside experts. The youthful member can witness
the reaction of the family to the advice provided by
the outsiders, and in so doing, more thoroughly ab-
sorb the information presented and ascertain its
relevance and application to the business at hand.
Indeed, external advisors who enter family firms
with their “prepackaged” kits have been notori-
ously ineffective in helping their clients—they
September
provide information but neglect to stimulate the
reflection and contextualization required to actu-
ally apply the knowledge appropriately (Dalley &
Hamilton, 2000). Again, the role played by family
members in education is quite critical.
Family Managerial Roles
Our final life cycle learning stage is firm manage-
ment. As our emphasis is on “learning to become
stewards,” we describe four learning foci that lie at
the heart of stewardship in many family firms: nur-
turing corporate culture; building win–win long-term
relationships (Miller & Le Breton-Miller, 2005); fos-
tering a long-term orientation (James, 1999); and
enriching social capital (Arregle et al., 2007). As be-
fore, the context is that of a younger executive
learning from others in the family firm how to
strengthen and extend these pillars of stewardship.
Again, several types of learning may be beneficial: For
example, analytic learning to discover the technical
aspects of the business; experimental learning-by-
doing at the job to absorb the craft of management;
structural learning from routines that embed effec-
tive practices; synthetic learning to conceptualize
and reflect on policy and strategy; interactive
learning through mentorship to hone social, politi-
cal, and other skills; and institutional learning to
assimilate values (Arregle et al., 2007; Miller et al.,
2008) and avoid family conflicts (Bertrand & Schoar,
2006; Schulze et al., 2003).
Of course, the training required of family members
who are to manage the business or parts of it will de-
pend on their unique career trajectories and the com-
petitive challenges facing the firm. It will also rely on
the advisory support available, as well as the context
in which they are to operate. However, where family
socialization, formal education, and apprenticeships
have provided a sound foundation, better use can be
made of the various learning opportunities.
These are often provided by rotation through
a variety of firm positions, and instruction via
mentorship and coaching by senior family mem-
bers. Indeed, it will be useful to formulate career
plans for family members entering the firm that take
them through a series of jobs where they can learn
the craft and about themselves, and where other
family members who understand their strengths
and weaknesses and their preferences can mentor
and guide them toward appropriate “next steps.”
In fact, there are dual parties involved in such
learning—the younger members learn from train-
ing and experiences, and the senior members learn
2015 Le Breton-Miller and Miller
about the younger ones’ capacities to better guide
their future—even if that future involves exiting the
firm.8
Relationships and Personal Networks
An integral aspect of the stewardship of family firms
is the willingness to invest in long-term, generous,
trust-based relationships with stakeholders (Arregle
et al., 2007; Miller et al., 2008). Given their long-term
orientation and concern for reputation, some family
businesses excel in building close, enduring rela-
tionships with partners, suppliers, and clients (Chen
& Miller, 2015). Family members entering the firm
can be taught about the rationales and drivers—
human, social, and financial—of these relationships,
and about the individuals and processes needed to
preserve and grow them. This often can be done well
by family managers who are intimate parties to these
relationships. The interactive mentoring that occurs
can take the form of seniors introducing younger
family members to specific partners, and letting them
first watch and then participate in negotiations
(Habbershon & Williams, 1999; Sirmon & Hitt, 2003).
Moreover, when a senior family member has a junior
accompany him in regular dealings with a partner, he
is imparting institutional legitimacy to the junior, as
well as analytic information about the partnership.9
Sometimes such introductions happen at social clubs.
At Bechtel, the megaproject construction giant, senior
family members were able to transfer their social
networks by introducing offspring to power brokers in
industry and government at the exclusive Bohemian
Grove club. Such introductions would be much less
likely at public companies, where managers are more
apt to be reluctant to share contacts with potential
rivals.
Social Capital
The social capital accruing to a family name, and
often arising out of assiduous stewardship, is
a unique asset of some family firms that can be
shared among family members (Arregle et al., 2007;
8
Given the abundance of material on managerial training in
family firms (see Hoy, 2008, and Hoy & Sharma, 2006, as excellent
guides), we shall focus on a relatively neglected topic; namely,
the unique resource endowments of some family firms and how
these can best be managed via mentorship and coaching.
9
Formal education may also be useful in supporting relation-
ships; for example training in logistics for supply chain re-
lationships and training in marketing where firms are required to
be selectively customer-centric.
395
Miller et al., 2008). Sometimes that capital takes the
form of a stellar reputation for quality, honesty, or
style. However, unless family members entering the
firm are mentored about the precise sources of so-
cial capital, where its benefits stem from, and ex-
actly how to foster and nurture it, social capital can
easily be lost. Analytic and interactive learning by
way of mentorship can convey such information,
and again, family members play a key training role
(Le Breton-Miller & Miller, 2014).
Although social capital is a valuable and path-
dependent resource that is hard for rivals to imitate, it is
both vulnerable and difficult to resurrect (Le Breton-
Miller & Miller, 2014). Thus senior family members in-
timate with and responsible for creating and nurturing
such capital may foster institutional learning by juniors
by way of indoctrination to ensure that underlying
values and ethics are preserved (Spiecker, 1987). This
mentoring often teaches by example. At Samsung, the
patriarch flew into a rage because of a small mal-
function in an early product and had a batch of thou-
sands of units destroyed in dramatic fashion, on the
spot, in front of all involved. That draconian lesson in
sustaining the reputation for quality remains a part of
corporate lore. At The New York Times, the reputation
for objectivity and truth was imprinted within the fam-
ily when, in the face of threats of imprisonment from the
U.S. government, senior family members insisted on
releasing the “Pentagon papers” that revealed dis-
crepancies in the government’s stance on Vietnam.
“Although social capital is a valuable and
path-dependent resource that is hard for
rivals to imitate, it is both vulnerable and
difficult to resurrect (Le Breton-Miller &
Miller, 2015).”
Corporate Culture
Another stewardship-driven asset of many family
firms is a cohesive corporate culture, united by strong
family values and psychological ownership (Arregle
et al., 2007). According to Schein (1990), corporate culture
is a learned product of group experience: It comprises
basic assumptions and beliefs shared by members and
represents a sometimes taken-for-granted view of the
organization and its environment. It grows out of the
history and adaptive experiences of an organization.
To preserve their culture, many successful family
firms, because of their lengthy time horizons, are
396 Academy of Management Learning & Education
selective in hiring talented and dedicated people, and
they treat them unusually well (Miller & Le Breton-
Miller, 2005). In the process, they reinforce a vibrant
corporate culture—especially where the demands of
their strategy require substantial levels of motivation
and initiative among devoted, competent staff.
Such cultures can be costly to maintain, and the
temptation is always to cut corners by engaging in
layoffs, forgetting about traditions and ceremonies,
and focusing on the bottom line. One way of avoiding
that tendency is to ensure by mentorship from senior
family members that youngsters entering the busi-
ness become aware not only of the costs, but also the
benefits of the culture, and of the role it has played
in the success of the company. By imparting lore of
what the employees of the firm have sacrificed for
the firm and the family, senior family members can
instill a sense of reciprocal loyalty. Younger members
also may be made aware of the levers that make
the culture work: hiring, promotion, reward and dis-
missal criteria, job design and accountability levers,
and critical corporate rituals and ceremonies. In
a nutshell, institutional learning through mentorship
can impart cultural values; experimental learning
through job rotation may expose juniors to the many
constituents composing the firm culture; and in-
teractive learning through social exchanges can re-
inforce and disseminate values.
At Hallmark, family members conducted courses in
how to be excellent stewards of their brand, not only
for younger family members but all employees. They
also were involved in hiring each staff member and
checked every single greeting card (there were thou-
sands) for consistency with the company’s image and
values. Finally, they engaged in significant acts of
charity toward employees that were deeply imprinted
upon the corporate culture. No family member (or
employee) joining the firm could fail to be aware of
such “teaching by example” and by stellar family role
models, originally nurtured in the family hearth.
Farsighted Investments
Because family stewards often wish to pass the firm
on to later generations and are relatively immune to
short-term pressures from impatient shareholders,
they are more willing to invest in projects with pay-
offs that come only after several years (James, 1999).
Such projects may confer competitive advantages,
as they are harder for rivals pressured by public
shareholders to engage in. But they demand patience
and discipline. Successful long-term investment
demands profound analysis—a knowledge of the
September
business that can only be secured by those who, by
way of analytic and synthetic learning, have truly
mastered its nature and the challenges and opportu-
nities in its environment. Job rotation can help in that
effort because it exposes managers to many business
realities (Cheraskin & Campion, 1996). But again, in-
stitutional indoctrination through mentoring plays
a role, often bringing about learning from example.
Jamie Houghton, the former CEO of the centenarian
Corning, and a member of the founding family, told us
that innovation and long-term investment was “in the
company’s DNA.” All managers were indoctrinated
through meetings and rituals celebrating Corning’s
history of far-sighted innovation, from the invention of
the first radio tubes, to television picture tubes, to heat
resistant Pyrex, to fiber-optic cable, the latter of which
took over a decade to recoup development costs. At the
same time, managers were taught how the innovation
strategy demanded ever-increasing economies from
older, cash-cow products—a lesson that was forgotten
when a nonfamily CEO took over.10
In some family firms, the use of intergenerational
or senior–junior co-presidencies and the coaching
opportunities these allow across generations is one
of the most intimate ways of transferring knowl-
edge and practices, and thereby, of preserving and
leveraging resources in a family firm. Companies
such as Corning, Michelin, Nordstrom, and Motorola
have used such practices with varying degrees of
success, as the personal relationships between the
parties and the governance practices used are of
critical importance (Miller & Le Breton-Miller, 2005).
RESEARCH OPPORTUNITIES
Much of our discussion has been based on our ex-
perience with and study of family firms and on some
of the literature on learning within such contexts.
However, there are many unanswered questions. To
stimulate further work on preparing prospective
and active family members to become better stew-
ards, we propose some questions and research ap-
proaches to explore in the future.11
10
In family firms, it is important that not only managers but owners
be made aware of the costs in delayed payoffs and uncertain divi-
dends of having a long-term strategy. And that, once again, can be
an educational responsibility of the family and the family council.
11
We have built our analysis on the stewardship perspective;
however, other conceptual lenses on family firms can enlighten
our understanding of such enterprises. These include agency
theory, the resource-based view (Habbershon & Williams, 1999),
and the socioemotional wealth perspective (Gomez-Mejia et al.,
2011), each containing insights on the challenges and opportu-
nities confronting family firms.
2015 Le Breton-Miller and Miller
Research Questions
We have discussed a number of learning modes that
may help young family members become more effec-
tive stewards of their companies. We have also related
these modes to different life stages and roles of family
members. Indeed, Table 1 can serve as a set of sug-
gestions for researchers examining which learning
modes are activated, under what conditions, and with
which results to the individual, his or her unit, or the
firm as a whole. Some illustrative questions follow:
• What are the most common educational roles
played by different family members in pre-
paring the next generation for possible entry
into the business? How do these roles vary
across the life cycle?
• How much more effective in educating younger
family members are older family members ver-
sus outsiders? For which stages or roles does
that apply? How do types of learning differ be-
tween family and nonfamily educators?
• Which among the six types of learning are most
common for the life stages and roles we have
discussed? Which are the most effective? How
do these types interact, and when are they best
used in combination?
• How do the different modes of learning influ-
ence the creation of the stewardship resources
we have discussed; i.e., social capital, relation-
ships, corporate culture, long-term orientations?
• How do individuals who vary in personality and
cognitive style respond to different modes of
learning and education? For example, do en-
trepreneurial types thrive on experimental and
interactive learning, whereas more shy or bu-
reaucratic personalities favor and benefit most
from analytic and synthetic modes?
More specific questions might include the following:
• How do interactive, experimental, and institu-
tional learning shape family member behavior in
the different functions of the business?
• Which types of training offered by consultants
and advisors are most complementary to the
educational efforts of family members? How can
senior family members help the juniors benefit
from outside educators?
Research Approaches
There is no one approach for studying learning in
families and family firms. Insightful case studies, par-
ticularly those that reach back into the early lives and
different generations of families and their businesses
can be most insightful in honing research questions
and survey instruments. Corporate biographies too can
be interesting sources for understanding how for-
mative experiences shape firm behavior and per-
formance. Chernow’s biographies of the Morgans
397
and the Warburgs, for example, are fascinating
accounts of how early educational experiences
influenced relationships and capabilities in
some famous family enterprises. 12
Survey research is another possible path to exam-
ine the impact of learning experiences and the effects
of different modes of education. Interviews and ques-
tionnaires asking about the learning modes and per-
sonal histories of various family managers and board
members can be informative where confidentiality is
assured and where there are multiple respondents
per enterprise to triangulate responses. This is espe-
cially true when there are objective measures of firm
climate, strategy, conflict, performance, and other
key outcomes, and where multiple generations of the
family participate in the research.
Research on the impact of the educational efforts
of consultants, the involvement of outside board
members, and the use of family coaches can be
conducted, preferably by longitudinal studies that
examine not only personal reactions of participants,
but actual changes in skills and competences
measured according to specific outcomes.
In short, there are abundant research opportunities
for systematic, qualitative, and rigorous work in a do-
main that is only just now beginning to be explored.
EPILOGUE
We have focused on the learning and educational
roles played by family members for family members.
As we have argued, education within the family and
within the family business, as overseen by committed
family members, can prove to be tremendous bas-
tions of stewardship for next-generation owners and
managers. However, there are numerous other sour-
ces of education: consultants, trainers and coaches,
universities and professional advisors, and family
business community groups and associations.13
Moreover, there is no universal set of educational
requirements that fits all firms—that will depend
both on the nature of the family—its size, emotional
12
See Chernow, R. The House of Morgan. NY: Grove Press, 2001
and The Warburgs. NY: Random House, 1994.
13
Hoy and Sharma (2006) provide a useful inventory of the pro-
fessional associations such as FFI, FBN, and the knowledge
compendia available to help family firms. There are also major
consulting organizations that specialize in advising family firms,
and the Young Presidents Organization. And there are entire
programs at universities devoted to educating for family busi-
ness, as well as courses in many undergraduate and MBA pro-
grams. In addition, there are numerous books, a few cited in this
article, on managing family businesses.
398 Academy of Management Learning & Education
climate, and generation, as well as the complexity,
ownership structure, and strategy of the company.
What are generally not emphasized, however, are
the early years of the younger family generations
where the right values and attitudes need to be
developed in the context of the family and by the
family. These are critical. Moreover, more needs to
be done to teach family firm executives how to build
and pass on the stewardship attitudes that manifest
in corporate culture, enduring relationships, social
capital, and patient investment, where family firms
may well have a competitive advantage over their
rivals (Miller & Le Breton-Miller, 2005).
Over the past decade, a swell of criticism has
been levied against managerial opportunism, greed,
and short-sightedness. The global financial crisis
that began in 2008 has amplified the protest. At the
same time there is a growing realization that man-
agement education has not only failed to raise the
ethical consciousness of today’s practitioners, but
may have actually contributed to the problem. MBA
and economics programs have been under attack for
their focus on techniques aimed at bottom-line and
commercial results with little concern for leadership
character, managerial craft, or ethics (Mintzberg,
2004; Pfeffer & Fong, 2002). Certainly, some family
firms are subject to ills such as nepotism, entrench-
ment, and appropriation from minority owners
(Bertrand & Schoar, 2006). Nonetheless, family firms
with ethical principles may have an advantage in
that the moral education and character-building that
begins in the home, and the intimate knowledge of
craft that can only be communicated by trusting
mentorship, can, with early family diligence, be
brought into the business. In an age where short-
termism afflicts so many public companies, these
aspects of family education, and their ability to
harness the unique resources arising out of a long-
run, emotionally engaged orientation must not be
ignored. They should be a part of every family firm’s
educational arsenal.
REFERENCES
Anderson, R. C., & Reeb, D. M. 2004. Board composition: Balancing
family influence in S&P 500 firms. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 49(2): 209–237.
Arregle, J. L., Hitt, M. A., Sirmon, D. G., & Very, P. 2007. The de-
velopment of organizational social capital: Attributes of
family firms. Journal of Management Studies, 44(1): 73–95.
Bandura, A. 1963. Social learning and personality development.
New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
Bandura, A. 1977. Social learning theory. Oxford, England:
Prentice-Hall.
September
Bertrand, M., & Schoar, A. 2006. The role of family in family firms.
The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20(2): 73–96.
Block, P. 1993. Stewardship: Choosing service over self-interest.
New York: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Bruner, J. S., & Austin, G. A. 1986. A study of thinking, New York:
Transaction Publishers.
Chen, M.-J., & Miller, D. 2015. Reconceptualizing competitive dy-
namics: A multidimensional framework. Strategic Manage-
ment Journal, 36(5): 758–775.
Cheraskin, L., & Campion, M. A. 1996. Study clarifies job-rotation
benefits. The Personnel Journal, 75(11): 31–38.
Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Holum, A. 1991. Cognitive apprenticeship:
Making thinking visible. American Educator, 15(3): 6–11.
Corbetta, G., & Salvato, C. A. 2004. The board of directors in family
firms: One size fits all? Family Business Review, 17(2): 119–134.
Crain, W. 2011. Theories of development: Concepts and applications,
(6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.
Dalley, J., & Hamilton, B. 2000. Knowledge, context and learning in the
small business. International Small Business Journal, 18(3): 51–59.
Davis, J. H., Schoorman, F. D., & Donaldson, L. 1997. Toward
a stewardship theory of management. Academy of Man-
agement Review, 22(1): 20–47.
Donaldson, L., & Davis, J. H. 1991. Stewardship theory or agency
theory: CEO governance and shareholder returns. Australian
Journal of Management, 16(1): 49–64.
Eddleston, K. A., & Kellermanns, F. W. 2007. Destructive
and productive family relationships: A stewardship theory
perspective. Journal of Business Venturing, 22(4): 545–565.
Eddleston, K. A., Kellermanns, F. W., & Sarathy, R. 2008. Resource
configuration in family firms. Journal of Management Stud-
ies, 45(1): 26–50.
Fuller, A., & Unwin, L. 2003. Fostering workplace learning: Look-
ing through the lens of apprenticeship. European Educa-
tional Research Journal, 2(1): 41–55.
Gersick, K., Davis, J. A., Hampton, M. M., & Lansberg, I. 1997.
Generation to generation: Life cycles of the family business,
Boston: Harvard Business Press.
Gomez-Mejia, L. R., Cruz, C., Berrone, P., & De Castro, J. 2011. The
bind that ties. The Academy of Management Annals, 5:
653–707.
Gott, S. P. 1988. Apprenticeship instruction for real-world tasks:
The coordination of procedures, mental models, and strate-
gies. Review of Research in Education, 8: 97–169.
Habbershon, T. G., & Williams, M. L. 1999. A resource-based
framework for assessing the strategic advantages of family
firms. Family Business Review, 12(1): 1–25.
Heimann, B., & Pittenger, K. K. 1996. The impact of formal men-
torship on socialization and commitment of newcomers.
Journal of Managerial Issues, 3.
Hoy, F., & Sharma, P. 2006. Navigating the family business edu-
cation maze. In P. Poutsiouris, C. Smyrnios, & S. Klein, (Eds.),
Handbook of research on family business: 49: 11–25. Chel-
tenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
2015 Le Breton-Miller and Miller 399

James, H. S. 1999. Owner as manager, extended horizons and the
family firm. International Journal of the Economics of Busi-
ness, 6(1): 41–55.
Kets de Vries, M. F. K., & Carlock, R. 2008. Family business on the
couch: A psychological perspective. NY: Wiley.
Kotlar, J., & De Massis, A. 2013. Goal setting in family firms. En-
trepreneurship Theory and Practice, 37(6): 1263–1288.
Lansberg, I. 1999. Succeeding generations: Realizing the dream of
families in business. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Le Breton-Miller, I., & Miller, D. 2014. The paradox of resource
vulnerability: Considerations for organizational curatorship.
Strategic Management Journal.36(3): 397–415.
Le Breton-Miller, I., Miller, D., & Steier, L. 2004. Toward an in-
tegrative model of effective FOB succession. Entrepreneur-
ship Theory and Practice, 28(4): 305–328.
Lubatkin, M. H., Ling, Y., & Schulze, W. S. 2007. An organizational
justice-based view of self-control and agency costs in family
firms. Journal of Management Studies, 44(6): 955–971.
McCann, G., DeMoss, M., Dascher, P., & Barnett, S. 2003. Educa-
tional needs of family businesses: Perceptions of university
directors. Family Business Review, 16(4): 283–291.
Miller, D. 1996. A preliminary typology of organizational learning.
Journal of Management, 22: 485–505.
Miller, D., & Le Breton-Miller, I. 2005. Managing for the long run.
Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Miller, D., & Le Breton-Miller, I. 2006. Family governance and firm
performance: Agency, stewardship, and capabilities. Family
Business Review, 19(1): 73–87.
Miller, D., Le Breton-Miller, I., & Scholnick, B. 2008. Stewardship vs.
stagnation: An empirical comparison of small family and non-
family businesses. Journal of Management Studies, 45(1): 51–78.
Miller, D., Steier, L., & Le Breton-Miller, I. 2003. Lost in time: In-
tergenerational succession, change, and failure in family
business. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(4): 513–531.
Miller, D., Xu, X., & Mehrotra, V. 2015. When is human capital a valu-
able resource? Strategic Management Journal 36(6): 930–944.
Mintzberg, H. 2004. Managers, not MBAs. San Francisco: Berrett-
Koehler.
Ormrod, J. E., & Davis, K. M. 2004. Human learning, New York: Merrill.
Patterson, G. R. 1975. Families: Applications of social learning to
family life. Champaign, IL: Research Press.
Pendergast, J., Ward, J., & de Pontet, S. 2011. Building a successful
family business board. New York: Palgrave.
Pfeffer, J., & Fong, C. 2002. The end of business schools? Less
success than meets the eye. Academy of Management
Learning & Education, 1(1): 78–95.
Piaget, J. 1997. The moral judgment of the child, New York: Simon
and Schuster.
Salvato, C., & Melin, L. 2008. Creating value across generations in
family-controlled businesses: The role of family social cap-
ital. Family Business Review, 21(3): 259–276.
Schank, R. C., Berman, T. R., & Macpherson, K. A. 1999. Learning
by doing. Instructional-Design Theories and Models, 2:
161–181.
Schein, E. H. 1990. Organizational culture. New York: American
Psychological Association.
Schulze, W. S., Lubatkin, M. H., & Dino, R. N. 2003. Toward a theory
of agency and altruism in family firms. Journal of Business
Venturing, 18(4): 473–490.
Shaffer, D. R. 2009. Social and personality development (6th ed.):
21–36. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Sirmon, D. G., & Hitt, M. A. 2003. Managing resources: Linking
unique resources, management, and wealth creation in
family firms. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 27(4):
339–358.
Skinner, B. F. 1953. Science and human behavior, New York:
Simon and Schuster.
Smith, P., Cowie, H., & Blades, M. 2010. Understanding children’s
development. (Basic Psychology; 4th ed.), Oxford, England:
Blackwell.
Spiecker, B. 1987. Indoctrination, intellectual virtues and ra-
tional emotions. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 21(2):
261–266.
Ward, J. L. 2011. Keeping the family business healthy: How to plan
for continuing growth, profitability, and family leadership,
New York: Macmillan.

Isabelle Le Breton-Miller (PhD, Imperial College, London) is an associate professor of man-

agement and holds the Chair of Succession and Family Enterprise at HEC Montreal, as well as
being Senior Research Fellow at the University of Alberta. Le Breton-Miller’s research, teaching
interests, and recent publications center on strategies, organization designs, governance
structures, and succession within family businesses. She is an associate editor at Strategic
Entrepreneuship Journal and serves on the editorial boards of Entrepreneurship Theory and
Practice, Family Business Review, and other journals, and consults with family businesses on
issues of strategy and succession. isabelle.lebreton@hec.ca
Danny Miller (PhD, McGill University) has held professorships at McGill University, HEC Mon-
treal, Columbia University, and the University of Alberta. Miller is currently a research professor
of strategic management at HEC Montreal, and chair in Strategy and Family Enterprise at the
University of Alberta. His areas of research interest are strategy, organization design and
change, and family business. danny.miller@hec.ca
Copyright of Academy of Management Learning & Education is the property of Academy of
Management and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a
listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print,
download, or email articles for individual use.