Frank Lambrechts

Purpose: This study aims to unravel a potential determinant of employee engagement in family firms. In particular, we focus on the role of the CEO by studying the influence of CEO transformational leadership on employee engagement. Moreover, we look into the potential mediating psychological safety might play in this relationship.Design/methodology/approach: Based on an extensive literature review, we propose that there will be a significant positive relationship between family firm CEOs’ transformational leadership and the level of employee engagement. We argue that psychological safety will serve as an underlying mechanism explaining this positive relationship. We empirically tested our research model using quantitative data collected through a questionnaire, completed by 508 employees from Belgian family firms.Findings: The results confirm the positive relationship between CEOs’ transformational leadership and employee engagement. Moreover, these results show that the degree of psychological safety mediates this relationship.Originality/value: This study forms a significant contribution to family firm literature. Until now, even though existing studies on employee engagement in general are numerous, we had little to no knowledge of the factors influencing employee engagement taking into account the unique context of family firms. With this study, we take an important step in this matter. In addition, this study also contributes to the general literature on employee engagement, since previous studies on the impact of leadership on employee engagement tended to focus on the role of the immediate supervisors and not the CEO.

This study focuses on family owner–nonfamily CEO relational practices and what these relational practices constrain and potentiate in family firm CEO succession. Our main contribution is developing a constructionist relational practice perspective and approach as an alternative to the entitative view that dominates the family business literature. We illustrate the relational practice perspective through our dialogically structured inquiries with family owners and nonfamily CEOs. We co-develop practical wisdom on how family owner–nonfamily CEO relational practices can construct stuckness in organizing or, conversely, open up new possibilities to go on depending on (i) the way the family owner and nonfamily CEO “handle” equivocality and tension they continuously (re)produce through their relational practices and (ii) the way they enact “relational balancing” to equilibrate their relation in the making in terms of value/self-worth maintenance by involving other actors, such as board members, management team members, or a coach.

This article studies the impact of emotional dissonance experienced in interactions with the CEO on affective organizational commitment in family firm top management teams. We argue that this relationship will be mediated by the level of satisfaction with the CEO. Additionally, we propose that CEO ownership will have a moderating effect. Using a multiple-respondent dataset of 212 top managers from 45 family firms, we find that emotional dissonance leads to less satisfaction with the CEO, influencing the level of affective organizational commitment. This relationship is even stronger if the CEO has a high degree of ownership power.