EDP Sciences logo
Submit your paper
Search
Menu
All issues Volume 35 / No 2 (2020) Ciência Téc. Vitiv., 35 2 (2020) 107-119 References
Open Access
Issue
Ciência Téc. Vitiv.
Volume 35, Number 2, 2020
Page(s) 107 - 119
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/ctv/ctv20203502107
Published online 18 September 2020
  • Aldrich H., Auster E.R., 1986. Even dwarfs started small: Liabilities of age and size and their strategic implications. Res. Organ. Behav., 8, 165–198. [Google Scholar]
  • Anderson R.C., Reeb D.M., 2003. Founding-family ownership and firm performance: Evidence from the S&P 500. J. Financ., 58, 1301–1328. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Ashenfelter O., Storchmann K., 2016. The economics of wine, weather, and climate change. Rev. Env. Econ. Policy, 10, 25–46. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Astrachan J.H., Kolenko T.A., 1994. A neglected factor explaining family business success: Human resource practices. Fam. Bus. Rev., 7, 251–262. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Bardaji I., Iraizoz B., 2015. Uneven responses to climate and market influencing the geography of high-quality wine production in Europe. Reg. Environ. Change, 15, 79–92. [Google Scholar]
  • Barnett T., Kellermanns F.W., 2006. Are we family and are we treated as family? Nonfamily employees’ perceptions of justice in the family firm. Entrep. Theory Pract., 30, 837–854. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Barney J., 1991. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. J. Manage., 17, 99–120. [Google Scholar]
  • Baruch Y., Holtom B.C., 2008. Survey response rate levels and trends in organizational research. Hum. Relat., 61, 1139–1160. [Google Scholar]
  • Bayo-Moriones J.A., Merino-Díaz de Cerio J., 2001. Size and HRM in the Spanish manufacturing industry. Empl. Relat., 23, 188–207. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Besanko D., Dranove D., Shanley M., Schaefer S., 2009. Economics of strategy. 606 p. John Wiley & Sons, New Jersey. [Google Scholar]
  • Boxall P., 1996. The strategic HRM debate and the resourcebased view of the firm. Hum. Resour. Manag. J., 6, 59–75. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Boxall P., 2013. Mutuality in the management of human resources: Assessing the quality of alignment in employment relationships. Hum. Resour. Manag. J., 23, 3–17. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Brandenburger A.M., Stuart H.W., 1996. Value-based business strategy. J. Econ. Manage. Strat., 5, 5–24. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Bresciani S., Giacosa E., Broccardo L., Culasso F., 2016. The family variable in the French and Italian wine sector. EuroMed J. Bus., 11, 101–118. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Cardon M.S., Stevens C.E., 2004. Managing human resources in small organizations: What do we know? Hum. Resour. Manage. R., 14, 295–323. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Carrasco-Hernandez A., Sánchez-Marín G., 2007. The determinants of employee compensation in family firms: Empirical evidence. Fam. Bus. Rev., 20, 215–228. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Carrasco-Hernández A.J., Sánchez-Marín G., 2014. El capital humano en la empresa familiar: un análisis exploratorio en empresas españolas. FAEDPYME Int. Rev.-FIR, 3, 19–29. [Google Scholar]
  • Chaney T., 2008. Distorted gravity: The intensive and extensive margins of international trade. Am. Econ. Rev., 98, 1707–1721. [Google Scholar]
  • Cosh A., Duncan J., Hughes A., Britain G., 1998. Investment in training and small firm growth and survival: An empirical analysis for the UK 1987–95. 73 p. Department for Education and Employment, London. [Google Scholar]
  • Cucculelli M., Mannarino L., Pupo V., Ricotta F., 2014. Ownermanagement, firm age, and productivity in Italian family firms. J. Small Bus. Manage., 52, 325–343. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Dawson A., 2012. Human capital in family businesses: Focusing on the individual level. J. Fam. Bus. Strateg., 3, 3–11. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • De Kok J.M., Uhlaner L.M., Thurik A.R., 2006. Professional HRM practices in family owned-managed enterprises. J. Small Bus. Manage., 44, 441–460. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • De Massis A., Frattini F., Pizzurno E., Cassia L., 2015. Product innovation in family versus nonfamily firms: An exploratory analysis. J. Small Bus. Manage., 53, 1–36. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Dess G.G., Davis P.S., 1984. Porter’s (1985) generic strategies as determinants of strategic group membership and organizational performance. Acad. Manag. J., 27, 467–488. [Google Scholar]
  • Dyer W.G., 2006. Examining the “family effect” on firm performance. Fam. Bus. Rev., 19, 253–273. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Eurostat, 2019. Database. Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/data/database (accessed 15.04.2020). [Google Scholar]
  • Fernández E., Pinilla V., 2018. Spain. In: Wine globalization: A new comparative history. 208–238. Anderson K., Pinilla V. (eds), Cambridge University Press, New York. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Ferrer-Lorenzo J.R., 2018. Factores de competitividad del sector vitivinícola español, 289 p. PhD Thesis, University of Zaragoza. [Google Scholar]
  • Ferrer-Lorenzo J.R., Maza-Rubio M.T., Abella-Garcés S., 2018. The competitive advantage in business, capabilities and strategy. What general performance factors are found in the Spanish wine industry? Wine Econ. Policy, 7, 94–108. [Google Scholar]
  • Ferrer-Lorenzo J.R., Maza-Rubio M.T., Abella-Garcés S., 2019. Business model and performance in the Spanish wine industry. J. Wine Res., 30, 31–47. [Google Scholar]
  • Franks J., Mayer C., Volpin P., Wagner H.F., 2011. The life cycle of family ownership: International evidence. Rev. Financ. Stud., 25, 1675–1712. [Google Scholar]
  • Gallucci C., Santulli R., Calabrò A., 2015. Does family involvement foster or hinder firm performance? The missing role of family-based branding strategies. J. Fam. Bus. Strateg., 6, 155–165. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • García-Cortijo, M.C., Villanueva, E.C., Castillo-Valero, J.S., Li, Y., 2019. Wine consumption in China: Profiling the 21st Century Chinese wine consumer. Ciência e Téc. Vitiv., 34, 71–83. [Google Scholar]
  • Gerhart B., Milkovich G.T., 1992. Employee compensation: Research and practice. In: Handbook of industrial and organizational Psychology. 481–569. Dunnette M.D., Hough L.M. (eds.), Consulting Psychologists Press, Palo Alto. [Google Scholar]
  • Gnan L., Lambrechts F., 2018. Human resources and mutual gains in family firms. J. Fam. Bus. Strateg., 9, I–II. [Google Scholar]
  • Gómez-Mejía L.R., Cruz C., Berrone P., De Castro J., 2011. The bind that ties: Socioemotional wealth preservation in family firms. Acad. Manag. Ann., 5, 653–707. [Google Scholar]
  • Gómez-Mejía L.R, Haynes K.T., Núñez-Nickel M., Jacobson K.J., Moyano-Fuentes J., 2007. Socioemotional wealth and business risks in family-controlled firms: Evidence from Spanish olive oil mills. Admin. Sci. Quart., 52, 106–137. [Google Scholar]
  • Gómez-Mejía L.R., Larraza-Kintana M., Makri M., 2003. The determinants of executive compensation in family-controlled public corporations. Acad. Manage. J., 46, 226–237. [Google Scholar]
  • González M., Guzmán A., Pombo C., Trujillo M.A., 2012. Family firms and financial performance: The cost of growing. Emerg. Mark. Rev., 13, 626–649. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Guo C., Brown W.A., Ashcraft R.F., Yoshioka C.F., Dong H.K.D., 2011. Strategic human resources management in non-profit organizations. Rev. Public Pers. Adm., 31, 248–269. [Google Scholar]
  • Habbershon T.G., Williams M.L., 1999. A resource-based framework for assessing the strategic advantages of family firms. Fam. Bus. Rev., 12, 1–25. [Google Scholar]
  • IEF, 2019. La empresa familiar en cifras. Available at: http://www.iefamiliar.com/cifras/1 (accessed 02.05.2020). [Google Scholar]
  • INE, 2018. Estadística estructural de empresas: sector industrial 2015. Available at http://www.ine.es/dyngs/INEbase/es/operacion.htm?c=Estadistica_C&cid=1254736143952&menu=resultados&idp=1254735576715 (accessed 14.05 2020). [Google Scholar]
  • Kidwell R.E., Fish A.J., 2007. High-performance human resource practices in Australian family businesses: Preliminary evidence from the wine industry. Int. Entrep. Manag. J., 3, 1–14. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Kotey B., Folker C., 2007. Employee training in SMEs: Effect of size and firm type - Family and nonfamily. J. Small Bus. Manage., 45, 214–238. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Kotlar J., De Massis A., Frattini F., Bianchi M., Fang H., 2013. Technology acquisition in family and nonfamily firms: A longitudinal analysis of Spanish manufacturing firms. J. Prod. Innovat. Manag., 30, 1073–1088. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • León-Guerrero A.Y., McCann III J.E., Haley Jr J.D., 1998. A study of practice utilization in family businesses. Fam. Bus. Rev., 11, 107–120. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Lindow C.M., Stubner S., Wulf T., 2010. Strategic fit within family firms: The role of family influence and the effect on performance. J. Fam. Bus. Strateg., 1, 167–178. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • López-Cabrales A., Pérez-Luño A., Cabrera R. ., 2009. Knowledge as a mediator between HRM practices and innovative activity. Hum. Resour. Manag., 48, 485–503. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Lozano-Reina G., Sánchez-Marín G., 2019. Prácticas de recursos humanos y rendimiento empresarial: explorando el modelo AMO en las PYME españolas. Small Bus. Int. Rev., 3, 67–85 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Markman G.D., Baron R.A., 2003. Person-entrepreneurship fit: Why some people are more successful as entrepreneurs than others. Hum. Resour. Manage. R., 13, 281–301. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Martínez B., Requejo I., 2017. Does the type of family control affect the relationship between ownership structure and firm value? Int. Rev. Financ., 17, 135–146. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Maury B., 2006. Family ownership and firm performance: Empirical evidence from Western European corporations. J. Corp. Financ, 12, 321–341. [Google Scholar]
  • Mazzi C., 2011. Family business and financial performance: Current state of knowledge and future research challenges. J. Fam. Bus. Strateg., 2, 166–181. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Miller D., Le Breton-Miller I., Lester R.H., Cannella Jr A.A., 2007. Are family firms really superior performers? J. Corp. Financ., 13, 829–858. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Miralles-Marcelo J.L., del Mar Miralles-Quirós M., Lisboa I., 2014. The impact of family control on firm performance: Evidence from Portugal and Spain. J. Fam. Bus. Strateg., 5, 156–168. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • OEMV, 2017. Principales tendencias de los mercados mundiales de vino. Available at: http://www.oemv.es/esp/-oemv.php (accessed 11.05.2020). [Google Scholar]
  • Ortega M.J., 2010. Competitive strategies and firm performance: Technological capabilities’ moderating roles. J. Bus. Res., 63, 1273–1281. [Google Scholar]
  • Patel P.C., Cardon M.S., 2010. Adopting HRM practices and their effectiveness in small firms facing product-market competition. Hum. Resour. Manag., 49, 265–290. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Pittino D., Visintin F., Lenger T., Sternad D., 2016. Are high performance work practices really necessary in family SMEs? An analysis of the impact on employee retention. J. Fam. Bus. Strateg., 7, 75–89. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Poutziouris P., Savva C.S., Hadjielias E., 2015. Family involvement and firm performance: Evidence from UK listed firms. J. Fam. Bus. Strateg., 6, 14–32. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Rauch A., Hatak I., 2016. A meta-analysis of different HRenhancing practices and performance of small and medium sized firms. J. Bus. Venturing, 31, 485–504. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Reid R.S., Adams J.S., 2001. Human resource management – A survey of practices within family and non-family firms. J. Eur. Ind. Train., 25, 310–320. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Resco P., Iglesias A., Bardají I., Sotés V., 2016. Exploring adaptation choices for grapevine regions in Spain. Reg. Environ. Change, 16, 979–993. [Google Scholar]
  • Richard P.J., Devinney T.M., Yip G.S., Johnson G., 2009. Measuring organizational performance: Towards methodological best practice. J. Manage., 35, 718–804. [Google Scholar]
  • Rubio-Bañón A., Aragón A., 2008. Recursos estratégicos en la pymes. Revista Europea de Dirección y Economía de la Empresa, 17, 103–126. [Google Scholar]
  • SABI, 2017. Sistema de Analisis de Balances Ibericos. Available at: https://sabi.bvdinfo.com (accessed 14.05.2020). [Google Scholar]
  • Sánchez-Marín G., Meroño-Cerdán A.L., Carrasco-Hernández A.J., 2017. Formalized HR practices and firm performance: An empirical comparison of family and non-family firms. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Man., 30, 1084–1110. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Santos J.B., Brito L.A.L., 2012. Toward a subjective measurement model for firm performance. Braz. Adm. Rev., 9 (SPE), 95–117. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Schulze W.S., Gedajlovic E.R., 2010. Whither family business? J. Manage. Stud., 47, 191–204. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Sciascia S., Mazzola P., 2008. Family involvement in ownership and management: Exploring nonlinear effects on performance. Fam. Bus. Rev., 21, 331–345. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Serrano R., Fernández-Olmos M., Pinilla V., 2018. Internationalization and performance in agri-food firms. Span. J. Agric. Res., 16, e0107. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Sirmon D.G., Hitt M.A., 2003. Managing resources: Linking unique resources, management, and wealth creation in family firms. Entrep. Theory Pract., 27, 339–358. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Soler I.P., Gemar G., Guerrero-Murillo R., 2017. Family and nonfamily business behaviour in the wine sector: A comparative study. Eur. J. Fam. Bus., 7, 65–73. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Spanos Y.E., Lioukas S., 2001. An examination into the causal logic of rent generation: Contrasting Porter’s competitive strategy framework and the resource-based perspective. Strategic Manage. J., 22, 907–934. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Steijvers T., Lybaert N., Dekker J., 2017. Formal human resource practices in family firms. J. Fam. Bus. Manag., 7, 151–165. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Thach L., Kidwell R.E., 2009. HR practices in US and Australian family wineries: Cultural contrasts and performance impact. Int. Entrep. Manag. J., 5, 219–240. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.