Volume 11 Issue 2 Article 4 12-31-2009 The role of women in family businesses Jaka Vadnjal Blaž Zupan Follow this and additional works at: https://www.ebrjournal.net/home Recommended Citation Vadnjal, J., & Zupan, B. (2009). The role of women in family businesses. Economic and Business Review, 11(2). https://doi.org/10.15458/2335-4216.1265 This Original Article is brought to you for free and open access by Economic and Business Review. It has been accepted for inclusion in Economic and Business Review by an authorized editor of Economic and Business Review. 159 THE ROLE OF WOMEN IN FAMILY BUSINESSES JAKA VADNJAL* BLAŽ ZUPAN** ABSTRACT: Th e role of women in family businesses is explored in the paper. Although rec- ognised as generally very important players, the role of women is oft en defi ned as invisible in business decision-making, supportive in men’s traditional business domains and only rarely adequately recognised and rewarded. Th e paper explores possible diff erences in the views of men and women who manage small family fi rms. Th eir attitudes opposing the traditional business roles of women, diff erent views on managerial, ownership and tran- sition issues and possible gender discrimination are examined. Th e fi ndings support the paradigm of a diff erent, more feminine style of management, while signs of discrimination are not clearly revealed. Key words: Family business; Women; Gender roles; Discrimination; Feminine managerial style UDC: 334.012.32:305 JEL classification: L26 1. INTRODUCTION While female entrepreneurship is not adequately developed in Slovenia (considering GEM studies 2003-2006), it is assumed that women play a very important role in fam- ily fi rms, an important segment of the entrepreneurship movement emerging from the transition period. Women in Slovenia have achieved a high level of equality in both edu- cation and employment and it may be expected that have also taken on a crucial role in family fi rms. Th e demographic situation involving a low number of children should enable them to establish themselves as heirs to family fi rms as well, which is important since a large share of family fi rms will be entering the succession process in the near future (Glas et al., 2005). In the article, the role of women in Slovenian family fi rms is ex- amined considering their role in ownership, managerial positions as well as diff erences in values, attitudes to family fi rms, their managerial styles etc. Th eir real contribution seems to be undervalued due to the conservative tradition in the country and the full ECONOMIC AND BUSINESS REVIEW | VOL. 11 | No. 2 | 2009 | 159–177 * GEA College of Entrepreneurship, Kidričevo nabrežje 2, 6330 Piran, Slovenia, Email: jaka.vadnjal@gea- college.si ** University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Economics, Kardeljeva ploščad 17, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia, Email: blaz. zupan@ef.uni-lj.si ECONOMIC AND BUSINESS REVIEW | VOL. 11 | No. 2 | 2009160 potential of women is still not well utilised. However, the role of Slovenian women in family fi rms should be further supported to the benefi t of their important economic and social roles, family well-being and the improved prospects of the development of family fi rms in the next generation. 2. BACKGROUND Th e family business literature is sparse on this topic and in the past very few contri- butions were based on empirical research (Rowe and Hong, 2000; Bowman-Upton and Heck, 1996). Women family members are one category of stakeholders with a vested interest in the viability of the business, next to owners and employees (Davis and Tag- iuri, 1991) and they can have an important impact on the business. While women tend to enhance their presence as female entrepreneurs, research on women in family busi- nesses has suggested that the majority of women continued to remain in the background, staying ‘invisible’ (Cole, 1997; Fitzgerald and Muske, 2002), contradicting the level of feminism. However, for some authors (Dumas, 1998; Lyman et al., 1985) occupying a subdued role has provided them with a unique vantage point allowing a rich under- standing of the prevailing issues and relationship dynamics where they might make a highly valuable input to the effi cient conduct of the business and the management of re- lationships among family members. Sharma (2004) even says that, if used astutely, wives’ observations, intuition and emotional capital can make a diff erence between the success or failure of a family fi rm. Th e main motivation to write this paper was to explore some particularities of wom- en’s contribution to family businesses through the paradigm of possible diff erent ap- proaches between the two genders regarding managerial styles and ownership issues, including transition questions. Th e theory on women’s involvement and roles in fam- ily businesses is built on a literature review. Five propositions emerge based on the theoretical background and extensive anecdotal experience of the researchers. Th e methodological approach is based on the focused surveying of a sample of family busi- nesses with a certain degree of female involvement. Th e results are discussed through several blocks covering the managerial role of women, ownership dilemmas and dif- ferent gender-based roles in family fi rms. Th e paper then off ers some conclusions and implications. 3. LITERATURE REVIEW Poza and Messer (2001) described six different types of roles adopted by spouses of successful family firms: jealous spouse; chief trust officer; partner or copreneur; vice-president; senior advisor; and free agent. Curimbaba (2002) reported that Bra- zilian women occupied either a professional, invisible or anchor role in their firms. Due to the small convenience samples these studies mainly provide an indication of the varying types of women’s roles. However, it is mostly expected that women oc- JAKA VADNJAL, BLAŽ ZUPAN | THE ROLE OF WOMEN INFAMILY BUSINESSES 161 cupy the second rank or head up one of the business functions, traditionally finance and accounting or sales. Danes and Olson (2003) found 42% of wives as major deci- sion-makers even in family firms owned and managed by men. Fourth, spouses and other female family members are often just paid employees in family firms: Danes and Olson (2003) found 57% of working spouses even in family firms owned by their husbands, with 47% being paid, which may suggest a certain level of discrimination at this point. Some authors analyse the advantages and disadvantages for women in family fi rms (Frishkoff and Brown, 1993), including fl exible work hours, access to positions in tradi- tionally male-dominated industries, job security, professional challenges, and opportu- nities for personal growth (Barnett and Barnett, 1988). However, family fi rms can also involve gender stereotyping and discrimination found in society at large (Jaff ee, 1990; Salganicoff , 1990), like the popular view that the male partner is the entrepreneur while the female partner does the bookkeeping in the back room (Dumas, 1998). Th is attitude leads to the fact that even an important contribution of women to family businesses may not be properly recognised in terms of job titles or salaries (Gillis-Donovan and Moynihan-Brandt, 1990; Lyman et al., 1985). Marshack (1994) found that 80% of male co-owners in husband-wife businesses advocated a stereotypical masculine sex-role orientation and 76% of female business co-owners supported a stereotypical feminine gender-role orientation. Traditional gender roles are oft en present in family businesses. Alcorn (1982) suggested the prevalence of the dominant father fi gure and a subordinate mother fi gure through- out family businesses. Lyman et al. (1985) stated that the work environment in family businesses displayed cultural traditions that placed women and men in diff erent social positions and diff erent work and family responsibilities. According to Ponthieu and Caudill (1993), these characteristics apply to wives, mothers and daughters. Th e evalu- ation of the true contribution to the family’s economic well-being therefore encounters a diff erent mix of paid employment and unpaid family work between men and wives (Voydanoff , 1990). A number of wives simultaneously: (1) are also employed somewhere else; (2) manage the household; and (3) work in the family business, thereby juggling three layers of obligation (Rowe and Hong, 2000). Involvement in a family business means being part of the family business’ core makeup: the role of family members in the business, how bonded the members are and how the business defi nes itself in relation to the outside world (Doherty et al., 1991). Not being adequately recognised and involved in running the business and making business deci- sions creates tensions out of the dissatisfaction and clashes of values and beliefs about the operation of the business and the involvement, tasks and rewards for family members (Danes and Amarapurkar, 2001; Frishkoff and Brown, 1993). Prolonged and unresolved tensions eventually aff ect the achievement, health and fellowship of the business (Danes et al., 2002). However, as Danes and Olson (2003) discuss, tensions and confl icts can either foster a constructive climate that focuses resources on targeted goals, leading to growth and/or continued success (Cosier and Harvey, 1998; Danes et al., 1999) or they ECONOMIC AND BUSINESS REVIEW | VOL. 11 | No. 2 | 2009162 could create an environment of a lack of trust and fellowship (Danes and Amarapurkar, 2001). Gender roles in family fi rms are changing but, when a female chooses a non-tradition- al role, tensions oft en surface (Freudenberger et al., 1989; Hollander and Bukowitz, 1996; Lyman et al., 1996). As entrepreneurship has emerged as a career choice for both men and women, that choice has disrupted traditions about how they manage their work lives and negotiates the overlap of their entrepreneurship endeavours and fam- ily obligations (Greenhaus and Callanan, 1994). Wicker and Burley (1991) found that wives’ infl uence on the business increases when they work in the family business. Th at relative infl uence can be a source of confl icting goals and can create tensions for the family business (Levinson, 1991; Marschak, 1998; Rodriguez et al., 1999). Work-family issues at the intersection of the business and family systems within family businesses are a particularly fertile area for confl ict (Harvey and Evans, 1994), with the content of confl ict arising from fi ve categories: justice, role, work-family, identity, and succession confl ict (Danes et al., 2000; McClendon and Kadis, 1991). Th e existence of more than one decision-maker in a family business will, over time, create some level of disagree- ment and tension (Kaye, 1996). Th is certainly depends on the situation as to whether: (1) spouses are partners so they should have a say in family business decisions; or (2) husbands are in control of the family business and the views of their wives may not be taken seriously (Rosenblatt et al., 1985). According to Danes et al. (2000), men and women use diff erent confl ict styles and confl ict begins to most easily subside when women try to avoid tensions. 4. METHODOLOGY A sample of Slovenian family fi rms was compiled by third-year undergraduate students from diff erent public sources like magazines, public presentations etc. In autumn 2007, students were asked to conduct questionnaire-based interviews as part of their Family Business course obligations. In order to be able to obtain a picture of diff erent gender roles students were advised to interview family fi rms that met the following criteria: (1) at least fi ve employees; (2) at least two family members employed; (3) have been in busi- ness for a minimum of three years to ensure a certain track record and well-established patterns of behaviour. As a matter of defi nition, the students were encouraged to make their own judgments regarding whether the particular family business they surveyed was a family business or not and, in addition, a student’s opinion was confi rmed by the surveyed company as to whether they felt they were a family business or not. Th us, it can be stated that a self-defi nition (Birley, 2001) of a family business was applied in this research to compile the sample. Th e students were given thorough guidelines on fi lling in the quite extensive question- naire which included the following sections: (a) general data on the family fi rm; (b) data on the manager; (c) data on the key woman in the fi rm (in case she was not holding the manager’s position; (d) data on the second woman in the fi rm (if there was one); (e) data JAKA VADNJAL, BLAŽ ZUPAN | THE ROLE OF WOMEN INFAMILY BUSINESSES 163 on women not yet employed in the family fi rm (mostly daughters still at school); and (f) data on women not employed in the family fi rm. Data on the second woman and women not employed were relatively scarce in the whole sample, which is why these data were excluded from the further analysis. Since this is the fi rst study of the role of women in family fi rms in Slovenia and it is doubtful that fi ndings from other countries would generally apply due to the diff erent history, culture and tradition in gender issues, fi ve propositions were developed from the overviewed literature survey and some fragmented fi ndings from previous surveys in Slovenia: P1 – Women rarely act as CEOs in family fi rms but dominate in second-level managerial positions (Cole, 1997; Fitzgerald and Muske, 2002). P2 – Women are modestly represented in the ownership structure of family businesses and consider this issue to be fairly unimportant (Lyman et al., 1996; Danes et al., 2002). P3 – Women’s view of transitional issues of their family fi rms are diff erent from men’s views (Danes, 1999; Sharma, 2004). P4 – Women in family fi rms exercise a diff erent, ‘feminine’ style of management due to diff erences in their values, personal traits and experience (Dumas, 1998; Poza and Messer, 2004). P5 – While there are diff erences in the gender roles and rewards in family fi rms, this situation is not perceived by both sexes as a pressing case of discrimination that would demand immediate action (Danes and Olson, 2003; Rowe and Hong, 2000). 5. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SAMPLE Family fi rms are mostly active in trade, but they are also quite well represented in manu- facturing and construction. One-third of them indicated that they cover two diff erent activities, chiefl y to ensure a more stable fl ow of revenues. As presented in Table 1, only 15% of the participating companies had been in business for 12 or less years, while the other companies were older. ECONOMIC AND BUSINESS REVIEW | VOL. 11 | No. 2 | 2009164 TABLE 1: Sample characteristics Parameter Number Percent Characteristics Activity (fi rms were allowed to list up to two activities, with 34 having two activities) 37 20 19 12 8 6 3 36 34.5 18.7 17.8 11.2 7.5 5.6 2.8 33.6 retail and wholesale trade manufacturing construction transport and communications other services tourism and restaurants fi nancial and other services other activities Legal status 62 45 57.9 42.1 incorporated businesses sole proprietors Number of employees Average: 12.8 Number of family members employed Average: 2.67 55 (51.4%) with two or less, 52 (48.6%) with three and more Founders 63 8 23 13 58.9 7.5 21.5 12.1 husband wife spouses as partners others (inherited businesses) Foundation date 41 50 16 38.2 46.7 15.0 before 1989 during 1990-1994 after 1995 Family ownership 97 9 1 90.7 8.4 0.9 100% family ownership 50-81% family ownership no family ownership Gender of the manager 89 18 83.2 16.8 male female Source: own sample, 2007 On average, the participating companies had 12.8 employees. According to EU cri- teria regarding the number of employees, there were 60 micro-, 45 small- and 2 medium-sized fi rms. Approximately half the sample (51.4%) employed up to two family members, while others employed at least three relatives. As expected, the vast majority of businesses were in the ownership control of the family, managed mostly by men in CEO positions (83.2%). One particular family business with no family ownership was recently sold to a multinational holding company but fam- ily members retained their managerial positions. Some gender-based characteristics of the observed groups within the sample are given in Tables 2 and 3. As can be observed in Table 2, on average the women are younger than the men in the sample. Th ere is no great diff erence between CEO women and key non-CEO women regarding their age and years of experience. Th e second woman in a family business is younger and less experi- enced, which may be interpreted by relying on the assumption that in several cases the second woman is the founder’s daughter. JAKA VADNJAL, BLAŽ ZUPAN | THE ROLE OF WOMEN INFAMILY BUSINESSES 165 TABLE 2: Selected data concerning age and experience for key groups of respondents Group of respondents Number of respondents Average age (in years) Average work experience (in years) Work experience in other fi rms (in years) Years in the CEO role Managers: all - male CEOs - female CEOs Key women – all Key non-CEO women Second women 107 89 18 107 89 25 47.2 48.2 42.6 42.2 42.1 38.4 25.6 26.8 19.4 20.7 20.9 16.4 10.2 10.5 8.7 9.0 9.1 7.5 14.2 14.9 10.3 Source: own sample, 2007 A possible drawback of Slovenian family fi rms is the large share of these fi rms origi- nating in the craft sector which saw intensive development during the 1980s under the then more liberal economic policy. Th is craft tradition supports a conservative view of some factors of success (Vadnjal and Glas, 2008): education of the managerial staff , market orientation vs. product infatuation, acceptance of modern technology etc. By mostly having fi rst-generation family fi rms in the sample, there is hardly any diff erence between the education of the founders and the acting managers as it is oft en expected in family businesses that the younger generation would have a higher level of formal education. On the other hand, as presented in Table 3, the women in the sample tend to have signifi cantly higher levels of formal education than the men (χ2 = 11.64; DF = 5; α = 0.04). TABLE 3: Level of formal education in the sample of family fi rms Education level completed Founders of family fi rms (%) Managers (%) All Female Grammar school Vocational school Secondary school College University Other 1.9 32.7 43.0 10.3 11.2 0.9 1.9 25.2 49.5 10.3 12.1 0.9 - 16.7 50.0 22.2 11.0 - Number of persons 107 107 18 Source: own sample, 2007 6. THE BUSINESS AND MANAGERIAL ROLE OF WOMEN First, the roles the women are occupying in the family fi rms are indentifi ed. In the start- up phase these fi rms are mostly a male aff air since 58% were established by men, 22% were a joint undertaking of the couple, and only 7% were initiated by women; the rest were established in earlier generations. Th e major role of men is also confi rmed by the ECONOMIC AND BUSINESS REVIEW | VOL. 11 | No. 2 | 2009166 fact that 83% of fi rms have a male CEO, although the fi gure obtained of 17% of women managers is quite close to the lower estimates of the share of women entrepreneurs in Slovenia (Kotar, 2006). While only a minor share of women (18%) occupy the CEO position, Slovenian women are far from only playing a supportive role or being ‘invisible’ in the background. As Table 4 shows, they hold the second managerial rank in a further 46% of fi rms and 29% are among professional staff with some level of decision-making power. In several cases, these formal ranks only seem to represent a formal designation so as to establish a posi- tion towards non-family employees while, on the other hand, men oft en discuss their de- cisions and listen to their wives above and beyond their formal status in the fi rm (Danes and Olson, 2003). TABLE 4: Th e business/managerial role of women in Slovenian family businesses Business / managerial role Key woman in the fi rm Second woman in the fi rm Number % Number % Manager (CEO) Assistant manager Second-level managerial rank - ’procurist’* - production - fi nance and accounting - marketing and sales Professional staff Supporting staff No answer 18 9 40 7 8 16 9 31 7 1 17.8 8.4 37.4 6.5 7.5 14.9 8.4 29.0 6.5 0.9 - 1 10 2 1 1 6 12 2 - - 4.0 40.0 8.0 4.0 4.0 24.0 48.0 8.0 - Number of respondents 107 100.0 25 100.0 Source: own sample, 2007; * someone authorised to sign on behalf of the company Considering the Curimbaba (2002) groups, Slovenian women are found in an anchor role (managerial position) in 18% and a weak anchor role (second-level managers) in 46% of all cases, followed by a professional status in 29% and being invisible in their support- ive role in 7% of all cases. However, a look at the business functions occupied by women partly downplays this extreme position. It shows that a number of women with a formal managerial role are in fact doing supportive tasks. JAKA VADNJAL, BLAŽ ZUPAN | THE ROLE OF WOMEN INFAMILY BUSINESSES 167 TABLE 5: Business areas occupied by non-CEO women Business areas occupied by women Key non-CEO women Second woman in the fi rm Number % Number % Managerial ranks: - Finance, investment - Marketing and sales - Production - Human resources Professional: administration Supporting role: - supporting role - ‘girl Friday’ Other 35 16 12 6 1 35 17 5 12 1 39.8 18.2 13.6 6.8 1.1 39.8 19.3 5.7 13.6 1.1 18 5 11 1 1 - 7 2 5 - 72.0 20.0 44.0 4.0 4.0 - 28.0 8.0 20.0 - Number of respondents 88 100.0 25 100.0 Source: own sample, 2007 While 40% of key women have a well-designated business function (Table 5), mostly in fi nance, another 40% handle administrative tasks that usually cover everything needed to run a micro business, and 19% are in the supportive role, mostly described as ‘a girl Friday’. Th ere seems to be a pattern whereby men take on the CEO position and key women handle fi nance and accounting. Considering the stereotype that women play the key role in working with employees, these family fi rms are generally too small to have an HRM department and women take on these tasks mostly as part of their managerial/ administrative tasks. Th is allocation of business areas is not only a matter of tradition and chance but also relies on an educational background. While the education level is generally low in fam- ily fi rms (Glas, 2003), the second generation is improving (Glas et al., 2006) and women have a higher formal education (see Table 3). However, they diff er signifi cantly in the area of education and therefore in their business expertise. While men are very profi cient in technical expertise, only one-tenth of non-CEO women come from this area and the huge majority has a background in business or the social sciences, proving the known gender diff erences in professional orientations in Slovenia. We also researched some common attitudes to the managerial role of family members asking respondents from diff erent groups to indicate their (dis)agreement with some statements on the behaviour of family fi rms that were used in some previous research (Vadnjal, 2008). Respondents expressed their attitude on a fi ve-point Likert scale from 1 (completely agree) to 5 (completely disagree). Th e mean values were computed and t-tests for the diff erences in mean values were run. ECONOMIC AND BUSINESS REVIEW | VOL. 11 | No. 2 | 2009168 TABLE 6: Attitudes to the managerial roles of family members Statements about managerial roles and succession in family fi rms Groups of respondents from family fi rms Managers (CEOs) All Men Women Children should be introduced to the fi rm at an early age 2.57 2.43(1) 3.29(1) Children’s education should be geared to the business’ needs 2.94 2.79(2) 3.76(2) Management successors should be chosen from the family 2.47 2.43 2.65 Parents should retire when the children are ready to take over 2.98 2.94 3.18 Sibling rivalry in the business is good for the business 4.32 4.26 4.65 Family members are entitled to diff erent pay arrangements than the rest of the employees 3.64 3.53 4.18 Number of respondents 107 89 18 Note: (1) t = -2.938, p = 0.004, (2) t = -3.208, p = 0.002 Source: own sample, 2007 Considering the issues in Table 6, there were signifi cantly diff erent answers between male and female managers regarding the fi rst two statements: women in the CEO position are more liberal as regards children, allowing them to exercise more freedom about joining the fi rm and choosing their education. Th ey probably better understand the dilemmas of children concerning their future in the family fi rm since they spend more time with them and might well remember diffi cult times in developing their own managerial sta- tus. While female CEOs are less inclined to have managerial positions monopolised by family members and to apply diff erent rules on rewarding family members, the diff er- ences are not statistically signifi cant. Th ese aspects of managerial careers do not have any important gender dimension. Th ey instead seem to be more infl uenced by their existing role in the company. Looking at attitudes to the managerial roles of women, male CEOs do not deny but only reluctantly agree that women can be successful CEOs. Th ere is no general opinion that family fi rms with women in the top jobs are more successful, which could be hard to argue; however, women are signifi cantly more in favour of this view. Th e level of agreement was measured by several statements on the characteristics of fam- ily fi rms on a fi ve-point Likert scale with 1 – completely agree to 5 – completely disagree. Th e diff erences were detected by a t-test for mean values and the results are presented in Table 7. JAKA VADNJAL, BLAŽ ZUPAN | THE ROLE OF WOMEN INFAMILY BUSINESSES 169 TABLE 7: Attitudes to the managerial roles of women Statements about the characteristics of family fi rms Managers All Men Women Women should only occupy ‘female’ areas like accounting, HRM, fi nance 3.83 3.62 4.89 t=4.308; P=0.000 Women can be successful CEOs in family fi rms 1.72 1.87 1.00 t=3.390; P=0.001 Family fi rms with women in the top jobs are more successful 3.05 3.11 2.72 t=1.978; P=0.049 Due to the ‘male’ tradition, women are often prevented from playing key roles in family fi rms 2.61 2.65 2.39 Women do not have ambitions to take managerial jobs since they take care of the family 3.79 3.67 4.39 t=2.567; P=0.012 Women take better care of the relationships among employees 2.32 2.41 1.89 t=3.304; P=0.003 Women are not tough and decisive enough in business 3.92 3.79 4.56 t=2.942; P=0.004 Women take fewer risks than men 3.15 3.08 3.50 Women can play a very positive informal role in the fi rm (e.g. in confl ict resolution) 2.14 2.17 2.00 t=1.821; P=0.070 Business partners do not take women CEOs as seriously as men CEOs 3.33 3.28 3.56 Source: own sample, 2007 Th ere is a consensus among male and female CEOs that women should not be confi ned to traditional ‘female’ functional areas such as accounting, HRM, and fi nance; however, this view is signifi cantly more shared by women who do not want to be pushed into these activities only but want to have more equal access to all functional areas. Still, stereotypes about their role are quite evident and only a handful of them are in charge of production and R&D areas. Women usually oppose the view that they should instead take care of the family and children and their husbands are also not pushing for this role. More male CEOs infor- mally acknowledge the mindset that women have fewer ambitions to take on manage- rial positions due to their family roles. Th ere were no signifi cant diff erences revealed between men and women in the perception of the ‘male’ tradition as the key barrier to playing a managerial role in family fi rms, although this tradition is considered quite important by both genders. Th e respondents do not agree that women minimise their business contribution on account of doing family chores, although male CEOs are far more inclined to accept this stereotype. Th e survey confi rmed the proposition that women diff er in their managerial style in many aspects, as presented in Table 7, and the majority of them confi rmed the following diff erences with statistical signifi cance: - they are considered superior in caring for the relationship with employees; however, women are far more convinced about this personal quality; ECONOMIC AND BUSINESS REVIEW | VOL. 11 | No. 2 | 2009170 - a minor share of respondents consider women to be less decisive and tough in busi- ness; - a number of respondents consider women as less risk-taking; however, no signifi cant gender diff erences were found; and - women are recognised as playing a very positive informal role which proves that for- mal roles, even when assigned, might be less important than informal ones and hence comprise a more subtle component of women’s actions. Th e attitude that business partners might take women CEOs less seriously is viewed in a neutral way. 7. OWNERSHIP ISSUES AND TRANSITION Th e ownership structure of family fi rms is presented by a pattern of fi rst-generation fam- ily fi rms: 96.3% of ownership (calculated as the non-weighted average) belongs to the family and only 3.7% is owned by other people. Men certainly dominate as owners. Inter- estingly, the attitudes to family ownership are very uniform as there are no statistically signifi cant diff erences between male and female groups of respondents. Th eir prevailing views can be presented as follows: - ownership should stay in the family, which is consistent with other research fi ndings, e.g. Vadnjal (2008) and Glas (2003); - attitudes to (non)equal shares of children are quite divided; however, no gender diff er- ences were assumed, the issue is more on their activity/role in the fi rm; and - family fi rms are quite reluctant to open co-ownership to non-family key employees. TABLE 8: Attitudes to some aspects of ownership in family fi rms Statements about some aspects of ownership and ownership transition Managers (CEOs) All N=107 Men N=89 Women N=19 Children should receive some shares when they join the business 3.32 3.16 3.65 Children who do not join the business should not receive shares 3.21 3.28 2.82 Children should receive shares in the business in equal amounts 2.69 2.67 2.76 Shares should only be transferred to members of the family 2.58 2.54 2.76 If non-family owners enter the business, they will be greedy 3.43 3.44 3.41 Key employees (also non-family) should become co-owners of the fi rm 3.30 3.30 3.29 Source: own sample, 2007 However, the family members do not consider this structure as highly important since wealth creation and earnings were ranked fi ft h among the reasons for establishing the fi rm, having been listed by 19% of fi rms (with autonomy being by far the most impor- tant, listed by 82% of fi rms as one of three possible reasons, followed by achievement, 44%, dissatisfaction with a previous job, 22% and creating a job opportunity, 20%). JAKA VADNJAL, BLAŽ ZUPAN | THE ROLE OF WOMEN INFAMILY BUSINESSES 171 As evident from Table 8, women are signifi cantly more in favour of equal ownership shares for both men and women if they are employed in family fi rms. 8. GENDER-BASED ROLES IN FAMILY FIRMS: A CASE FOR GENDER DISCRIMINATION? Men dominate when it comes to occupying the CEO position. Th is may simply follow from the fact that they were dominating founders who took over the CEO position and women were left with the secondary role. Th e question asked at this point is how women feel in their role? Do they perceive it as a case of gender discrimination in the family fi rm? Th e level of agreement about the characteristics of family fi rms concerning certain gender aspects was measured by several statements on a fi ve-point Likert scale with 1 – completely agree to 5 – completely disagree. Th e diff erences are presented in Table 9 and were explored by a t-test for mean values. While male CEOs consider their role as very important, women are quite convinced that they hold ‘three corners’ (paraphrasing a local proverb that usually applies to women holding their place and power in households) even in family fi rms – this view refl ects the fact that they have to handle diff erent issues while men have taken a more specifi c, selective role. TABLE 9: Attitudes about the characteristics of family fi rms concerning gender aspects Statements about the characteristics of family fi rms Managers All Men Women Women hold ‘three corners’ even in family fi rms 2.78 2.90 2.22 t=2.548; P=0.013 If employed in family fi rms, women should have equal shares 2.31 2.39 1.89 t=2.167: P=0.031 Women should instead care for the family and children 4.11 3.99 4.72 t=3.090; P=0.003 Women cannot contribute fully to the fi rm since they support ‘three corners’ in households 3.60 3.47 4.25 t=3.058; P=0.003 Even women making an equal contribution to the fi rm do not get a ‘discount’ in family chores 2.67 2.70 2.56 t=2.005; P=0.046 Women are paid less than men for equal work 3.88 3.99 3.33 t=2.207; P=0.029 Women do less demanding, responsible and therefore lower paid jobs 3.69 3.72 3.56 Women face a tougher situation than men when it comes to being promoted 3.17 3.26 2.72 t=2.269; P=0.023 Source: own sample, 2007 It is quite generally understood that the family/household care is a signifi cant burden on women and women complain about the fact that they miss enough assistance for do- ECONOMIC AND BUSINESS REVIEW | VOL. 11 | No. 2 | 2009172 ing family chores, particularly when they provide an equal contribution in family fi rm activities. Th is survey confi rmed that the general fi nding about the asymmetric gender pattern of work-family-leisure activities also extends to family businesses. Women’s par- ticipation in business has not yet been rewarded by the relaxation of their family role. While there is no general belief that women are paid less for equal work, women feel the diff erences in pay signifi cantly more. Th is issue should be studied more carefully since it might be proposed that women are paid less partly due to their less specifi c job assign- ments and less defi nitive responsibilities. Women also fi nd that they face a tougher situ- ation when it comes to receiving a promotion. However, they are not considered as doing less demanding or responsible work and no gender-specifi c views were found concerning this traditional comment that seeks to justify their lower salaries. Although a number of respondents recognise several specifi c features of female manage- rial styles, the diff erences are not considered as a disadvantage that may prevent women from taking top positions in family fi rms. Th ey would instead propose that women play a complementary role bringing some ‘soft ness’ vis-à-vis tough male managers. Th e female attitudes to equal ownership shares prove that they do not perceive the current dominant male ownership as just and that there is room to improve their satisfaction with their role in family fi rms. It is evident that women in family fi rms perceive their situation in a signifi cantly more critical way than the male CEOs. Large diff erences were revealed in the views of wom- en who hold diff erent positions in family fi rms. Th ese diff erences are probably partly due to their diff erent experiences related to their roles and partly due to the diff er- ent characteristics of women belonging to diff erent groups. Th e views of male CEOs may refl ect some traditional concepts about women and male CEOs tend to neglect the meaning of the formally equal treatment of women to enhance their satisfaction and motivation. While not complaining intensively, women do perceive their share in management, ownership and rewards as inherently unjust and fi nd their dual role in the family and fi rm as consistently more demanding in time and energy spent than the role of men. Slovenian women are not inclined to talk about their deprivation, but these perceptions are shared. Some recommendations to change this situation would include: - enhancing the support for women in their family/household role through a number of provided services, but also promoting the role of men as fathers and partners in shar- ing diff erent chores; - ensuring a fairer ownership share of women; - defi ning the duties/obligations of women in the fi rm more concisely, this is also related to the reward and promotion systems; and - promoting women’s education and training in functional areas that are important for the business activity beyond an economics/business education. To examine the urgency of changes, we asked the women in the survey to indicate whether their position in the business and family should change in order for them to JAKA VADNJAL, BLAŽ ZUPAN | THE ROLE OF WOMEN INFAMILY BUSINESSES 173 feel equal to men, using a fi ve-point Likert scale with 1 (completely disagree) to 5 (com- pletely agree). Evidently, no radical demands were found. Key women mostly desire to be listened to more carefully in discussions and decision-making, both by family and other company staff and the family burden should be shared more equally between partners. Some literature suggests (Sharma, 2004) that family fi rms neglect the education of fe- male members. However, women hardly demand a pay increase, even shun more benefi ts and do not demand a larger share of ownership. 9. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS Considering the number of family fi rms in Slovenia, more women are taking part in the accumulated entrepreneurial potential in these fi rms than those starting their own busi- nesses. Working with family members and avoiding stress and uncertainty by leaving the leadership role to their male partners seems more attractive to women than facing business challenges as sole owners. On the other side, while the informal role of women on boards and in managerial ranks is oft en recognised such a role is more pronounced in family fi rms. In the latter, women are exercising their infl uence on the decision-making process in the offi ce and during family time. Th is advantage of interlocking family and business supports our fi rst proposition since the formal role of women in family fi rms does not reach beyond the role of women in non-family businesses. Th erefore, the fi rst proposition can be regarded as supported. Considering that female family members share the second-rank managerial roles in a large share of family businesses where men dominate as CEOs, their share in owner- ship certainly understates their role in running the family business. However, women do not seem to oppose the existing situation and oft en consider their informal infl u- ence as powerful enough to provide them with personal satisfaction. Th ey also do not opt for higher salaries and benefi ts, although this aspect may become important with the reform of the health and pension systems which would increasingly make access to services depend on the voluntary involvement of benefi ciaries. Women instead deny these fi nancial aspects are important and this denial is a good cause not to push for changes. All of this is line with the second proposition which can also be regarded as supported. Th e ‘feminine’ style of women in family fi rms is very important for creating good inter- nal relationships, the overall climate in the business, employees’ satisfaction and morale. Th is aspect is likely to positively contribute to the fi nancial performance of family fi rms but it has a value in itself for the well-being of employees even if not materialised in improved balance sheets. Th is contribution by women is oft en benevolently recognised but not adequately rewarded. Again, women are quite patiently wishing to receive so- cial recognition and the recognition of their family members but they do not intensely pursue their demand. Th us, it can be concluded that data from the study confi rm the third proposition which suggests that women oft en possess diff erent views on transi- tional issues compared to men. Interestingly, this confi rmation is greater with female ECONOMIC AND BUSINESS REVIEW | VOL. 11 | No. 2 | 2009174 respondents which may be interpreted as meaning that women are more aware of their feminine-caused managerial roles. When becoming CEOs, women would introduce a number of changes in the manage- ment style whereby they would add their soft er feminine approach as a new quality to the existing style. Th is assumption is very relativistic since the research indicated that female CEOs behave unlike other female family members involved in the fi rm. It is a question for discussion that women in family fi rms really need to be tough and superior to their male family members in order to reach the top position. Th e process of their elevation to the CEO position can neutralise part of their femininity and soft ness and performing the duties of a CEO seems to develop experiences that harden their approach. Taking all the mentioned fi ndings into account, proposition four can be neither confi rmed nor rejected. Th e discrimination issue is somewhat controversial. Women consider their role in the family business very diff erently to male CEOs, which indicates a lack of discussion of these issues. It can be assumed that women are frustrated by the existing formal struc- ture of family fi rms. However, they seem reluctant to raise these issues in the family and are not radical in demanding the changes. Th e feminist movement never had deep roots in Slovenia and radicalism has mostly been calmed by legislation that formally supports (full) gender equality, but no mechanisms to ensure this equality have been devised. Th us, the fi ft h proposition can be confi rmed in the fi rst part where it suggests that there are diff erence in gender roles and rewards. However, as to the second part the data can- not be interpreted in a confi rmatory manner. For the purpose of managing small family fi rms and also consulting to them, it should be clear that women’s role in the family business is oft en underestimated. Women not only play a traditional supportive and invisible role but can also contribute to a diff erent, more people-oriented managerial style where their feminine style of tackling business issues is applied as an alternative to the more traditionally viewed masculine approach. In diagnostic processes of consulting projects women, although not holding leadership positions, may be invaluable sources of information and complementary opinions. In confl ict-resolution programmes, women can play an enormously positive role in reduc- ing the heat which appears mostly among men. Th ere are many opportunities for further research in the fi eld. Researchers should be encouraged to use more sophisticated analytical approaches; however, they should pro- vide larger samples in order to arrive at reliable assessments. A more multi-disciplinary approach is recommended because the complex family and partnership relationship combined with pressures of day-to-day business activities demands much broader re- search skills and knowledge than is usually available to and provided by business science researchers. RECEIVED: DECEMBER 2008 JAKA VADNJAL, BLAŽ ZUPAN | THE ROLE OF WOMEN INFAMILY BUSINESSES 175 REFERENCES Alcorn, P. B. (1982), Success and Survival in the Family-Owned Business, New York: McGraw-Hill Book Com- pany. Barnett, F., S. Barnett (1988), Working together: Entrepreneurial couples, Berkeley, CA: Ten Speed Press. Birley, S. (2001), “Owner-Manager Attitudes to Family and Business Issues: A 16 Country Study”, Entrepre- neurship Th eory and Practice 26 (2), 221–235. Bowman-Upton, N., R. K. Z. Heck (1996), “Th e Family Dimension of Entrepreneurship”, In Sexton, D. L. (Ed.), Th e state of the art of entrepreneurship. Upstart, Chicago, 1–36. Cole, P. M. (1997), “Women in Family Business”, Family Business Review 10 (4), 353–371. Cosier, R. A., M. Harvey (1998), “Th e Hidden Strengths in Family Business: Functional Confl ict”, Family Business Review 11 (1), 75–79. Curimbaba, F. (2002), “Th e Dynamics of Women’s Roles as Family Business Managers”, Family Business Review 15 (3), 239–246. Danes, S. M., R. Leichtentritt, M. E. Metz, C. Huddleston-Casas (2000), “Eff ects of Confl ict Styles and Con- fl ict Severity”, Journal of Family and Economic Issues 21 (3), 259–286. Danes, S. M., V. S. Zuiker, R. Kean, J. Arbuthnot (1999), “Predictors of Family Business Tensions and Goal Achievement”, Family Business Review 12 (3), 241–252. Danes, S. M., S. Amarapurkar (2001), “Business Tensions and Success in Farm Family Businesses”, Family Economics and Resource Management Biennial 4, 178–190. Danes, S. M., M. A. Reuter, H. K. Kwon, W. Doherty (2002), “Family FIRO Model: An Application to Family Business”, Family Business Review 15 (1), 31–43. Danes, S. M., P. D. Olson (2003), “Women’s Role Involvement in Family Businesses, Business Tensions, and Business Success”, Family Business Review 16 (1), 53–68. Davis, J., R. Tagiuri, (1991), “Bivalent Attributes of the Family Firm”, In C. E. Aronoff , J. L. Ward (Eds.) Family business sourcebook: A guide for families who own businesses and the professionals who serve them, Detroit, MI: Omnigraphics, 62–73. Doherty, W. J., N. Colangelo, D. Hovander (1991), “Priority Setting in Family Change and Clinical Practice: Th e Family FIRO Model”, Family Process 30 (3), 227–240. Dumas, C. (1998), “Women’s Pathways to Participation and Leadership in the Family-Owned Firm’, Family Business Review 11 (3), 219–228. Fitzgerald, M. A., G. Muske (2002), “Copreneurs: An Exploration and Comparison to Other Family Busi- nesses”, Family Business Review 15 (1), 1–16. Freudenberger, H. J., D. K. Freedheim, T. S. Kurtz (1989), “Treatment of Individuals in Family Business”, Psychotherapy 26 (1), 47–53. Frishkoff , P., B. Brown (1993), “Women on the Move in Family Business”, Business Horizons 36 (2), 66–70. Gillis-Donovan J., C. Moynihan-Brandt (1990), “Th e Power of Invisible Women in the Family Business”, Family Business Review 3 (2), 153–167. ECONOMIC AND BUSINESS REVIEW | VOL. 11 | No. 2 | 2009176 Glas, M. (2003), “Druzinska podjetja v Sloveniji: kaj vemo o njih?”, In Vadnjal, J., ed., Challenges and Oppor- tunities of EU Enlargement for SMEs in CEI Countries. 5th International Conference Proceedings, Piran. Glas, M., M. Coh, A. Visnar, J. Vadnjal (2005), “Transgenerational Views on the Success and the Future De- velopment of Family Firms”, Paper presented at the EFMD Conference. Barcelona, IESE. Glas, M., J. Herle, F. Lovsin Kozina, J. Vadnjal (2006), “Th e State of Family Firm Management in Slovenia”, Paper presented at 2nd Workshop on Family Firm Management Research, Nice, 1-2 June 2006. Greenhaus, J. H., G. A. Callanan (1994), Career management (2nd ed.), Ft. Worth: Dryden Press. Harvey, M. R. E. Evans (1994), “Family Business and Multiple Levels of Confl ict”, Family Business Review 7 (4), 331–348. Hollander, B. S., W. R. Bukowitz (1996), “Women, Family Culture and Family Business”, In C. E. Aronoff , J. H Astrachan, J. L. Ward (Eds.), Family and Business. Sourcebook II. Marietta, GA: Business Resources, 451–459. Jaff ee, D. T. (1990), Working with the ones you love: Confl ict resolution & problem solving strategies for a suc- cessful family business. Berkeley: Conari Press. Kaye, K. (1996), “When the Family Business is a Sickness”, Family Business Review 9 (4), 347–368. Kotar, S. (2006), Slovenski podjetniki in njihove znacilnosti (E.: Slovenian Entrepreneurs and Th eir Character- istics). Unpublished M.Sc. thesis. Ljubljana: Faculty of Economics. Levinson, H. (1991), “Problems in Managing a Family Owned Business”, In C. E. Aronoff , J. L. Ward (Eds.) Family business sourcebook: A guide for families who own businesses and the professionals who serve them. Detroit: Omnigraphics, 169–174. Lyman A., M. Salganicoff , B. Hollander (1985), “Women in Family Business: An Untapped Resource”, In C. E. Aronoff , J. L. Ward (Eds.), Family business sourcebook. Detroit: Omnigraphics, 46–49. Lyman, A., M. Salganicoff , B. Hollander (1996), “Women in family business: An untapped resource”, In C. E. Aronoff , J. H. Astrachan, J. L. Ward (Eds.), Family and business sourcebook II. Marietta, GA: Business Resources, 460–463. Marshack, K. J. (1994), “Copreneurs and Dual-career Couples: Are Th ey Diff erent?”, Entrepreneurship Th eory and Practice 19 (1), 49–69. Marshack, K. J. (1998), Entrepreneurial couples: Making it work at work and at home. Palo Alto, CA: Davies- Black Publishing. McClendon, R., L. B. Kadis (1991), “Family Th erapists and Family Businesses: A View to the Future”, Contem- porary Family Th erapy 13 (6), 641–651. Ponthieu, L. D., H. L. Caudill (1993), “Who’s the Boss? Responsibility and Decision. Making in Copreneurial Ventures”, Family Business Review 6 (1), 3–17. Poza, E. J., T. Messer (2001), “Spousal Leadership and Continuity in the Family Firm”, Family Business Review 14 (1), 25–36. Rodriguez, S. N., G. J. Hildreth, J. Mancuso (1999), “Th e dynamics of families in business: How therapists can help in ways consultants don’t”, Contemporary Family Th erapy 21 (4), 453–468. Rosenblatt, P. C., L. de Mik, R. M. Anderson, P. A. Johnson (1985), Th e Family in Business: Understanding and Dealing with the Challenges Entrepreneurial Families Face, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. JAKA VADNJAL, BLAŽ ZUPAN | THE ROLE OF WOMEN INFAMILY BUSINESSES 177 Rowe, B. R., G. S. Hong (2000), “Th e role of wives in family business: the paid and unpaid work of women”, Family Business Review 13 (1), 1–13. Salganicoff , M. (1990), “Women in family business: Challenges and Opportunities”, Family Business Review 3 (2), 125–138. Sharma, P. (2004), “An Overview of the Field of Family Business Studies: Current Status and Directions for the Future”, Family Business Review 17 (1), 1–36. Vadnjal, J. (2008), “Development and Growth Orientation of Family and Non-family Businesses”, Economic and Business Review 10 (3), 197–218. Vadnjal, J., M. Glas (2008), “Transgenerational Entrepreneurial Attitudes in Family Businesses in a Transi- tion Economy”, In V. Gupta, N. Levenburg, L. L Moore, J. Motwani, T. V. Schwarz, (Eds.), Culturally-sensitive Models of Family Business in Eastern Europe: A Compendium Using the GLOBE Paradigm, Hyderabad: Th e Icfai University Press, 23–48. Voydanoff , P. (1990), “Economic Distress and Family Relations: A Review of the Eighties”, Journal of Mar- riage and the Family 52 (4), 1099–1115. Wicker, A. W., K. A. Burley (1991), “Close coupling in work-family relationships: Making and implementing decisions in a new family business and at home”, Human Relations 44 (1), 77–92.