SADUN, BLOOM, AND VAN REENEN
Why are family fi rms so reluctant to embrace strong manage-
ment processes? One explanation— which finds support in our
research— is that their adoption may have signifi cant personal costs
to family members. New practices may require hiring or delegating
authority to talent outside the family circle. (Indeed, we’ve seen
that higher management scores tend to go hand- in- hand with more-
decentralized decision making.)
An example of this is Gokaldas Exports, a family- owned business
founded in 1979 that had grown into India’s largest apparel exporter
by 2004. Gokaldas was a highly successful fi rm with 30,000 workers,
was valued at approximately $215 million, and exported nearly 90%
of its production. Its founder, Jhamandas Hinduja, had bequeathed
control of the company to three sons, each of whom brought his own
son into the business. Nike, a major customer, wanted Gokaldas to
introduce lean management practices; it put the company in touch
with consultants who could help make that happen. Yet the CEO was
resistant. It took rising competition from Bangladesh, multiple visits
to see lean manufacturing in action at fi rms across Asia and the United
States, and fi nally the intervention of other family members (one of
whom we taught in business school) to overcome his reluctance.
Self- refl ection exercises can help family CEOs clarify whether
they value their firms’ long- term success more than “being the
Family-run fi rms tend to have weaker management
Average score by type of ownership (1 = worst; 5 = best)
1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
Dispersed shareholders
Private equity
Family owned, external CEO
Managers
Private individuals
Government
Family owned, family CEO
Founder owned, founder CEO