Relationship Between Conflict and Deviant Workplace Behavior in Family Business

Introduction

Organizations contain rules which are set by the founder to protect the interests of both the organization and individuals. These rules may be written, as well as non-written expectations and norms. While some individuals show compliance behavior, some individuals do not. Negative work behaviors of individuals to disrupt the activities of the organization have been investigated by the researchers in the field of management and organization for a long time and the related theories are suggested.

Family companies are the enterprises with the highest rate of economic structure in the whole world. Therefore, these companies are becoming increasingly important nowadays and are examined by researchers. In Turkey, like in many parts or the world, while some family companies have managed to maintain their existence, some others disappear in their second generation or lose their previous power (Lambrecht, 2005). Interpersonal conflicts and organizational deviation behaviors of their members as well as wrongly chosen business strategies and policies are very influencial in the failure of family businesses in their struggle to maintain their assets (Chrisman, Chua, & Sharma, 2005; Levinson, 1971).

Background

Family business concepts consist of work and family, cover the areas in which people attach much importance and spend most of their time. Family companies are considered as separate structures from other businesses because they are composed of two sub-systems which are referred to as “family institution” and “business community” (Harvey & Evans, 1994; Lee & Rogoff, 1996). The family, which is the owner of the business in these enterprises, can take part in the management of the enterprise and can intervene in different levels of management (Tagiuri & Davis, 1996). According to Chittor and Das (2007), family businesses are the enterprises that are managed and owned by a coalition of the same family, which shape the business processes and future goals according to the direction of this coalition, and continue their lives by transferring between generations.

There are many studies dealing with family businesses and in these studies, it is observed that the concept of family business is defined in different ways. Family businesses according to the literature are defined as having one or more than one feature of the following definitions simultaneously; “ownership”, “having a certain weight in the management structure”, ”transfer of ownership and ownership to the next generation of the family”, interaction of family and business systems” (Ayrancı & Semerciöz 2010; Shanker & Astrachan, 1996). Family businesses, in the simplest form, can be expressed as structures created by the ownership of a family and dominated by a certain family in the administration (Henssen, Voordeckers, Lambrechts & Koiranen, 2011).

Role conflict and role ambiguity, is defined by Tagiuri & Davis (1996) as the role conflicts and role uncertainties resulting from conflicts in the interaction of work, family and ownership subsystems in three circle model family businesses. According to Gersick, Davis, Hampton & Lansberg, (1997), individuals in three circle models have different expectations depending on the area they have different objectives. These different expectations constitute the main reason of the role conflicts. The model also clarifies the complexity of the role typologies that individuals take on depending on their field. For those who undertake different role typologies that is a family member, at the same time, ownership role, and along with a role in the management subsystems, develope different, incompatible behaviors. The changing role behavior according to the situation depending on the different roles as given is called conflict between roles (Katz & Kahn, 1978; Rizzo, House & Lirtzman, 1970). Furthermore, when the expectations are not clear, then a role ambiguity is created.