The most recent HBR has the theme, “Are Investors Bad for Business?” (excerpt). Extraordinarily respected Clayton Christensen of HBS talks of how bad capital market theory is for innovation and job creation. Finance rations capital to a short term bias presuming capital is scarce. But it isn’t, Christensen asserts.
Family business capitalism sees the world differently. Families see capital as limited, but also embrace the long-term view. Families don’t decide as much by IRRs as by future scenarios. Limited capital sharpens the commitment, persistence, and agility necessary for sustainable success.
For years I’ve thought that shareholder capitalism couldn’t escape its fundamental assumptions and elegant, even if wrong, orthodoxy. With Professor Christensen leading a different thesis I’m heartened we maybe see things differently. While that’s good for society, it also lessens the competitive advantage of business families. Or, maybe, business families are so innately good at this thinking that they are protected by years of experience.
It’s ironic. Just as the share value capitalism theory is facing critique by advocates, business families are losing confidence in their inherent advantages. They are increasingly being told by family business researchers that they compromise shareholder value too much for family continuity and comfort.