Socioemo ional weal h (SEW) ac oss bo de s: In eg a ing na ional con ex
in o SEW esea ch
Vale iano Sanchez-Famoso
a,*,1
, C is ina C uz
b
, Mohamed Mazen Ba e jee
b
,
Jo ge-Humbe o Mejia-Mo elos
c,2
, Luis Cisne os
d,3
, Nhu Tuyen LE
e,4
a
Uni e si y o he Basque Coun y UPV/EHU, Spain
b
IE Business School –IE Uni e si y, IE Towe , Paseo de la Cas ellana, 259, Mad id 28046, Spain
c
En ep eneu ship &Inno a ion Depa men , Obse a o y o En ep eneu ship La Sph`
e e, HEC Mon eal 3000, Chem. de la Cˆ
o e-Sain e-Ca he ine, Mon ´
eal, QC H3T
2A7, Canada
d
En ep eneu ship &Inno a ion Depa men , Obse a o y o En ep eneu ship La Sph`
e e, Business Families Cen e , HEC Mon eal 3000, Chem. de la Cˆ
o e-Sain e-
Ca he ine, Mon ´
eal, QC H3T 2A7, Canada
e
G enoble Ecole de Managemen , 12 Rue Pie e Sema d, G enoble 38000, F ance
ARTICLE INFO
Keywo ds:
SEW
FIBER scale
Con ex esea ch
Measu emen in a iance
C oss-coun y compa ison
ABSTRACT
This s udy add esses he challenges associa ed wi h in eg a ing he na ional con ex in o socioemo ional weal h
(SEW) esea ch and highligh s he consequences o o e looking con ex ual a ia ions. We emphasize wo c i ical
issues: inadequa e es ing o SEW assump ions and h ea s o he cons uc alidi y o SEW measu emen . We
ecommend ha cul u al and ins i u ional aspec s o he na ional con ex should be inco po a ed o unde s and
how amily owne s p io i ize SEW dimensions, and how hei willingness ades o cu en SEW weal h o
p ospec i e inancial gains. We also conduc an explo a o y s udy measu ing he FIBER scale in Canada, Mexico,
Saudi A abia, Spain, and Vie nam. We su ey 1464 amily owne s o enhance SEW cons uc alidi y by p obing
he c oss-coun y measu emen in a iance o he FIBER scale. Fu he mo e, we conduc compa a i e esea ch o
in es iga e how cul u al and ins i u ional aspec s shape he FIBER dimensions ac oss na ional con ex s.
1. In oduc ion
The socioemo ional weal h (SEW) amewo k o igina ed om he
seminal wo k o G´
omez-Mejía e al. (2007) is a pi o al ad ancemen in
amily business esea ch (B igham &Payne, 2019, p. 326). I is widely
used ac oss a ious domains wi hin amily i m con ex s, including i m
s a egic decisions (Dehlen, 2013; Feldman e al., 2014; Ko la e al.,
2018; La anchini e al., 2022), co po a e go e nance (Bammens e al.,
2011; Di Vi o &T o ie , 2022; Labaki &D’Allu a, 2021), social e-
sponsibili y (Combs e al., 2023; C uz e al., 2014; Dayan e al., 2019),
and en ep eneu ial ou comes (Block e al., 2013; Ch isman &Pa el,
2012; Rod igues e al., 2022). A i s co e, he SEW amewo k posi s ha
amily owne s’decisions a e mo i a ed by hei commi men o
sa egua ding he amily SEW— he non- inancial aspec s o he i m—-
which ul ills hei a ec i e needs (G´
omez-Mejía e al., 2007).
Despi e he ex ensi e li e a u e on SEW, a signi ican gap pe sis s due
o he lack o con ex ualiza ion. Al hough s udies o en apply he SEW
logic, hey bo ow a gumen s om o he s and igno e he speci ici ies o
each con ex (K uege e al., 2021). This o e sigh is oubling, gi en
ha con ex ualized SEW esea ch sugges s ha amily owne s’p e e -
ences a e deeply in luenced by hei ins i u ional and cul u al su -
oundings (Be one e al., 2012; Gomez-Mejia e al., 2020). The
challenge o conduc ing “con ex - ee”SEW esea ch becomes appa en
when conside ing he alida ion o SEW as a cons uc , which emains
unce ain (B igham &Payne, 2019). The widely used FIBER scale has
signi ican a ia ion ac oss coun ies (Ge ken e al., 2022; Hauck e al.,
* Co esponding au ho .
E-mail add esses: [email p o ec ed] (V. Sanchez-Famoso), [email p o ec ed] (C. C uz), [email p o ec ed] (M.M. Ba e jee),
[email p o ec ed] (J.-H. Mejia-Mo elos), [email p o ec ed] (L. Cisne os), [email p o ec ed] (N. Tuyen LE).
1
ORCID: 0000–0003-3977–3337
2
ORCID: 0000–0001-7324–2367
3
ORCID: 0000–0001-5983–8973
4
ORCID: 0000–0003-3057–2563
Con en s lis s a ailable a ScienceDi ec
Jou nal o Family Business S a egy
jou nal homepage: www.else ie .com/loca e/j bs
h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.j bs.2024.100647
Jou nal o Family Business S a egy 16 (2025) 100647
A ailable online 30 Decembe 2024
1877-8585/© 2024 The Au ho s. Published by Else ie L d. This is an open access a icle unde he CC BY-NC license (
h p://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by-
nc/4.0/ ).
2016), highligh ing he need o a deepe unde s anding o he easons
and implica ions o hese di e ences. Un o una ely, he e is no
comp ehensi e explana ion o how con ex ma e s o he concep ual-
iza ion o SEW (G´
omez-Mejía &He e o, 2022).
This s udy add esses he challenges o in eg a ing na ional con ex
in o SEW esea ch, building on ecen indings emphasizing he
con ex ual speci ici ies o amily owne s in di e en egions (Basco
e al., 2019; Gomez-Mejia e al., 2020; K uege e al., 2021). We high-
ligh ha ailing o conside hese con ex ual a ia ions aises wo
c i ical issues: inadequa e es ing o he ele an assump ions o he SEW
app oach and h ea s o o e all cons uc alidi y ega ding he SEW
measu emen . Thus, we p opose ha bo h cul u al and ins i u ional
aspec s o he na ional con ex should be inco po a ed when conduc ing
SEW esea ch. These ac o s pa ly de e mine how amily owne s p i-
o i ize SEW dimensions and hei willingness o ade o cu en SEW
o u u e inancial gains. Addi ionally, we emphasize he impo ance o
enhancing cons uc alidi y in SEW esea ch by es ing he
c oss-coun y measu emen o SEW measu emen ins umen s, his is o
say es ing whe he hese ins umen s assess he SEW concep in a
consis en manne ac oss coun ies (Cheung &Rens old, 2002; Ha k-
ness e al., 2003). I he SEW ins umen shows c oss coun y measu e-
men in a iance, we can con iden ly a ibu e he disc epancies
iden i ied in SEW ac oss coun ies a ise om a ying cul u al and
ins i u ional condi ions, and no o limi a ions o he scale i sel , hus
enabling meaning ul c oss-coun y compa isons.
To ad ance in his di ec ion, we employ a compa ing app oach o
SEW esea ch and de elop an explo a o y s udy ha measu es SEW in
i e coun ies: Canada, Mexico, Saudi A abia, Spain, and Vie nam.
Su eying 1464 amily owne s ac oss hese coun ies, we ini ially
in es iga e he c oss-coun y measu emen in a iance o he FIBER
scale. This scale is he mos widely ci ed ool o SEW measu emen
(Swab e al., 2020). Ou esul s con i m he c oss coun y measu emen
in a iance o he SEW scale. This means ha , while he e may be a i-
a ions in he impo ance a ibu ed o each FIBER dimension ac oss
na ional con ex s, amily owne s’ esponses o he FIBER scale can be
meaning ully compa ed ac oss coun ies. Based on ou indings, we
conduc compa a i e SEW esea ch o e eal he nuances o SEW di-
mensions ac oss coun ies. This explo a o y compa ison e eals signi -
ican di e ences among he i e coun ies ega ding how amily owne s
p io i ize a ious SEW dimensions. We heo ize ha cul u al and ins i-
u ional aspec s o he na ional con ex may help explain hese
a ia ions.
O e all, ou esul s add ess ecen calls o a mo e con ex -sensi i e
app oach in amily business esea ch in gene al (Ama o e al., 2022;
Basco e al., 2019; K uege e al., 2021) and SEW esea ch in pa icula
(Gomez-Mejia e al., 2024; G´
omez-Mejía &He e o, 2022). Despi e
ad ances in he esea ch on amily businesses, he impo ance o con ex
in shaping SEW an eceden s and ou comes emains la gely unde ex-
plo ed (C uz e al., 2023; G´
omez-Mejía &He e o, 2022). Mo eo e , by
highligh ing he nuances ela ed o he speci ici ies o amily i ms in
di e en coun ies, we con ibu e o a be e in e p e a ion o con ex as
a sou ce o amily i m he e ogenei y (Basco e al., 2020)
2. Theo e ical backg ound
Subs an ial academic e idence demons a e ha he conduc o i ms
is con ingen upon hei na ional con ex . Bounda ies be ween coun ies
ep esen a unique se o cul u al no ms ha d i e sha ed belie s, alues,
cus oms, adi ions, and beha io s (Sundin &Ho owi z, 2002). Mo e-
o e , companies wi hin a pa icula coun y a e embedded in an ins i-
u ional en i onmen ela ed o he o mal and in o mal ules, laws, and
egula o y sys ems ha shapes in e nal and ex e nal co po a e go e -
nance mechanisms o os e economic exchanges (Lien e al., 2016; Peng
&Jiang, 2010). Cul u al expec a ions and ins i u ional amewo ks a y
widely ac oss na ions and ha e p o ound implica ions o he in e e-
la ionship among wo k, amily, and business (Kossek &Ollie -Mala e e,
2013).
Family i ms and hei owne s a e also p one o hese in luences.
Family owne s ac oss a ious coun ies exhibi signi ican dispa i ies in
hei goals and beha io (Gup a e al., 2010; Howo h e al., 2010). Fo
ins ance, Howo h e al. (2010) e ealed di e en endencies among
amily i m owne s in Eu opean coun ies, such as Spain, G eece, and
I aly, in con as o hose in he Uni ed S a es. Eu opean amily owne s
a e o en eluc an o pa wi h hei businesses, iewing hem as in e-
g al ex ensions o hei amilies. In con as , amily owne s in he Uni ed
S a es a e mo e inclined o conside selling hei businesses, p o ided
he p ice is igh . This c oss-coun y a ia ion in gene a ional in en ions
among amily owne s is u he co obo a ed by Co be a and Mon-
eme lo (1999), who highligh ed a no able con as be ween Ame ican
and I alian amily owne s. Simila ly, Sha ma and Rao (2000) compa ed
successo ’s a ibu es in Indian and Canadian amily i ms, and ound
ha , whe eas i was ex emely impo an o Indian amily owne s ha
he successo should be om hei bloodline, his was no as impo an
o Canadian owne s.
Recen yea s ha e seen g owing ecogni ion ha he unde lying logic
o SEW easoning may no ope a e in a s anda dized manne ac oss
na ional con ex s (C uz e al., 2023; Gomez-Mejia e al., 2024). The SEW
app oach, oo ed in p io amily- i m and beha io al s udies, assumes
ha amily i ms a e commonly mo i a ed by and commi ed o p e-
se ing hei SEW (Be one e al., 2012), de ined as he “non-economic
u ili ies o amily owne s”(G´
omez-Mejía e al., 2007). I e e s o amily
owne s’in en ional pu sui o noneconomic objec i es, such as con ol,
ansgene a ional succession, social capi al, emo ional connec ion o he
i m, and epu a ion (Be one e al., 2012). Hence, amily owne s
ep esen he ocal decision-making g oup ega ding SEW (Swab e al.,
2020). The ope a ing s a egies o amilies may di e ac oss na ional
bounda ies based on cul u al no ms and ins i u ional di e ences
(W igh e al., 2014). Fu he , building on he beha io al agency model
(Wiseman &Gomez-Mejia, 1998), he SEW app oach a gues ha amily
i ms base hei decision on he aming o he p oblem and e e ence
poin when making s a egic decisions (Ko la e al., 2013). The e e -
ence poin would be s ongly shaped by si ua ional aspec s ha occu a
he amily and/o business le el (Basco, 2018; G´
omez-Mejía &He e o,
2022).
Unde s anding hese SEW di e ences ac oss na ional con ex s whe e
he amily i m ope a es could subs an ially b oaden ou pe cep ion o
he he e ogenei y among amily i ms and gene alizabili y o SEW
esea ch indings. Speci ically, conduc ing “na ional con ex - ee”SEW
esea ch— esea ch ha does no conside he speci ici ies o he cul u al
and ins i u ional se ing whe e he amily i ms ope a e ac oss na ional
bounda ies—poses wo c i ical issues: inadequa e es ing o he ele an
assump ions o he SEW app oach and i s in luence on i m ou comes,
and h ea s o o e all cons uc alidi y ega ding SEW measu emen .
2.1. Na ional con ex - ee SEW esea ch and inadequa e heo y es ing
The p edominan depic ion o SEW as an explana o y a iable ends
o ea i as a la en concep a he han ope a ionalizing i di ec ly
(Gomez-Mejia e al., 2011). SEW is o en equa ed wi h dis al p oxies like
amily owne ship o managemen (e.g., Chi ico e al., 2020;C uz e al.,
2014;Gomez-Mejia e al., 2018). This concep ualiza ion po ays SEW
as an asse as well as a liabili y o amily i ms, impac ing s a egic
decision-making in bo h posi i e and nega i e ways (Swab e al., 2020).
Howe e , he e is no consensus ega ding he ela ionship be ween SEW
and i m ou comes, pa icula ly i s impac on i m pe o mance
(G´
omez-Mejía &He e o, 2022). Some sugges a posi i e co ela ion,
hin ing ha SEW os e s commi men and longe in es men ho izons
(C uz e al., 2010; Zellwege e al., 2012). O he s p opose a po en ial
“da k side,”posi ing ha amily i ms migh p io i ize SEW o e
inancial e u ns (Kelle manns e al., 2012). C oss-s udy compa isons
a e hinde ed by he di e si y o con ex s, hus a ec ing he es ablish-
men o p e alen posi ions.
V. Sanchez-Famoso e al. Jou nal o Family Business S a egy 16 (2025) 100647
2
To add ess his inconclusi eness, Da ila e al. (2023) conduc ed a
me a-analysis and e ealed a posi i e co ela ion be ween SEW and
amily i m pe o mance. They highligh ed wo c ucial nuances in he
ela ionship: he non-uni o m in luence o SEW dimensions on pe o -
mance and he nega i e ela ionship be ween SEW and speci ic s a egic
choices impac ing i m pe o mance. Howe e , including cul u ally
dis an coun ies in he me analyses aises conce ns ega ding he in-
luence o he na ional cul u e in explaining he SEW-pe o mance
ela ionship. Examining hese nuances h ough a na ional con ex ual
lens could be signi ican in SEW esea ch.
Cul u al se ings may shape how amily membe s p io i ize SEW
dimensions, in luencing he ela ionship be ween SEW dimensions and
pe o mance (Gomez-Mejia e al., 2024; Swab e al., 2020). Da ila e al.
(2023) ound ha while mos SEW dimensions co ela e posi i ely wi h
i m pe o mance, dynas ic succession is nega i ely co ela ed.
G´
omez-Mejía and He e o (2022) ound ha in highly collec i is ic so-
cie ies, whe e amily ies a e pa amoun , amily owne s p io i ized he
enewal o amily ies h ough succession ( he “R”dimension o he
FIBER scale). Consequen ly, including he na ional cul u e may explain
SEW-pe o mance a ia ions ac oss coun ies: highly collec i is ic so-
cie ies may p io i ize dynas ic succession, hus po en ially impac ing
pe o mance nega i ely.
Examining he nega i e ela ionship be ween SEW and speci ic
s a egic choices impac ing i m pe o mance h ough a na ional
con ex ual lens can also b ing in e es ing indings o ligh . Acco ding o
he SEW logic, amily owne s o en do no pu sue di e se s a egic op-
ions o sa egua d amily con ol (Ch isman &Pa el, 2012). This is
pa icula ly ue o coun ies wi h high powe dis ance, whe e cul u al
no ms p omo e au oc a ic leade ship and emphasize amily au ho i y,
ein o cing amily con ol o e he business (Ho s ede, 1983). Conse-
quen ly, in such socie ies, he posi i e ela ionship be ween SEW and
pe o mance may weaken compa ed o hose wi h lowe sco es in his
cul u al dimension. This may s em om an in ensi ied ocus on he
amily con ol dimension o SEW, po en ially hinde ing amily i ms
om engaging in alue-enhancing s a egic ac i i ies.
Recen SEW s udies sugges ha amily owne s’beha io is in lu-
enced by he ins i u ional amewo k wi hin a speci ic coun y (Be one
e al., 2022). Gomez-Mejia e al. (2024) sugges ed ha he ola ile,
unce ain, complex, and ambiguous (VUCA) na u e o he
La in-Ame ican and Ca ibbean con ex (LAC) a e impo an ins i u ional
ac o s ha in luence SEW in he egion. Thei e iew o he i e FIBER
dimensions conside ing he con ex ual peculia i ies o he egion con-
cludes ha because o cul u al aspec s, amily businesses in his egion
a e “SEW in ensi e.”This means ha hey gi e high p io i y o all SEW
dimensions. Howe e , he ins i u ional en i onmen shapes how amily
owne s p io i ize each dimension. Fo ins ance, while he concep o an
ex ended amily in LAC emphasizes he impo ance o he “I”(Family
Iden i ica ion) dimension o SEW, a VUCA en i onmen mode a es his
ela ionship nega i ely, due o associa ed isks o kidnappings and ex-
o ions because o main aining a s ong public image in hese coun ies.
Fu he , a ecen s udy conduc ed by Pinelli e al. (2023) examined
SEW and amily i m acquisi ions and del ed in o he implica ions o
conside ing how he ins i u ional con ex a ec s he SEW app oach.
They sugges ha SEW conce ns make amily i ms mo e likely han
non amily i ms o unde ake ela ed acquisi ions when ope a ing in
unce ain en i onmen s. This is done o a oid losses o he amily’s
cu en SEW. Ne e heless, amily owne s a e mo e likely o unde ake
un ela ed acquisi ions when he a ge i m ope a es in a mo e de el-
oped ins i u ional con ex . Taking a close look a his om a con ex ual
lens, we ealize ha ins i u ional en i onmen s wi h obus amewo ks
suppo ing economic ansac ions, such as en o cemen con ac s, p o-
ec ion o p ope y igh s, and s able na ional go e nance, acili a e
un ela ed acquisi ions. This is because hese elemen s enhance p e-
dic abili y ega ding p ospec i e inancial gains om such acquisi ions,
making hem mo e appealing o amily i ms.
To summa ize, his discussion unde sco es he signi ican in luence
o cul u al and ins i u ional no ms on SEW. Neglec ing hem may lead o
inadequa e es ing o SEW assump ions. The e o e, inco po a ing cul-
u al and ins i u ional con ex s in heo e ical a gumen s is c ucial o
comp ehensi e SEW esea ch.
2.2. Na ional con ex - ee SEW esea ch and lack o cons uc alidi y
In addi ion o he challenges ela ed o inadequa e heo y es ing, he
issue o con ex - ee SEW also aises conce ns abou cons uc alidi y.
The e is a lack o cla i y ega ding he alidi y o he SEW cons uc and
i s measu emen (B igham &Payne, 2019; Chua e al., 2015; Newbe &
C aig, 2017).
This c i icism is e iden in s udies ha es he SEW cons uc using
he FIBER scale ac oss cul u ally di e se coun ies such as Spain
(G´
omez-Mejía &He e o, 2022), Bangladesh (Razzak &Jassem, 2019),
Finland (Filse e al., 2018), Mexico (Angulo e al., 2016), and he
Uni ed A ab Emi a es (Dayan e al., 2019). These s udies yielded
inconclusi e esul s ega ding he dimensions cons i u ing he SEW
cons uc . Fo example, while Razzak and Jassem (2019) concluded ha
all 27 i ems o he FIBER model load on o he scale, Dayan e al. (2019)
sugges ed ha he “F”dimension may no be signi ican in explaining
SEW o Uni ed A ab Emi a es amilies.
To o e come hese limi a ions, ecen s udies ha e a emp ed o
alida e he psychome ic p ope ies o he o iginal FIBER scale using
samples om di e en coun ies. The i s a emp , Hauck e al. (2016),
was buil on 216 ques ionnai es—112 om Ge man and 104 om
Aus ian i ms. The au ho s acknowledge ha he sample is en i ely
based on he Ge man con ex and calls o u u e esea ch o “ e alida e
he scale wi h a sample composed o mo e he e ogeneous i ms”(p.
143). Ge ken e al. (2022) esponded o his call by conduc ing a
eplica ion s udy using i e samples om i e di e en s udies ha used
ques ionnai es in which he FIBER scale was included (Heide e al.,
2021; Sch¨
a e , 2016; Schneide , 2018; Weimann, 2020). The o al
sample included 1206 esponses om amily owne s in Eu ope, Asia,
and he US. The au ho s alida ed he scale, bu hey did no acknowl-
edge he in luence o cul u al con ex on SEW measu emen . Las ,
G´
omez-Mejía and He e o (2022) es ed he FIBER scale in Spain and
ecognized he lack o con ex ualiza ion, emphasizing ha “ he ex en o
which he o e a ching cul u e makes a di e ence in he con en s uc-
u e o SEW and i s e ec s s ill emains an open ques ion”(p. 8).
Toge he , hese s udies highligh he signi icance o con ex ual a -
ia ions among coun ies in shaping he amily SEW. Howe e , hey also
sugges ha disc epancies among s udies may ha e eme ged om in-
consis encies in he scale i sel , including me hodological dispa i ies o
di e gen unde s andings o SEW ac oss coun ies. I his is he case, he
uni e sali y o SEW o cap u e amily owne s a ec i e endowmen
would be ques ionable and his would in alida e conduc ing SEW c oss
coun y esea ch. Hence, ha ing a c oss-cul u al alid and eliable SEW
ins umen is an essen ial o con ex ualize SEW esea ch.
2.3. Ad ancing SEW esea ch: Con ex by compa ing i e na ional
con ex s
The p eceding discussion concludes ha unconside ed con ex ual
a ia ion in SEW s udies may lead o issues, including o e all h ea s o
alidi y and insu icien heo y es ing. To ad ance u he , we inco -
po a e he na ional con ex in o SEW esea ch, d awing inspi a ion om
he ecommenda ions o Bambe ge (2008). This app oach, ecen ly
applied o amily i m s udies by Ama o e al. (2022),Gomez-Mejia e al.
(2020), and K uege e al. (2021), p oposes a p og essi e in oduc ion o
(na ional) con ex esea ch in amily business s udies in di e en s ages.
Fi s , mo e SEW s udies a e conduc ed in di e se na ional se ings
(con ex by sampling). Nex , mo e compa a i e SEW s udies a e de el-
oped ac oss coun ies (con ex by compa ing). Las , con ex is in o-
duced in o heo e ical a gumen s o he SEW app oach, adop ing a
con ex by heo izing esea ch s a egy.
V. Sanchez-Famoso e al. Jou nal o Family Business S a egy 16 (2025) 100647
3
In exis ing SEW esea ch ha conside s con ex ual ac o s, a p e a-
len app oach in ol es inco po a ing con ex h ough a con ex by
sampling s a egy. This spec um anges om s udies ea ing con ex as
angen ial (e.g., Be one e al., 2010) o hose highligh ing i s c i ical
ole in SEW an eceden s and ou comes (e.g., Calab `
o e al., 2018). While
con ex by sampling con ibu es o consis ency in SEW esea ch, i does
no acili a e a nuanced unde s anding o he causal o mode a ing
ela ionship be ween na ional con ex and SEW. Hence, we emb ace he
nex s ep p oposed by Bambe ge (2008) and emba k in “con ex by
compa ing”SEW esea ch. We unde ake a compa a i e s udy o SEW in
i e coun ies ep esen ing dis inc na ional con ex s. By gaining insigh
in o he challenges associa ed wi h measu ing SEW ac oss na ional
con ex s and by shedding ligh on he he e ogenei y o SEW ac oss na-
ions, we aim o enhance ou comp ehension o how a ious SEW di-
mensions a e al e ed, modi ied, o cons ained by na ional cul u e.
Conduc ing con ex by compa ing SEW esea ch is a majo challenge
o SEW esea che s, making i impe a i e o examine i a ailable scales
o measu e SEW a e alid ac oss na ions, as emphasized by c oss-
coun y esea ch (Lacko e al., 2022). Consequen ly, we ini ially ocus
on assessing whe he he FIBER scale can be uni e sally applied ac oss
coun ies, gauging i s eliabili y in cap u ing SEW wi hin he
i e-coun y con ex . The p e e ed me hod o conduc ing he s a is ical
and psychome ic assessmen o he c oss-cul u al equi alence o an
ins umen is h ough es ing i s “measu emen in a iance”(Cheung &
Rens old, 2002; Ha kness e al., 2003). Building on hese es ablished
me hodologies, we del e in o es ing he c oss-coun y measu emen
in a iance o he FIBER scale.
Once we con i m he measu emen in a iance o he SEW scale, we
ocus on c ea ing a compa a i e unde s anding o SEW ac oss na ions.
We con end ha de eloping his compa a i e knowledge is a c ucial
p e equisi e be o e adop ing a con ex heo izing SEW app oach.
2.4. Tes ing he c oss-coun y measu emen in a iance o he FIBER scale
2.4.1. Sample selec ion
We chose i e coun ies wi h dis inc na ional con ex s and whe e
amily i ms ha e an impo an economic impac : Canada, Mexico, Saudi
A abia, Spain, and Vie nam.
In Canada, amily i ms gene a e 49 pe cen o he p i a e sec o eal
g oss domes ic p oduc (GDP) and accoun o 47 pe cen o p i a e
sec o employmen (Fo bes &Basse , 2019). In Mexico, mo e han 70
pe cen o he businesses ha e a amily s uc u e and employ app oxi-
ma ely 54 million people (G an -Tho n on, 2011). Family business in
Saudi A abia cons i u e up o 90 pe cen o all companies, employing 80
pe cen o he wo k o ce and con ibu ing o 60 pe cen o he egion’s
GDP (PwC, 2016). In Spain, amily i ms gene a e 70 pe cen o he o al
GDP, ep esen ing a ound 75 pe cen o o al p i a e employmen
(Spanish Family En e p ise Ins i u e, 2021). Las , while o icial s a is ics
a e lacking, 95 pe cen o Vie namese en e p ises a e amily businesses
(Nguyen Dang Tuan e al., 2019). Mo eo e , acco ding o he PwC
amily Business Su ey (2021), in Vie nam, he op 100 amily busi-
nesses accoun o 25 pe cen o he coun y’s GDP.
Fu he mo e, hese i e coun ies show impo an cul u al di e -
ences, and hus, his is a s ingen es o ensu e he gene alizabili y o
ou esul s. In Table 1a, we compa e he cul u al dimensions among
coun ies using Ho s ede’s dimensions and classi y he coun ies’sample
based on Ho s ede scale sco es o ensu e ha we ha e selec ed cul u ally
dis an coun ies (Debicki e al., 2016; Ho s ede, 2001). As Table 1a
shows, Canada is he mos indi idualis ic socie y, whe eas Vie nam,
Saudi A abia, and Mexico a e collec i is socie ies. Ne e heless, Canada
has he lowes powe -dis ance sco e in ou sample, while Mexico and
Saudi A abia ank high in his dimension. Fu he , al hough he e a e
wo “La in socie ies,”Mexico sco es 97 in he “Indulgence”dimension,
which is in sha p con as wi h Spain’s sco e o 35.
The selec ed coun ies also di e in hei ins i u ional con ex . As
Table 1b shows, hey ank e y di e en ly ega ding he Wo ld Bank
Go e nance Indica o s (Kau mann e al., 2010), which p o ide in o -
ma ion on a ious dimensions o a coun y’s ins i u ional con ex (i.e.,
oice and accoun abili y, poli ical s abili y and absence o iolence,
go e nmen e ec i eness, egula o y quali y, ule o law, and con ol o
co up ion). Fo all six indica o s, Canada’s a ings compa e a o ably
wi h he es o he coun ies, showing i s s ong ins i u ional en i on-
men . On he con a y, Vie nam, Saudi A abia, and Mexico a e below a
leas 60 pe cen o coun ies on mos go e nance indica o s, sugges ing
weak ins i u ional amewo ks.
We ollowed he sugges ions o ecen c oss-coun y s udies dealing
wi h scale alida ion (Kanka aˇ
s&Moo s, 2014; Lacko e al., 2022) and
ensu ed he c oss-cul u al compa abili y o ou sample. We used he
same de ini ion o amily i ms ac oss he i e coun ies. Following
p e ious s udies (Voo decke s e al., 2007; Wes head &Howo h, 2006),
he selec ed i ms me wo condi ions: a) a leas 51 % o he owne ship
belongs o he amily and b) a leas one amily membe occupies a
go e nance and/o managemen posi ion. Ne e heless, as access o
amily i ms’da a a ies a lo ac oss coun ies, we buil he da abase o
amily i ms con e gen wi h c oss-cul u al compa abili y (Lacko e al.,
2022). In Canada, we compiled da a p o ided by Business Families -
HEC Mon ´
eal and he Na ional Bank Ins i u e o En ep eneu ship - HEC
Mon ´
eal. Nex , we complemen ed his da a wi h hose p o ided by he
Business Families Founda ion, which gene ously p o ided us access o
i s da a on Qu´
ebec amily businesses. Fo obus ness check, we checked
he En e p ise Regis e o Qu´
ebec o e i y ha he selec ed i ms clas-
si y as amily i ms acco ding o ou wo condi ions. Thus, 1938 com-
panies om all egions o he p o ince o Qu´
ebec we e con ac ed.
Simila ly, Saudi A abian amily i ms we e iden i ied h ough da a-
bases p o ided by associa ions such as he Jeddah Chambe o Com-
me ce, he Family Business Council in he Council o Saudi Chambe s,
he Family Business Fo um, and he Na ional Cen e o Family Business.
Th ough hese da abases, we iden i ied 1189 i ms ha we e classi ied
as amily i ms based on ou de ini ion.
The selec ion o amily i ms in Spain was done using he SABI
1
da abase (Casillas e al 2024). To ob ain a sample, based on ou
Table 1a
Ho s ede’s cul u al dimensions sco es in he i e sampled coun ies.
Ho s ede Cul u al
Dimensions
Canada Mexico Spain Vie nam Saudi
A abia
Powe Dis ance 39 81 57 70 95
Indi idualism 80 30 51 20 25
Masculini y 52 69 42 40 60
Unce ain y A oidance 48 82 86 30 80
Long-Te m O ien a ion 36 24 48 57 36
Indulgence 68 97 44 35 52
Table 1b
Ins i u ional di e ences among he i e sampled coun ies.
Canada Mexico Saudi
A abia
Spain Vie nam
Poli ical S abili y and
Absence o Violence/
Te o ism
81.6 17.9 23.5 58 49
Go e nance E ec i eness 95.7 39 63.8 79.5 53.33
Regula o y Quali y 96 55.7 49 52 39
Con ol o co up ion 92.8 18 62.3 73 32.86
1
The SABI da abase con ains in o ma ion on 2600,000 companies om
Spain and 800,000 companies o m Po ugal, and includes public and p i a e
Spanish and Po uguese companies. SABI is he Spanish/Po uguese (Ibe ic)
e sion o he O bis da abase, om Bu eau Van Dick, which has wo ldwide
co e age. Spain is one o he coun ies in which he co e age o his da abase is
g ea e (Bajga e al., 2020).
V. Sanchez-Famoso e al. Jou nal o Family Business S a egy 16 (2025) 100647
4
de ini ion o amily i ms, we conduc ed an exhaus i e e iew o he
sha eholding s uc u es (pe cen age o common s ock) and composi ion
(name and su names o sha eholde s)
2
o hese i ms. Thus, we selec ed
companies om SABI ha me he ollowing c i e ia: i) non-lis ed
Spanish companies wi h mo e han nine employees; ii) companies
wi h inancial in o ma ion o (a leas ) he las i e yea s; iii) companies
no a ec ed by special si ua ions such as insol ency, wind-up, liquida-
ion o ze o ac i i y; and i ) companies in which a leas 51 pe cen o
he i m owne s we e membe s o he amily. F om he o iginal da ase
o 27,355 Spanish en e p ises ha ell wi hin he se o pa ame e s, 1312
companies me he speci ied amily c i e ia.
In Mexico, he e is no a single p o essional associa ion wi h public
da abases o amily business. Thus, we buil ou sample in h ee s eps.
Fi s , we iden i ied amily i ms lis ed in he Na ional Ins i u e o S a-
is ics and Geog aphy (INEGI, 2015). Second, we e i ied hese da a
wi h schola s (expe s) pa icipa ing in esea ch on amily businesses in
ou uni e si ies in Mexico, as well as wi h consul an s collabo a ing
wi h amily businesses. Then, we a ge ed amily i ms in he s a es o
Mexico ha ing he highes con ibu ion o PIB: Campeche, Ciudad de
Mexico, Es ado de M´
exico, Jalisco, Nue o L´
eon, and Ve ac uz (Na ional
S a is ical Di ec o y o Economic Uni s o INEGI, 2015). Las , we con-
ac ed 650 amily i ms ha me ou c i e ia o in i e hem o pa icipa e
in he s udy.
In Vie nam oo, he e is no p o essional associa ion o amily i ms.
Mo eo e , amily owne s in Vie nam ecei e high social conside a ion,
so i is no easy o each ou o hem. The e o e, we elied on ou
in o mal ne wo ks o se up con ac s wi h di ec o s and manage s o
amily i ms. The esea ch eam con ac ed each o hese manage s o
explain o hem he goal o he p ojec as well as he con en o he
ques ionnai e. We con ac ed 295 i ms.
We ollowed a igo ous p ocess o ensu e he alidi y o he ques-
ionnai e ac oss coun ies (Tan e al., 2020). We ca e ully ansla ed he
English e sion o he FIBER ques ionnai e in o F ench, A abic, Spanish,
and Vie namese. Then, all he ansla ions we e modi ied based on a
e iew by h ee na i e social scien is s wi h a doc o al deg ee. We
ca e ully minimized he p oblems inhe en in simple ansla ion, such as
linguis ic o psychome ic nonequi alence be ween he di e en lan-
guage e sions (Hulin &Maye , 1986). Back ansla ion (B islin &
Olms ead, 1973) was pe o med on he inal e sions by bilingual in-
di iduals. A compa ison o he o iginal and back- ansla ed i ems indi-
ca ed subs an ial simila i y be ween he o iginal and ansla ed e sions.
We an a pilo es o make su e ha he meanings o he ques ions we e
adequa e o each cul u al con ex . Fo example, in Vie nam, he no ion
o kinship ansla ed in o Vie namese may gene a e con usion, as he
concep o kinship in Wes e n cul u es means a blood ela ionship.
Howe e , in Vie nam, i means he ela ionship be ween amily mem-
be s (in he sense o communi y). Thus, we ook ca e o hese cul u al
di e ences and adap ed ou inal scale acco dingly.
The da a we e collec ed be ween July 2018 and June 2019. A com-
pany ha specializes in ma ke esea ch adminis e ed he su ey and
collec ed da a in all coun ies excep Vie nam. In Vie nam, we selec ed a
g oup o 20 s uden s en olled in Managemen Science cou ses in Vie -
namese uni e si ies and ained hem in da a collec ion. Wi h ha d
copies o he ques ionnai e, he s uden s ook on he ole o in e iewe s
and conduc ed ace- o- ace in e iews wi h each esponden .
The o al inal sample ac oss he i e coun ies comp ised 1464 e-
sponden s: we ecei ed 495 comple ed ques ionnai es (25.5 pe cen
esponse a e) om Canada, 114 (17.5 pe cen ) om Mexico, 400 (33.6
pe cen ) om Saudi A abia, 160 (17.7 pe cen ) om Spain, and in he
case o Vie nam, we sen 500 ques ionnai es, ou o which 295 in-
e iews we e comple ed success ully (59 pe cen ).
To es o non- esponse bias, we pe o med a Kolmogo o -Smi no
es (Siegel &Cas ellan, 1988) be ween esponding and non- esponding
i ms in Canada, Mexico, Saudi A abia, and Spain. The analysis e ealed
no signi ican di e ences in he main demog aphic ea u es be ween he
wo g oups (i.e., numbe o employees, annual sales, i m size, and age).
Table 2 shows some desc ip i e s a is ics. I e eals in e es ing di e -
ences in he amily in luence ac oss he sample coun ies. Fo ins ance,
amily owne ship is highe han 90 pe cen in all coun ies, excep in
Canada whe e he amily owne ship mean is 77 pe cen . Spain shows a
highe pe cen age o amily membe s in ol ed in he TMT, while Saudi
A abia has he lowes amily in ol emen in managemen e-
sponsibili ies. Las , while mos amily i ms in Canada and Mexico a e in
he i s gene a ion, in he es o he coun ies, he majo i y o i ms a e
con olled by he second gene a ion.
3. Resul s
C oss-coun y managemen s udies pose a c ucial ques ion: can in-
s umen s alida ed in one coun y be eadily applied in di e en con-
ex s wi hou assessing hei c oss-cul u al applicabili y (Du asula
e al., 1993; Ma ondo e al., 2003)? Responding esea ch has p edom-
inan ly aimed a mi iga ing he me hodological and s a is ical chal-
lenges associa ed wi h he issue o measu emen non-in a iance. The
mos widely adop ed app oach o sc u inize he c oss-cul u al equi a-
lence o an ins umen is he examina ion o “measu emen in a iance”
(Cheung &Rens old, 2002; Ha kness e al., 2003). In essence, his
concep seeks o de e mine whe he a measu emen ins umen assesses
he same unde lying concep consis en ly ac oss a ious subg oups o
esponden s (Chen e al., 2008; Ho n &Mca dle, 1992, p. 117). Be o e
emba king on a compa a i e analysis o SEW ac oss di e en coun ies,
i is impe a i e o subjec he FIBER scale o igo ous c oss-coun y
measu emen in a iance es ing.
To do so, we d aw upon Mul iG oup Con i ma o y Fac o Analysis
(MGCFA) (J¨
o eskog, 1971) as i “ ep esen s he mos powe ul and
e sa ile app oach o es ing o c oss-na ional measu emen in a i-
ance”(S eenkamp &Baumga ne , 1998, p. 78). I in ol es se ing
c oss-g oup cons ain s and compa ing mo e es ic ed models wi h less
es ic ed ones (By ne e al., 1989; S eenkamp &Baumga ne , 1998).
Addi ionally, we ollow he s epwise p ocedu e p oposed by hese au-
ho s, es ing om he leas o he mos demanding o m o in a iance.
We s a ed by es ing whe he he FIBER ac o s uc u e is adequa e
in each coun y by es ima ing a con i ma o y ac o analysis (CFA)
model o each o he i e da a se s (coun ies). Table 3 shows he CFAs
o all he da ase s. All C onbach’s alphas (CA) a e abo e he ecom-
mended alue o 0.70, and he composi e eliabili y (CR) indices a e
abo e 0.70 (Fo nell &La cke , 1981). Mo eo e , he a e age a iance
ex ac ed (AVE) o he cons uc s exceed he ecommended h eshold
alue o 0.50 (Fo nell &La cke , 1981).
A e es ing ha he scale is accep able o each coun y, we es ed
whe he i shows con igu al equi alence, ha is, whe he i exhibi s he
Table 2
Desc ip i e s a is ics o he sample.
Canada Mexico Saudi
A abia
Spain Vie nam To al
Numbe o
Responden s
495 114 400 160 295 1464
Male 395 68 338 80 142 1023
Female 100 46 62 80 153 441
Company Size
Mean (No. o
employees)
55 200 39 42 119 95
Owne ship Mean
(%)
77 94 88 92 89 88
Family in TMT (%) 54 58 48 66 54 56
Gene a ion in
Cha ge
1 1 2 2 2 2
2
In Spain, people ha e wo su names. The i s is he i s su name o he
a he , and he second is he i s su name o he mo he . The e o e, amily
ela ionships among sha eholde s a e mo e e iden han in o he coun ies.
V. Sanchez-Famoso e al. Jou nal o Family Business S a egy 16 (2025) 100647
5
Table 3
Valida ion o he measu emen model – eliabili y and con e gen alidi y.
Canada Mexico Saudi A ab Spain Vie nam All Toge he
Dimension Indica o S anda dised
Loading
S anda dised
Loading
S anda dised
Loading
S anda dised
Loading
S anda dised
Loading
S anda dised
Loading
FI em 1 0.707 CA =0.89
CR =0.89
AVE =0.59
0.610 CA =0.86
CR =0.86
AVE =0.51
0.681 CA =0.86
CR =0.86
AVE =0.51
0.806 CA =0.91
CR =0.91
AVE =0.62
0.710 CA =0.86
CR =0.87
AVE =0.54
0.721 CA =0.88
CR =0.88
AVE =0.55
I em 2 0.703 0.748 0.795 0.814 0.838 0.785
I em 3 0.790 0.797 0.683 0.765 0.739 0.737
I em 4 0.812 0.783 0.673 0.782 0.410 0.635
I em 5 0.799 0.777 0.705 0.742 0.820 0.780
I em 6 0.771 0.546 0.743 0.819 0.797 0.780
II em 7 0.838 CA =0.85
CR =0.86
AVE =0.51
0.768 CA =0.87
CR =0.88
AVE =0.54
0.768 CA =0.88
CR =0.88
AVE =0.56
0.794 CA =0.88
CR =0.88
AVE =0.56
0.531 CA =0.86
CR =0.88
AVE =0.55
0.721 CA =0.88
CR =0.88
AVE =0.55
I em 8 0.655 0.784 0.797 0.753 0.724 0.749
I em 9 0.720 0.520 0.836 0.821 0.829 0.789
I em 10 0.622 0.840 0.729 0.686 0.850 0.735
I em 11 0.789 0.700 0.737 0.838 0.867 0.805
I em 12 0.647 0.772 0.580 0.578 0.572 0.644
BI em 13 0.831 CA =0.94
CR =0.94
AVE =0.75
0.703 CA =0.85
CR =0.86
AVE =0.55
0.656 CA =0.87
CR =0.87
AVE =0.58
0.664 CA =0.84
CR =0.85
AVE =0.54
0.772 CA =0.86
CR =0.86
AVE =0.55
0.725 CA =0.89
CR =0.89
AVE =0.61
I em 14 0.905 0.826 0.731 0.775 0.681 0.789
I em 15 0.916 0.773 0.763 0.850 0.759 0.827
I em 16 0.832 0.728 0.828 0.660 0.768 0.788
I em 17 0.842 0.663 0.807 0.705 0.713 0.772
EI em 18 0.681 CA =0.86
CR =0.86
AVE =0.52
0.539 CA =0.86
CR =0.86
AVE =0.50
0.730 CA =0.085
CR =0.85
AVE =0.50
0.763 CA =0.89
CR =0.89
AVE =0.58
0.666 CA =0.88
CR =0.88
AVE =0.56
0.680 CA =0.87
CR =0.87
AVE =0.53
I em 19 0.761 0.622 0.777 0.807 0.659 0.773
I em 20 0.851 0.808 0.814 0.821 0.850 0.821
I em 21 0.458 0.608 0.707 0.695 0.702 0.657
I em 22 0.841 0.809 0.479 0.723 0.755 0.707
I em 23 0.646 0.820 0.677 0.749 0.817 0.732
RI em 24 0.785 CA =0.80
CR =0.80
AVE =0.51
0.666 CA =0.79
CR =0.80
AVE =0.50
0.818 CA =0.84
CR =0.84
AVE =0.58
0.730 CA =0.86
CR =0.87
AVE =0.63
0.795 CA =0.87
CR =0.87
AVE =0.62
0.781 CA =0.84
CR =0.84
AVE =0.57
I em 25 0.526 0.680 0.674 0.702 0.747 0.657
I em 26 0.705 0.808 0.796 0.831 0.774 0.774
I em 27 0.805 0.675 0.745 0.887 0.831 0.796
No es: CA: C onbach Alpha; CR: Composi e Reliabily; AVE: A e age Va iance Ex ac ed.
V. Sanchez-Famoso e al. Jou nal o Family Business S a egy 16 (2025) 100647
6
same con igu a ion o ac o loadings in di e en coun ies (Ho n &
Mca dle, 1992). We an a Mul iG oup Con i ma o y Fac o Analysis
(MGCFA) o all he da a oge he in one da ase . Table 4 shows ha he
Ben le -Bone non-no med i index (BBNNFI), compa a i e i index
(CFI), and inc emen al i index (IFI) a e all abo e 0.80, which indica es
a good model i (S ini asan e al., 2002).
3
In addi ion, Table 4 shows he
oo mean squa e e o o app oxima ion (RMSEA) o he model. I s
alue lowe han 0.095 indica es good i (Hu &Ben le , 1995; Kline,
2005). Mo eo e , all ac o loadings a e g ea e han 0.40, which is he
cu -o demons a ing adequa e le els o i (Fo d e al., 1986; Nunnally
&Be ns ein, 1994), all ps <.001. The e o e, Tables 3 and 4 p o ide
e idence o con e gen alidi y and in e nal consis ency o he FIBER
scale o all he da ase s. Thus, ac o s’s uc u e does no di e in he
i e cul u al g oups (Lacko e al., 2022; Widaman &Reise, 1997).
E idence o disc iminan alidi y is necessa y o ensu e con igu al
in a iance as well. Acco dingly, we ollowed wo c i e ia. Fi s , we
applied he Fo nell-La cke c i e ion ha compa es he squa e oo o
he AVE alues wi h he la en a iable co ela ions. To show disc im-
inan alidi y, he squa e oo o each dimension’s AVE o an ins umen
should be g ea e han i s highes co ela ion wi h any o he dimension.
The he e o ai -mono ai (HTMT) c i e ion is he second and mo e
conse a i e app oach. The HTMT is compu ed as he geome ic mean
o he he e o ai -he e ome hod co ela ions di ided by he a e age o
he mono ai -he e ome hod co ela ions. I he HTMT alue is below
he (conse a i e) h eshold alue o 0.85, disc iminan alidi y would
be suppo ed (Hai e al., 2017). Table 5 shows e idence o disc iminan
alidi y
4
( o all coun ies oge he ) wi h bo h he Fo nell-La cke c i-
e ion and HTMT c i e ion. This implies ha he FIBER scale has
disc iminan alidi y, ha is, each dimension o he FIBER scale is
unique and cap u es phenomena no ep esen ed by o he dimensions in
he scale. These esul s con i m he con igu al in a iance o he FIBER
scale. This means ha amily owne s in all i e coun ies concep ualize
he p ese a ion o hei SEW in same manne .
The second s ep in ol es es ing whe he he a ious dimensions and
he i ems associa ed wi h each dimension a e unde s ood in he same
way ac oss coun ies, ha is, es ing he me ic in a iance o he FIBER
scale. Me ic c oss-coun y in a iance equi es ha he ac o loadings
be ween i ems and ac o s a e in a ian ac oss na ions. I is es ed by
es ic ing he ac o loading o each i em on i s co esponding ac o o
be he same ac oss g oups. Once he ac o loading o each i em is
es ic ed, we es i he di e ence be ween he con igu a ional model
(wi hou es ic ions) and me ic in a iance model (wi h es ic ions) is
signi ican . I i is, he me ic in a iance does no exis . In ou case, he
con igu al in a iance model has a
χ
2
(1570) =3806.87, while he me ic
in a iance model has a
χ
2
(1678) =3892.16. Thus, he di e ence be-
ween he models is (Δ
χ
2
(108) =85.293, p >.10). The e o e, as he
me ic in a iance model is no signi ican ly wo se han he i o he
con igu al in a iance model, and as he RMSEA and o he indica o s o
model i ha e imp o ed o a leas emained equal o hose in he
con igu al model (see Table 6), me ic in a iance is suppo ed. This
means ha he FIBER cons uc has he same me ic and same meaning
ac oss g oups.
While me ic in a iance implies ha he ins umen used o measu e
he cons uc has been pe cei ed simila ly ac oss na ional cul u es
(We nsing, 2014), i does no imply ha he sco es o he ins umen can
be meaning ully compa ed ac oss g oups. Such compa isons a e mean-
ing ul only i he i ems exhibi “scala ”in a iance (Me edi h, 1993;
S eenkamp &Baumga ne , 1998). Scala in a iance show ha i em
sco es om di e en g oups ha e he same scaling, o igin, and in e -
p e a ion ac oss g oups. To assess scala in a iance, bo h ac o loadings
and i em in e cep s a e cons ained o be equal ac oss coun ies. We
es ed he scala in a iance o he FIBER scale by cons aining all ac o
loadings and i em in e cep s. The model o me ic in a iance (wi h only
ac o loading o each i em cons ained) has a
χ
2
(1678) =3892.16,
while he model o scala in a iance (wi h bo h ac o loadings and i em
in e cep s cons ained) has a
χ
2
(1766) =187.842. Once we ha e he i
o he me ic model and scala model, we check i he di e ence be ween
he i o he wo models is signi ican . I i is, scala in a iance would
no be es ablished. In ou case, he di e ence be ween he wo models is
s a is ically signi ican (Δ
χ
2
(88) =187.842, p <.010), such ha we
canno ensu e he scala in a iance o he SEW scale (see Table 6).
Ideally, i would be p e e able SEW measu es ha show scala
in a iance, whe ein he ac o s uc u e o he ins umen is ully
equi alen ac oss coun ies. Howe e , se e al esea che s ha e
emphasized ha ull measu emen in a iance does no hold, and hus
ep esen s oo s ic a equi emen o g oup compa isons, especially in
c oss-coun y s udies (Mu h´
en &Ch is o e sson, 1981; Schmi &Kul-
janin, 2008; S eenkamp &Baumga ne , 1998). The e o e, By ne e al.
(1989) and S eenkamp and Baumga ne (1998) p oposed ha i is
su icien o ha e a minimum o wo in a ian loadings and in e cep s o
ensu e pa ial scala in a iance, ha is, i is no necessa y o ha e he
cons ain s o all he loadings and in e cep s being equal and in a ian
ac oss g oups (Millsap &Kwok, 2004). Hence, as he las s ep, we es ed
he pa ial in a iance o he FIBER scale. Pa ial scala in a iance is
suppo ed when he pa ame e s o a leas wo indica o s a e equal
ac oss coun ies (S eenkamp &Baumga ne , 1998). This means we
mus ensu e ha a leas wo i ems pe la en cons uc ha e equal
loading and in e cep s (By ne e al., 1989). In ou case, mo e han wo
indica o s a e cons ained in e ms o loadings and in e cep s, and a e
equal ac oss coun ies. Thus, pa ial scala in a iance was suppo ed o
he FIBER scale ac oss all coun ies. I indica es ha he in e p e a ion o
a leas one ques ion om each dimension di e ed ac oss he g oups.
Howe e , a leas wo ques ions om each dimension did no di e
ac oss he g oups ( ha is, had he same meaning). Thus, pa ial scala
in a iance o he FIBER scale ensu es meaning ul and alid g oup
compa isons (By ne e al., 1989; S eenkamp &Baumga ne , 1998).
Scala measu emen in a iance allows esea che s o a leas compa e
he g oup-speci ic (s anda dized) coe icien s o he ela ionships in he
s uc u al model. O he wise, when less han wo i ems pe la en a i-
able (dimension) ha e equal loadings and/o in e cep s, mul ig oup
compa isons in SEM may be p oblema ic (Hensele e al., 2016).
Ou es o he measu emen in a iance o he FIBER scale sugges s
ha amily owne s in all i e coun ies concep ualize he p ese a ion o
hei SEW in same manne (i.e., he FIBER scale shows con igu al
in a iance). Fu he , he scale exhibi s me ic in a iance, signi ying ha
amily owne s ac oss hese coun ies espond o he scale’s dimensions
consis en ly. Las , he con i ma ion o pa ial in a iance unde sco es
ha he ope a ional de ini ion o SEW p ese a ion using he FIBER
Table 4
Model i o he FIBER scale.
Chi-
Squa e
Tes
Deg ees o
F eedom
BBNNFI CFI IFI RMSEA
Canada 749.872 314 0.932 0.940 0.940 0.053
Mexico 574.249 314 0.826 0.845 0.848 0.081
Saudi
A abia
762.277 314 0.911 0.921 0.921 0.060
Spain 753.218 314 0.827 0.845 0.847 0.094
Vie nam 727.875 314 0.893 0.904 0.905 0.067
All
oge he
1422.08 314 0.938 0.944 0.944 0.049
3
The goodness o i desc ibes how well i i s a se o obse a ions. In o he
wo ds, how close he model-implied co a iance ma ix app oxima es he
obse ed co a iance ma ix (Ga son, 2016). Measu es o goodness o i ypi-
cally summa ize he disc epancy be ween obse ed alues and he alues ex-
pec ed unde he model in ques ion (By ne, 2006). I a model has a good i , i is
supposed ha he model quali y is good and in ou case ha he FIBER scale is
eliable.
4
The disc iminan alidi y o all he coun ies independen ly is a ailable on
eques .
V. Sanchez-Famoso e al. Jou nal o Family Business S a egy 16 (2025) 100647
7
scale emains consis en ac oss di e se cul u al se ings.
To ob ain u he e idence o c oss-cul u al applicabili y o he
FIBER scale, we an measu emen in a iance es s by looking a com-
pany size and gene a ion in con ol.
5
The scale shows pa ial scala
in a iance ac oss size and gene a ions (see Table 7a and Table 7b). A
leas wo indica o s a e cons ained in e ms o loadings and in e cep s
and a e equal in he wo mul ig oups in each dimension (one mul ig oup
conside s he size o he company, and he o he conside s he gene a-
ion in con ol o he amily i m).
To u he es he c oss-coun y alidi y o he scale, we es ed i s
nomological alidi y. I s impo ance is well documen ed in he li e a u e
(e.g., C onbach &Meehl, 1955). Following Lee e al. (2019) and Ellinge
e al. (2011), we an he s uc u al model and compa e he chi-squa es
and he i o he model wi h he measu emen model. I he measu e-
men model has a signi ican ly be e i han he s uc u al model
(Ellinge e al., 2011; Lee e al., 2019), hen he nomological alidi y is
no es ed (see Table 8a and Table 8b); o in ou case, he models a e no
signi ican ly di e en (1423.09 –1422,8 =1,01
no signi ican
).
To u he e i y he nomological alidi y o he FIBER scale, we
ollow Lee e al. (2019). As can be seen, in Table 8a, all co ela ions
among he di e en dimensions a e signi ican and posi i e (p<0.01).
These indings p o ide suppo he nomological alidi y (Lee e al.,
2019) o he FIBER measu e by indica ing ha all he dimensions o he
FIBER scale a e signi ican ly posi i ely co ela ed o one ano he . Fo
esea che s and p ac i ione s, his e i ica ion implies ha all he di-
mensions o he FIBER scale need o be unde s ood wi h conside a ion o
he a iables’independency and high co ela ions.
We conduc ed an addi ional es o explo e he connec ions be ween
SEW dimensions and o he ele an and “popula ”cons uc s used in
amily business li e a u e as pe o mance (He n´
andez-Lina es e al.,
2020; Sanchez-Famoso e al., 2015).
6
In his sense, pe o mance is
measu ed using h ee ques ions using i ems adop ed om So enson e al.
(2009) wi h an alpha C onbach equal o 0.82. As BBNNFI equals o 0.98;
CFI equals o 0.98; IFI equals o 0.97, RMSEA equals o 0.059 and R
2
is
0.38, we can conclude ha he s uc u al model has an excellen i
(Kline, 2005). Thus, he accu a e ecompu a ion o co a iances is
possible (Ben le , 1990). All he dimensions ha e a signi ican e ec on
pe o mance: i) “F”dimension (β=0.26; - alue =2.03); ii) “I”
dimension (β=0.55; - alue =3.92); iii) “B”dimension (β=0.31;
- alue =2.23); i ) “E”dimension (β=0.32; - alue =2.24); and ) “R”
dimension (β=0.28; - alue =2.14). These indings show he nomo-
logical ne wo k o he FIBER scale.
Wi h hese indings, we can con iden ly asse ha he FIBER scale is
obus and can be meaning ully compa ed ac oss a ious na ional cul-
u al con ex s. This se s he s age o us o emba k on making c oss-
coun y compa isons o he esul s de i ed om he scale wi hin hese
coun ies.
3.1. Conduc ing compa a i e SEW esea ch: Examining he c oss-coun y
a ia ions o he FIBER scale
The analyses conduc ed in he p eceding sec ion p o ide suppo o
he obus ness o he FIBER scale, indica ing i s sui abili y o mean-
ing ul compa ison ac oss di e se na ional con ex s. Impo an ly, we can
con iden ly a ibu e he disc epancies iden i ied in he dimensions o
he scale in his sec ion o di e ences a ising om a ying cul u al and
ins i u ional condi ions.
Table 9 p esen s he mean sco es o each SEW dimension ac oss he
i e sampled coun ies. Al hough explo a o y, he able p o ides p e-
limina y e idence on how na ional con ex shapes he signi icance
a ibu ed o di e en SEW dimensions.
As shown in Table 9, Mexico anks highes in bo h, he Family
Con ol and Renewal o Family Bonds, dimensions o SEW. Table 1a
e eals ha Mexico is cha ac e ized by a collec i is ic and high powe -
dis ance socie y. This obse a ion aligns wi h Gomez-Mejia e al. (2024),
sugges ing ha in La in Ame ican and Ca ibbean (LAC) coun ies, which
a e cha ac e ized by high collec i ism and powe dis ance, amily
businesses p io i ize ex ended amily concep s. We specula e ha hese
cul u al aspec s o he con ex os e amily owne s’unencumbe ed
disc e ion o p o ide jobs o a g ea e numbe o ela i es. They also
acili a e hem o ob ain pe quisi es o main ain he ex ended amily
li es yle. Mo eo e , a con ex whe e he amily is concep ualized as
ex ended also inc eases he impo ance o he “R”dimension, ha is, he
amily’s conce n o ans e he business o he nex gene a ion, as he
Table 5
Disc iminan alidi y (Fo nell-La cke c i e ion and HTMT c i e ion).
Fo nell- La cke C i e ion HTMT
85
C i e ion
F I B E R F I B E R
F 0.789 F
I 0.487 0.790 I 0.550
B 0.350 0.342 0.829 B 0.394 0.386
E 0.115 0.203 0.186 0.781 E 0.134 0.230 0.208
R 0.377 0.391 0.391 0.196 0.818 R 0.438 0.454 0.458 0.222
No e: In he Fo nell-La cke c i e ion, he diagonal ep esen s he squa e oo o AVEs.
Table 6
Tes o measu emen in a iance o he FIBER scale.
Chi-Squa e Tes Deg ees o F eedom Chi-Squa e ΔDeg ees o F eedom Δp-Value RMSEA BBNNFI CFI IFI
Single G oup Solu ions
Canada 749.872 314 0.053 [0.048–0.058] 0.932 0.940 0.940
Mexico 547.249 314 0.081 [0.069–0.092] 0.826 0.845 0.848
Saudi A abia 762.277 314 0.060 [0.054–0.065] 0.911 0.921 0.921
Spain 753.218 314 0.094 [0.085–0.102] 0.802 0.823 0.847
Vie nam 727.875 314 0.067 [0.060–0.073] 0.893 0.904 0.905
Measu emen In a iance
Equal Fo m 3806.87 1570 0.070 [0.067–0.073] 0.897 0.908 0.909
Equal Fac o Loadings 3892.16 1678 85.293 108 0.948 0.067 [0.064–0.070] 0.905 0.909 0.909
Scala In a iance
Equal In e cep s 6617.92 1796 2725.763 118 0.000 0.098 [0.095–0.100] 0.788 0.806 0.807
5
We hank he anonymous e iewe s o his insigh ul sugges ion.
6
We hank one o ou anonymous e iewe s o his insigh ul sugges ion.
V. Sanchez-Famoso e al. Jou nal o Family Business S a egy 16 (2025) 100647
8
ex ended amily implies ha mo e amily membe s a e a ailable o lead
he i m now o in he dis an u u e.
The ela i ely highe impo ance o hese wo dimensions in Mexico
is also unde s ood in he con ex o a high powe -dis ance socie y, whe e
he e is a signi ican powe gap be ween au ho i y igu es and sub-
o dina es. In a amily business con ex , his may esul in a mo e au o-
c a ic leade ship s yle and a cul u e o espec ing and complying wi h
amily au ho i y, he eby ampli ying he amily’s con ol o e he
business bo h in sho and long un.
In e es ingly, Mexico sco es lowes in he “I”dimension, con a y o
expec a ions in a collec i is ic socie y whe e “social li e e ol es a ound
he amily and close ela ions”(Field, 1985, p. 87). In Saudi A abia,
howe e , his dimension is p io i ized. While bo h coun ies sha e low
indi idualism, di e ences in ins i u ional s abili y may explain his
a iance. The g ea e ins abili y and co up ion ha cha ac e ize he
Mexican landscape compa ed o Saudi may explain why amily owne s
may exe cise cau ion in d awing excessi e a en ion o he amily’s
iden i y. Un o eseen e en s o poli ical changes could nega i ely impac
bo h he amily’s and business’s epu a ion. Mo e impo an ly, as
Table 7a
Tes o measu emen in a iance o he FIBER scale ( aking in o accoun company size).
Chi-Squa e
Tes
Deg ees o
F eedom
Chi-Squa e
Δ
Deg ees o F eedon
Δ
p-
Value
RMSEA BBNNFI CFI IFI
Single G oup Solu ions
Companies (employees >
100)
(n =754)
914.64 314 0.052
[0.048–0.055]
0.931 0.938 0.939
Companies (employees <
101)
(n =710)
903.07 314 0.051
[0.047–0.055]
0.933 0.940 0.940
Measu emen In a iance
Equal Fo m 1844.71 628 0.051
[0.044–0.054]
0.932 0.939 0.939
Equal Fac o Loadings 1881.42 655 36.71 27 0.101 0.051
[0.048–0.053]
0.934 0.938 0.938
Scala In a iance
Equal In e cep s 3.074,96 692 1193.54 37 0.000 0.070
[0.067–0.071]
0.871 0.882 0.882
Table 7b
Tes o measu emen in a iance o he FIBER scale ( aking in o accoun gene a ion in con ol).
Chi-Squa e
Tes
Deg ees o
F eedom
Chi-Squa e
Δ
Deg ees o F eedon
Δ
p-
Value
RMSEA BBNNFI CFI IFI
Single G oup Solu ions
G oup 1 (Gene a ion 1 and
2)
(n =907)
1015.39 314 0.050
[0.047–0.054]
0.937 0.944 0.944
G oup 2 (Gene a ion >2)
(n =557)
812.60 314 0.053
[0049–0.058]
0.925 0.933 0.933
Measu emen In a iance
Equal Fo m 1827.99 628 0.051
[0.048–0.054]
0.933 0.940 0.940
Equal Fac o Loadings 1866.43 655 38.44 27 0.071 0.051
[0.048–0.054]
0.933 0.938 0.938
Scala In a iance
Equal In e cep s 3160.64 692 1294.21 37 0.000 0.070
[0.067–0.072]
0.872 0.883 0.883
Table 8a
Nomological alidi y o he FIBER scale.
Measu emen Model S uc u al Model
Chi-Squa e 1422.08 1423.09
Deg ees o F eedom 314 313
BBNNFI 0.938 0.935
CFI 0.944 0.942
IFI 0.944 0.942
RMSEA 0.049 0.050
Table 8b
La en a iable in e co ela ions in he FIBER nomological ne wo k.
F I B E
I0.543
B0.398 0.386
E0.124 0.227 0.209
R0.430 0.441 0.437 0.221
Table 9
C oss-coun y compa ison o he FIBER dimensions.
SEW DIMENSIONS Canada Mexico Spain Vie nam Saudi A abia
SEW alue Rank SEW alue Rank SEW alue Rank SEW alue Rank SEW alue Rank
(F)amily Con ol and In luence 4.337 2 4.722 2 4.443 2 3.948 1 3.890 3
(I)den i ica ion o Family Membe s wi h he Fi m 4.375 1 3.319 5 4.426 3 3.768 4 4.085 1
(B)inding Social Ties 4.26 3 4.387 3 4.234 4 3.927 3 3.956 2
(E)mo ional A achmen o Family Membe s 3.952 5 4.058 4 3.292 5 3.436 5 3.826 5
(R)enewal o Family Bonds Th ough Dynas ic Succession 3.998 4 4.883 1 4.478 1 3.94 2 3.874 4
V. Sanchez-Famoso e al. Jou nal o Family Business S a egy 16 (2025) 100647
9
