Should you take over the family business or build something new?

Succession in family firms is rarely a clean handoff. Some next-generation members step into leadership willingly. Others resist, and a significant number walk away entirely to start their own ventures. The question of what drives this choice—staying or leaving—has occupied family business researchers for decades, but most studies examine individual factors in isolation: education, motivation, family support. This paper takes a different approach.

Using fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) on a sample of 169 Italian entrepreneurs with family business backgrounds—113 who succeeded in the family firm and 56 who founded new ventures—the authors identify how combinations of family embeddedness, individual attributes, and human capital produce distinct entrepreneurial profiles. The result is a typology that captures the real complexity of next-generation career decisions.

What We Studied

The study examined seven conditions grouped into three categories. Family embeddedness included emotional and practical family support and prior work experience in the family firm. Individual attributes covered achievement goals, financial goals, and risk tolerance. Human capital encompassed formal education and professional experience outside the family business.

Rather than testing which single factor matters most, fsQCA identifies which combinations of conditions lead to a specific outcome. This configurational approach recognizes equifinality—the same outcome (succession or independent founding) can result from fundamentally different paths.

Key Insights

Four distinct successor profiles

Conservative successors grew up in the family firm with strong emotional ties but limited education or outside experience. Their commitment is driven by loyalty and duty rather than strategic ambition. Qualified successors combine family business experience with formal education—typically in business, law, or engineering—and approach succession as a professional career choice, though their financial performance is not consistently superior. Embedded gamblers are deeply embedded in the family firm and show high willingness to take risks and pursue financial gains, often driving innovation and international expansion despite limited formal education. Returning gamblers initially left the family firm but came back under difficult circumstances—illness, conflict, or crisis—and tend to operate reactively, with weaker performance outcomes.

Two distinct founder profiles

Supported founders launch new ventures while still receiving emotional and financial backing from their families. Their decisions reflect a sense of reciprocity—honoring the family while forging their own path—and their ventures often align with the family’s legacy through diversification or adjacent markets. Independent founders avoid family involvement altogether, driven by autonomy, external experience, financial ambition, and high risk tolerance. Some pursue lifestyle entrepreneurship; others build high-growth ventures.

The same outcome can emerge from different paths

The configurational approach reveals that there is no single recipe for succession or independent entrepreneurship. A conservative successor and an embedded gambler arrive at the same outcome—taking over the family firm—through fundamentally different combinations of motivation, capability, and context. This has practical consequences: succession planning that assumes a single ideal profile will miss most of the real variation in how next-generation members make career decisions.

Takeaways

For family business leaders

Do not equate emotional loyalty with readiness for succession. Strong family bonds are necessary but not sufficient—the combination of family embeddedness with education, risk tolerance, and external experience matters more than any single factor. Support next-generation members in gaining outside experience; it often increases rather than decreases their interest in returning.

For next-generation members

Be honest about your motivations. Whether you crave stability, autonomy, or the thrill of building something new, recognizing your own profile helps you make a more deliberate career choice. Contributing to the family legacy does not require taking over the firm—supported founding is a legitimate and often effective path.

For advisors and educators

Avoid standardized succession planning. The six profiles identified here suggest that effective support requires understanding each individual’s specific configuration of family ties, personal goals, and professional capabilities. Tailored guidance outperforms generic recommendations.

Impact

This study advances family business research by demonstrating that succession is not a binary choice driven by a single variable. It is a configurational outcome shaped by how multiple factors interact. The typology of six profiles provides a practical framework for researchers, advisors, and family leaders—one that captures the messy reality of next-generation career decisions better than any single-factor model can.

Recommendations

1. Create space for exploration. Allow next-generation members to gain experience inside and outside the family firm without pressuring them into predetermined roles.
2. Assess configurations, not checklists. Evaluate potential successors based on how their family embeddedness, personal goals, and capabilities combine—not on whether they tick individual boxes.
3. Recognize supported founding as a valid outcome. Not every departure from the family firm is a failure. Some of the most productive next-generation contributions come through new ventures that extend the family’s reach.