







































 Business Management Research and Applications: A Cross Disciplinary Journal 
 

1  

 

A Qualitative Study of Transfer of Knowledge in Small 

Family Farms            

 

Thomas M. Waskiewicz, DBA| Columbia Southern University, Orange Beach, Alabama, USA 

 

Abstract 

This study employed a qualitative methodology to explore small family farm owners' strategies 

to transfer knowledge and preserve critical expertise, skills, and organizational insights. Given 

the challenges inherent in small family farms, including the lack of standardized processes for 

knowledge transfer, qualitative research allows for an in-depth exploration of these complexities. 

The study aimed to investigate knowledge transfer strategies used by retired small family farm 

owners in the northeastern U.S. A total of 13 were interviewed using a semi-structured format, 

focusing on strategies employed to facilitate knowledge retention. Data was analyzed through 

coding and theme identification to provide comprehensive insights into the barriers, facilitators, 

and situational factors affecting knowledge transfer. Findings contribute valuable knowledge to 

the existing literature on knowledge transfer and offer practical recommendations for improving 

knowledge retention in small family farms. 

Keywords: Qualitative research, knowledge transfer, small family farms, expertise preservation, 

strategies, rural entrepreneurship. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



  June 2025 | Volume 4, Number 2 
2  

 

Introduction/Background  
 

Small businesses play a crucial role in the U.S. economy. However, small business owners often 

face challenges regarding succession planning. Complications such as emotional attachment to 

the business, finding time to mentor successors, and determining the financial arrangements to 

transfer assets often arise when owners consider handing over control. These challenges are 

especially significant for family businesses, where succession planning and management 

professionalization are essential but often receive little attention, particularly regarding human 

resource management (Fama & Jensen, 2017). While small business owners may hesitate to 

relinquish control, having a clear succession plan that includes knowledge transfer is key to 

ensuring the long-term success of their businesses (Rothwell, 2015).  

 

The dynamics between retiring owners and the next generation can complicate the succession 

process in family-owned businesses, including small family farms. Family relationships and 

dynamics often influence decision-making, power struggles, and conflicts during succession 

(Dyer & Hatch, 2006). Emotional attachments, differing interests, and unresolved conflicts may 

affect objective decision-making (Mohamad et al., 2023). While business operations involve 

various components such as people, technology, resources, and policies (Argote et al., 2022), 

succession decisions are often driven by familial considerations rather than business needs. This 

"extraverted" approach to succession can lead to suboptimal decisions (Stavrou, 2023). During 

succession, considerations such as competence, merit, and long-term viability should guide the 

selection of successors, yet family dynamics can overshadow these factors (Garcia & Sosa-Fey, 

2020). 

The tradition of passing ownership from parent to child is deeply rooted in small businesses, 

including family farms (Cooper et al., 2013). Gran (2022) found that 60-70% of small business 

owners desire to pass their business on to family members, but only 15% succeed. The 

succession process is fraught with challenges, particularly the transfer of knowledge across 

various areas such as finances, marketing, staffing, and legalities (Castaneda & Cuellar, 2020). 

Many small business owners lack access to the resources or networks that could provide them 

with insights on best practices for knowledge transfer (Huang, F., 2019). The demands on 

owners' time and a lack of formal training in business management and knowledge transfer often 

make the process seem overwhelming (Castaneda & Cuellar, 2020). 

This study defines small family farms as those employing fewer than 20 individuals with annual 

sales under $5 million and serving local or regional markets. Participants were retired small 

family farm owners from the northeast U.S., and their interviews provided detailed insights into 

their experiences with knowledge transfer. The information gathered contributed to developing 

strategies, policies, and interventions to optimize knowledge transfer and foster sustainable 

growth in small family farm businesses. 

Summary of the Literature Review 



 Business Management Research and Applications: A Cross Disciplinary Journal 
 

3  

Successful knowledge transfer is vital for the long-term sustainability of small family farms, and 

understanding the mechanisms, processes, and strategies employed by retiring owners is crucial 

in safeguarding the future of such businesses.  

Knowledge Transfer in Small Businesses 

Small businesses, especially family-owned farms, often face challenges related to the continuity 

of critical knowledge, which is essential for their survival and growth. Knowledge transfer (KT) 

refers to the process through which knowledge is shared, disseminated, and applied within an 

organization (Mthuli et al., 2021). Effective KT enables the preservation of expertise, skills, and 

business insights, which are essential during business transitions such as succession. However, 

small businesses—particularly family-owned ones—often struggle with ensuring this knowledge 

transfer due to various obstacles such as limited resources, emotional attachment to the business, 

and the absence of formal knowledge-sharing systems (Fama & Jensen, 2017; Rothwell, 2015). 

The literature suggests that many small business owners, particularly in the agricultural sector, 

fail to recognize KT's value until they prepare for retirement or the transfer of ownership 

(Castaneda & Cuellar, 2020). When knowledge transfer is delayed or poorly executed, it can 

significantly lose operational continuity, leading to inefficiencies, decreased productivity, and 

eventual failure (Wickert & Herschel, 2001). The successful transfer of tacit knowledge—

knowledge that is not easily written down or formalized—is particularly challenging in small 

businesses where informal networks and personal relationships are central to operations (Mitton 

et al., 2007). 

Challenges in Knowledge Transfer for Small Family Farms 

Small family farms face unique challenges when it comes to knowledge transfer. Many of these 

farms rely on informal systems of knowledge transmission, such as personal mentorship and on-

the-job training (Langmann et al., 2021). This informal nature of knowledge sharing makes it 

difficult to establish a standardized process for ensuring critical knowledge is passed on to the 

next generation. The lack of formalized processes often results in knowledge gaps when an 

owner retires or transitions ownership to a successor. 

Another key challenge is the emotional attachment that small business owners have to their 

businesses. Nows (2022) notes that business owners often find it difficult to imagine a time when 

they will no longer oversee operations, leading to delays in succession planning and KT. 

Furthermore, family dynamics can complicate the process, as succession decisions are often 

influenced by personal relationships and emotional attachments rather than business 

considerations. Studies have found that family power struggles, conflicting interests, and 

unresolved family issues can hinder effective succession planning (Mohamad et al., 2023; 

Muskat & Zehrer, 2017). 

Small family farms also tend to overlook the strategic importance of knowledge transfer. While 

much focus is placed on the practical and operational aspects of running the farm, the 

significance of passing down knowledge regarding finances, marketing, staffing, and long-term 

goals is often underappreciated (Cooper et al., 2013).  



  June 2025 | Volume 4, Number 2 
4  

Theoretical Framework 

This study uses two key theories as a foundation: Social Constructionist Theory (SCT) and 

ethnomethodology. SCT is particularly relevant to understanding knowledge transfer in the 

context of small businesses, as it emphasizes the role of social interactions and shared meanings 

in shaping how knowledge is transferred (Gergen, 2009). The theory suggests that knowledge is 

co-constructed through social interactions, which can be crucial in transferring tacit knowledge 

within family-owned businesses. In small family farms, where relationships are often close-knit 

and informal, SCT provides a lens through which to examine how knowledge is shared, 

transferred, and applied. 

On the other hand, ethnomethodology focuses on the everyday practices that individuals use to 

make sense of their social world. This approach highlights how knowledge transfer occurs in 

informal, context-dependent ways through language, demonstrations, and shared experiences 

(Garfinkel, 1967). In small family farms, much of the knowledge transfer happens through 

informal conversations and mentorship, and ethnomethodology allows researchers to understand 

how these interactions shape the transfer process. By observing the everyday interactions 

between retiring farm owners and their successors, the study aimed to uncover the subtle, 

context-dependent ways knowledge is passed on. 

 

Methods 
 

The study design utilized a qualitative, pragmatic inquiry to address the question: What strategies 

do small family farm owners employ to facilitate knowledge transfer?  

The population for this study consisted of retired small-family farm owners located in the 

northeast sector of the U.S. Small-family farms are typically defined as businesses that employ 

fewer than 20 people, generate average annual revenues of less than $5 million, and primarily 

serve local or regional markets. Using purposive and snowball sampling techniques, the sample 

included 13 retired small family farm owners in the northeast U.S. who were interviewed to 

explore successful knowledge transfer strategies. Potential participants were identified through 

local business associations, chambers of commerce, and government databases that categorize 

businesses by size, location, and revenue. A screening questionnaire was sent to potential 

participants to verify that they met the inclusion criteria, including the business size, location, 

and revenue. Participants were required to have retired from their business and have been 

actively involved in the ownership transition and knowledge transfer process. 

Data Collection 

This study's primary data collection method included semi-structured interviews, which allow for 

open-ended and follow-up questions based on the participants' responses, allowing for a deeper 

understanding of the participants’ unique experiences. The interview questions were designed to 

explore the participants' experiences with knowledge transfer, including their strategies for 

ensuring business continuity, handling succession, and addressing challenges in knowledge 

dissemination. 



 Business Management Research and Applications: A Cross Disciplinary Journal 
 

5  

Additionally, the researcher used content analysis to review the farms' operations documents, 

including business manuals, succession plans, and training documents. This analysis aimed to 

triangulate the interview findings and gain a broader understanding of how knowledge transfer 

strategies were formalized or documented within the small family farm context. 

Data Analysis 

The data analysis for this study was conducted using thematic analysis. Thematic analysis 

involves identifying, analyzing, and reporting patterns within the data (Braun & Clarke, 2006). 

The researcher used an inductive approach to coding the interview transcripts, allowing themes 

to emerge directly from the data rather than being pre-defined. The interview data were coded to 

identify key themes related to knowledge transfer strategies, challenges, and success factors. 

These codes were then grouped into categories, and patterns were identified across participants' 

responses. 

Results 

The primary research question that guided this study was: What strategies did retired small 

family farm owners utilize to foster knowledge transfer to ensure the continuity of critical 

expertise, skills, and organizational insights to the next ownership?  

Four major themes emerged from the analysis of the transcribed interviews (see Table 1). 

 

Table 1 

Emerging Themes and Frequencies 

 

Theme Frequency Percentage of Total 

Mentoring and Hands-on Learning 42 32.30% 

Family Dynamics and Interactions 37 28.46% 

Communication and Respect 28 21.55% 

Technology and Documentation 23 17.69% 

Total 130 100.00% 

 

 

Theme 1: Mentoring and Hands-on Engagement 



  June 2025 | Volume 4, Number 2 
6  

 

Mentorship, particularly through hands-on engagement, was identified as a central strategy in 

knowledge transfer. This finding supports research by Gantt et al. (2024), who emphasized the 

importance of long-term, empathetic mentorship. Participants frequently discussed the value of 

teaching by example, describing their mentorship in practical, everyday farm activities such as 

operating equipment and performing essential tasks. RF12 stated, “I simply taught them day in 

and day out. I worked with them, showed them everything.” RF6 echoed this sentiment, 

highlighting the importance of informal knowledge sharing and experiential learning. 

This theme was categorized into three subthemes: 

1. Skill development and knowledge transfer—Participants emphasized their role in helping 

successors develop technical skills and knowledge about farm operations. 

2. Personal and professional growth – Mentorship also supported the personal development of 

successors, fostering confidence, motivation, and professional growth. 

3. Engagement and relationship building – Building strong interpersonal relationships between 

mentor and successor was crucial to successful knowledge transfer. 

The frequency of key terms such as mentor, teaching, and hands-on in interviews confirms the 

centrality of this theme (see Table 2). 

 

Table 2 

Code Words Related to "Mentoring and Hands-on Engagement" 

Code Word Referenced by Total Times Mentioned 

Mentor RF1, RF4, RF8, RF11, RF13 12 

Teach, Taught, Teaching RF3, RF6, RF9, RF13 11 

Receptive RF5, RF9 3 

Hands-on RF2, RF4, RF5, RF8, RF13 7 

Learning by doing RF7, RF8, RF13 9 

Showed, Showing, Shown RF1, RF2, RF8, RF10 7 

 

 

Theme 2: Family Dynamics and Interactions 

 

Family dynamics played a significant role in knowledge transfer. Trust was identified as a crucial 



 Business Management Research and Applications: A Cross Disciplinary Journal 
 

7  

component in fostering a positive, effective learning environment. Bell (2019) found that trust 

influences intergenerational farm succession, and this study reinforced that finding. Key family 

values, such as mutual respect and emotional support, emerged as vital for ensuring that 

knowledge was successfully passed down. Participants stressed the importance of trust in the 

mentor-mentee relationship, with RF10 stating, “The first is trust; if the person who is learning is 

receptive, great. Because if they don’t want to learn, you’re not gonna teach them a damn thing.” 

Participants also emphasized the significance of intergenerational relationships, noting that clear 

communication between family members—particularly between parents and children—was 

essential. RF13 described family dynamics: “The process of passing knowledge involved 

balancing traditional methods with new approaches,” which aligns with research on multi-

generational leadership (Dewanto et al., 2024). 

Table 3 

Code Words Related to "Family Dynamics and Interactions" 

Code Word Referenced by Total Times Mentioned 

Trust RF3, RF6, RF7, RF9, RF13 12 

Relationships RF1, RF2, RF4, RF6, RF9 12 

Family RF2, RF4, RF8, RF12, RF13 14 

Respect RF1, RF10, RF11 5 

Intergenerational RF2, RF4, RF5, RF8 5 

 

 

Theme 3: Communication and Respect 

 

Communication and mutual respect were highlighted as key to successful knowledge transfer. 

Several participants noted that passing knowledge was significantly hindered without open, 

honest, and empathetic communication. RF7 emphasized the importance of “passing on not only 

technical knowledge but also the culture and passion associated with the work.” Similarly, RF13 

described the role of respect: “Issues such as personality conflicts and a lack of respect can 

hinder the learning process significantly.” 

 

This theme involved subthemes such as: 

1. Interpersonal skills – Effective communication requires listening and empathizing with others. 

2. Feedback and dialogue – Open, two-way feedback was essential to fully transfer knowledge. 



  June 2025 | Volume 4, Number 2 
8  

3. Equality and dignity – Respecting the learner and fostering a culture of equality were 

foundational for ensuring a positive learning experience. 

 

 

Table 4 

Code Words Related to "Communication and Respect" 

Code Word Referenced by Total Times Mentioned 

Empathy RF1, RF4, RF6, RF13 8 

Personality RF5, RF9, RF10 5 

Listening RF6, RF10, RF12 6 

Appreciation RF1, RF6, RF11, RF13 4 

Support RF1, RF4, RF6, RF8 8 

 

 

Theme 4: Technology and Documentation 

Technology and documentation were critical for preserving knowledge and ensuring future 

success. Participants discussed how technology was increasingly necessary to manage farm 

operations, particularly record-keeping, automation, and database management. As RF13 noted, 

“We kept explicit notes in notebooks… every single field, every single crop, everything we do. 

You make a note. Well, that’s how we did it.” However, there was also a generational divide 

regarding the use of technology. For example, RF2 and RF7 expressed frustration with newer 

technologies, while recognizing their importance for efficient farm management. 

Key subthemes in this category included: 

1. Record-keeping – Maintaining detailed records documenting farm activities and techniques was 

critical for knowledge transfer. 

2. Automation – Technology tools such as QuickBooks and databases were increasingly necessary 

for managing farm operations. 

Table 5 

Code Words Related to "Technology and Documentation" 



 Business Management Research and Applications: A Cross Disciplinary Journal 
 

9  

Code Word Referenced by Total Times Mentioned 

Technology RF2, RF4, RF6, RF7, RF8 12 

Record-Keeping RF1, RF2, RF7, RF13 9 

Databases RF4, RF7, RF9, RF13 7 

QuickBooks RF2, RF6, RF8, RF13 6 

Automation RF2, RF4, RF6, RF8, RF13 6 

 

Summary of Findings and Conclusion 

The findings from this study reveal that knowledge transfer in small family farms is a 

multifaceted process, requiring a combination of mentorship, effective communication, trust-

building, and strategic use of technology. Successful strategies involve hands-on learning, a deep 

respect for family dynamics, and a structured approach to record-keeping and technology 

integration. However, challenges like personality conflicts, technological resistance, and 

inadequate documentation often hinder the transfer process. Addressing these challenges through 

clear communication, empathy, and updated technological practices is essential for ensuring that 

knowledge is effectively passed to the next generation of farm owners. Small family farms can 

ensure the continuity of their operations and knowledge base by fostering supportive 

relationships, respecting diverse learning styles, and utilizing modern tools. 

Knowledge transfer in small family farms involves systematically passing on vital expertise, 

skills, and organizational insights from retiring owners to their successors. This study revealed 

the significance of formal and informal methods in ensuring critical knowledge is preserved and 

effectively utilized. Key findings emphasize the importance of experiential learning, where 

hands-on mentorship and day-to-day training are central. This process aligns with existing 

literature, highlighting that knowledge transfer goes beyond information sharing—it embeds 

skills and practices through direct engagement and interaction. 

A notable example of successful knowledge transfer involved retiring farm owners gradually 

integrating their successors into farm operations. The success of these transitions was attributed 

to structured mentorship programs where owners provided consistent, empathetic guidance over 

extended periods. Integrating detailed documentation and technology, such as digital record-

keeping systems, further supported these processes. This approach mirrors the findings of 

Harvey and Valerio (2022), who emphasized the combination of direct mentorship and modern 

tools for enhancing learning outcomes and ensuring operational continuity. 

In contrast, knowledge transfer failures often arise from personality conflicts and resistance to 

new methods or technologies. Participants observed that such failures were linked to a lack of 

mutual respect and ineffective communication, where either the successors were unreceptive, or 

the mentors struggled to convey their knowledge. Resistance to adopting new technologies or 



  June 2025 | Volume 4, Number 2 
10  

failing to thoroughly document processes also hindered the transfer, corroborating findings by 

Mthuli et al. (2021), which stress the importance of technological integration in knowledge 

transfer. 

The study identified several challenges in knowledge transfer, including maintaining accurate 

documentation, overcoming resistance to change, and fostering an environment of trust and open 

communication. Participants underscored the importance of systematically capturing knowledge 

through traditional and digital notebooks. Successful identification of critical knowledge often 

involves collaboration and discussion among senior members. Practical strategies to encourage 

knowledge sharing included regular meetings, workshops, and leveraging technology for easy 

access to information. Designating individuals as mentors or knowledge transfer facilitators was 

also crucial in ensuring the process was structured and continuous. These findings align with 

Biloslavo and Lombardi's (2021) research, which stresses the importance of structured roles and 

strategic practices in knowledge transfer. 

Implications 

The study’s findings offer valuable insights into knowledge transfer strategies among retired 

small family farm owners and have broader implications for the theories of knowledge transfer 

and organizational learning. 

The findings present significant theoretical implications for knowledge transfer and 

organizational learning, particularly within small family farms. The study reinforces that 

experiential learning and hands-on mentorship are vital to successful knowledge transfer. This 

supports experiential learning theory, which asserts that learning through practical experience is 

essential for understanding and skill development. Furthermore, using modern technology and 

traditional documentation methods highlights the importance of combining tacit and explicit 

knowledge for effective learning and transfer. 

This study challenges existing theories, primarily focusing on formalized, structured approaches, 

such as standardized training programs or written manuals. Instead, it underscores the value of 

informal, relationship-based methods often overlooked in traditional knowledge transfer models. 

The results suggest that future theoretical frameworks should emphasize knowledge transfer's 

social and relational aspects, recognizing that trust, mutual respect, and personal interaction are 

crucial. Additionally, while technology is an important tool, it should not be seen as the primary 

method for knowledge transfer, but rather as a supportive resource that complements traditional 

practices. 

This study advances knowledge transfer theories by demonstrating the interplay between 

mentorship, documentation, technology, and interpersonal dynamics. It suggests that future 

frameworks should adopt a more holistic approach, considering human and technological factors. 

This research expands existing theories by illustrating that effective knowledge transfer in small 

family farms is achieved through a combination of traditional methods and modern innovations, 

providing a nuanced understanding of how knowledge is preserved and transmitted in familial 

business settings. 



 Business Management Research and Applications: A Cross Disciplinary Journal 
 

11  

References 

Argote, L., Guo, J., Park, S.-S., & Hahl, O. (2022). The mechanisms and components of 

knowledge transfer: The virtual special issue on knowledge transfer within 

organizations. Organization Science, 33(3), 1232–1249. 

https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2022.1590 

Bell, C. (2019). People of future agriculture: Trust and succession in family businesses. 

International Journal of Agricultural Management, 8(3). 

Biloslavo, R., & Lombardi, R. (2021). Knowledge transferring and small and medium 

enterprises’ (SMEs) effectiveness: Emerging insights and future directions. Business 

Process Management Journal, 27(6). 

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in 

Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa 

Castaneda, D., & Cuellar, S. (2020). Knowledge sharing and innovation: A systematic review. 

Knowledge and Process Management, 27(3), 159–173. https://doi.org/10.1002/kpm.1637 

Cooper, J. T., Kidwell, R. E., & Eddleston, K. A. (2013). Boss and parent, employee and child: 

Work-family roles and deviant behavior in the family firm. Family Relations, 62(3), 457–

471. https://doi.org/10.1111/fare.12012 

Dewanto, I., Lantu, D., Hendarman, A., & Wicaksono, A. (2024). Accelerating millennials' 

leadership development program – a proposal for new guidelines. Grey Journal, 20(1 

Dyer, J. H., & Hatch, N. W. (2006). Relation-specific capabilities and barriers to knowledge 

transfers: Creating advantage through network relationships. Strategic Management 

Journal, 27(8), 701–719. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.543 

Fama, E. F., & Jensen, M. C. (2017). Separation of ownership and control. The Journal of Law 

and Economics, 26(2), 301–325. 

Gantt, H. S., Cain, L. K., Gibbons, M. M., Thomas, C. F., Wynn, M. K., Johnson, B. C., & 

Hardin, E. E. (2024). “Knowing I had someone to turn to was a great feeling”: Mentoring 

rural Appalachian STEM students. Behavioral Sciences, 14(1), 75 

Garcia, S., & Sosa-Fey, J. (2020). Knowledge management: What are the challenges for 

achieving organizational success? International Journal of Business and Public 

Administration, 17(2). 

Garfinkel, H. (1967). Parenthood and the Wayana People. Sociology Mind, 06(03), 149–161. 

https://doi.org/10.4236/sm.2016.63013 

Gergen, K. J. (2009). Relational being: Beyond self and community. Oxford University Press. 

Gran, B. (2022). All you need to know about succession planning. PNC Bank. 

https://www.pnc.com/insights/small-business/business-planning/all-you-need-to-know-

about-small-business-succession-planning.html 

Harvey, V. S., & Valerio, A. M. (2022). Coaching to accelerate the development of learning 

agility. Consulting Psychology Journal, 74(3), 269–290.  

Huang, F. (2019). Will senior employees be willing to voluntarily transfer their knowledge to 

younger employees? The effect of perceived age discrimination and organizational 

identification. Journal of Human Resource and Sustainability Studies, 07(02), 244–

260. https://doi.org/10.4236/jhrss.2019.72015 

Langmann, S., Bezemer, P.-J., & Pick, D. (2021). Knowledge sharing for sustainable 

development: An examination of practices in local-level NGOS in Tamil Nadu, 

https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2022.1590
https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
https://doi.org/10.1002/kpm.1637
https://doi.org/10.1111/fare.12012
https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.543
https://doi.org/10.4236/sm.2016.63013
https://doi.org/10.4236/jhrss.2019.72015


  June 2025 | Volume 4, Number 2 
12  

India. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit 

Organizations, 32(4), 809–820. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-021-00348-4 

Mitton, C., Adair, C. E., McKenzie, E., Patten, S. B., & Perry, B. W. (2007). Knowledge transfer 

and exchange: Review and synthesis of the literature. Milbank Quarterly, 85(4), 729–

768. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0009.2007.00506.x  

Mohamad, O., Kuemo, L., & Jonars, D. (2023). Training environment and tacit knowledge 

transfer: The mediating role of training motivation. Management Research and 

Practice, 15(1), 18–33.  

Mthuli, S., Ruffin, F., & Singh, N. (2021). 'Define, explain, justify, apply' (deja): An analytic 

tool for guiding qualitative research sample size. International Journal of Social Research 

Methodology, 25(6), 809-821. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2021.1941646 

Muskat, B., & Zehrer, A. (2017). A power perspective on knowledge transfer in internal 

succession of small family businesses. Journal of Small Business & Entrepreneurship, 

29(5), 333–350. https://doi.org/10.1080/08276331.2017.1345208 

Nows, D. (2022). Acquisition entrepreneurship: One solution to the looming business succession 

crisis. Indiana Law Journal, 97(001), 1–13. Oriaifo, J., Torres de Oliveira, R., & Ellis, K. 

M. (2020). Going above and beyond: How intermediaries enhance change in emerging 

economy institutions to facilitate small to medium enterprise development. Strategic 

Entrepreneurship Journal, 14(3), 501–531. https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1349 

Rothwell, J. (2015). Effective succession planning: Ensuring leadership continuity and building. 

Amacom. 

Stavrou, E. T. (2023). Leadership succession in owner-managed firms through the lens of 

extraversion. International Small Business Journal: Researching Entrepreneurship, 

21(3), 331–347. https://doi.org/10.1177/02662426030213005  

Wickert, A., & Herschel, R. (2001). Knowledge‐management issues for smaller businesses. 

Journal of Knowledge Management, 5(4), 329–337. 

https://doi.org/10.1108/13673270110411751  

 
 

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-021-00348-4
http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0009.2007.00506.x
https://doi.org/10.1080/08276331.2017.1345208
https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1349
https://doi.org/10.1177/02662426030213005
https://doi.org/10.1108/13673270110411751

