Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to explore differences between non-family employees of family and non-family firms regarding the perceptions of organizational justice and levels of organizational commitment. Moreover, focusing on non-family employees of family firms, the study assesses the relation between the perceptions of organizational justice and levels of organizational commitment. Finally, the study seeks to understand which dimension of organizational commitment (i.e. affective, continuance, or normative) is more associated with the perceptions of organizational justice of non-family employees working in family firms.Design/methodology/approach: The empirical evidence is provided by a sample of 205 Portuguese employees, 98 non-family employees of family firms, and 107 non-family firms' employees, who responded to a questionnaire that included organizational justice and commitment measures. All firms included in the sample are small-sized privately owned companies.Findings: Results show that there are no differences between non-family employees of family and non-family firms regarding the perceptions of organizational justice. However, results reveal that there are significant differences regarding the levels of organizational commitment. Furthermore, it was found that, in family firms, non-family employees' perceptions of organizational justice are positively related to the levels of commitment, especially regarding the affective dimension.Originality/value: This paper aims to contribute to the literature by addressing two classical organizational aspects, which are yet under-researched in the comparison between family and non-family firms, while pursuing to shed some light on the relationship between the perceptions of organizational justice and levels of organizational commitment of non-family employees working in family firms.

This study conducts a review of the current practices of bioeconomy education and training in the EU; as well as the associated methodologies; techniques and approaches. In recent years; considerable efforts have been made towards developing appropriate bioeconomy education and training programs in order to support a transition towards a circular bioeconomy. This review separates bioeconomy education approaches along: higher education and academic approaches, vocational education and training (VET) and practical approaches, short-term training and education approaches, and other approaches. A range of training methodologies and techniques and pedagogical approaches are identified. The main commonalities found amongst these approaches are that they are generally problem based and interdisciplinary, and combine academic and experiential. Higher education approaches are generally based on traditional lecture/campus-based formats with some experiential approaches integrated. In contrast, VET approaches often combine academic and practical learning methods while focusing on developing practical skills. A range of short-term courses and other approaches to bioeconomy education are also reviewed.

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to explore differences in the decision-making styles between family and nonfamily firms, while assessing how family participation relates to the use of decision-making styles within family firms.Design/methodology/approach: The empirical evidence is provided by a sample of 155 firms, located in the Azores, Portugal, 82 family controlled and 73 nonfamily controlled firms. All firms included in the sample are small-sized privately owned enterprises. Business owners and managers responded to a decision-making styles questionnaire, followed, in the case of family firms, by the report of the number of family members actively involved in the business.Findings: Results show that there are no differences in the use of rational decision making between family and nonfamily firms. However, nonfamily firms show higher levels of experiential decision making than family firms. Results also show that family participation plays a key role in guiding the decisional process, by promoting the use experiential decisions and inhibiting the adoption of a rational decision-making styles in family firms.Research limitations/implications: From a theoretical perspective, this study opens the door to new research on an under investigated topic in the family business literature. It contributes with initial notions that may help profile the decisional style within small family firms, while revealing how family participation affects it. Thus, creating a fertile ground of discussion that can be an impulse for more research in this area.Practical implications: From an applied perspective, assessing the influence of family participation in the adoption of a decisional style is potentially valuable for practitioners as well as for owners and managers. Providing them with clues that may help them better understand the basis of their decisions which can benefit their relations with other family members, as with customers, partners and suppliers that play a key role in the firm’s growth, profitability and adaptability.Social implications: From a social point of view, showing that family firms tend to be rational in their decisions may help create a more reputable and credible image surrounding these firms that are sometimes perceived as less professional than nonfamily firms. Thus, a more solid reputability can help improve their relationship with important partner institutions (e.g. financial, governmental), becoming more attractive to private and public investment, which can translate into win-win situations.Originality/value: This study responds to a gap in the literature, by exploring the use of experiential vs rational decision-making styles in small family and nonfamily firms. This study also contributes to the understanding of the decision making within family firms, by assessing the role of family participation in the adoption of a decisional style.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the differences between employees working in family and non-family firms regarding their emotion regulation and job satisfaction levels. Moreover, focusing on family firms, we assess the relationship between the employees’ emotion regulation and job satisfaction levels. The empirical evidence is provided by a sample of 178 Portuguese employees, 80 employees of family firms, and 98 non-family firms’ employees, who responded to a questionnaire that included emotion regulation and job satisfaction measures. All respondents work in small- and medium-sized private companies. Although the results do not confirm the first hypothesis, suggesting that employees working on family firms show higher levels of emotion regulation than those of non-family companies, the idea that employees of family companies show higher levels of job satisfaction than employees of non-family companies is confirmed (i.e., Hypothesis 2). Moreover, the results also support the third hypothesis, confirming that emotion regulation levels have a significant and positive relationship with the job satisfaction levels of employees working in family firms. This paper makes several contributions to the research literature by addressing two organizational aspects still under-addressed in the comparison between family and non-family firms, while pursuing to offer insights on the relationship between the emotion regulation and job satisfaction levels of employees working in family firms.

Purpose: This paper examines the interplay between organizational justice, turnover intentions and resilience among employees in family and non-family businesses in the Portuguese hotel industry. Specifically, it seeks to (1) compare employees’ perceptions of these constructs across family and non-family businesses, (2) investigate the link between organizational justice and turnover intentions in family businesses and (3) determine whether resilience mediates this relationship.Design/methodology/approach: Grounded in the socioemotional wealth paradigm, this paper adopts a cross-sectional design using a sample of 205 employees from small and medium-sized hotels in Portugal. Data were collected using an online questionnaire incorporating validated measures of organizational justice, turnover intentions and resilience. Statistical analyses, including t-tests, regression models and mediation analysis, were performed to test the study's hypotheses.Findings: The results reveal that employees in family firms exhibit significantly lower turnover intentions and higher resilience levels compared to their counterparts in non-family firms. Organizational justice perceptions negatively correlate with turnover intentions in family firms, with resilience acting as a partial mediator in this relationship. However, organizational justice perceptions do not significantly differ between family and non-family firms.Originality/value: This paper contributes to the limited body of literature on family businesses in the hospitality sector by elucidating the mediating role of resilience in the justice-turnover dynamic. It challenges assumptions of inherent fairness advantages in family businesses and highlights the importance of fostering justice and resilience to improve employee retention in the hospitality sector.