This study examines how intergenerational dynamics shaped by gendered expectations influence the legitimate peripheral participation (LPP) of junior members in women-led family SMEs. It explores the impact of these dynamics on knowledge transfer, professional development and emotional outcomes such as job satisfaction, organizational commitment and work engagement.
Using a qualitative approach, the study draws on semi-structured interviews with junior family members in 10 Italian women-led SMEs across diverse industries. The methodology highlights juniors' narratives and perceptions to understand their integration into family businesses through the LPP framework.
The study reveals that intergenerational dynamics often delay juniors' strategic integration, particularly due to incumbents' attachment to the business and cultural biases. Daughters face additional barriers, such as limited access to decision-making, but sons also experience delayed participation. External mentors, including fathers and non-family managers, play a critical role in supporting juniors' professional growth and emotional balance.
The study's reliance on a single national context and qualitative methods limits generalizability. Future research could adopt cross-national and mixed-method approaches to capture broader patterns.
Structured mentorship programs, gender-sensitive governance strategies and expanded communities of practice are recommended to support equitable leadership development and knowledge transfer.
The findings emphasize the need to challenge traditional gender norms and promote inclusivity in family businesses, contributing to sustainable generational transitions.
This research advances the understanding of LPP by highlighting the ambivalent role of female incumbents in perpetuating traditional power structures, providing a nuanced perspective on gendered dynamics in family SMEs.
Introduction
Family-owned Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs) play a crucial role in the global economy, contributing substantially to employment, innovation, and economic resilience (Credit Suisse Research Institute, 2019). Their long-term sustainability depends heavily on the effective intergenerational transfer of knowledge (Hatak and Roessl, 2015; Gusenbauer et al., 2023). This organizational knowledge—comprising technical expertise, embedded values, behaviors, and routines—is a strategic resource that supports successors' professional development and legitimacy (Davenport and Prusak, 1998; Durst and Edvardsson, 2012; Grant, 1996). A key mechanism in facilitating such transfer is the formation of communities of practice (CoPs), defined as informal networks where individuals engage in shared learning through participation in mutual activities (Wenger, 1998; McAdam et al., 2024). In family SMEs, CoPs often include both family and non-mily actors and serve as essential environments for transmitting tacit knowledge, preserving values, and cultivating entrepreneurial identity (Rossignoli et al., 2023).
Despite widespread recognition of the importance of knowledge-sharing, the gendered nature of intergenerational dynamics in family SMEs remains underexplored (Brophy et al., 2023; Koch and Kuckertz, 2024). Sociocultural norms and entrenched power structures often create exclusionary environments, especially for daughters (Le Breton-Miller and Miller, 2006; Poza et al., 2004; Rossignoli et al., 2023). Daughters are frequently sidelined in succession processes, receiving fewer opportunities to acquire strategic knowledge and establish legitimacy (Ferrari, 2022; Ferrari, 2020b; Maseda et al., 2023).
In response, scholars increasingly call for gender-sensitive governance approaches in family business research (Maseda et al., 2023). Empirical studies reveal that fathers often reinforce traditional gender norms by assigning daughters symbolic roles while grooming sons as heirs (Brumana et al., 2015; Mussolino and Calabrò, 2014). By contrast, female incumbents are typically seen as more relational and inclusive, suggesting their leadership might foster more equitable learning environments. However, recent findings also show that women leaders are not immune to perpetuating exclusionary practices. Calabrò et al. (2024) and Bannò et al. (2024) find that overidentification with the business can lead to overprotection and delayed delegation, limiting offspring's growth—even in women-led firms.
In parallel, informal governance mechanisms such as storytelling and early exposure to business life foster juniors' affective commitment in family firms (Bloemen-Bekx et al., 2021), yet their impact on gendered access to strategic roles remains underexplored—particularly in women-led SMEs (Wood et al., 2023). Similarly, Mukesh and Bailey (2023) emphasize how tradition and family values shape gendered career expectations early on. However, research has yet to examine how these early dynamics influence offspring’ long-term participation and leadership development. To investigate these dynamics, this study adopts the theoretical framework of Legitimate Peripheral Participation (LPP) (Lave and Wenger, 1991, 2002). LPP conceptualizes learning as a socially situated process in which newcomers progressively move from peripheral involvement to full participation by engaging in the daily practices of a community. Within the context of family SMEs, LPP offers a valuable lens to examine how junior members gain tacit knowledge and legitimacy through observation, mentoring, and interaction with incumbents (Clinton et al., 2021; Orsmond et al., 2022). The added value of using the LPP approach lies in its ability to uncover whether learning environments in family firms are genuinely inclusive or still susceptible to exclusionary practices. While female leadership is on the rise (Bannò et al., 2024; Bjursell and Bäckvall, 2011), structural barriers continue to constrain daughters' access to strategic roles and experiential learning opportunities. Applying LPP to intergenerational dynamics allows for a more nuanced exploration of how gendered expectations and leadership styles shape offspring's access to participation, recognition, and decision-making authority.
Importantly, this approach addresses a critical gap in the literature. Prior research often treats junior members as a uniform category, failing to account for the ways gender mediates learning trajectories and access to strategic knowledge (Cho et al., 2024; Leitón and Kintana, 2023). Moreover, recent contributions reveal that Communities of Practice (CoPs), while central to learning in family firms, may unintentionally reproduce exclusionary dynamics that undermine female successors' identity development and legitimacy (McAdam et al., 2023). By integrating the LPP framework, this study contributes a deeper understanding of how learning, legitimacy, and leadership readiness are shaped in women-led family firms, with particular attention to gendered barriers that may persist even under maternal leadership. In light of these theoretical and empirical gaps, this study adopts a qualitative multiple case study approach to explore how maternal leadership influences the legitimate peripheral participation (LPP) of junior members in women-led family SMEs. Drawing on semi-structured interviews, the research investigates not only how intergenerational gender dynamics shape access to learning and leadership, but also how these experiences impact emotional and attitudinal outcomes, such as job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and work engagement.
This study addresses two research questions:
How do intergenerational dynamics, shaped by gendered expectations and roles, influence and support the legitimate peripheral participation (LPP) of junior members in women-led family SMEs?
How does legitimate peripheral participation (LPP) shape job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and work engagement among junior members in women-led family SMEs?
To guide this investigation, this study derives two theoretical propositions grounded in the LPP framework and the literature on gendered intergenerational dynamics:
In women-led family SMEs, intergenerational dynamics—when influenced by incumbents' gendered expectations and leadership behaviors—may either support or hinder next generation's legitimate peripheral participation by shaping their access to tacit knowledge, mentorship, and strategic engagement.
The degree of next generation's legitimate peripheral participation is positively associated with emotional and attitudinal outcomes—such as job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and work engagement—while gendered barriers to participation can lead to alienation, frustration, and disengagement.
This study contributes to theory in three ways. First, it extends the LPP framework by integrating a gender lens to examine how maternal leadership affects junior members' learning and identity formation. Second, it challenges assumptions about the inclusivity of female leadership, revealing how gendered patterns may persist. Third, it refines the concept of CoPs in family businesses by highlighting how mentorship—both familial and non-familial—can counterbalance exclusion and foster inclusive succession.
Theoretical background
Legitimate peripheral participation and intergenerational gender dynamics
Legitimate Peripheral Participation (LPP), introduced by Lave and Wenger (1991, 2002), is a social learning theory that describes how newcomers gradually become full participants in communities of practice through situated learning. Rather than learning through abstract instruction, individuals gain knowledge, skills, and legitimacy by engaging with experienced members in real work contexts. In the context of business succession, the gradual transfer of management responsibilities is critical to developing successors' entrepreneurial capabilities (Chirico, 2008; Hatak and Roessl, 2015). This progression relies heavily on organizational knowledge sharing and creation—processes which are particularly complex in family firms, where knowledge is often informal, experiential, and difficult to codify (Rossignoli et al., 2023; Sirmon and Hitt, 2003). LPP thus becomes an essential mechanism in family SMEs, enabling next generations to learn technical competencies and cultural values by observing, collaborating, and engaging with senior members over time (Clinton et al., 2021; Orsmond et al., 2022). Through this engagement, they gradually gain legitimacy and credibility in their roles as future leaders and entrepreneurs.
Cho et al. (2024) emphasize that professional identity formation in family businesses— encompassing values, functionality, and sociality—is not a fixed event but an evolving process shaped through participation in organizational practices and the reification of roles and routines within the family firm. However, while the existing literature provides valuable insights into how professional identity is constructed (McAdam et al., 2024; Rossignoli et al., 2023), it remains largely silent on when this process begins, intensifies, or reaches key developmental milestones. Overall, while prior work has established LPP as a useful lens to understand learning and succession in family firms, it has largely overlooked the intersection of gender and legitimacy, especially in women-led contexts. Emotional, identity-related, and motivational consequences of exclusion or constrained participation remain insufficiently explored.
Recent scholarship has advanced LPP's application in family business contexts. McAdam et al. (2024) show how intergenerational learning unfolds through storytelling, observation, and benchmarking—practices that form evolving communities of practice (CoPs) and sustain legacy knowledge. However, many of these dynamics are deeply gendered. While the LPP model implicitly assumes equitable access to participation, studies such as Cunningham et al. (2017) reveal how leadership style and parental control—often shaped by gender norms—can restrict junior engagement. Daughters, in particular, face double exclusion: constrained not only by generational hierarchy but also by deeply ingrained gender expectations that often sideline them from strategic and symbolic roles (Ferrari, 2020b; Ferrari, 2017; Maseda et al., 2023). As a result, legitimate peripheral participation may be denied or delayed for daughters, weakening their leadership development and identity formation.
Furthermore, although LPP can foster the construction of professional identity through situated practice and social legitimation (Cho et al., 2024; Konopaski et al., 2015), these benefits are not evenly distributed. Traditional norms continue to favor sons as successors, marginalizing daughters in both formal decision-making and informal learning spaces. Moreover, even when daughters are present in the business, the internalization of gendered role expectations may reduce their visibility and perceived legitimacy (Ferrari, 2019). Maternal leadership has been proposed as a potential enabler of more inclusive learning environments, particularly for daughters. Women leaders may adopt more relational and emotionally attuned practices that open space for junior members' development (Cesaroni and Paoloni, 2016). However, recent studies (e.g. Calabrò et al., 2024; Bannò et al., 2024) caution that female incumbents may unintentionally replicate exclusionary behaviors, shaped by their own socialization and firm-level norms. This duality— between the inclusive potential and the unintentional reproduction of patriarchal practices—remains under-theorized in LPP-based literature.
Emotional and attitudinal consequences of gendered legitimate peripheral participation
The emotional and attitudinal outcomes of legitimate peripheral participation (LPP) in family SMEs are deeply shaped by gendered intergenerational dynamics, which influence juniors' access to learning, their perceived legitimacy, and their psychological engagement with the firm. While LPP can foster juniors' socialization, motivation, and identification with the business (Hamilton, 2011; Konopaski et al., 2015), these benefits are unevenly distributed when gender norms and leadership expectations restrict participation. Gendered LPP—where daughters are more likely to be relegated to peripheral or supportive roles—can result in delayed development, reduced access to tacit knowledge, and weaker emotional ties to the family firm (Brumana et al., 2015; Leitón and Kintana, 2023; Ferrari, 2019; Ferrari, 2020a).
Inclusive and psychologically safe learning environments are known to enhance professional identity development and satisfaction (Cho et al., 2024). However, deeply rooted family expectations continue to guide leadership succession along traditional, male-referred lines. Fathers often unconsciously delegate strategic responsibilities to sons, reinforcing the belief that they are natural heirs (Cunningham et al., 2017; Mussolino and Calabrò, 2014). Conversely, although maternal leadership is frequently perceived as more relational and nurturing, recent studies show that it can also reproduce exclusionary dynamics through overprotection and restricted delegation (Calabrò et al., 2024; Bannò et al., 2024). These mechanisms limit daughters' integration into decision-making roles and diminish their engagement in meaningful learning, thereby weakening their emotional connection to the firm. In this regard, Bloemen-Bekx et al. (2021) emphasize that affective commitment—defined as an emotional attachment to the family firm—is cultivated through informal governance practices such as symbolic rituals, early exposure to business activities, and relational trust. However, the extent to which these mechanisms support or hinder next generations' satisfaction, commitment and engagement remains unclear (Baù et al., 2020).
Job satisfaction is closely tied to the perceived meaningfulness of tasks and the recognition of one's contribution—both structured through LPP (Locke, 1976; Hatak and Roessl, 2015). Sons often benefit from early involvement in strategic decisions, reinforcing their sense of purpose and achievement. Daughters, however, are more frequently limited to administrative or symbolic tasks, leading to underappreciation and misalignment between their capabilities and their assigned responsibilities (Ferrari, 2020a; Akhmedova et al., 2020), which in turn weakens satisfaction and reduces their sense of belonging.
Organizational commitment—which comprises affective, normative, and continuance dimensions (Meyer and Allen, 1991)—also reflects the effects of gendered LPP. While affective commitment is strengthened when juniors feel emotionally and professionally engaged in the firm (Ge and Campopiano, 2021; Arzubiaga et al., 2021), restricted access to strategic roles weakens this bond, especially among daughters. When perceived legitimacy is low and opportunities for advancement are limited, motivation declines, and successors may reconsider their long-term commitment (Ferrari, 2019; Glover, 2014; Maseda et al., 2023).
Work engagement—understood as the presence of vigor, dedication, and absorption (Schaufeli et al., 2002)—is similarly shaped by juniors' involvement in core activities. Meaningful contributions enhance energy and focus, particularly when juniors are entrusted with responsibility (Kossyva et al., 2023; Rossignoli et al., 2023). However, when daughters are excluded from decision-making or are perceived as unready for leadership, their engagement often suffers. Research by McAdam et al. (2023, 2024) shows that lack of symbolic recognition, persistent marginalization, and identity dissonance can lead to emotional disengagement and reduced leadership readiness among junior women.
Although maternal leadership has the potential to foster inclusive and emotionally supportive learning environments, its impact remains ambivalent. On one hand, maternal leaders may be more attuned to the emotional and developmental needs of juniors (Cesaroni and Paoloni, 2016); on the other, they may unconsciously reproduce patriarchal expectations that hinder strategic delegation (Bannò et al., 2024; Calabrò et al., 2024). This duality points to an unresolved gap in the literature: the emotional and attitudinal effects of gendered LPP are still insufficiently explored, particularly in the underexamined context of women-led family SMEs. Understanding how gendered participation affects juniors' emotional experiences is therefore crucial to developing more inclusive and sustainable succession strategies.
In summary, to clarify the positioning of this study within the broader scholarly discourse, Table 1 presents a thematic synthesis of key literature, its limitations, and how this study addresses the gap.
Thematic summary of key literature
| Theme | Key studies | Key findings | Limitations | How current research addresses gap |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge Sharing, Learning, and Innovation Processes | Rossignoli et al. (2023), Cunningham et al. (2016, 2017), Ferrari (2020a, b), Giovannoni et al. (2011), Gusenbauer et al. (2023), McAdam et al. (2023) | These studies explore how knowledge is created, retained, and shared in family businesses. They highlight mechanisms such as CoPs, temporal search, past knowledge reuse, and rhetorical histories | Limited integration of gender-sensitive learning models like LPP and emotional outcomes of participation. Often lack psychological and affective dimensions | Applies LPP to investigate how gendered leadership and intergenerational tensions shape knowledge sharing and successors' emotional development |
| Community of Practice (CoP), Family Traditions, and Intergenerational Learning | McAdam et al. (2024), McAdam et al. (2023), Bloemen-Bekx et al. (2021) | Family businesses as CoPs or mnemonic communities emphasize identity construction, tradition, and informal governance in learning across generations | Gender and emotional aspects of participation are underexplored, especially regarding female incumbents or successors | Explores how maternal roles and emotional attachments influence juniors' LPP, learning, and affective commitment |
| Career Development and Contextual Influences | Mukesh and Bailey (2023), Baù et al. (2020), Akhmedova et al. (2020), Bloemen-Bekx et al. (2021), Ferrari (2020c) | Contextual variables like family systems, traditions, marriage, and motivation shape the career decisions of next-gens, especially daughters | Lack of integration with learning theories such as LPP and limited exploration of how leadership gender impacts access and agency | Links family and gender context to LPP, showing how maternal leadership mediates juniors' motivation, role centrality, and engagement |
| Gender, Leadership, and Legitimacy in Family Firms | Calabrò et al. (2024), Bannò et al. (2024), Hashim et al. (2021), Akhmedova et al. (2020) | These studies explore legitimacy processes for women, role conflict, and stereotyping in family firms. They highlight social and emotional barriers to leadership | Limited connection to how these legitimacy challenges affect informal learning and successors' emotional outcomes | Shows how legitimacy judgments and maternal behaviors influence participation quality and emotional experiences during succession |
| Research Evolution and Diversity in Family Business Studies | Bannò et al. (2024), Rovelli et al. (2022), Baù et al. (2020) | Calls for deeper engagement with diversity, identity, and gender in family business. Bibliometric studies show under-representation of intersectional themes | Broad calls for future research lack operationalization in concrete conceptual frameworks | Operationalizes diversity and identity within an LPP-based framework, focused on gender, emotion, and learning in women-led SMEs |
By addressing these gaps, this study contributes to a deeper understanding of how gendered access to LPP shapes emotional commitment, job satisfaction, and work engagement in family business succession. Rather than viewing participation solely as a structural or strategic issue, this work reframes it as a relational and psychological process—one that directly impacts the sustainability of leadership transitions and long-term business continuity.
Methodology
The research setting
Italy represents an ideal context for investigating intergenerational gender dynamics in women-led family SMEs due to its unique socio-economic structure and deeply rooted family traditions. Family-owned firms are the backbone of the Italian economy, accounting for over 85% of private enterprises (AIDAF, 2024), with small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) playing a dominant role (ISTAT, 2023). Despite recent improvements in female employment, INPS data (2024) reveal persistent gender inequalities in the broader labor market: women experience lower workforce participation, higher job precarity, and disproportionate caregiving burdens. These disparities often translate into long-term disadvantages, such as significantly lower pension benefits, highlighting a structural delay in women's full integration into the professional sphere.
The Italian socio-cultural context, as documented by CENSIS (2024), places a strong emphasis on the family as a source of identity, stability, and continuity. This cultural norm profoundly shapes the organization and succession of family businesses, where intergenerational transitions are frequently guided by traditional expectations. Notably, gendered perceptions persist, favoring sons as natural successors and positioning daughters in more peripheral or symbolic roles. These dynamics remain largely intact even in the presence of female leadership, creating a complex and often contradictory environment for next-generation participation.
Yet, while statistical data document these disparities in the general labor market, comparative insights into gendered participation within family businesses remain limited. The combination of widespread family firm ownership and deeply embedded cultural values makes Italy a fertile empirical setting to explore whether and how women-led family SMEs reproduce or challenge exclusionary practices, particularly in relation to mentoring, strategic delegation, and successor development. This study addresses that gap by focusing on the micro-dynamics of learning and legitimacy-building under maternal leadership in a context where tradition and transformation often coexist in tension.
Sample selection and criteria
This qualitative study investigates how gendered intergenerational dynamics influence the legitimate peripheral participation (LPP) of junior family members in women-led family SMEs. The research follows a thematic analysis methodology (Naeem et al., 2023), which is well-suited for exploring the narratives, meanings, and patterns emerging from participants' experiences. All participating firms were selected based on the following criteria: (1) fewer than 50 employees; (2) at least 50% family ownership; (3) a female incumbent in a leadership role; (4) strategic decisions made by family members; (5) active involvement of at least two generations; and (6) junior family members with a minimum of five years of experience in the business. These criteria ensured that the study focused on companies where intergenerational knowledge transfer, maternal leadership, and LPP dynamics were observable and relevant.
Recruitment was facilitated via the Gruppo Giovani Confindustria, which distributed a call for participation to 538 firms. From the 52 responses received, 31 met the inclusion criteria. From these, 10 were purposively selected to ensure heterogeneity across sectors (e.g. fashion, engineering, IT, food, and chemicals) and offspring roles (sons and daughters with varying responsibilities and experiences). This allowed for richer triangulation and saturation across diverse contexts (Eisenhardt, 1989; De Massis and Kotlar, 2014). Table 2 provides details on the participants.
Profile of participants in the study
| Company | Generation | Participant | Age | Position | Role | Sector |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I | 1st | A | 37 | Son | Operations Executive | Facility Management |
| I | 1st | B | 42 | Daughter | Accountant | Facility Management |
| II | 1st | C | 36 | Son | Technician | Chemical |
| II | 1st | D | 28 | Daughter | Junior Production Engineer | Chemical |
| III | 2nd | E | 35 | Son | Sales Manager | Food |
| III | 2nd | F | 27 | Son | Procurement Officer | Food |
| III | 2nd | G | 33 | Daughter | Marketing Executive | Food |
| IV | 1st | H | 35 | Son | Project Leader | IT |
| V | 3rd | I | 39 | Son | Technician | Chemical |
| V | 3rd | J | 34 | Son | Technician | Chemical |
| V | 3rd | K | 41 | Daughter | Quality Assurance | Chemical |
| V | 3rd | L | 29 | Daughter | Customer Service | Chemical |
| VI | 2nd | M | 35 | Daughter | Product Designer | Fashion |
| VII | 1st | N | 54 | Son | Project Manager | Mechanical |
| VII | 1st | O | 49 | Sons | Project Manager | Mechanical |
| VIII | 1st | P | 60 | Son | Physiotherapist | Healthcare |
| VIII | 1st | Q | 53 | Daughter | Physiotherapist | Healthcare |
| IX | 1st | R | 33 | Son | Technician | Electronics |
| IX | 1st | S | 31 | Daughter | Help Desk Sales | Electronics |
| X | 3rd | T | 43 | Daughter | Head Winemaker/Director | Agriculture (Wine) |
| X | 3rd | U | 38 | Daughter | Export Manager | Agriculture (Wine) |
| X | 3rd | V | 37 | Daughter | Hospitality Manager | Agriculture (Wine) |
Interview process
The study used semi-structured interviews lasting 60–90 min to explore legitimate peripheral participation (LPP), knowledge transfer, and affective outcomes like job satisfaction, organizational commitment and work engagement (See Appendix). Data were collected through semi-structured interviews between December 2023 and December 2024, enabling observation of LPP as a progressive process over a one-year period—consistent with the theory's emphasis on gradual integration and evolving legitimacy (Lave and Wenger, 1991). Each junior participant was interviewed at least twice: the first was an in-depth semi-structured interview lasting 60–90 min; the second was a formal follow-up session aimed at validating emerging insights, clarifying ambiguities, and exploring subsequent developments. To further enhance data clarity and reliability, additional informal interactions (e.g. via email or phone) were conducted when necessary.
All interviews were conducted in Italian, recorded with consent, and transcribed verbatim. Since translation was not required, the data maintained linguistic authenticity. Ethical clearance was obtained, and all participant names were anonymized using pseudonyms.
Coding process
Thematic analysis was conducted in accordance with the six-phase framework proposed by Naeem et al. (2023), which provides a systematic and replicable approach to qualitative data interpretation. This methodology enabled the transformation of raw textual data into meaningful and theoryinformed themes.
Phase 1 – Familiarization with the Data. All interviews were transcribed verbatim and reviewed multiple times to develop a deep understanding of the content. During this phase, reflective notes and analytic memos were used to capture initial insights and recurring patterns across transcripts.
Phase 2 – Keyword Identification. Significant terms, emotional expressions, and repeated phrases were highlighted. This process helped identify linguistic indicators and contextual cues relevant to the study's focus on knowledge sharing, role progression, and emotional engagement.
Phase 3 – Initial Coding. The transcripts were broken down into meaningful segments and assigned descriptive first-order codes. Codes were developed both inductively from participant language and deductively based on theoretical constructs such as LPP and work engagement.
Phase 4 – Grouping into Themes. Codes with conceptual affinity were clustered into candidate themes. These groupings captured broader patterns in how juniors experienced legitimacy, learning, and emotional connection within the firm.
Phase 5 – Thematic Interpretation. Themes were refined for internal coherence and distinctiveness and interpreted through the study's guiding frameworks—particularly LPP and theories of organizational commitment and work engagement.
Phase 6 – Model Development and Theory Integration. The final themes were positioned in relation to one another and integrated with the theoretical framework to build an explanatory model of how gendered LPP processes shape knowledge acquisition and emotional outcomes in family SMEs.
An illustrative example of how the six-phase process was applied is provided below:
Raw Data Segment (Interview Excerpt, Phase 1): “I was mostly doing administrative work … I wasn't involved in key decisions.”
Keyword Identification (Phase 2): Keywords identified: “administrative work” “not involved”
Initial Codes (Phase 3):
Peripheral roles
Initial exclusion
Theme Development (Phase 4): these codes were grouped under the broader theme: Delayed Integration into Core Practices.
Thematic Interpretation (Phase 5): this theme was interpreted through the lens of LPP, indicating how juniors remained at the periphery of decision-making roles, which delayed their legitimacy and learning trajectories.
Theoretical Integration (Phase 6): the theme also informed analysis of emotional disengagement and was cross-referenced with the concept of Low Levels of Devotion and Absorption, drawing on work engagement theory (e.g. Schaufeli et al., 2002).
Findings
This section presents the findings from the interviews conducted with next generation family members. The results are organized around key themes emerging from the interviews, highlighting the challenges and opportunities juniors face in their integration into the family business. Table 3 outlines the main findings and challenges identified in the research, with investigated dimensions, key themes and direct quotes from the participants.
Outline of the findings
| Dimension | Theme | Subtheme/Description | Illustrative quotes | Participant |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. LPP and Situated Learning | 1.1 Delayed Legitimation through Peripheral Involvement | Assigned Peripheral Roles – Juniors begin with routine tasks and are excluded from strategic decision-making for extended periods | “In the beginning, I was mostly doing administrative work … almost ten years later, the situation hasn't changed much.” | Company II, Participant C, son |
| Symbolic Participation – Daughters often remain in peripheral roles, despite formal involvement | “When I tell my mother I'm an engineer and want to work in production, she quotes: “I know something about women doing men's jobs … ’” | Company II, Participant D, daughter | ||
| 1.2 Gendered Allocation of Strategic Learning | Strategic Tasks Reserved for Sons – Sons gain early exposure to leadership and planning, unlike daughters | “My brother was already part of strategic meetings, while I was stuck managing minor operations.” | Company IX, Participant S, daughter | |
| 2. Emotional and Attitudinal Consequences | 2.1 Ambivalent Commitment and Emotional Disengagement | Attachment Without Recognition – Juniors feel emotionally connected but undervalued | “I feel proud to be part of the family business, but sometimes I question whether staying is the right decision.” | Company IX, Participant S, daughter |
| Reduced Job Satisfaction – Limited strategic involvement leads to unfulfillment and a sense of wasted potential | “It's fulfilling to contribute, but I feel stuck. My mother still sees me as the young girl who just joined.” | Company VIII, Participant Q, daughter | ||
| Low Engagement from Role Ambiguity – Exclusion undermines motivation and focus | “I try to stay motivated, but without being involved in strategic decisions, my enthusiasm has faded.” | Company IX, Participant R, son | ||
| 2.2 External Support as Emotional Buffer | Compensatory Support Networks – Emotional needs unmet by maternal leadership are fulfilled by others | “My father … listens to me and encourages my ambitions. It makes me feel less alone.” | Company VI, Participant M, daughter | |
| “One of the senior non-family managers encouraged me to take on more responsibilities.” | Company VII, Participant O, son | |||
| “I go to the accountant to vent about my mother … Sometimes we share a laugh at her expense.” | Company VIII, Participant Q, daughter | |||
| 2.3 Leadership Ambiguity and Future Anxiety | Delayed Transition Creates Uncertainty – Prolonged incumbent control leaves juniors in limbo | “I'm stuck in the shadow of my mother … It's hard to plan for the future.” | Company III, Participant F, son | |
| “My mother rarely involves me … she thinks I'll figure it out eventually, but I feel left out.” | Company VIII, Participant Q, daughter | |||
| “She doesn't intentionally exclude me, but she's so focused on running things herself …” | Company III, Participant F, son |
Legitimate peripheral participation and intergenerational gender dynamics
In family SMEs, legitimate peripheral participation (LPP) offers a useful lens for understanding how juniors transition from peripheral to core roles. However, the data reveal that this progression is often delayed, uneven, and gendered. Although LPP assumes gradual and inclusive learning, these cases challenge that assumption, particularly where maternal leadership is present but does not translate into inclusive practices. Across cases, both sons and daughters reported being assigned peripheral roles, with limited exposure to strategic activities. This mirrors Lave and Wenger's (1991) notion of peripheral engagement but diverges in that participation does not naturally evolve into centrality. As one son observed:
In the beginning, I was mostly doing administrative work and wasn’t involved in key decisions. Now, almost ten years later, the situation hasn’t changed much. Every time I bring it up, my mom seems surprised and says she needs to delegate some financial activities to me, but in reality, that hasn’t happened yet. I felt like an outsider even though I was part of the family. (Company II, Participant C, son)
This delay in strategic involvement contradicts expectations embedded in the LPP framework, which emphasizes increasing participation through active mentorship and situated learning (Clinton et al., 2021). The juniors' perceptions reflect a lack of structured pathways to legitimacy. A daughter similarly shared:
I was given tasks that felt trivial. My brother was already part of strategic meetings, while I was stuck managing minor operations. (Company IX, Participant S, daughter)
The perceived inequity in these accounts reinforces findings by Cunningham et al. (2017) that parental leadership often reflects unconscious gender biases. Even in women-led firms, maternal incumbents may unconsciously delay strategic inclusion. The misalignment between junior contributions and parental recognition suggests that LPP is not just about participation, but also about perceived readiness and legitimacy, which can be socially constructed and constrained by incumbent expectations. As another daughter explained:
When I tell my mother that I’m an engineer and would like to work in production, she stops me and quotes Shakespeare in Love: “I know something about women doing men’s jobs …” (Company II, Participant D, daughter)
Such gendered perceptions contradict the inclusive potential associated with maternal leadership (Cesaroni and Paoloni, 2016), instead aligning with concerns raised by Calabrò et al. (2024) and Bannò et al. (2024) about the reproduction of patriarchal practices by female incumbents. Moreover, juniors reported role stagnation due to incumbent resistance to retirement or delegation.
Even though my mother is the leader, she rarely involves me in key decisions. She believes I'll figure things out eventually, but without her guidance, I often feel left out of the process and unsure of my readiness to take on a leadership role. (Company VIII, Participant Q, daughter)
I feel like I’m stuck in the shadow of my mother. She’s still making all the key decisions, and I’m left wondering when or if I’ll ever truly take over. It’s hard to plan for the future when there’s no clear path for my role. (Company III, Participant F, son).
Importantly, gendered dynamics did not only affect daughters. Several sons described similar feelings of symbolic participation and invisibility:
I’ve learned more from watching how the external consultants handle things than from my mother. It’s almost like they don’t think I’m ready to learn the business yet. (Company II, Participant C, son)
These accounts resonate with critiques of LPP's implicit assumption that all juniors have equal access to participation. Instead, this study reveals an emergent pattern of “assumed learning”, a belief by incumbents that juniors will naturally acquire strategic competence through passive observation:
It’s not that my mother doesn’t trust me; it’s just that she doesn’t think about involving me in these big decisions. She’s so focused on running the business herself that I think she assumes I’ll pick it up along the way, but I feel like I’m missing out on so much. (Company IV, Participant H, son)
These findings expand LPP theory by showing that passive inclusion does not translate into situated learning without intentional guidance and recognition. As Participant D illustrates through her exclusion from production despite being an engineer, and as Participant C recounts in describing a decade of peripheral tasks, legitimacy cannot emerge from observation alone. This aligns with Clinton et al. (2021) on the necessity of active mentorship and with recent warnings by Calabrò et al. (2024) and Bannò et al. (2024) that maternal leadership may inadvertently reproduce exclusionary practices, delaying both learning and legitimation.
Emotional and attitudinal consequences of gendered legitimate peripheral participation
The findings also reveal that gendered LPP dynamics have emotional and psychological consequences. In line with Hamilton (2011) and Konopaski et al. (2015), juniors emphasized how marginalization affected their motivation, job satisfaction, and identification with the firm. Several juniors expressed dissatisfaction stemming from underutilization of their skills. Others highlighted the frustration of being underestimated:
It’s fulfilling to contribute to the business, but I feel like I’m stuck. I want more challenges, but my mother still sees me as the young girl who just joined. (Company VIII, Participant Q, daughter)
These accounts align with Locke's (1976) job satisfaction theory, as juniors reported a disconnect between expectations and lived experience. More strikingly, the emotional bond to the firm became a source of ambivalence:
I’m very connected to the company emotionally, but sometimes I feel like I stay because I don’t have other options. It’s hard to leave because it’s my family, but I don’t always feel valued. (Company III, Participant G, daughter)
Work engagement also declined in the face of limited strategic involvement:
I try to stay motivated, but without being involved in strategic decisions, my enthusiasm has faded. I feel like my work doesn’t matter in the grand scheme of things. (Company IX, Participant R, son)
These accounts underscore that limited recognition and restricted access to meaningful tasks undermine both satisfaction and commitment, echoing Locke's (1976) view that fulfillment arises from task significance and Hatak and Roessl's (2015) emphasis on relational competence in knowledge transfer. As Participant Q noted, being persistently underestimated eroded her motivation, while Participant G highlighted how emotional attachment without recognition led to ambivalence in commitment—dynamics that align with Ge and Campopiano's (2021) and Arzubiaga et al. (2021) findings on the fragility of affective bonds in the absence of strategic inclusion. In line with Schaufeli et al.’s (2002) theory of work engagement, these results confirm that gendered marginalization not only saps energy and dedication but also weakens the long-term legitimacy of successors within the community of practice.
The role of external support
A surprising yet significant finding of this study is the critical role played by external figures, including non-involved fathers, long-standing advisors, and senior non-family managers, in nurturing junior members' affective commitment and confidence. This pattern emerges most prominently when incumbents fail to provide adequate strategic engagement or emotional reinforcement.
I always thought my mother, as the leader, would involve me more and guide me through the business. Instead, it's my father, who's not even part of the company, who listens to me and encourages my ambitions. On one hand, it's really frustrating, but on the other, it's comforting—it makes me feel less alone. (Company VI, Participant M, daughter)
This account reinforces insights from Bloemen-Bekx et al. (2021), who emphasize that affective commitment is not solely developed through formal business interactions, but also through emotional support and symbolic interactions outside operational roles. In fact, instrumental encouragement from a nurturing figure, even outside the formal business hierarchy, can substitute for absent mentoring within the firm.
It wasn’t my family but one of the senior non-family managers who encouraged me to step up and take on more responsibilities. That support gave me the confidence my family never did. (Company VII, Participant O, son)
This quote aligns with findings by Aldamiz-Echevarría (2017) who note that trusted nonfamily mentors can play a vital role in legitimizing juniors' ambitions. These actors become part of the junior's informal community of practice, offering what Bloemen-Bekx et al. (2021) describe as “symbolic legitimacy” and “relational scaffolding”—that is, belief in one's potential, outside formal authority structures.
An accountant has been working with us for decades. He’s known me since I was a child, coming to the office during the summer. Even now, when I can’t stand my mother anymore, I go to his office to vent about my mother not listening to me. I’m not sure if it’s a healthy approach—maybe we should “keep everything in the family”—but together [with the accountant], we sometimes share a laugh at my mother’s expense! (Company VIII, Participant Q, daughter)
This account illustrates how enduring relationships with non-family advisors can provide affective safety valves, especially when formal mentorship within the firm is lacking. While this behavior may fall outside conventional understandings of LPP, typically focused on learning from senior insiders, it confirms that legitimacy and commitment are also co-constructed through external interactional routines, resonating with Mukesh and Bailey's (2023) insights on the role of symbolic supports in navigating family expectations. These findings align with the core assumption of LPP, which holds that situated learning and legitimacy are primarily transmitted by incumbents within closed, family-centered communities of practice (McAdam et al., 2024). However, they also demonstrate that external actors can meaningfully contribute to the junior's learning journey, reinforcing affective commitment and identity formation, even when incumbents are absent, resistant, or overbearing. Furthermore, such external encouragement, whether from non-family mentors or emotionally engaged yet non-operational fathers, aligns with Bloemen-Bekx et al.’s (2021) notion of “roots and wings” parenting. According to this perspective, juniors flourish when they are provided both with emotional grounding (roots) and the autonomy to explore strategic ambitions (wings). Fathers offering encouragement without managerial interference may embody this dynamic, enabling daughters and sons to develop self-efficacy outside formal business roles.
In summary, this pattern reveals a theoretical extension to the LPP framework: legitimacy and learning do not exclusively arise from proximity to power or incumbency, but can be externally scaffolded through informal but trusted relationships. This underexplored dimension provides a pathway for enhancing juniors' emotional resilience and strategic ambition, especially in women-led firms where the transfer of authority may be delayed or restricted. External allies thus emerge as crucial actors in counterbalancing exclusionary practices and nurturing affective commitment, even in firms where family-based mentorship is limited or fraught.
Discussion
The study highlights significant challenges in the legitimate peripheral participation (LPP) of junior family members in family-owned and women-led SMEs. LPP, introduced by Lave and Wenger (1991), emphasizes learning through gradual integration into community activities, with junior members progressively assuming responsibilities. However, findings reveal that juniors, regardless of gender, are often relegated to peripheral tasks, while strategic decision-making remains dominated by senior family members. This exclusion hinders offspring's development of strategic knowledge and skills, fostering feelings of frustration and stagnation. Research by Chirico (2008) and Koiranen and Chirico (2006) confirms the critical role of knowledge transfer in succession but acknowledges the behavioral complexities that can obstruct this process. Findings show although family ties are believed to foster altruistic knowledge sharing (Karra et al., 2006; Sánchez-Famoso and Maseda, 2014), power imbalances and exclusionary practices prevent juniors from fully participating in leadership roles. Gender dynamics further complicate these challenges. While daughters often face exclusion from structured learning pathways and decisionmaking processes crucial for their leadership identity (Ferrari, 2019; Hindi et al., 2022; Mussolino and Calabrò, 2014), sons also experience delayed integration and limited participation in strategic tasks, undermining their confidence and sense of belonging.
Contrary to the assumption that male successors benefit from gender biases, the study shows that both sons and daughters encounter marginalization. This finding aligns with literature emphasizing socio-relational barriers in succession planning (Ferrari, 2020c) and challenges traditional narratives favoring male successors (Haberman and Danes, 2007; Wang, 2010; Glover, 2014). Even in female-led businesses, juniors face difficulties acquiring leadership knowledge and advancing their roles due to entrenched hierarchical practices. The findings support the maternal care narrative, which sometimes prioritizes nurturing over empowerment, thereby reinforcing gendered barriers in succession (Ferrari, 2019; Notko and Sevòn, 2006; Maseda et al., 2023). Additionally, the findings indicate that female incumbents often perpetuate traditional power structures, further hindering juniors' integration into strategic roles. However, in juniors' perception these hindering dynamics are not driven by explicit strategies of power conservation (as elsewhere suggested: Ferrari, 2019) but rather by a strong identification with the company. Female entrepreneurs, particularly first-generation ones, are likely to have faced significant challenges to attain and sustain their positions, especially in traditionally male-dominated sectors such as mechanical engineering and IT. This intense commitment may have triggered an endowment effect (Morewedge and Giblin, 2015), leading to a psychological over-investment in the company, as elsewhere highlighted (Ferrari, 2019).
Job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and work engagement are critical for junior family members in family SMEs, particularly when viewed through the lens of legitimate peripheral participation (LPP). LPP allows juniors to transition gradually into core business roles, beginning with peripheral tasks and progressively assuming more significant responsibilities. This structured progression shapes their professional identity, job satisfaction, and engagement as they move toward full participation in the community of practice (Ferrari, 2017; Konopaski et al., 2015). However, exclusion from strategic decision-making disrupts this pathway, leading to frustration, disengagement, and diminished job satisfaction. Emotional ties to the family business often exacerbate these challenges. For instance, a daughter from Company III expressed strong emotional loyalty but felt undervalued and uncertain about her future role. This highlights the tension between affective commitment, understood as emotional attachment to the business, and continuance commitment, where juniors remain out of obligation rather than personal growth opportunities (Meyer and Allen, 1991; Hatak and Roessl, 2015). Such situations weaken long-term engagement, as juniors feel compelled to stay without deriving fulfillment. Work engagement, defined by vigor, dedication, and absorption in work (Schaufeli et al., 2002), is also influenced by LPP. Exclusion from strategic roles diminishes juniors' motivation and sense of purpose, leaving them disengaged. Without meaningful responsibilities that foster professional growth, juniors struggle to maintain energy and dedication.
The findings underscore significant challenges in LPP when juniors are excluded from strategic roles, impeding their development and leadership readiness. This aligns with calls by Arzubiaga et al. (2021) to examine how successors navigate knowledge-sharing dynamics to acquire both tacit and explicit knowledge. Limited involvement hampers juniors' transition into core roles, a critical phase for grooming effective successors (Ge and Campopiano, 2021). To address these challenges, family businesses must actively integrate juniors into decision-making and communities of practice (CoPs). Such integration fosters knowledge creation, sharing, and transfer while supporting juniors' professional and emotional growth (McAdam et al., 2024; Rossignoli et al., 2023). Expanding CoPs to include fathers and non-family managers can enhance this process. Fathers, even those not directly involved in the business, provide critical emotional support and alternative perspectives, reinforcing juniors' confidence and legitimacy. Non-family managers contribute professional expertise and impartial mentorship, helping juniors navigate internal dynamics and overcome biases. These external influences complement mentorship from female incumbents, creating a balanced, inclusive environment that promotes skill development and prepares juniors for leadership.
Conclusion
This study enriches the theory of legitimate peripheral participation (Lave and Wenger, 1991) by exploring how gendered dynamics within women-led family SMEs influence the developmental trajectories of junior members. Through a gender-sensitive lens, the findings reveal that LPP is neither universally inclusive nor unidirectional, particularly in the context of maternal leadership where incumbents are assumed to foster equitable learning. First, this research challenges the assumption, implicit in both gender and family business literature, that maternal leadership inherently creates more inclusive environments for daughters. Contrary to expectations, the data show that female leaders often replicate exclusionary practices, delaying the integration of both sons and daughters into strategic roles. While this dynamic has been previously theorized in studies of patriarchal family firms (e.g. Mussolino and Calabrò, 2014; Cunningham et al., 2017), the novelty here lies in demonstrating that even in women-led firms, where relational leadership might be expected, juniors face symbolic participation, delayed legitimization, and stalled identity formation.
This finding extends recent insights from Calabrò et al. (2024) and Bannò et al. (2024), who caution against idealizing maternal leadership. It also addresses a tension in the existing literature: while maternal leadership is often associated with emotional attunement (Cesaroni and Paoloni, 2016), the findings of this study indicate that such care may manifest as overprotection, thereby inhibiting the delegation of strategic responsibilities. Thus, the findings call for a refinement of the LPP framework, showing that proximity to power does not guarantee access to learning, especially when incumbents unconsciously adhere to rigid role expectations shaped by their own struggles for legitimacy.
Second, the study makes a novel contribution by highlighting the legitimizing role of external figures, such as non-involved fathers and long-time advisors. These actors often provide the emotional scaffolding, symbolic encouragement, and informal mentoring absent within formal family hierarchies. Their influence is especially meaningful when juniors are emotionally conflicted or excluded from strategic decision-making. Drawing on Bloemen-Bekx et al.’s (2021) concept of “roots and wings” parenting and Mukesh and Bailey's (2023) framework of symbolic support, this study extends the notion of LPP beyond the boundaries of the firm. It shows that communities of practice (CoPs) can include emotionally significant actors outside the traditional family business context. In doing so, it refines situated learning theory by emphasizing that legitimacy and identity can be co-constructed through external relational networks, not solely via hierarchical mentorship.
Furthermore, this external support serves not only as a buffer against emotional disengagement, but as an alternative pathway for affective commitment and self-efficacy. When incumbents fail to provide recognition, juniors do not simply disengage; they often redirect their need for affirmation toward external mentors, creating a hybrid learning environment that blends formal and informal CoPs.
Contribution to the literature
This study contributes to the literature on intergenerational knowledge transfer and gender dynamics in family SMEs by addressing key gaps previously identified in the literature. It builds on calls by Arzubiaga et al. (2021) and McAdam et al. (2024) for greater understanding of how successors acquire tacit and explicit knowledge within family firms, particularly through informal mechanisms such as legitimate peripheral participation (LPP) and communities of practice (CoPs).
A central contribution lies in applying the LPP framework to examine the uneven and gendered inclusion of junior members in family SMEs. Prior research (e.g. Le Breton-Miller and Miller, 2006; Poza et al., 2004) has noted that family dynamics can either support or hinder juniors' involvement in decision-making. However, this study extends those insights by explicitly showing how hierarchical and relational structures, including the emotional attachments of incumbents, can delay legitimation and obstruct meaningful participation, even in women-led firms.
By exploring the gendered allocation of strategic learning, the study addresses the literature's tendency to treat junior members as a homogeneous group (Cho et al., 2024; Leitón and Kintana, 2023). It responds to Maseda et al.’s (2023) call for gender-sensitive governance research by providing empirical evidence of how maternal incumbents may unconsciously reproduce exclusionary dynamics, challenging the common assumption that female leadership automatically fosters inclusivity (Cesaroni and Paoloni, 2016; Calabrò et al., 2024; Bannò et al., 2024).
Furthermore, this study adds to existing knowledge by clarifying the emotional and attitudinal outcomes of limited participation highlighting how perceived exclusion from CoPs negatively affects job satisfaction, affective commitment, and work engagement (Hamilton, 2011; Schaufeli et al., 2002). It refines the understanding of LPP by emphasizing that legitimacy is not only earned through task involvement, but also through symbolic recognition and emotional reinforcement— dimensions often overlooked in the literature.
Finally, the study expands the theoretical boundaries of LPP and CoPs by showing how legitimacy and support are also co-constructed through relationships with external actors, such as noninvolved fathers and senior non-family managers. This insight aligns with prior findings (Bloemen- Bekx et al., 2021; Mukesh and Bailey, 2023), but provides a unique contribution by integrating these relational dynamics into the framework of LPP, offering a more holistic understanding of learning and leadership development in family SMEs.
Practical implications for gender in management
This study offers targeted insights for enhancing gender equity and intergenerational succession practices in women-led family SMEs. A first implication concerns the institutionalization of strategic learning pathways. The findings highlight the need for structured and transparent processes that enable junior members, regardless of gender, to gradually access strategic roles. Initiatives such as mentorship programs, job rotation across departments, and early exposure to leadership tasks can support equitable learning trajectories and improve successors' readiness.
A second implication relates to the persistence of unconscious bias in maternal leadership. Even female incumbents may inadvertently reproduce exclusionary practices. Reflective leadership training and succession planning audits can help uncover and correct gendered assumptions, ensuring that daughters receive the same opportunities as sons to lead and contribute strategically.
The results also underscore the importance of leveraging external mentors and support networks. Fathers and non-family senior managers often play a crucial yet overlooked role in fostering juniors' confidence and affective commitment. Encouraging informal mentoring relationships beyond the immediate leadership structure can compensate for gaps in internal support and provide alternative sources of legitimacy.
Another implication concerns governance. Boards and family councils should be encouraged to adopt gender-sensitive succession policies that go beyond symbolic inclusion. Mechanisms such as regular feedback from junior members and the involvement of third-party facilitators can ensure that governance systems are not only formally fair but also genuinely inclusive in practice.
Finally, the study invites a rethinking of emotional attachment as a potential leadership barrier. Overidentification with the business may prevent effective delegation, limiting juniors' growth. Female leaders, in particular, can benefit from gradually transitioning from operational control to advisory roles, thereby supporting the autonomy of the next generation and fostering sustainable succession.
Taken together, these recommendations point to the need for intentional interventions that foster inclusive learning environments, sustain long-term leadership development, and unlock the full potential of next-generation talent.
Limitations and suggestions for future research
This paper explores how junior family members experience learning and involvement in family businesses, with a specific emphasis on gendered dynamics in women-led SMEs. While the qualitative approach yields important theoretical and empirical contributions, several limitations point to promising directions for future research.
Firstly, the study's reliance on a small number of cases and a limited number of interviews per participant constrains the breadth of perspectives represented. Although each junior was interviewed at least twice, with an initial in-depth session followed by a formal follow-up, and additional informal contacts were used to enhance data reliability, the overall sample size remains modest. This may restrict the generalizability of the findings and raises questions about the representativeness of the insights presented. Future research could expand the number and diversity of participants, enabling deeper comparative analysis and stronger empirical grounding.
Secondly, the study is situated within a single national context (Italy), which further limits the generalizability of its conclusions. Family businesses operate within distinct cultural and institutional frameworks, and gendered succession norms may vary substantially across countries. Future research adopting a cross-national design could account for contextual variation, helping to uncover how socio-cultural norms, labor market structures, and welfare systems influence gendered career progression and intergenerational knowledge transfer. This would align with findings from Dvouletý et al. (2022), who highlight how societal expectations and caregiving responsibilities shape women's professional paths in family and entrepreneurial contexts.
Thirdly, while the qualitative methodology provided rich insights into juniors' subjective experiences, it does not allow for testing causal relationships or assessing broader trends. Future studies should incorporate quantitative approaches, such as survey-based or mixed-method designs, to examine how variables like job satisfaction, perceived legitimacy, work engagement, and organizational commitment interact with gender and leadership style in family firms. Inspired by Cowling and Dvouletý (2024), future research could also assess the impact of indirectly gendered or gender-neutral policy interventions, such as access to start-up loans, mentoring, or training, on junior members' ability to advance within family businesses.
Fourthly, the current study focuses exclusively on SMEs, which typically feature informal governance and less structured succession plans. Including larger family firms in future research could clarify whether organizational scale and formalization moderate the effects of gendered leadership on junior members' learning and participation.
Fifth, the exclusive focus on women-led firms may limit our understanding of how leadership gender and role interact. Future studies could benefit from comparing male- and female-led family businesses or including interviews with both maternal and paternal incumbents. A comparative design would allow scholars to disentangle the effects of leader gender from leadership role and provide richer insight into how different leadership styles influence the experiences of junior family members—particularly regarding strategic learning, emotional engagement, and role legitimation.
Finally, an intriguing theoretical direction for future research concerns the potential role of stereotype threat in shaping women's experiences within family firms. Stereotype threat theory suggests that individuals from marginalized groups may underperform or withdraw in high-stakes contexts due to anxiety about confirming negative stereotypes. This mechanism may help explain internalized barriers to leadership and participation, especially in settings where traditional gender expectations remain influential. Future studies could explore whether and how stereotype threat affects junior women's confidence, learning behavior, and perceived legitimacy in the family business. Swab et al. (2022) and von Hippel et al. (2024) offer a valuable conceptual foundation for applying stereotype threat theory to organizational research and outline a promising agenda for further empirical investigation.
By addressing these limitations, future research can refine theoretical frameworks on learning and leadership in family firms, while informing the design of interventions—both organizational and policy-level—that promote equitable participation, talent development, and long-term business continuity.
Appendix Semi-structured interview guide
Legitimate Peripheral Participation
Main question: Could you describe how you entered the business and what your initial roles were?
Follow-up: How has your level of involvement changed over time?
Follow-up: Have you ever felt that you were relegated to marginal roles, or were you always involved in important decisions?
Main question: How was your learning process managed within the business?
Follow-up: How useful was learning through observing senior members?
Follow-up: What role did senior members play in facilitating your learning?
Situated Learning and Knowledge Transmission
Main question: How do you feel you acquired the necessary skills for your current role?
Follow-up: What were the main sources of knowledge within the company (e.g. observation, direct instruction, involvement in projects)?
Follow-up: Did you have opportunities to acquire tacit knowledge (e.g. through hands-on experience)?
Main question: What were the major difficulties you encountered in the learning process?
Follow-up: How were these difficulties overcome?
Follow-up: Do you think the knowledge transmission practices are structured or do they occur informally?
Emotional and Attitudinal Consequences: Organizational Commitment and Work Engagement
Organizational Commitment
Main question: How do you feel about your connection to the family business?
Follow-up: Do you feel emotionally attached to the company? If so, how?
Follow-up: What is your primary motivation for continuing to work in the company? (Explore affective, normative, and continuance commitment)
Main question: Do you feel a moral obligation to stay in the family business, regardless of external job opportunities?
Follow-up: If you were to leave the business, what costs do you perceive? (Explore continuance commitment)
Work Engagement
Main question: How would you describe your energy and motivation in your daily work? (Explore vigor)
Follow-up: Do you feel that the work you do is meaningful to you? (Explore devotion)
Follow-up: Do you feel immersed and fully concentrated in the business activities? (Explore absorption)
Main question: How does your level of involvement in business decisions affect your enthusiasm and motivation in work?
Job Satisfaction
Main question: Are you satisfied with your current role in the family business?
Follow-up: What do you enjoy the most about your work? Is there anything you are dissatisfied with?
Follow-up: How would you describe the balance between your private and professional life in the family business?
Main question: Do you feel that your skills are recognized and valued within the business?
Follow-up: Have you ever felt that your contribution was not appreciated or recognized?
Follow-up: How does recognition (or the lack of it) impact your job satisfaction?
Final Thoughts
Do you have any other observations or experiences that you feel are important to share regarding your journey in the family business and how you learned and developed?
