Economic analysts have long grappled with a persistent question: are family businesses ultimately more resilient and efficient, or do they lag behind firms operating under purely corporate structures, free from kinship ties? The debate remains unresolved and, at times, takes on an almost ideological character, with compelling arguments on both sides.

However, when the discussion shifts from theory to empirical evidence, a clearer picture emerges. Survival rates, succession patterns, and demographic trends indicate that intergenerational transition constitutes the most critical and vulnerable phase in the lifecycle of family businesses. As founders and dominant figures gradually withdraw, these transitions increasingly shape the long-term viability of such enterprises.

Around 25% of the world’s major listed companies are family-owned. One in four large corporations is not just an impersonal shareholder structure, but a continuity of blood and name. This in itself turns the debate into a central issue. What happens in family businesses is not about a ‘special category’, but about the very backbone of global capitalism. And yet, behind that 25% figure lies another, harsher statistic.

57% of the world’s family businesses don’t even have a formal, organised succession plan. In other words, about six out of ten businesses that will eventually have to pass from one generation to the next enter this process without a map. If the percentage is reversed, it means that less than half have a rudimentary preparation. And even fewer, about 27%, have a fully structured plan.