The Handler/Kram article states that there are four general perspectives why there is resistance to succession in family firms. The first perspective is individual. This perspective holds the idea that problems with succession arise due to factors that operate at the individual level. This focuses mostly on the psychological characteristics of the owner, and the social factors that played a role in his development and shaped him as a leader. For the entrepreneur, the business becomes his way of dealing with identification issues developed when he was younger. The loss of power and maybe even self-esteem, prevent the owner from allowing succession. The second perspective is group, where the family and the business are two different but overlapping systems of organization. These two systems influence each other. As a father, you may see their son taking over as his son not needing him anymore, or taking over his role as head of the family, which leads to resistance. The next perspective is organizational, where succession in family businesses is viewed from an external focus. This effectively states that the organization is not yet ready for a transition of leadership. If for example, there are delegation difficulties, the owner will not take the necessary step to provide for the next generation of management. The last perspective is environmental which states that there is a low need for succession when the environment is predictable, and it takes a turbulent environment to create the need for change and thus reduces the resistance to succession.
When looking at Coopers, the company has already had several successors and the next will be from the sixth generation. From the individual perspective, this reduces reluctance to step down significantly since the leader is not the founder and the psychological characteristics of the founder, causing him to start the