Most respondents run family firms in the region.
Say their company is a family firm
Have their company’s seat in Region Jönköping
Preliminary · wave 1 · 30 Oct 2026
garbarometern 2026
How business owners in Småland see ownership today. An annual, research-based survey from CeFEO at JIBS. This year’s theme: ownership transition and exit.
98%feel a strong personal connection to the company
39%have a clear plan for generational succession
54%govern through informal conversations
60%want better access to an owner network
Who answered
The owners behind the barometer, their companies and how deeply rooted they are in the region.
Nearly half of the family firms are still controlled by their founders.
Generation controlling ownership today, % of family firms
48%28%15%
- First generation (founder)48%
- Second generation28%
- Third generation15%
- Fourth or later9%
Preliminary · wave 1 · 30 Oct 2026 · Family firms only · In 96% of them, family members sit in management
Active owners of small and medium-sized firms.
- Own a share in the company82%
- Active in day-to-day operations90%
- Micro firm, 1–10 employees41%
- Small firm, 11–49 employees33%
- Medium-sized firm, 50–249 employees23%
- Grew headcount in the last 12 months38%
Preliminary · wave 1 · 30 Oct 2026 · Headcount kept level: 51%, reduced: 8%
Ownership is mostly shared: a typical firm has two owners.
2Median number of owners per firm
Have a single owner
Have three owners or more
Preliminary · wave 1 · 30 Oct 2026 · 97% of family-firm respondents belong to the owner family
Owners see their local roots as an asset.
Say their ownership structure gives a trust advantage with customers and suppliers
Say the company actively contributes to the local community
Find it important that the company keeps its seat in the region
Preliminary · wave 1 · 30 Oct 2026 · Agree = 4–5 of 5, ‘not applicable / don’t know’ excluded
How ownership is governed
Where owner decisions are made, how much is written down and how owners get along.
Ownership is governed more over coffee than in the boardroom.
Governance forums in use, % of firms (several answers allowed)
- Informal conversations54%
- Formal board42%
- Family council29%
- Board with external members22%
- Owner forum14%
- Advisory board8%
Preliminary · wave 1 · 30 Oct 2026 · 7% use none of these forums
Values are widely shared; formal structures less so.
Owners share explicit values that guide ownership decisions
Values and direction are set down in a written owner directive or shareholders’ agreement
Ownership, board and management roles are kept clearly apart
Preliminary · wave 1 · 30 Oct 2026 · Agree = 4–5 of 5, ‘not applicable / don’t know’ excluded
Owners agree on fairness, yet relationships still weigh on decisions.
% agreeing
- Shared view of what is fair in pay, dividends and value87%
- Personal relations strongly affect business decisions39%
- Family dynamics make ownership decisions more complex36%
Preliminary · wave 1 · 30 Oct 2026 · Agree = 4–5 of 5, ‘not applicable / don’t know’ excluded
Open friction between owners is rare.
% agreeing, axis 0–100%
- Unresolved conflicts between owners10%
- Hard to attract or keep managers11%
- Minority or passive owners shut out8%
- Agreed decisions not carried out3%
Preliminary · wave 1 · 30 Oct 2026 · Agree = 4–5 of 5, ‘not applicable / don’t know’ excluded
Two in three see their ownership model as a source of strength.
65%12%21%
- Say the way ownership is organised mainly creates reinforcing strengths65%
- See a mix of strengths and tensions12%
- See mainly tensions and conflicting goals1%
- Not applicable21%
Preliminary · wave 1 · 30 Oct 2026 · 21% answered not applicable
Planning the next owner
This year’s theme: ownership transition and exit. Plans, attachment and what would trigger a sale.
Plans exist for carrying on, rarely for handing over.
A clear plan exists for each ownership scenario, % agreeing
- Continue as today54%
- Generational succession39%
- Partner buyout39%
- External sale22%
- New external investors15%
- Management buyout6%
Preliminary · wave 1 · 30 Oct 2026 · Agree = 4–5 of 5, ‘not applicable / don’t know’ excluded, so bases differ
Owners are deeply attached to their firms.
Feel a strong personal connection to the company
See the company as part of who they are
Would find it hard to let go of the company
Preliminary · wave 1 · 30 Oct 2026 · Agree = 4–5 of 5, ‘not applicable / don’t know’ excluded
Pride and joy outweigh worry and pressure.
What owners associate with their role, % (up to five choices)
89%Pride71%Joy58%Freedom49%Belonging49%Loyalty41%Meaning
Preliminary · wave 1 · 30 Oct 2026 · Also named: worry 30%, pressure 21%, loneliness 11%
Ownership is held for the long term; successors are only half prepared.
Say keeping ownership long term is central to how the owners see themselves
Say successors get structured preparation: mentoring, training, gradual responsibility
Have discussed a full or partial sale, formally or informally
Preliminary · wave 1 · 30 Oct 2026 · Agree = 4–5 of 5, ‘not applicable / don’t know’ excluded
A sale would come from life events more than from offers.
- Personal reasons: health, retirement, life change50%
- No successor willing or able to take over39%
- An attractive offer from an external buyer37%
- A sale is not something we would consider25%
- Disagreement among the owners on direction16%
- Financial difficulties or capital needs11%
Preliminary · wave 1 · 30 Oct 2026 · Sale already discussed: formally 18%, informally 40%, never 31%
In the owners’ own words
Open answers, lightly shortened and translated · 8 quotes
“Losing, through a sale, my identity tied to the company: the one I have wanted all my life and now have.”
“I would worry about our employees. What happens to them?”
“Two of us three siblings work in the firm, yet the third gets an equal share of the cake.”
“Disagreement among the new owners: one wanting to take out as much money as possible, or a different view of where to go.”
“A plan for the next generational change, so my children can choose to work in the firm or be passive owners.”
“Building a board, leaving operations and working in the company from a board perspective.”
“An owners’ council with a clear purpose and structure, and an external person to help lead the discussions.”
“A national helpline where every business owner can get answers on all the new rules.”
Barriers and support
The challenges right now, what stands in the way of a transition and which support is missing.
48% have a peer network. 60% want a better one.
Share agreeing that a good network of fellow owners is available to them, and that better access would help them. Preliminary figures.
Agree that a good network of fellow owners is available to them
Agree that better access would help them
For transitions, competence gaps weigh as much as tax rules.
Lack the competence to handle the legal, financial and governance side of a transition
Say tax rules on transfers hinder their transition planning
Say public support for owners in the region meets their needs
Preliminary · wave 1 · 30 Oct 2026 · Agree = 4–5 of 5, ‘not applicable / don’t know’ excluded
Demand and staffing top the list of pressing challenges.
Most pressing challenges right now, % of firms (up to five choices)
- Economy and demand51%
- Skilled staff38%
- Regulatory burden36%
- Energy prices30%
- Work–life balance30%
- Competition22%
Preliminary · wave 1 · 30 Oct 2026 · Also: sustainability 21%, digital and AI 20%, ownership transition 18%
Social responsibility leads what owners build into strategy.
% agreeing their strategy integrates each consideration
- Social: working conditions, wellbeing95%
- Governance: board, transparency, ethics89%
- Environment: energy, emissions, waste78%
- Digitalisation and AI64%
Preliminary · wave 1 · 30 Oct 2026 · Agree = 4–5 of 5, ‘not applicable / don’t know’ excluded · Self-reported intent
In the owners’ own words
Open answers, lightly shortened and translated · 12 quotes
“Keeping culture and feeling when the previous generation leaves. We fear a split in the owner group.”
“A generational shift in the workforce, while the next generation needs to embrace a clearer culture.”
“The total cost of employing must come down; constant streamlining leaves too few people at work.”
“Earning enough to hire more staff, to be less vulnerable and give us owners more free time.”
“Almi and Handels ran courses on selling small businesses that gave us an aha moment.”
“Almi’s courses and cheques have helped; Almi means more for our development than Företagarna.”
“Most useful: membership in FBN.”
“I don’t know what support there is. We talk to the university and a lawyer.”
“Many families earn their living from our decisions.”
“It cannot move. It is geographically fixed.”
“We could never pay market value. A lower price risks being seen as salary to me.”
“Organised ownership gives strength in long-term decisions, but little say in strategy brings unpredictability.”
Support mentioned in the open answers
Almi3FBN2Företagarna2JU and Ägarlyftet1Used no support4
Deep dive
Exploratory analyses: indices, group comparisons, regression and fsQCA. Rerun as more answers arrive.
Later generations are more rooted locally and more ESG-minded.Exploratory
Index means (1–5), family firms: white = founder generation, yellow = later generations
- Governance formalisationp = 0.425founder generation: 3.79later generations: 3.59
- Owner identityp = 0.852founder generation: 4.22later generations: 4.37
- Local embeddednessp = 0.004founder generation: 3.89later generations: 4.39
- Relational complexityp = 0.407founder generation: 2.37later generations: 2.59
- ESG integrationp = 0.010founder generation: 4.11later generations: 4.54
founder generationlater generationsScale 1–5
Exploratory · wave 1, preliminary · 30 Oct 2026 · Mann–Whitney tests
Readiness rises with formal governance and strong owner identity.Exploratory
Odds ratios with 95% intervals, ordered logit, family firms
- Governance formalisation3.211.47–7.02
p = 0.003 - Owner identity3.681.37–9.86
p = 0.010 - Has transition competence0.770.44–1.32
p = 0.338 - Later generation2.820.77–10.29
p = 0.116 - External board members0.650.16–2.70
p = 0.554
Odds ratio, log scale; right of 1 = more ready
Exploratory · wave 1, preliminary · 30 Oct 2026 · McFadden R² = 0.17 · readiness: low 11, mid 12, high 26
Formal governance grows with firm size.Exploratory
Governance formalisation index, mean on the 1–5 scale
By firm size, all firms
- Micro, 1–103.40
- Small, 11–493.86
- Medium or larger4.02
Kruskal–Wallis, p = 0.089
By generation, family firms, adjusted for size and owners
- Founder generation3.91
- Later generations3.46
Adjusted for size and number of owners
Exploratory · wave 1, preliminary · 30 Oct 2026 · OLS, robust SE · R² = 0.12 · size 50+ vs micro +0.96 (p =.009)
Five indices summarise the core of the survey.Exploratory
Index = mean of its items on the 1–5 scale; scored when at least two items are answered
| Index | Items | Alpha | Mean |
|---|---|---|---|
| Governance formalisation | 3 | 0.66 | 3.73 |
| Owner identity | 4 | 0.72 | 4.29 |
| Local embeddedness | 3 | 0.66 | 4.14 |
| Relational complexity | 3 | 0.61 | 2.49 |
| ESG integration | 3 | 0.71 | 4.35 |
Exploratory · wave 1, preliminary · 30 Oct 2026 · Alpha = Cronbach’s alpha on complete cases
Four routes to the same outcomeExploratory
Fuzzy-set QCA shows which combinations of conditions lead to an outcome. Choose a model:
No single recipe for readiness yet.
Fuzzy-set QCA, family firms: the strongest configurations, none above the 0.80 consistency threshold
| Formal | Ext. board | Later gen | Attached | Competent | Cases | Consistency | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Configuration 1 | 5 | 0.78 | |||||
| Configuration 2 | 5 | 0.76 | |||||
| Configuration 3 | 9 | 0.73 | |||||
| Configuration 4 | 2 | 0.66 | |||||
| Configuration 5 | 5 | 0.61 |
presentabsent– does not matterConsistency threshold 0.80 · PRI 0.60
Owner attachment appears in 97% of ready firms, but also in almost all others: a background condition, not a lever.
Exploratory · wave 1, preliminary · 30 Oct 2026 · cut-off 0.80, PRI 0.60
Unprepared firms get there by several routes.
Outcome: not ready for transition (no clear plan or no prepared successors), family firms
| Formal | Ext. board | Later gen | Attached | Competent | Cases | Consistency | Coverage | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Path 1 | – | – | – | 2 | 0.90 | 0.23 | ||
| Path 2 | – | – | – | – | 2 | 0.91 | 0.21 | |
| Path 3 | – | – | 6 | 0.95 | 0.21 | |||
| Path 4 | – | – | 2 | 1.00 | 0.05 |
presentabsent– does not matterConsistency threshold 0.80 · PRI 0.60
Solution consistency 0.90 · coverage 0.52
Missing transition competence runs through two of the four routes, which cover 8 of the 12 unprepared firms the solution explains.
Exploratory · wave 1, preliminary · 30 Oct 2026 · solution consistency 0.90, coverage 0.52
Formal governance has more than one route.
Outcome: governance formalisation index, all firms with complete data
| 11+ staff | 3+ owners | Family | Complexity | Ext. board | Cases | Consistency | Coverage | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Path 1 | – | – | 12 | 0.86 | 0.26 | |||
| Path 2 | – | – | – | 11 | 0.93 | 0.25 | ||
| Path 3 | – | – | – | 5 | 0.93 | 0.12 | ||
| Path 4 | – | – | – | 4 | 0.74 | 0.07 | ||
| Path 5 | – | – | 1 | 0.87 | 0.03 |
presentabsent– does not matterConsistency threshold 0.80 · PRI 0.60
Solution consistency 0.88 · coverage 0.67
Two main routes: larger firms with one or two owners and calm owner relations, and firms with three or more owners that bring in external board members.
Exploratory · wave 1, preliminary · 30 Oct 2026 · solution consistency 0.88, coverage 0.67 · path 4 below 0.80
Owners who lack transition know-how want a peer network.
Outcome: would benefit from better access to an owner network, all firms
| Has network | Competent | 11+ staff | Attached | Cases | Consistency | Coverage | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Path 1 | – | – | – | 28 | 0.84 | 0.69 | |
| Path 2 | – | 9 | 0.84 | 0.26 | |||
| Path 3 | – | – | 7 | 0.83 | 0.22 | ||
| Path 4 | – | – | 2 | 0.91 | 0.09 |
presentabsent– does not matterConsistency threshold 0.80 · PRI 0.60
Solution consistency 0.82 · coverage 0.81
Lacking transition competence is enough on its own: of the 38 owners who lack that know-how, 28 want a better peer network.
Exploratory · wave 1, preliminary · 30 Oct 2026 · solution consistency 0.82, coverage 0.81
A first reading of wave 1 · Ägarbarometern 2026, preliminary
Strong values, informal structures, thin plans for handing over.
- Question 1Who will own your company in ten years, and do they know it?
- Question 2Which of your owner decisions are written down, and which live only in conversation?
- Question 3Where would you turn for help with an ownership transition?
Wave 1 is preliminary and the figures will be updated when the survey closes. The full results are presented at Ägarlyftet on 25 November, and wave 2 in 2027 gives the first trend. Research team: Massimo Baù, Kajsa Haag, Joaquín Cestino, massimo.bau@ju.se
