Beyond the oxymoron: advancing the conceptualisation of the family council in family business research

Purpose Despite decades of academic and practical interest in the family council as a governance mechanism, there continues to be ambiguity around the definition, hindering both theoretical development and practical implementation. This perspective article aims to address this gap by clarifying the conceptual inconsistencies underlying the term family council, introducing new philosophical insights and bridging the divide between scholarly rigour and real-world relevance. Design/methodology/approach Applying conceptual elucidation procedures (synthesis and analysis) from the philosophy of science, we systematically review existing definitions to identify syntactic and semantic inconsistencies. Drawing on Arendt’s necessity–freedom dichotomy, we analyse the etymological tension between the terms family (a necessity-driven private sphere) and council (a freedom-based public institution). This approach ensures a combination of empirical grounding and depth of theoretical inquiry. Findings Our findings suggest that the idea of a family council is an oxymoron. The traditional nuclear family is found to lack the conditions necessary for deliberative governance. We first classify the inconsistencies into three categories: functional overlap with other governance bodies, ambiguous units of analysis and imprecise terminology. We then propose strategies to address them. Next, we argue that a functional family council requires a shift towards a business family mindset, based on the principles of freedom, plurality and reciprocity. This shift allows the council to operate as a hybrid mechanism, reconciling private family bonds with public decision-making functions. Originality/value This article makes three contributions. First, we illustrate how clarification procedures can resolve conceptual ambiguities, providing a replicable framework for future research. Second, using Arendt’s philosophy, we reveal the contradictory nature of the family council and propose prerequisites to address these issues, thereby providing a novel perspective in the family business literature. Third, we suggest practical criteria for families to evaluate their preparedness for a council, thereby bridging theory and practice.