When it comes to engaging successfully with the next generation in a family business, plenty has been discussed around their priorities, changing value system, purpose drive, and involving them in the business interests. Ultimately, all of this is necessary to secure family business succession and at its core, this usually involves direct and open communication between the generations, clarity around business goals, and working towards a collective dream that can help to build alignment. However, the factors playing a role in alignment and effect engagement are constantly changing. With global interest growing in areas of sustainable development, and in particular climate change, there’s been an increase of cases that demonstrate there’s a strong disconnect between the goals and ambitions of different generations.
One recent example is the resolved feud that took place amongst the Murdoch family
In July 2020, James Murdoch, son of media mogul Rupert Murdoch, resigned from the board of directors of News Corp, citing “disagreements over certain editorial content published by the company’s news outlets and certain other strategic decisions.” His departure followed years of visible tension over climate coverage and political positioning, particularly after the devastating bushfires in Australia.
These disagreements over values ultimately translated into economics. In September 2025, Rupert Murdoch struck a $3.3bn settlement that bought out James and his sisters Elisabeth and Prudence, each receiving a $1.1bn payout to exit the family trust. The move secured Lachlan Murdoch’s sole control of the empire and resolved decades of uncertainty.
Not all next-generation values are created equal
At News Corp’s AGM in late 2019, Rupert Murdoch famously claimed there were “no climate change deniers around here.” Yet actions spoke louder than words, and contradictions only deepened generational frustration. James Murdoch leaned toward moderation and sustainability, while Lachlan reinforced his father’s conservative positioning, particularly through Fox News’ editorial stance.
These differences weren’t just about climate. They reflected a broader split over the role of media in society – whether it should be a vehicle for political influence or adopt a more centrist, socially responsible posture. James and Elisabeth often voiced unease with the empire’s political sway, while Lachlan aligned more closely with Rupert in maintaining its right-leaning direction.
The September 2025 deal demonstrated that when values diverge too widely, resolution may not come through dialogue but through restructuring ownership itself. By accepting payouts, the dissenting heirs effectively stepped away from influence, leaving Lachlan in uncontested control of both the business and its ideological direction.
For family offices, the lesson is clear: values misalignment can destabilise succession unless governance structures or liquidity events are in place to manage the fallout.
Transparency and communication inside and out of the family business
If sibling rivalry wasn’t enough, the role of spouses also added complexity. James’ wife, Kathryn, an environmental campaigner, put her name to the joint statement highlighting their uneasiness with the company’s public views on climate change. Following the statement, she also amplified stories about investment company BlackRock putting climate change at the centre of its investment strategy.
So much of what has been reported around the Murdoch sibling rivalry demonstrates how basic interpersonal challenges can spiral into structural issues for the business. The saga revealed three recurring risks for family offices:
- Diverging values: Heirs often hold different worldviews shaped by politics, environment, or social causes.
- Trust deficits: When dialogue is absent or mistrusted, family members turn to public platforms to air grievances.
- External influence: Spouses, advisors, or partners can amplify tensions and shift the balance in succession debates.
Instead of resolving these differences internally, grievances spilled into the public domain, weakening alignment both within the family and with external stakeholders. Ultimately, the September 2025 settlement showed that when communication fails, ownership restructuring and liquidity may become the only way to impose clarity.
Aligning the family to a collective vision and greater purpose
In any family, it can be difficult to get everyone on the same page. In a family business, especially one as prolific as the Murdochs, aligning the family, the business, various agendas and values, and getting everyone to work together is even more complex. If the matter ended with the owners and the businesses, it might still be manageable, but the discussion around next-generation also includes the consumers of tomorrow. Millennials are stepping into roles where they can make their mark, and they choose with their purchasing decisions and stand by what’s important to them.
For family offices, this highlights several recurring challenges:
- Multiple agendas: Owners, business leaders, and next gens may pursue different visions of success.
- Consumer influence: Shifting expectations, especially among younger generations, affect not only strategy but also brand reputation.
- Purpose alignment: Investments tied to a clear purpose gain support; those that contradict family values risk fracture.
- Conflict resolution: Raising disagreements early and finding common ground is less costly than allowing disputes to fester.
The importance of alignment isn’t only about family business succession, but about the future of an entire organisation. At the same time, aligning investments to a greater purpose is not about forcing impact, but ensuring that investments resonate with the family’s intentions. If individual family members don’t agree with where their family invests, it is critical to surface this and work towards shared understanding.
What does this mean for family business succession?
For years, one of the biggest questions surrounding the Murdoch family feud was who would inherit the media empire. That question has now been answered. In September 2025, Rupert Murdoch struck a $3.3bn settlement that bought out three of his children – James, Elisabeth and Prudence – each receiving $1.1bn to exit the family trust. The deal leaves Lachlan Murdoch in sole control, joined in the trust by his younger half-sisters, Grace and Chloe.
The outcome underscores several lessons for family offices:
- Clarity comes at a cost: Succession was resolved not through alignment of values but through a multibillion-dollar buyout.
- Trust structures drive outcomes: Equal voting rights created deadlock; restructuring shifted control.
- Streamlining helps succession: Rupert’s earlier sale of 21st Century Fox to Disney in 2017 reduced complexity, making succession easier to execute.
- Founder influence endures: Even at 94, Murdoch imposed his vision on the future, ensuring Lachlan’s leadership and the conservative political direction of Fox and News Corp.
- Liquidity as a tool: Strategic payouts can buy peace where values clash, but at the cost of shrinking long-term family wealth.
For family offices, the Murdoch case demonstrates how delayed decisions compound cost and complexity. By waiting until disputes had hardened, Rupert Murdoch had to spend billions to impose clarity. Earlier governance and alignment could have achieved the same outcome at far lower cost, but without the drama that made this one of the most famous succession sagas of modern business.
From family feud to family office lesson
The Murdoch settlement is more than a media headline; it’s a cautionary tale for family offices navigating succession. Waiting until disputes crystallise can transform differences in values into billion-dollar payouts. By contrast, early governance planning, structured dialogue, and clear trust design can provide smoother transitions, preserve wealth, and maintain alignment without public fallout.
For family leaders, the lesson is clear: succession isn’t just about choosing an heir, it’s about creating the frameworks that allow future generations to lead with purpose. The Murdoch saga shows that when these frameworks are absent or contested, the cost of clarity only grows, in wealth, reputation, and family trust.