The purpose of this comparative case study is to understand codetermination intwo family firms. Thereby, this study aims at exploring the role of employee-representativesin two non-listed family businesses. Empirically, this study draws on aninterpretive case study of two family businesses. Its findings extend earlier research,by exploring and introducing the phenomenon of codetermination in the familybusiness literature. Codetermination is explored with the perspective of paternalismas analytical lens. Theoretically, the study draws on the control-collaboration paradoxwhich helps understanding the phenomenon of codetermination. The study revealsdifferent types of codetermination, i.e., the works council and the board of directors.The implications of these types are highlighted and discussed. Findingshighlight the need for professional governance structures in order to facilitate cooperationbetween family owners, the management, and employee representatives.Professional governance allows handling the paternalistic ideological underpinningswhich can otherwise prevent continued firm success, leading to unsolved conflicts.