Search results

The purpose of this study is to conduct a comparative analysis of the long-term operating performance of family and non-family firms from the agency theoretic perspective. The analysis is focused on investigating the impact of family ownership on principal–agent conflicts of interest.

This paper examines the relationship between firm operating performance and family ownership for a large sample of 677 Australian-listed companies. The paper uses the Generalised Method of Moments (GMM) estimator model developed by Arellano and Bond (1991) and used by other studies in finance (Baltagi, 2012; Bond, 2002; Mohamed et al., 2008).

The empirical results show that firms with ownership concentration has a better operating performance due to the alignment of owner-management interests. This study also finds that family-listed companies have higher survival rates and perform better than non-family companies. Findings support the hypothesis that agency costs arise as a result of privileged access of information and self-interest behaviour of managers (outsiders) in firms with dispersed ownership structures.

Earlier studies have only focused on short-term perspectives, particularly investigating small and medium types of Australian family businesses from narrow aspects, such as productivity, business behaviour, capital structure and leverage. Therefore, this paper has conducted a comparative examination of family and non-family firms listed on the Australian Stock Exchange (ASX) to identify the impact of agency costs on their financial performance.

The purpose of this paper is to design a methodology to identify territory-linked family business groups (TLFBGs) in order to overcome the methodological challenges and ease studies about family business groups' (FBGs) impact on territories.

The paper applied an algorithm to a data set of firms located in Gipuzkoa that were registered in the SABI database in 2018.

The paper defined a new construct, TLFBGs, and proposed a methodology that automatized the identification of TLFBGs by a seven-stage algorithm that was intended to be applicable to any firm-level economic and financial data set, including all registered firms and not only listed firms.

TLFBGs unveil the real relevance that family businesses have in the territorial development, encouraging the political support to family business. Additionally, the methodology provided allows understanding growth processes of family business.

The paper defines a new construct, TLFBGs, that highlights both the underexplored links existing between family and territory and between family and business groups, providing the process and criteria to capture it. The paper opens up large-scale empirical research on the social (and economic) influence of TLFBGs in territorial development.

To examine differences between family and non‐family SMEs in business goals, management practices and performance as they grow.

The study was based on 233 small non‐family and 362 small family firms. Medium firms comprised 305 family and 341 non‐family firms. Chi‐square tests and t‐tests were used to investigate the hypotheses formulated.

Small family firms were less likely to pursue growth compared with similar non‐family firms. Although medium family proprietors desired growth, their actual growth was lower than similar non‐family firms. Management practices were less formal in family firms and the gap between family and non‐family firms in this area widened with growth. Small family firms achieved greater profits than their non‐family counterparts, although this disparity disappeared at the medium level. Exports were low for both firms at the small level. However, medium family firms were less likely than similar non‐family firms to export.

Firms in the various size groups examined were independent of one another. A longitudinal investigation of family and non‐family firms as they progress through various growth stages should complement the findings.

The findings should assist policies makers, advisers, owners and management in designing policies and programs, providing advice and managing the two ownership types. Informal management procedures and the associated flexibility may enhance performance of small family firms but may impede their performance at larger sizes.

The paper demonstrates that the relationship between goals, strategies and performance varies between family and non‐family firms and the variations change with firm size.

This paper aims to investigate the financial performance of listed firms on the Australian Securities Exchange (ASX) over two sample periods (1998-2007 and 2008-2010) before and during the global financial crisis periods.

The generalized method of moments (GMM) has been used to examine the relationship between family ownership and a firm’s performance during the financial crisis period, reflecting on the higher risk exposure associated with capital markets.

Applying firm-based measures of financial performance (ROA and ROE), the empirical results show that family firms with ownership concentration performed better than nonfamily firms with dispersed ownership structures. The results also show that ownership concentration has a positive and significant impact on family- and nonfamily-owned firms during the crisis period. In addition, financial leverage had a positive and significant effect on the performance of Australian family-owned firms during both periods. However, if the impact of the crisis by sector is taking into account, the financial leverage only becomes significant for the nonmining family firms during the pre-crisis period. The results also reveal that family businesses are risk-averse business organizations. These findings are consistent with the underlying economic theories.

This paper contributes to the debate whether the ownership structure affects firms’ financial performance such as ROE and ROA during the global financial crisis by investigating family and nonfamily firms listed on the Australian capital market. It also identifies several influential drivers of financial performance in both normal and crisis periods. Given the paucity of studies in the area of family business, the empirical results of this research provide useful information for researchers, practitioners and investors, who are operating in capital markets for family and nonfamily businesses.

The purpose of this paper is to provide an understanding of the importance of socioemotional wealth (SEW) to family firms in Poland viewed through the lens of the events surrounding the first hostile takeover bid of the post-communist era on the Warsaw Stock Exchange when the clothing company Vistula & Wólczanka (V&W) made an unsolicited, leveraged bid for the family-controlled jewelry company W. Kruk.

The 2008 takeover and its aftermath are described in the context of the corporate governance and legal environment in Poland. The case study events demonstrate the connection between firm behavior and SEW theory.

After the acquisition of W. Kruk by V&W, the Kruk family purchased stock in the newly named Vistula Group and gained influence over the supervisory board in concert with a business ally, eventually wresting back control of the company in the style of a Pac-Man “defense.” The case study illustrates the importance of SEW in family firm takeovers.

The case study design has limitations for generalizability. Nevertheless the research highlights the important role of SEW preservation in understanding the market for corporate control of listed family firms in Poland.

Understanding the reaction by family firms to takeover bids requires recognition that there is a tradeoff between financial and SEW considerations, not just financial gains and losses.

The case study demonstrates the importance of SEW to family firms and suggests that the balance of power in takeovers on the Polish stock market rests with incumbent management.

Empirical studies provide conflicting conclusions regarding the corporate social performance (CSP) of family firms. The purpose of this paper is to synthesize the existing empirical evidence and examine the potential role of research design and contextual factors.

A meta-analysis of existing empirical studies was performed to examine the role of sampling, measurement and contextual factors in explaining the different and often conflicting results of empirical studies in the family business literature.

The overall relationship between family firms and CSP is positive. The relationship between family firms and CSP is positive for private family firms but is negative for public family firms. The relationship between family firms and CSP is positive when family involvement includes both family ownership and management as opposed to only family ownership or family management. Private family firms care more and public family firms care less about the community, environment, and employees than private and public nonfamily firms. The relationship between family firms and CSP is stronger in institutional environments with weak labor and corporate governance regulatory frameworks.

The operationalization of both the family firm and CSP constructs significantly predicts the magnitude and direction of the relationship between family firms and CSP.

Family firms should become more skilled at measuring and disseminating information about the firm’s CSP. Family firms should work to improve public perceptions about the CSP of family firms.

Policy should encourage family firms to remain privately owned by the family. Policy should also incentivize the involvement of family owners in the management of family firms.

Although several literature reviews address the relationship between family firms and CSP, this is the first review to use the meta-analysis method. The authors contribute to the family business literature by analyzing how differences in study-, firm- and country-level factors can explain some of the variance in the results of the studies in the literature.

This paper aims to explore the power of one of the primary organizational stakeholders (shareholders) in the development of a corporate social performance (CSP) score. Few research works in the CSP empirical literature have studied the relationship between stakeholder power and CSP.

Stakeholder theory is used as a theoretical framework to explain how shareholder voting power can influence the CSP level of French publicly listed companies. Stakeholder theory is tested through the operationalization of Ullmann’s (1985) three-dimensional model. Hypotheses related to shareholder voting power, strategic posture and financial performance are formulated through a literature review. A Data Envelopment Analysis approach was presented as a strong tool to measure CSP level. Multiple linear regressions were undertaken to test the hypotheses in a sample of 129 French companies between 2006 and 2007.

The results indicate that companies with dispersed ownership and high proportion of institutional shareholders record a high score of CSP. Strategic posture measured by the implementation of environmental certification standard was positively and significantly related to CSP. Financial performance does not affect significantly the level of CSP.

This paper is the first to empirically analyse the relationship between Ullmann’s three-dimensional model and CSP level in the French context. It offers to managers a better understanding of the power that certain stakeholders can use to acquire satisfaction.

This article aims to explore how cluster affiliation moderates the relationship between family involvement and speed of internationalization in family firms. The speed of internationalization is examined in terms of earliness and post-internationalization speed.

The research is based on a sample of 639 Portuguese family businesses (FBs) created and internationalized between 2010 and 2018 that was retrieved from the Iberian Balance Analysis System – SABI database. The partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) was used to assess the measurement and construct the model.

The results suggest that higher levels of family involvement in ownership and management make family firms enter on international markets in later stages of their development but, after the first international market entry, the firms are able to exhibit a higher post-internationalization speed. When considering the effect of cluster affiliation, the authors found that clustered FBs are more likely to engage in early internationalization and to accelerate the post-internationalization process than non-clustered FBs.

The study's findings are explained by the existence of socially proximate relationships with other cluster members, based on similarity, trust, knowledge exchange and sense of belonging, which push family firms to internationalize and increase their level of international commitment over time. The empirical evidence, therefore, highlights the primary role of industrial clusters in moderating the relationship between family involvement, earliness of internationalization and post-internationalization speed.

This paper attempts to examine the activity and involvement of board of directors in internationalization activities of firms in emerging markets, by evaluating the resource provisioning roles of interlocks provided by board of directors, and the frequency of board meetings. We demonstrate that the effectiveness of board involvement is contingent upon the levels of family ownership in firms since family ownership could impact the firm’s ability to utilize the presence of different types of board members.

The authors test our hypotheses on a sample of listed Indian companies, extracted from the Prowess database published by the Centre for Monitoring Indian Economy (CMIE), a database of the financial performance of Indian companies. On a panel of 3,133 firm years of 605 unique Indian firms with foreign investments, over a time period of 2006–2017, the authors apply different estimation techniques.

The results demonstrate that both board meeting frequency and director interlocks are instrumental in supporting internationalization activities in emerging market firms. However, family ownership moderates the role of insider and independent interlocks on internationalization investments in different ways; the authors find that interlocks provided by independent directors support internationalization activities in family firms, whereas those provided by insider directors do not. Further, the study also finds that board meetings are less effective in internationalization of family firms.

The authors conclude that family firms aiming at international diversification require to develop more connected and networked independent directors to enable internationalization in firms. While independent director interlocks enhance the international investments, it is also useful to know that board meetings are ineffective in utilizing the resources in family firms. This points to the possibility that family firms should device mechanisms to integrate family meetings with board meetings so that they can utilize the within-family processes to aid in their internationalization decisions.

The study contributes to resource dependence theory by understanding its limiting role in family firms. Theoretically, it helps delineate the limiting resource provision role of the insider directors vis-à-vis independent directors. The authors argue that the resource provision role of insider director interlocks does not effectively help in internationalization in comparison to independent director interlocks in family-dominated firms. Consequently, the study shows the limiting role of resource provision and utilization by family-owned firms in comparison to non-family-owned firms.

Family businesses often lack sufficient knowledge about digital business model innovation digital business model innovation (BMI). This study's purpose was to analyze how and when organizational readiness for digital innovation exerts a positive impact on family businesses' digital BMI. To do so, the authors examined the mediating effect of the familiness learning mechanism and the moderating effect of family involvement on this relationship.

A quantitative survey method was used to collect the data for this study. Using a sample of 282 family businesses involved in manufacturing in China, the authors conducted hierarchical regression analyses to evaluate the authors' theoretical model.

The results of this work demonstrate a positive relationship between organizational readiness for digital innovation and family businesses' digital BMI, and the find that the familiness learning mechanism mediates this relationship. The findings also show that second-generation family involvement in management moderates the direct effect of organizational readiness for digital innovation on the familiness learning mechanism, as well as the indirect effect of organizational readiness for digital innovation on digital BMI via the familiness learning mechanism. Moreover, the results establish that family involvement in ownership moderates the direct effect of the familiness learning mechanism on digital BMI, as well as the indirect effect of organizational readiness for digital innovation on digital BMI via the familiness learning mechanism.

This study provides practical contributions to the literature on family businesses and to public policy, providing concrete suggestions for fostering digital innovation in family enterprises. This study also enriches our understanding of the unique conditions by which family businesses can successfully implement digital BMI.

This research confirms that organizational readiness for digital innovation is an antecedent of digital BMI. This finding offers a new perspective that helps explain what might lead family businesses to engage in digital BMI. This study also places the familiness learning mechanism into a theoretical framework, which expands the current understanding of how organizational readiness for digital innovation facilitates digital BMI. Moreover, this work provides new insights into the boundary conditions by which organizational readiness for digital innovation affects the digital BMI of family businesses in terms of second-generation family involvement in management and family involvement in ownership.