No abstract

Social impact investments represent a cultural revolution, as they offer the opportunity to pursue financial and social goals simultaneously. However, Social impact investing market configurations are not evolving equally across national contexts. Therefore, in different contexts, different actors may play the pivotal role to make social impact investments more attractive. The present work, by looking at the Italian context, applies a qualitative methodology to study Foundations of Banking Origin (FBOs). This is a specific category of foundation which is bound by law to work and expand the charity sector. It emerges that the role of these entities, inside the philanthropy system, should develop from “impact facilitators” to “impact generators” in promoting social initiatives. Furthermore, the work sustains the importance of introducing a social impact rating system as a formalized methodology to select and finance the worthiest social project. In this perspective, the definition of a clear social rating philosophy and its correct application in the rating system design and use is a necessary condition to increase the solidity of a social impact assessment model.

In the years following the economic and financial crisis, Italy, where most firms are family-owned, has seen the demise of more companies than any other country. To avoid a similar disaster in the future, it is important to understand which determinants influence firms’ survival. Stemming from financial and family business literature, this paper investigates the role of financial ratios and family corporate governance in predicting family firms’ survival probability. To obtain empirical evidence, it performs a mediating regression analysis using a sample of 273 Italian family firms. The main findings show that family ownership concentration and the presence of a family CEO increase firms’ survival probability, while a high number of family members involved in the firm and the co-presence of more generations hinder it.

PurposeIn this study, a panel of 74,128 Italian SMEs was analyzed to verify whether any syndromes could be identified and defined through financial ratios. Defining relevant syndromes (i.e. the set of correlated signs and symptoms often associated with a particular disorder) can be of importance for assessing which specific intervention can solve a firm's difficulties.Design/methodology/approachTo identify the main syndromes involved in company defaults, firstly, financial data on defaulted firms for each of the main economic sectors were examined through a cluster analysis; the results obtained for each sector were then compared to verify whether syndromes recur across sectors. Finally, the effects of each syndrome were compared with possible default causes, as described by previous literature.FindingsResults show that a significant share of corporate insolvencies is characterized by a set of recurrent signs and symptoms so that the main syndromes can be identified. The results also show that these syndromes recur across sectors, even if specific values characterize each sector.Research limitations/implicationsThe approach adopted in this study sets a new direction for the analysis of default risk, as the study shows that certain key syndromes can be defined and described, and the study suggests that different problems can induce different risk patterns. Further analyses of other samples could confirm whether the same syndromes recur over countries and over time.Originality/valueThis is the first study aimed at identifying and describing the syndromes affecting SMEs, conducted by means of balance-sheet ratios.

No abstract