Employee Ownership Work Attitudes, and Power Relationships.

French, J. Lawrence; Rosenstein, Joseph

doi:10.2307/255883

Cited by 73 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Family ownership has been the most common proxy used to capture the intensity of SEW in prior studies and many articles in top journals have validated it (Berrone et al, 2010;Gómez-Mejía et al, 2007. Moreover, as the concentration of company ownership in family hands increases, the family has greater influence over the firm's strategic decisions (Anderson & Reeb, 2003;Miller, Le Breton Miller, & Lester, 2010), reinforcing the control dimension of SEW, the level of personal attachment and identification, and the emotional bonds between family members and the firm (French & Rosenstein, 1984). In addition, as Berrone et al (2012) argued, the percentage of shares owned by a family is "perhaps the only available alternative when using large archival databases" (p. 264).…”

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are Family Firms Really More Socially Responsible?

Cruz

Larraza‐Kintana²,

Garcés-Galdeano³

et al. 2014

Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice

416

491

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper conducts an empirical study as to whether family firms are more socially responsible than their nonfamily counterparts and explores the conditions in which this difference in social behavior occurs. We argue that family firms, given their socioemotional wealth bias, have a positive effect on social dimensions linked to external stakeholders, yet have a negative impact on internal social dimensions. Thus, family firms can be socially responsible and irresponsible at the same time. We also suggest that institutional and organizational conditions act as catalysts in the relationship between firm type and corporate social responsibility (CSR). General support for our thesis that family firms neglect internal social dimensions came from the study of a sample of 598 listed European firms over a period of 4 years. Moreover, while national standards and industry conditions influence the degree of CSR in nonfamily firms, these factors do not affect family firms. However, family firms' social activities are more sensitive to declining organizational performance.

show abstract

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are Family Firms Really More Socially Responsible?

Cruz

Larraza‐Kintana²,

Garcés-Galdeano³

et al. 2014

Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice

416

491

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…More specifically, I draw on research of self‐identification and socio‐emotional wealth to argue that managerial equity reduces the likelihood of divesting. Prior research shows that firm ownership leads to stronger managers’ identification with their organization (French and Rosenstein, ) which enhances their emotional attachment to the firm, often called socio‐emotional wealth (Gomez‐Mejia et al ., ). This emotional attachment could lead to decision biases where managers favor strategies inconsistent with economic efficiency rationales.…”

Section: Theory and Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

To Divest or not to Divest: A Meta‐Analysis of the Antecedents of Corporate Divestitures

Kolev

2015

British J of Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Corporate divestitures have been identified as important strategic actions with a positive impact on firm performance. Yet, what is still missing in the strategic management literature is an integrative framework that quantitatively synthesizes the relative impact of various antecedents to divestitures, and theoretically reconciles the multitude of theories underlying divestiture research. To fill this gap, the author conducts a meta-analysis (based on a sample of 35 studies) and develops four broad categories of determinants: corporate governance; firm strategy; performance; and industry environment. Evidence is found that divestitures are driven mainly by prior divestment experience, structural factors (firm size and firm diversification) and weak unit performance. In addition, the relative predictive validity of several theoretical perspectives on divestment decisions is assessed.

show abstract

“…A rich stream of research on share ownership and employee attitudes over many years has shown that ESO can generate intrinsic satisfaction from owning shares (Pendleton et al, 1998), extrinsic satisfaction from the financial benefits it conveys (Buchko, 1993;French and Rosenstein, 1984) and instrumental satisfaction based on involvement in decision-making (Long, 1980). Under certain conditions, workers with ownership may experience psychological ownership (Pierce et al, 1991).…”

Section: Theoretical Background and Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do investments in human capital lead to employee share ownership? Evidence from French establishments

Guery

Pendleton

2016

Economic and Industrial Democracy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Investments in human capital can create a hold-up problem whereby both employers and employees exploit the bargaining weaknesses of the other. Employee share ownership (ESO) can mitigate this hold-up problem because it can align interests, develop loyalty, signal good-will and lock in employees. Previous studies have shown positive relationships between company investments in human capital and the use of ESO consistent with this argument but have been unable to identify the direction of causality. Using panel data from the French REPONSE survey, the findings indicate that significant and continuous investments in human capital take place prior to the implementation of ESO.

show abstract

Employee Ownership Work Attitudes, and Power Relationships.

Cited by 73 publications

References 10 publications

Are Family Firms Really More Socially Responsible?

Are Family Firms Really More Socially Responsible?

To Divest or not to Divest: A Meta‐Analysis of the Antecedents of Corporate Divestitures

Do investments in human capital lead to employee share ownership? Evidence from French establishments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About