Exploring the relation between family involvement and firms' financial performance: A meta-analysis of main and moderator effects

O’Boyle, Ernest H.; Pollack, Jeffrey M.; Rutherford, Matthew W.

doi:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2011.09.002

Cited by 240 publications

(253 citation statements)

References 153 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

230

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, to make sure that the targeted companies met our definition of family firms, introductory defining questions were posed. These questions included the alignment of ownership and management in the same family/-ies, a majority of shares held by the family/-ies, and at least two family members being active in the firm (Miller et al 2007;Westhead and Cowling 1998;Steiger et al 2015;O'Boyle et al 2012). We assume that the introductory defining questions yielded a high rate of uncompleted questionnaires as, for example, the ownership situation did not confirm with our requirement.…”

Section: Research Design 31 Sample and Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Both construct variations of EO are assumed to positively affect financial performance (Wales et al 2013), which usually is measured in terms of profitability, sales growth or other financial measures Dess 1996, 2001) Family-related interests influence the importance of EO dimensions and their effect on performance in family firms (Nordqvist et al 2008;Kraus et al 2012a;Xi et al 2013). For the purpose of this study, we define family firms as firms where ownership and management is aligned within one or more families (i.e., family members of the owning family/-ies are involved in managing the firm), owning family/-ies hold more than 50% of shares, and at least two family members are active in the firm (Miller et al 2007;Westhead and Cowling 1998;O'Boyle et al 2012;Steiger et al 2015). Previous studies show, for example, that, in comparison to their non-family counterparts, family firms do business rather risk-averse (Naldi et al 2007), and less aggressive, unless threatened (Gómez-Mejía et al 2007), due to image and reputation reasons (Deephouse and Jaskiewicz 2013).…”

Section: Theoretical Foundation 21 Entrepreneurial Orientation and Fmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Tweaking the entrepreneurial orientation–performance relationship in family firms: the effect of control mechanisms and family-related goals

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Management literature is currently giving growing conceptual and empirical attention to the peculiarity and relevance of entrepreneurial attitudes in family firms, with divergent outcomes. Aiming at concretizing the effects of these attitudes, denoted by the entrepreneurial orientation construct, on family business performance and considering that family dynamics come into play in this relationship, we particularly investigate the impact of control mechanisms and familyrelated goals. Findings are based on a sample of 180 family firms and show that Proactiveness and Autonomy are particularly relevant to financial performance. Agency-problems avoiding control mechanisms moderate the effect of Innovativeness and Autonomy, while socioemotional wealth (SEW) goals moderate the effect of Risk-Taking, respectively. The usage of these mechanisms and managing SEW goals provide opportunities for a more efficient exploitation of entrepreneurial attitudes.

show abstract

Section: Research Design 31 Sample and Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Theoretical Foundation 21 Entrepreneurial Orientation and Fmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tweaking the entrepreneurial orientation–performance relationship in family firms: the effect of control mechanisms and family-related goals

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…CSP ratings and reputational rankings are also considered externally reported or archival measures of CSP. The difference between self-reported and externally-reported CSP measurement approaches is analogous to the difference between accounting and market based measures that are commonly used to measure CFP [64][65][66][67][68][150][151][152]. To test for the moderating effect of the CSP measurement approach, the sample was divided on the basis of the two categories.…”

Section: The Moderating Role Of Approaches To the Measurement Of Corpmentioning

confidence: 99%

Firms’ Board Independence and Corporate Social Performance: A Meta-Analysis

Ortas

Álvarez

Zubeltzu³

2017

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper investigates the influence of organizations' board independence on corporate social performance (CSP) using a meta-analytic approach. A sample of 87 published papers is used to identify a set of underlying moderating effects in that relationship. Specifically, differences in the system of corporate governance, CSP measurement models and market conditions have been considered as moderating variables. The results show that the independence of a company's board positively influences CSP. This is because companies with more independent directors in their boards are more likely to commit to stakeholder engagement, environmental preservation and community well-being. Interestingly, the results also show that the positive connection between board independence and CSP is stronger in civil law countries and when CSP is measured by self-reporting data. Finally, the strength of the influence of the independence of a firm's board on CSP varies significantly in different market conditions. The paper concludes by presenting the main implications for academics, practitioners and policy makers.

show abstract

“…There is a growing interest in the literature related to the analysis of how firms with ownership concentration, particularly in family groups, face these challenges, and the effects that particular ownership structures have on firm performance [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11]. The importance of family firms in national economies is even more evident in emerging economies, where it has been measured in terms of contribution to gross domestic product, employment, and number of firms [12,13].…”

Section: Open Accessmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Family Ownership, Debt and Board Composition on Mexican Firms Performance

Martín-Reyna

Durán-Encalada

2015

IJFS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines the relationship between ownership structure and performance of public firms in Mexico, considering debt and the structure of the board of directors as contextual and institutional factors. This research seeks to explain the mixed results about the relationship of ownership and performance presented by other relevant studies in family and non-family businesses, mainly in emerging countries. The results confirm the positive association between family ownership concentration and performance, calculated by Tobin's Q, showing how the participation of inside shareholders on the board and a low debt level contribute to higher performance. However, the association of these variables with performance shows a contrasting effect in the case of family as compared to non-family businesses. The particular corporate legal context in Mexico could be highlighted as one of the main reasons for these results.

show abstract

Exploring the relation between family involvement and firms' financial performance: A meta-analysis of main and moderator effects

Cited by 240 publications

References 153 publications

Tweaking the entrepreneurial orientation–performance relationship in family firms: the effect of control mechanisms and family-related goals

Tweaking the entrepreneurial orientation–performance relationship in family firms: the effect of control mechanisms and family-related goals

Firms’ Board Independence and Corporate Social Performance: A Meta-Analysis

Effects of Family Ownership, Debt and Board Composition on Mexican Firms Performance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About