At the intersection of corporate governance and performance in family business settings: Extant knowledge and future research

Despite the proliferation of research on governance and performance of family firms over the past decades, the extant empirical evidence remains inconclusive. Acknowledging multiple sources of family firm variation, scholars started explaining the observed differences in governance structures and performance outcomes by taking into consideration the heterogeneity among family firms. In this paper, we undertake a review of the literature at the intersection of governance and performance in family firms to elucidate (a) the role of various governance attributes as performance drivers; and (b) the variability of governance effects across different performance indicators. By taking stock of what is already known and discussing avenues for further investigation, we seek to contribute to a more fine‐grained understanding of the intricate governance–performance relationship in light of the heterogeneous nature of family firms. The key priorities for future inquiry consist in: the identification of missing mediating and moderating variables; the inclusion of currently underexplored governance determinants of family firm performance; and the analysis of complementarity and substitution effects among multiple attributes of monitoring and their changing dynamics over time to secure an optimal governance–performance alignment in family firms.     

Revisiting the entrepreneur gender–performance relationship: a firm perspective

Research shows that firms started by women underperform those started by men but the relationship may not be as straightforward as previously thought. Using a sample of 4,540 Korean ventures in 2002 we investigated the effects of three firm characteristics—resources, industry, and regional location—on firm performance. Results indicate that firms started by male entrepreneurs, compared to female, have greater firm assets, compete in high-technology manufacturing industries, and are more likely to locate in clustered regions. Further, these firm characteristics are positively associated with domestic and international firm performance. Findings suggest firm resource and context characteristics fully mediate the entrepreneur gender–firm performance relationship. Overall, gender is not a determinant of domestic or international firm performance.     

Family Firm Heterogeneity and Tax Aggressiveness: A Mixed Gamble Approach

Few studies try to understand how the unique preferences of family firms affect tax strategies, and how family firm heterogeneity drives variation in tax activities. Drawing on the mixed gamble approach, this study examines the tax aggressiveness of different types of family firms, considering how various sources of heterogeneity alter the perception of potential gains and losses to socioemotional and financial wealth. Based on a panel dataset of 242 private family firms for the period 2012–2014, this study shows that strong family-owned firms, family firms with a family CFO, family-founder firms, and family-named firms display lower levels of tax aggressiveness. These findings demonstrate that family firm heterogeneity is a crucial factor in the mixed gamble calculus of tax aggressiveness.     

Family Firms and Labor Productivity: The Role of Enterprise‐Level Bargaining in the Italian Economy

We investigate the role of Italian firms in labor productivity performance. We find that family‐owned firms have lower labor productivity than their non‐family counterparts. In a second step, we estimate the role of firm‐level bargaining (FLB) to determine whether family‐controlled firms that adopt this type of bargaining may partially close the gap in terms of labor productivity with their non‐family competitors. Our results, obtained through IV estimation to control for endogeneity bias, suggest that enterprises under family governance achieve significant labor productivity gains—greater than those achieved by their non‐family counterparts—when they adopt firm‐level bargaining.     

Women’s Leadership and Firm Performance: Family Versus Nonfamily Firms

We evaluate the relationship between the appointment of women to CEO or Chair positions and firm performance, and shed light on the differences between family and nonfamily firms. By using a propensity score matching approach on a sample of 394 French firms over the period 2001–2010, we find major discordances between women’s leadership style and family business expectations relative to firm performance, as measured by return on assets and Tobin’s q. Notably, our results support the conjecture that family firms, which are more conducive to transformational leadership, offer women a more appropriate climate for exercising the function of Chair than that of CEO. In contrast, women CEOs perform better in nonfamily firms. Our findings move away from the predominant focus on barriers and stereotypes images about the female leadership and support the contingency theory of leadership, which states that the effectiveness of a leadership style depends on the organization and culture in which leaders operate, and on task-related positions     

The characteristics of family firms: exploiting information on ownership,kinship, and governance using total population data

Family firms are often considered characteristically different from non-family firms. However, our understanding of family firms suffers from an inability to identify them in total population data; information is rarely available regarding owners, their kinship, and their involvement in firm governance. We present a method for identifying domiciled family firms using register data; this method offers greater accuracy than previous methods. We apply this method to Swedish data concerning firm ownership, governance, and kinship from 2004 to 2010. We find that the family firm is a significant organizational form, contributing over one third of all employment and gross domestic product (GDP). Family firms are common in most industries and range in size. Furthermore, we find that, compared to private non-family firms, family firms have fewer total assets, employment, and sales and carry higher solidity, although family firms are more profitable. These differences diminish with firm size. We conclude that the term “family firm” includes a large variety of firms, and we call for increased attention to their heterogeneity.     

Why some are more equal: Family firm heterogeneity and the effect on management’s attention to CSR

Research at the family firm–Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) nexus lacks agreement about whether family firms are more or less socially responsible than their non‐family counterparts, which leads discussion relating to the bright and dark side of socioemotional wealth (SEW). We add to this ongoing debate in two different ways. First, we build on family firm heterogeneity and argue for a gray side to SEW, located between the bright and dark sides that is dependent upon the kind of family firm ownership. Second, we assume that prior research on a diverse set of CSR behaviors may, to some extent, explain the contradicting results; thus, we propose going back a step and focusing on management’s attention to CSR as an important antecedent of CSR behavior. By analyzing the letters to the shareholders of German HDAX firms from 2003 to 2012, this study finds that family ownership positively affects management’s attention to CSR, mainly driven by founders and family foundations. The research adds to our understanding of the family firm–CSR nexus by scrutinizing the role SEW plays in management’s attention to CSR when it comes to family firm heterogeneity.     

Family firms and financial performance: The cost of growing

This study examines the relationship between financial performance and family involvement for 523 listed and non-listed Colombian firms over 1996–2006. Using a detailed database and performing several panel data regression models, we find that family firms exhibit better financial performance on average than non-family firms when the founder is still involved in operations, although this effect decreases with firm size. With heirs in charge, there is no statistical difference in financial performance. Both direct and indirect ownership (control through pyramidal ownership structures within family business groups) affect firms' financial performance positively. However, this positive effect decreases with firm size. The results suggest that some kinds of family involvement appear to make firm growth expensive.     

A taxonomy of small- and medium-sized international family firms

This study develops a taxonomy of small- and medium-sized family firms that internationalise and discusses the different configurations of these firms based on firm culture (in terms of organisational orientations), firm strategy (in terms of differentiation, cost leadership and marketing standardisation) and firm structure (in terms of integration, centralisation and specialisation). Although the literature on international family firms has highlighted the significant role of organisational culture in firm internationalisation, the strategies and structures of international family firms and their consequences for performance have been disregarded. To examine the interplay of international family firm culture, strategy and structure, we employ a quantitative taxonomic approach that is rooted in configurational theory, analysing 504 Germany-based small- and medium-sized family firms. Different combinations of strategy, structure and culture result in different configurations of family firms and different levels of non-domestic performance. In considering these configurations, we aim to determine which combinations of strategies, structures and firm orientations are primarily applied by international family firms and whether these organisational configurations are successful. Our empirical findings suggest that there are four groups of firms: Domestic-Focussed Traditionalists, Global Standardisers, Multinational Adapters and Transnational Entrepreneurs. These configurations are clearly distinctive in terms of their structure, orientations and performance but differ less in terms of their strategies. Superior international (i.e. non-domestic) performance tends to be driven by a decentralised entrepreneurial approach.     

Non-family chair and corporate performance

Using a sample of Chinese family firms listed from 1999 to 2014, we investigate the relationship between non-family leadership and firm performance. We find that firms with a non-family member as board chair perform significantly worse than firms whose chair belongs to the family. Moreover, we show that the underperformance of nonfamily-chair firms is more pronounced when firms are under weaker outside monitoring and when the controlling families care less about family business longevity. The negative effect of a non-family chair is robust to a variety of endogeneity tests. We also dismiss alternative explanations other than concern for reputation. Overall, our empirical results suggest that the social norms regarding family reputation are important in shaping the controlling shareholders’ expropriation incentives and firm performance.     

Non-family chair and corporate performance

Using a sample of Chinese family firms listed from 1999 to 2014, we investigate the relationship between non-family leadership and firm performance. We find that firms with a non-family member as board chair perform significantly worse than firms whose chair belongs to the family. Moreover, we show that the underperformance of non-family-chair firms is more pronounced when firms are under weaker outside monitoring and when the controlling families care less about family business longevity. The negative effect of a non-family chair is robust to a variety of endogeneity tests. We also dismiss alternative explanations other than concern for reputation. Overall, our empirical results suggest that the social norms regarding family reputation are important in shaping the controlling shareholders’ expropriation incentives and firm performance.     

Characterising Euro Area Multinationals

This study uses firm‐level data on a large sample of European manufacturing firms to investigate the links between opening up foreign affiliates and firms’ productivity. The analysis is guided by recent theoretical models of international trade with firm heterogeneity. The paper finds that while only a small share of euro area firms locate affiliates abroad, these firms account for over‐proportionally large shares of output, employment and profits in their home countries. They have higher survival rates and their productivity growth is also higher. The strongest contribution is by productivity growth of existing firms with a multinational status rather than entry into the multinational status. Finally, there are performance premia for multinationals with a large number of affiliates abroad relative to those with a small number.     

Multinational Enterprises and Foreign Direct Investment: Introduction

This study uses firm‐level data on a large sample of European manufacturing firms to investigate the links between opening up foreign affiliates and firms’ productivity. The analysis is guided by recent theoretical models of international trade with firm heterogeneity. The paper finds that while only a small share of euro area firms locate affiliates abroad, these firms account for over‐proportionally large shares of output, employment and profits in their home countries. They have higher survival rates and their productivity growth is also higher. The strongest contribution is by productivity growth of existing firms with a multinational status rather than entry into the multinational status. finally, there are performance premia for multinationals with a large number of affiliates abroad relative to those with a small number.     

Resignation of officials as independent directors and firm performance

In 2013, the Chinese government implemented Rule No. 18, which suspended the directorships of incumbent government officials and precluded those who retired within the past three years from serving as independent directors for listed firms. The surprise implementation of Rule No. 18 triggered a wave of resignations among official independent directors (OIDs). The event provided a unique opportunity to examine the impacts of the political connections of board members on firm performance. We applied a difference-in-difference technique to empirically investigate the effect of OID resignations on firm performance from the perspectives of resource dependence theory and social capital theory. The results indicate that the resignation of OIDs had a significantly negative effect on firm performance, as measured by Tobin’s Q and firm leverage. This also confirmed the importance of independent directors’ political connection on firm performance, as discovered in prior research. However, this influence varied across OIDs’ heterogeneity, external environment and firm ownership. The results indicate that political connections may not be necessary channels for firms to achieve success.     

Environmental Dynamism as a Moderator of Familiness and Performance in Mexican SMEs

This research explores how the environmental dynamism affects the relationship between familiness and a family firm’s performance in an emerging economy. To achieve this goal, we used an instrument to measure three familiness theoretical dimensions (process, human, and organizational resources). To collect data, we interviewed owners of family firms characterized as SMEs in México. Contrary to what is expected, our findings suggest that familiness, as a source of competitive advantage for family firms, may be more suitable in stable environments characterized by certainty of conditions. In other words, the effect of familiness on a family firm’s performance diminishes in highly dynamic environments.     

Heterogeneity in business groups and the corporate diversification-firm performance relationship

This article examines how heterogeneous features among business groups influence the corporate diversification-firm performance relationship. The study classifies heterogeneity along three dimensions: group size, group diversity, and share ownership. Using a sample of firms from India, the study finds some evidence that for firms affiliated to larger business groups, corporate diversification enhances firm performance. However, business group diversity does not influence the diversification-performance relationship. The impact of diversification on firm performance differs substantially owing to the heterogeneity in share ownership. The paper documents an interesting interplay between business group and ownership structure.     

Founding Family Controlled Firms: Performance, Risk, and Value

An agency theory framework is used to test the effects of founding family control on firm performance, capital structure, and value. Both the finance and management literatures regarding the relationship between firm control and firm value are explored. Controlling for size, industry, and managerial ownership, the results suggest that firms controlled by the founding family have greater value, are operated more efficiently, and carry less debt than other firms.     

Founding Family Firms,CEO Incentive Pay,and Dual Agency Problems

This paper contributes to the literature on agency theory by examining relations between family involvement and CEO compensation. Using a panel of 362 small U.S. listed firms, we analyze how founding families influence firm performance through option portfolio price sensitivity. Consistent with the dual agency framework, we find that family firms have lower CEO incentive pay, which is further reduced by higher executive ownership. Interestingly, such incentive pay offsets the positive impact that families have on firm valuation. Collectively, our results show that, compared with nonfamily firms, lower incentive pay adopted by family firms due to lower agency costs mitigates the direct effect of family involvement on firm performance. Once accounting for CEO incentive pay, we do not observe performance differences between family and nonfamily firms.     

Firm-level comparative advantage

We study the consequences of heterogeneity in factor intensity on firm performance. We present a standard Heckscher–Ohlin model augmented with factor intensity differences across firms within a country–industry pair. We show that for any two firms, each of whose capital intensity is, for instance, one percent above (below) its respective country–industry average, the relative marginal cost of the firm in the capital-intensive industry of the capital-abundant country is lower (higher) than that of the other firm. Our empirical analysis, conducted using data for a large panel of European firms, supports this prediction. These results provide a novel approach to the verification of the Heckscher–Ohlin theory and new evidence on its validity.