This paper sheds light on the incongruent findings concerning the relationship between family involvement and firms’ corporate social responsibility. While prior studies have mainly taken the perspective of families’ socioemotional wealth preservation, we approach this relationship from the perspective of behavioral agency theory, highlighting the important role played by CEOs’ family memberships. Specifically, we posit that family firms are more likely to invest in CSR when their CEOs are members of the controlling families. Furthermore, we examine how family firms can (...) employ long-term incentives to encourage non-family CEOs to act in the interests of the controlling families to preserve SEW and thus enhancing family firms’ CSR performance. We tested our hypotheses using hand-collected data of family firms included in the S&P 500 index, in the period of 2003–2010. The empirical findings support our hypotheses that family firms with family members as the CEOs have better CSR performance and family firms tend to provide a high level of long-term incentives to non-family than family CEOs. In addition, long-term incentives strongly motivate CEOs to improve firms’ CSR performance, regardless of their family memberships. (shrink)

This research proposes an explanation for the conflicting extant evidence about whether family ownership of a business promotes proactive environmental strategy (PES). Based on insights drawn from strategic reference point theory, organizational identity theory, and the socioemotional wealth preservation perspective, we propose that family ownership has a moderated–mediated relationship with PES, with commitment as a moderator and long-term orientation as a mediator. A test using 454 China private firms with different levels of family ownership supports the hypotheses. This shows that (...) PES as a strategy related to business ethics does not happen without commitment and long-term orientation. (shrink)

This systematic literature review contributes to the increasing interest regarding corporate social responsibility (CSR) in family firms—a research field that has developed considerably in the last few years. It now provides the opportunity to take a holistic view on the relationship dynamics—i.e., drivers, activities, outcomes, and contextual influences—of family firms with CSR, thus enabling a more coherent organization of current research and a sounder understanding of the phenomenon. To conceptualize the research field, we analyzed 122 peer-reviewed articles published in highly (...) ranked journals identifying the main issues examined. The results clearly show a lack of research regarding CSR outcomes in family firms. Although considered increasingly crucial in family firm research, a study investigating family outcomes (e.g., family community status, family emotional well-being), as opposed to firm outcomes, is missing. This literature review outlines the current state of research and contributes to the actual debate on CSR in family firms by discussing how family firms can use CSR activities as strategic management tools. Moreover, our analysis shows a black box indicating how CSR links different antecedents and outcomes. The black box is significant since firms generally need to know where to allocate their scarce resources to generate the best outcomes. We identify nine research questions based on these findings, which we hope will inspire future research. (shrink)

This paper investigates the layoff behavior, a typical people dimension of corporate social performance, of family firms from a place-based perspective. We theorize that a place-based culture within family firms ensures that all organizational members share a deep sense of connection with the place of operations which makes them inherently care about their impact on society. Using data on layoffs of 2000 largest US firms between 1994 and 2007, we find that family firms do indeed exhibit a lower tendency to (...) lay off employees in comparison to non-family firms; this relationship is particularly strong in ‘places’ with low population where the negative social externalities related to layoffs tend to be higher. Further post hoc analyses indicate that family firms have a strong place-based culture which can provide resource-based competitive advantages. (shrink)

This study explores the downsizing propensity of family and non-family firms by considering their territorial embeddedness during both periods of economic stability and financial crisis. By drawing on a panel dataset of Spanish manufacturing firms for the period 2002–2015, we show that, all things being equal, family firms have a lower propensity to downsizing than non-family firms. When considering the effect of territorial embeddedness, we found that territorially embedded family firms have an even lower propensity to downsizing than their non-family (...) counterparts. Furthermore, the concern of territorially embedded family firms for their employees’ welfare was particularly pronounced during the years of the global financial crisis. This result is explained by the existence of socially proximate relationships with the firms’ immediate surroundings, based on similarity and a sense of belonging, which push deeply rooted family firms to treat their employees as salient stakeholders during hard times. Overall, our study stresses the importance of local roots in moderating the relationship between family firms and downsizing. (shrink)