Family involvement in publicly traded firms and firm performance: a meta-analysis

Abstract

Purpose

This study aims to investigate the effects of family involvement in corporations on firm performance. It remains unclear whether family-owned companies, or companies with other forms of family involvement in the corporate governance, perform better than firms with no family involvement. Furthermore, the study focuses on family involvement in publicly traded firms, which are different from private family firms. Hence, knowledge about family firms will be enriched through a closer look at the publicly traded family firms and shed further light onto the heterogeneity among family firms.

Design/methodology/approach

The present study uses a meta-analysis of the extant research on family involvement and publicly traded family firm performance. The authors synthesize past research, identify and reconcile mixed findings and expand the understanding of the phenomenon.

Findings

Involvement of the founding family members in firm governance tends to improve firm performance, albeit the effect is rather weak. However, the effect varies greatly depending on the type of family involvement and the measure of performance. The authors also identify regional differences, as well as variations by the firm size and study design. Furthermore, under-researched areas are identified for future research.

Practical implications

The results of the study would be useful in guiding organizational design and investment decisions.

Originality/value

By using the meta-analytic approach, the present study provides a comprehensive review of the empirical evidence available on the issue so far. Most importantly, the authors were able to conduct a series of tests to assess the moderating effects of a number of factors that could not be evaluated in any individual study in the meta-analytic database.

Citation

Taras, V., Memili, E., Wang, Z. and Harms, H. (2019), "Family involvement in publicly traded firms and firm performance: a meta-analysis", Management Research Review, Vol. 41 No. 2, pp. 225-251. https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-05-2017-0150