The Asian economic landscape is dominated by various types of business group. Asian Business Groups provides a comprehensive review and introduction to the different types of business group. The origins and founding context of groups from particular national settings form the basic structure of the book. Emphasis is given to both the similarities and differences in group governance and performance and the implications for Asian international competitiveness are addressed. Multidisciplinary framework that integrates managerial, sociological, and economic perspectives on business groups and permits analysis of both their positive and negative aspectsComprehensive survey of empirical findings on the financial and market performanceSensitivity to the changing historical context and major events that have shaped business group development and dynamics
Zugriffsoptionen:
Die folgenden Links führen aus den jeweiligen lokalen Bibliotheken zum Volltext:
The management field increasingly recognizes that most firms in the world are family firms and that these entities operate differently from the non-family firms on which most of our current management theories are based. The De Gruyter Handbook of Business Families brings together work from leading academics who explore emerging research themes relevant to business families, particularly drawing in new insights from adjacent disciplines that can advance the family business field. The handbook challenges the traditional notion of the "single firm-single family" that has characterized most early research on family business. Recognizing that families may simultaneously own or control multiple businesses as well as substantial wealth beyond these firms in the form of financial and non-financial assets, this handbook focuses on business families rather than the narrower construct of family business. The contributions in this handbook explore the relatively neglected dynamics between individuals with family ties that shape the interaction between family and business; business families with multiple businesses; how business families adopt formal rules and processes around their joint activities; and the institutionalization of wealth and business families in society. The De Gruyter Handbook of Business Families fills a gap in the family business research literature and is an essential reference work for researchers and graduate-level students in the area of business families.
Purpose This study aims to advance an international political economy (IPE) perspective that geo-political events can have long-lasting imprint effects on countries and their firms. The study also aims to explore the idea that shared political history and geography combine to create specific structural conditions that shape the international competitiveness of all firms in a region. In particular, the authors consider whether the Monroe Doctrine of 1823, which asserted American influence in the Western Hemisphere, contributed to the creation of institutional structures across Latin America (LA) affecting the strategies of all firms to this day. The authors also illustrate the IPE perspective using the example of the contemporary international competitiveness of LA business groups.
Design/methodology/approach The authors illustrate the IPE perspective using the example of the contemporary international competitiveness of LA business groups. The exploratory framework of this study leads to a proposition about the export performance of Latin American business group affiliates. The authors use firm-level performance data for 32,000 firms across emerging economies to explore the proposition empirically while controlling for alternative explanations. To do this, the authors draw on the World Bank Economic Surveys.
Findings The authors derive a proposition that argues the Monroe Doctrine has had a long-run imprint effect on economic policymaking in LA, resulting in a common, persistent and negative impact on the international competitiveness of firms. The authors find strong and consistent evidence that in terms of export performance, all Latin American firms export less and group affiliates do not outperform independent firms, This finding contrasts with the results for all the other emerging market regions around the world.
Research limitations/implications The main contribution of this study has been to suggest the potential importance of shared regional geopolitical history and geography in explaining firm-level outcomes. However, this study is preliminary and introductory, although the authors seek to control for alternative country-specific explanations of the results. The analysis considers the effects of one particular IPE phenomenon, the Monroe Doctrine, in one particular location: LA. Future work should seek to contrast LA with other geopolitical security and alternative IPE structures. They might also address the time dimension from a historical perspective: is imprinting in LA driven by the length of the Monroe Doctrine arrangements?
Practical implications The most important managerial learning point concerns the relevance of geography and political economy factors for multinational enterprises strategy formation. There is widespread understanding that context is an important determinant of subsidiaries' performance, and that strategies need to be constructed to take account of country-specific characteristics, most importantly, in emerging economies and institutional arrangements. This paper proposes that managers also need to take account of IPE structures, including security arrangements, and to consider the resulting regional as well as national context.
Social implications The analysis suggests that not only the performance of firms, including emblematic firms, but also the socially beneficial spillovers that might be generated from them, are contingent on the regional as well as national characteristics. Thus, business groups in most emerging economies are found to yield better performance and to provide higher levels of social impact, including concerning ESG goals. However, the findings of this study suggest that the former is not true for LA, which, the authors argue, is a consequence of imprinting as a result of the Monroe Doctrine. Further work is needed to establish whether the latter effect is also not true, but if that is the case, then regionally specific policies may be required to address the resulting corporate social shortfalls.
Originality/value The core idea is that geo-political events can have long-lasting imprint effects on countries and their firms: that shared political history and geography create specific structural conditions that shape the international competitiveness of all firms in a region. The authors explore this concept with reference to the Monroe Doctrine, asking whether its assertion of US influence across the Americas contributed to the creation of institutional structures across LA affecting the strategies of all firms to this day.
AbstractManuscript TypeEmpiricalResearch Question/IssueWe examine the effects of firm‐ and country‐level "good" corporate governance prescriptions on firm performance before and during the recent financial crisis, using a large sample of 1,197 firms across 26 European countries.Research Findings/InsightsWe propose a contextualized agency perspective suggesting that firm‐ and country‐level good governance prescriptions designed to assure managerial oversight may not hold in a financial crisis. This is because firms can benefit from broadening managerial discretion so as to facilitate the exercise of initiative and decisive leadership. Overall, our firm‐ and country‐level findings support this argument. In a crisis, CEO duality is associated with better performance. We also find that the use of incentive compensation and the existence of a wedge between ownership and control rights negatively impacts on firm performance in a crisis. Hierarchical linear modeling shows that 25 percent of the heterogeneity in firm performance is among countries, indicating the importance of including country‐level institutions in our analyses. In a crisis, we find that the general quality of the legal system and creditor rights protection are positively related to firm performance, but protection for equity investors is not.Theoretical/Academic ImplicationsThe findings challenge the universality of good governance prescriptions and contribute to the growing body of work proposing that the efficacy of governance mechanisms may be contingent upon organizational and environmental circumstances.Practitioner/Policy ImplicationsThe study offers insights relevant to policy and practitioner communities, showing that governance mechanisms operate differently in crisis and non‐crisis periods. The tendency to respond to a crisis with more stringent rules may be counterproductive since such measures may compromise executives' ability to respond appropriately to systemic shocks. Practitioners are encouraged to optimize rather than maximize their governance choices.
PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to examine two prominent perspectives on business group functioning, institutional void (IV) and entrenchment/exploitation (EE), that make different predictions about the effect of business group (BG) on the economy. The authors examine the effects of BG prevalence in an economy and its effect on macroeconomic outcomes including foreign direct inward and outward investment, innovation and development of the financial sector.Design/methodology/approachThe authors build a unique database by extracting estimates of BG prevalence for multiple countries between 1978 and 2012 from the existing literature and use this to test conflicting predictions derived from the IV and EE perspectives, respectively.FindingsThe authors find no consistent evidence that BG prevalence diminishes over time with economic development as IVs diminish, which is predicted by the IV perspective. Instead, the long-term persistence of BGs in many countries appears to be more consistent with the EE perspective. However, this study also finds no support for the perspective that high levels of BG prevalence are negatively associated with country-level indicators and determinants of economic development and competitiveness, as suggested by that perspective.Originality/valueThe authors conclude that there is no robust support for either the IV or the EE perspective and highlight the need for more contextualized theorizing about the evolution of BGs.
AbstractManuscript TypeEmpiricalResearch Question/IssueOur study seeks to explain the relationship between publicly listed family‐controlled firms (FCFs) and investor and employee outcomes before and during the global financial crisis. Theoretically, we develop hypotheses suggesting that FCF resilience is beneficial to both investor and employees. Employing a large firm‐level data set of 2,949 firms across 27 European countries, we test the hypotheses that FCFs' long‐term orientation makes them resilient to the effects of economic shocks. In addition, using hierarchical linear modeling we evaluate family firm investor and employee outcomes, and the moderating impact of legal institutions protecting minority investors and employees.Research Findings/InsightsWe find that FCFs financially outperform non‐FCFs during the financial crisis, beginning in 2007 and reaching its lowest point in 2009, but show no significant differences during the stable‐growth period between 2004 and 2006. We evaluate two employee outcomes: downsizing and wage decreases. We find that FCFs are less likely to downsize their workforce or cut wages in both pre‐crisis and crisis conditions. Based upon hypotheses founded in the comparative capitalisms logic, we find significant institutional effects that are contrary to our predictions. Our findings suggest that investors and employees of FCFs achieve more favorable outcomes for their interests when the rules pertaining to investor protection and their enforcement are poorly developed.Theoretical/Academic ImplicationsWe contribute to the emerging literature on the institution‐based view of comparative corporate governance by demonstrating that family‐controlled firms' stakeholder outcomes are contingent upon legal protection for employees and investors under contrasting economic circumstances.Practitioner/Policy ImplicationsFamily owners, employees and minority investors should consider both firm‐level and country‐level governance institutions when investing in different countries, especially in times of economic crisis as jurisdiction‐level institutions and firm ownership choices produce variable outcomes for different stakeholders in both crisis and non‐crisis conditions.
AbstractManuscript TypeEmpiricalResearch Question/IssueA contentious and prominent research question in the management literature is whether publicly listed family firms (FFs) outperform other types of corporations. Through a research synthesis of all available studies on the performance of US FFs, we address this question directly. We also extend the debate by raising three salient follow‐up questions. First, is the performance differential between FFs and non‐FFs attributable to a unique set of strategic choices? Second, do FF performance effects persist across generational transitions in FF control? Third, are performance differentials across generations attributable to intergenerational shifts in corporate governance and strategy?Research Findings/InsightsWith respect to our primary research question, we find that the balance of evidence indicates that (US) FFs outperform other types of public corporations. We also evaluate competing narratives regarding which strategies are characteristic of FFs, and demonstrate that their diversification, internationalization, and financing strategies mediate the FF‐performance relationship in manners consistent with the narratives advanced by certain leading FF scholars, but not others. Further, we find that the performance of (US) FFs drops dramatically after the first generation and show that this negative performance differential is due to the much more conservative patterns of strategic decision making enacted by successor generations.Theoretical/Academic ImplicationsIn addition to providing the most comprehensive evidence to date regarding the performance attributes of FFs, we nuance several theoretical debates concerning the propensity of FFs to diversify, internationalize, and leverage their equity capital.Practitioner/Policy ImplicationsWe identify value‐creating strategic choices of FFs related to internationalization, diversification, and capital structure. We also identify strategic choices often made in successor‐led FFs which reduce value. Both sets of findings are relevant to FF executives and consultants. The policy implications of the study are that in advanced liberal market economies high‐quality capital market institutions are likely to contribute to FF outperformance vis‐à‐vis other types of publicly listed firms, but these findings may not hold in other types of national governance systems or in emerging markets.
