Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Intrinsic CSR and Competition pp 185–200Cite as

Palgrave Macmillan

Virtue Ethics, Values of the Founders, and Organizational Growth

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Abstract

This chapter provides a theoretical model to explain the heterogeneity of family businesses regarding sustainability activities. Family business scholars tend to argue that the non-financial goals of family businesses, through the construct of socio-emotional wealth (SEW), would motivate a family business to adopt more a proactive sustainability strategy than a non-family business that is driven by the financial goal. However, studies have mixed supports when scholars rarely consider that family businesses have both financial and non-financial goals and their importance are contingent upon the life-stage of the firm. In this chapter, I propose a temporal framework that differentiates family businesses at three stages—founding, post-founder, and cousin consortia—in which the alignment between financial and SEW goals varies, and thus changes the focus of a family business’ sustainability strategy. It discusses critical role of temporal factor when examining sustainability strategies of family businesses.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    One of the most commonly used database in existing studies to look at corporate sustainability activities, including practices addressing issues related to community, diversity, employees, environment, product and services (Carroll et al. 2016; Harrison and Freeman 1999). Now, it is renamed as MSCI ESG database.

References

  • Aguilera, R. V., Rupp, D. E., Williams, C. A., & Ganapathi, J. (2007). Putting the S back in corporate social responsibility: A multilevel theory of social change in organizations. Academy of Management Review,32(3), 836–863.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aguinis, H., & Glavas, A. (2012). What we know and don’t know about corporate social responsibility: A review and research agenda. Journal of Management,38(4), 932–968.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Astrachan, J. H., Klein, S. B., & Smyrnios, K. X. (2002). The F-PEC scale of family influence: A proposal for solving the family business definition problem. Family Business Review,15(1), 45–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Astrachan, J. H., & Shanker, M. C. (2003). Family businesses’ contribution to the U.S. economy: A closer look. Family Business Review,16(3), 211–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berrone, P., Cruz, C., & Gomez-Mejia, L. R. (2012). Socioemotional wealth in family firms: Theoretical dimensions, assessment approaches, and agenda for future research. Family Business Review,25(3), 258–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berrone, P., Cruz, C., Gomez-Mejia, L. R., & Larraza-Kintana, M. (2010). Socioemotional wealth and corporate responses to institutional pressures: Do family-controlled firms pollute less? Administrative Science Quarterly,55(1), 82–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Block, J., & Wagner, M. (2014a). Ownership versus management effects on corporate social responsibility concerns in large family and founder firms. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 5(4), 339–346.

    Google Scholar 

  • Block, J., & Wagner, M. (2014b). The effect of family ownership on different dimensions of corporate social responsibility: Evidence from large US firms. Business Strategy and the Environment, 23(7), 475–492.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cabrera-Suárez, M. K., Déniz-Déniz, M. de L. C., & Martín-Santana, J. D. (2014). The setting of non-financial goals in the family firm: The influence of family climate and identification. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 5(3), 289–299.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campopiano, G., Massis, A. D., & Chirico, F. (2014). Firm philanthropy in small- and medium-sized family firms the effects of family involvement in ownership and management. Family Business Review,27(3), 244–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cardon, M. S., Zietsma, C., Saparito, P., Matherne, B. P., & Davis, C. (2005). A tale of passion: New insights into entrepreneurship from a parenthood metaphor. Journal of Business Venturing,20(1), 23–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carney, M., Van Essen, M., Gedajlovic, E. R., & Heugens, P. P. M. A. R. (2015). What do we know about private family firms? A meta-analytical review. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice,39(3), 513–544.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, R. J., Primo, D. M., & Richter, B. K. (2016). Using item response theory to improve measurement in strategic management research: An application to corporate social responsibility. Strategic Management Journal,37(1), 66–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cassar, G. (2007). Money, money, money? A longitudinal investigation of entrepreneur career reasons, growth preferences and achieved growth. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development,19(1), 89–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cennamo, C., Berrone, P., Cruz, C., & Gomez-Mejia, L. R. (2012). Socioemotional wealth and proactive stakeholder engagement: Why family-controlled firms care more about their stakeholders. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice,36(6), 1153–1173.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chua, J. H., Chrisman, J. J., & Sharma, P. (1999). Defining the family business by behavior. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice,23(4), 19–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, A. C. (1981). Strategic management: New ventures and small business. Long Range Planning,14(5), 39–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cruz, C., Larraza-Kintana, M., Garcés-Galdeano, L., & Berrone, P. (2014). Are family firms really more socially responsible? Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice,38(6), 1295–1316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deephouse, D. L., & Jaskiewicz, P. (2013). Do family firms have better reputations than non-family firms? An integration of socioemotional wealth and social identity theories. Journal of Management Studies,50(3), 337–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dou, J., Zhang, Z., & Su, E. (2014). Does family involvement make firms donate more? Empirical evidence from Chinese private firms. Family Business Review,27(3), 259–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Du, X. (2015). Is corporate philanthropy used as environmental misconduct dressing? Evidence from Chinese family-owned firms. Journal of Business Ethics,129(2), 341–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dyer, W. G. (2006). Examining the “family effect” on firm performance. Family Business Review,19(4), 253–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eccles, R. G., Ioannou, I., & Serafeim, G. (2014). The impact of corporate sustainability on organizational processes and performance. Management Science,60(11), 2835–2857.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feliu, N., & Botero, I. C. (2016). Philanthropy in family enterprises: A review of literature. Family Business Review,29(1), 121–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gersick, K. E. (1997). Generation to generation: Life cycles of the family business. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gomez-Mejia, L. R., Cruz, C., Berrone, P., & De Castro, J. (2011). The bind that ties: Socioemotional wealth preservation in family firms. Academy of Management Annals,5(1), 653–707.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gómez-Mejía, L. R., Haynes, K. T., Núñez-Nickel, M., Jacobson, K. J. L., & Moyano-Fuentes, J. (2007). Socioemotional wealth and business risks in family-controlled firms: Evidence from Spanish olive oil mills. Administrative Science Quarterly,52(1), 106–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gond, J.-P., Palazzo, G., & Basu, K. (2009). Reconsidering instrumental corporate social responsibility through the mafia metaphor. Business Ethics Quarterly,19(1), 57–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hammond, N. L., Pearson, A. W., & Holt, D. T. (2016). The quagmire of legacy in family firms: Definition and implications of family and family firm legacy orientations. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice,40(6), 1209–1231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, J. S., & Freeman, R. E. (1999). Stakeholders, social responsibility, and performance: Empirical evidence and theoretical perspectives. Academy of Management Journal,42(5), 479–485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hauswald, H., & Hack, A. (2013). Impact of family control/influence on stakeholders’ perceptions of benevolence. Family Business Review,26(4), 356–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holt, D. T., Pearson, A. W., Carr, J. C., & Barnett, T. (2017). Family firm(s) outcomes model: Structuring financial and nonfinancial outcomes across the family and firm. Family Business Review,30(2), 182–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jennings, J. E., & McDougald, M. S. (2007). Work-family interface experiences and coping strategies: Implications for entrepreneurship research and practice. Academy of Management Review,32(3), 747–760.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Labelle, R., Hafsi, T., Francoeur, C., & Amar, W. B. (2018). Family firms’ corporate social performance: A calculated quest for socioemotional wealth. Journal of Business Ethics, 148(3), 511–525.

    Google Scholar 

  • Le Breton-Miller, I., & Miller, D. (2013). Socioemotional wealth across the family firm life cycle: A commentary on “Family business survival and the role of boards”. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice,37(6), 1391–1397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Le Breton-Miller, I., & Miller, D. (2016). Family firms and practices of sustainability: A contingency view. Journal of Family Business Strategy,7(1), 26–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mandl, I. (2008). Overview of family business relevant issues. Vienna: European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maon, F., Lindgreen, A., & Swaen, V. (2010). Organizational stages and cultural phases: A critical review and a consolidative model of corporate social responsibility development. International Journal of Management Reviews,12(1), 20–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, G., & Gomez-Mejia, L. (2016). The relationship between socioemotional and financial wealth: Re-visiting family firm decision making. Management Research: Journal of the Iberoamerican Academy of Management,14(3), 215–233.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGuire, J., Dow, S., & Ibrahim, B. (2012). All in the family? Social performance and corporate governance in the family firm. Journal of Business Research,65(11), 1643–1650.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D., & Friesen, P. H. (1984). A Longitudinal study of the corporate life cycle. Management Science,30(10), 1161–1183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Minichilli, A., Nordqvist, M., Corbetta, G., & Amore, M. D. (2014). CEO succession mechanisms, organizational context, and performance: A socio-emotional wealth perspective on family-controlled firms. Journal of Management Studies,51(7), 1153–1179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peake, W. O., Cooper, D., Fitzgerald, M. A., & Muske, G. (2017). Family business participation in community social responsibility: The moderating effect of gender. Journal of Business Ethics,142(2), 325–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pieper, T. M. (2010). Non solus: Toward a psychology of family business. Journal of Family Business Strategy,1(1), 26–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • PwC. (2016). Family business survey 2016—The “missing middle”: Bridging the strategy gap in family firms. London, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spence, L. J. (2016). Small business social responsibility expanding core CSR theory. Business and Society,55(1), 23–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vandekerkhof, P., Steijvers, T., Hendriks, W., & Voordeckers, W. (2015). The effect of organizational characteristics on the appointment of nonfamily managers in private family firms: The moderating role of socioemotional wealth. Family Business Review,28(2), 104–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zientara, P. (2017). Socioemotional wealth and corporate social responsibility: A critical analysis. Journal of Business Ethics,144(1), 185–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland

    Josh Wei-Jun Hsueh

Authors
  1. Josh Wei-Jun Hsueh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Josh Wei-Jun Hsueh .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Environment and Sustainability, University of Surrey, Guildford, Surrey, UK

    Walter Wehrmeyer

  2. University of Surrey, Guildford, UK

    Stéphanie Looser

  3. Department of Economics, Society and Politics, University of Urbino Carlo Bo, Urbino, Italy

    Mara Del Baldo

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Hsueh, J.WJ. (2020). Virtue Ethics, Values of the Founders, and Organizational Growth. In: Wehrmeyer, W., Looser, S., Del Baldo, M. (eds) Intrinsic CSR and Competition. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21037-3_11

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation