Patricio Duran

Why Is Family Firms' Internationalization Unique? A Meta‐Analysis

Despite its importance, there is no clear understanding of the uniqueness of family firms’ internationalization. This article sheds new light on this issue with a meta–analysis of 76 studies covering 41 countries. We show that the considerable study and cross–country differences in the relationship between family firm and internationalization are explained by the roles of family control, internationalization types, and home countries’ institutional contexts (i.e., minority shareholders protection and generalized trust of people from other countries). Therefore, we examine the existing divergent results using theories that reconcile some of these mixed findings and shed light on family firms’ specific internationalization challenges.

Corporate Governance in China: A Meta‐Analysis

How has the impact of ‘good corporate governance’ principles on firm performance changed over time in China? Amassing a database of 84 studies, 684 effect sizes, and 547,622 firm observations, we explore this important question by conducting a meta‐analysis on the corporate governance literature on China. The weight of evidence demonstrates that two major ‘good corporate governance’ principles advocating board independence and managerial incentives are indeed associated with better firm performance. However, we cannot find strong support for the criticisms against CEO duality. In addition, we go beyond a static perspective (such as certain governance mechanisms are effective or ineffective) by investigating the temporal hypotheses. We reveal that over time, with the improvement in the quality of market institutions and development of financial markets, the monitoring mechanisms of the board and state ownership become more strongly related to firm performance, whereas the incentive mechanisms lose their significance. Overall, our findings advance a dynamic institution‐based view by substantiating the case that institutional transitions matter for the relationship between governance mechanisms and firm performance in the second largest economy in the world.

An institutional perspective of the socioemotional-financial wealth relationship: Commentary on Martin and Gomez-Mejia’s “The relationship between socioemotional and financial wealth: re-visiting family firm decision making”

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to offer an institutional perspective of the Martin and Gomez-Mejia model. Specifically, this paper offers arguments of how institutions moderate the socioemotional wealth (SEW) and financial performance relationship. Design/methodology/approach This is an individual commentary that explores country-level institutional contingencies that affect the predicted effect of SEW dimensions upon financial performance offered by Martin and Gomez-Mejia. Findings The paper offers arguments of how both formal and informal institutions, such as the legal protection of minority shareholders, labor and investors; freedom of expression and information; and the country’s culture, exacerbate or ameliorate the predicted effect of the five SEW dimensions upon financial performance. Originality/value By exploring an institutional perspective of the socioemotional and financial wealth relationship, this commentary offers additional boundary conditions to those offered by Martin and Gomez-Mejia to further refine their theory.

The family-legitimizing environment and the prevalence, strategy, and performance of family firms

Family-controlled firms (FCFs) are dominant actors at the global level, but their prevalence, enacted strategies, and economic performance differ markedly across contexts. We link these differences...