Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of Management and Governance 3/2017

23-06-2016

The impact of family CEO’s ownership and the moderating effect of the second largest owner in private family firms

Authors: Limei Che, Pingying Zhang

Published in: Journal of Management and Governance | Issue 3/2017

Log in

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

This study explores two ownership issues in private family firms. First, we investigate the relationship between the ownership of family CEOs and firm performance, and postulate that this relationship in private family firms is more complex than the inverted “U” relationship found in public family firms. Second, we predict a potential moderating effect of the second largest owner, who may exert a monitoring role on family CEOs. We focus on private family firms as recent studies show that private family firms have distinct features compared to public family firms, and that findings documented in public family firms may not apply to the ubiquitous, but much less studied, private family firms. We have applied agency theory to develop the two hypotheses, used secondary data on a large sample of private family firms, utilized an adjusted conventional quadratic technique to test the hypotheses, and validated the findings using a second method of piecewise linear specification. The results show that the non-linear relationship between the ownership of family CEOs and firm performance is more complicated than the often-documented inverted “U” shape from public firms. Meanwhile, the second largest owner with a high enough ownership stake can impose a positive moderating effect by mitigating potential agency problems caused by family CEOs.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Footnotes
1
We thank the reviewer’s suggestion for providing theoretical arguments for the differences between private and public family firms.
 
2
It is difficult to pin point the exact thresholds at which the negative effects could take place, which is beyond the scope of this paper.
 
3
The second largest owner could be, e.g., a private person, an institutional investor, a foreign investor, or a company.
 
4
When discussing the moderating effect of the second largest owner on family CEO, we assumed that the family CEO is the largest owner.
 
5
We describe below how we determined the threshold for ownership of the second largest owner.
 
6
We exclude small firms that do not have significant economic importance to preclude that they distort the results.
 
7
We use ROA1 in the main analyses because ROA1 measures the total profitability of the firm before debt interests and taxes are paid out; this number will not be affected by taxes that could be affected by factors such as loss carry-forward.
 
8
Though it would be interesting to explore the direct effect of the ownership of the second largest owner, this paper focuses on the moderating impact of the second largest owner with a high ownership on firm performance by monitoring family CEOs.
 
9
We thank the reviewer for the suggestion of using attributes of family CEOs.
 
10
The board structure might be less important than the ownership structure for firm performance in private family firms (Che and Langli 2015).
 
11
Note that this is different from CEO duality, which refers to the case that the CEO and the chair of the board are the same person.
 
12
For brevity, we write 33 and 67 % for the thresholds of 1/3 and 2/3.
 
13
Note one-family-owner structure is different from the one-owner structure, where the former may have (multiple) non-family owners.
 
14
We do not report the results when the cut-off point for a powerful second largest owner is 15 % for brevity.
 
Literature
go back to reference Anderson, R. C., & Reeb, D. M. (2003). Founding-family ownership and firm performance: Evidence from the S&P 500. Journal of Finance, 58I(3), 1301–1328.CrossRef Anderson, R. C., & Reeb, D. M. (2003). Founding-family ownership and firm performance: Evidence from the S&P 500. Journal of Finance, 58I(3), 1301–1328.CrossRef
go back to reference Bertrand, M., & Scholar, A. (2006). The role of family in family firms. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20(2), 73–96.CrossRef Bertrand, M., & Scholar, A. (2006). The role of family in family firms. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20(2), 73–96.CrossRef
go back to reference Bøhren, Ø. & Ødegaard, B. A. (2001). Patterns of corporate ownership: Insights from a unique data set. Nordic Journal of Political Economy, 27, 55–86. Bøhren, Ø. & Ødegaard, B. A. (2001). Patterns of corporate ownership: Insights from a unique data set. Nordic Journal of Political Economy, 27, 55–86.
go back to reference Carney, M., Van Essen, M., Gedajlovic, E. R., & Heugens, P. P. (2015). What do we know about private family firms? A meta-analytical review. Entrepreneuriship Theory and Practice, 39(3), 513–544.CrossRef Carney, M., Van Essen, M., Gedajlovic, E. R., & Heugens, P. P. (2015). What do we know about private family firms? A meta-analytical review. Entrepreneuriship Theory and Practice, 39(3), 513–544.CrossRef
go back to reference Chandler, A. D. (1990). Scale and scope: The dynamics of industrial capitalism. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press. Chandler, A. D. (1990). Scale and scope: The dynamics of industrial capitalism. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.
go back to reference Che, L., & Langli, J. C. (2015). Governance structure and firm performance in private family firms. Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, 42(9–10), 1216–1250.CrossRef Che, L., & Langli, J. C. (2015). Governance structure and firm performance in private family firms. Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, 42(9–10), 1216–1250.CrossRef
go back to reference Chrisman, J. J., Chua, J. H., Pearson, A. W., & Barnett, T. (2012). Family involvement, family influence, and family-centered non-economic goals in small firms. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 36(2), 267–293.CrossRef Chrisman, J. J., Chua, J. H., Pearson, A. W., & Barnett, T. (2012). Family involvement, family influence, and family-centered non-economic goals in small firms. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 36(2), 267–293.CrossRef
go back to reference Clark, R. (1986). Corporate law. Boston, MA: Little, Brown and Company. Clark, R. (1986). Corporate law. Boston, MA: Little, Brown and Company.
go back to reference Daily, C. M., Certo, S. T., & Dalton, D. R. (1999). A decade of corporate women: Some progress in the boardroom, none in the executive suite. Strategic Management Journal, 20(1), 93–99.CrossRef Daily, C. M., Certo, S. T., & Dalton, D. R. (1999). A decade of corporate women: Some progress in the boardroom, none in the executive suite. Strategic Management Journal, 20(1), 93–99.CrossRef
go back to reference Dalton, D. R., Hitt, M. A., Certo, S. T., & Dalton, C. M. (2007). Chapter 1: The fundamental agency problem and its mitigation. The Academy of Management Annals, 1(1), 1–64.CrossRef Dalton, D. R., Hitt, M. A., Certo, S. T., & Dalton, C. M. (2007). Chapter 1: The fundamental agency problem and its mitigation. The Academy of Management Annals, 1(1), 1–64.CrossRef
go back to reference Dawson, A. (2011). Private equity investment decisions in family firms: The role of human resources and agency costs. Journal of Business Venturing, 26(2), 189–199.CrossRef Dawson, A. (2011). Private equity investment decisions in family firms: The role of human resources and agency costs. Journal of Business Venturing, 26(2), 189–199.CrossRef
go back to reference Eddleston, K. A., Otondo, R. F., & Kellermanns, F. W. (2008). Conflict, participative decision-making, and gernerational ownership dispersion: A multilevel analysis. Journal of Small Business Management, 46(3), 456–484.CrossRef Eddleston, K. A., Otondo, R. F., & Kellermanns, F. W. (2008). Conflict, participative decision-making, and gernerational ownership dispersion: A multilevel analysis. Journal of Small Business Management, 46(3), 456–484.CrossRef
go back to reference Fama, E. F. (1980). Agency problems at the theory of the firm. The Journal of Political Economy, 88(2), 288–307.CrossRef Fama, E. F. (1980). Agency problems at the theory of the firm. The Journal of Political Economy, 88(2), 288–307.CrossRef
go back to reference Fama, E. F., & Jensen, M. C. (1983). Separation of ownership and control. Journal of Law and Economics, 26(2), 301–325.CrossRef Fama, E. F., & Jensen, M. C. (1983). Separation of ownership and control. Journal of Law and Economics, 26(2), 301–325.CrossRef
go back to reference Gomez-Mejia, L. R., Larraza-Kintana, M., & Makri, M. (2003). The determinants of executive compensation in family-controlled public corporations. Academy of Management Journal, 46(2), 226–237.CrossRef Gomez-Mejia, L. R., Larraza-Kintana, M., & Makri, M. (2003). The determinants of executive compensation in family-controlled public corporations. Academy of Management Journal, 46(2), 226–237.CrossRef
go back to reference Gomez-Mejia, L. R., Nunez-Nicel, M., & Gutierrez, I. (2001). The role of family ties in agency contracts. Academy of Management Journal, 44(1), 81–95.CrossRef Gomez-Mejia, L. R., Nunez-Nicel, M., & Gutierrez, I. (2001). The role of family ties in agency contracts. Academy of Management Journal, 44(1), 81–95.CrossRef
go back to reference Huse, M. (2000). Boards of directors in SMEs: A review and research agenda. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 12(4), 271–290.CrossRef Huse, M. (2000). Boards of directors in SMEs: A review and research agenda. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 12(4), 271–290.CrossRef
go back to reference Huse, M. (2007). Boards, governance, and value creation: The human side of corporate governance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef Huse, M. (2007). Boards, governance, and value creation: The human side of corporate governance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
go back to reference Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305–360.CrossRef Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305–360.CrossRef
go back to reference Johnson, J. L., Daily, C. M., & Ellstrand, A. E. (1996). Boards of directors: A review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 22(3), 409–438.CrossRef Johnson, J. L., Daily, C. M., & Ellstrand, A. E. (1996). Boards of directors: A review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 22(3), 409–438.CrossRef
go back to reference Kang, D. (1999). Ownership structure and corporate divident policy: How large block family owners increase dividend payout and achieve superior firm performance. working paper number 99-032. Boston: Harvard Business School. Kang, D. (1999). Ownership structure and corporate divident policy: How large block family owners increase dividend payout and achieve superior firm performance. working paper number 99-032. Boston: Harvard Business School.
go back to reference McConnel, J. J., & Servaes, H. (1990). Additional evidence on equity ownership and corporate value. Journal of Financial Economics, 27(2), 595–612.CrossRef McConnel, J. J., & Servaes, H. (1990). Additional evidence on equity ownership and corporate value. Journal of Financial Economics, 27(2), 595–612.CrossRef
go back to reference Miller, D., Breton-Miller, I. L., Lester, R. H., & Cannella, A. A, Jr. (2007). Are family firms really superior performers? Journal of Corporate Finance, 13(5), 829–858.CrossRef Miller, D., Breton-Miller, I. L., Lester, R. H., & Cannella, A. A, Jr. (2007). Are family firms really superior performers? Journal of Corporate Finance, 13(5), 829–858.CrossRef
go back to reference Miller, D., Le Breton-Miller, I., & Scholnick, B. (2008). Stewardship vs. stagnation: An emprical comparison of small family and non-family businesses. Journal of Management Studies, 45(1), 51–78. Miller, D., Le Breton-Miller, I., & Scholnick, B. (2008). Stewardship vs. stagnation: An emprical comparison of small family and non-family businesses. Journal of Management Studies, 45(1), 51–78.
go back to reference Miller, D., Steier, L., & Le Breton-Miller, I. (2003). Lost in time: Intergenerational succession, change, and failure in family business. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(4), 513–531.CrossRef Miller, D., Steier, L., & Le Breton-Miller, I. (2003). Lost in time: Intergenerational succession, change, and failure in family business. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(4), 513–531.CrossRef
go back to reference Mishra, C. S., Randoy, T., & Jenssen, J. I. (2001). The effect of founding family influence on firm value and corporate governance. Journal of International Financial Management and Accounting, 12(3), 235–259.CrossRef Mishra, C. S., Randoy, T., & Jenssen, J. I. (2001). The effect of founding family influence on firm value and corporate governance. Journal of International Financial Management and Accounting, 12(3), 235–259.CrossRef
go back to reference Morck, R., Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1988). Management ownership and market valuation: An empirical analysis. Journal of Financial Economics, 20, 293–315.CrossRef Morck, R., Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1988). Management ownership and market valuation: An empirical analysis. Journal of Financial Economics, 20, 293–315.CrossRef
go back to reference Nadkarni, S., & Herrmann, P. O. L. (2010). CEO personality, strategic flexibility, and firm performance: The case of the Indian business process outsourcing industry. Academy of Management Journal, 53(5), 1050–1073.CrossRef Nadkarni, S., & Herrmann, P. O. L. (2010). CEO personality, strategic flexibility, and firm performance: The case of the Indian business process outsourcing industry. Academy of Management Journal, 53(5), 1050–1073.CrossRef
go back to reference Nagar, V., Petroni, K., & Wolfenzon, D. (2011). Governance problems in closely held corporations. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 46(4), 943–966.CrossRef Nagar, V., Petroni, K., & Wolfenzon, D. (2011). Governance problems in closely held corporations. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 46(4), 943–966.CrossRef
go back to reference O’Boyle, E. H, Jr., Pollack, J. M., & Rutherford, M. W. (2012). Exploring the relation between family involvement and firms’ financial performance: A meta-analysis of main and moderator effects. Journal of Business Venturing, 27(1), 1–18.CrossRef O’Boyle, E. H, Jr., Pollack, J. M., & Rutherford, M. W. (2012). Exploring the relation between family involvement and firms’ financial performance: A meta-analysis of main and moderator effects. Journal of Business Venturing, 27(1), 1–18.CrossRef
go back to reference O’Neal, F. H., & Thompson, R. (1985). O’Neal’s oppression of minority shareholders. Wilmette, IL: Callaghan Lawyers Cooperative Publishing. O’Neal, F. H., & Thompson, R. (1985). O’Neal’s oppression of minority shareholders. Wilmette, IL: Callaghan Lawyers Cooperative Publishing.
go back to reference Osward, S. L., Muse, L. A., & Rutherford, M. W. (2009). The influence of large stake family control on performance: Is it agency or entrenchment? Journal of Small Business Management, 47(1), 116–135.CrossRef Osward, S. L., Muse, L. A., & Rutherford, M. W. (2009). The influence of large stake family control on performance: Is it agency or entrenchment? Journal of Small Business Management, 47(1), 116–135.CrossRef
go back to reference Ouchi, W. G. (1980). Markets, bureaucracies, and clans. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25(1), 129–141.CrossRef Ouchi, W. G. (1980). Markets, bureaucracies, and clans. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25(1), 129–141.CrossRef
go back to reference Pagano, M., & Roell, A. (1998). The choice of stock ownership structure: Agency costs, monitoring, and the decision to go public. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 113(1), 187–225.CrossRef Pagano, M., & Roell, A. (1998). The choice of stock ownership structure: Agency costs, monitoring, and the decision to go public. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 113(1), 187–225.CrossRef
go back to reference Randøy, T., & Goel, S. (2003). Ownership structure, founder leadership, and performance in Norwegian SMEs: Implications for financing entrepreneurial opportunities. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(5), 619–639.CrossRef Randøy, T., & Goel, S. (2003). Ownership structure, founder leadership, and performance in Norwegian SMEs: Implications for financing entrepreneurial opportunities. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(5), 619–639.CrossRef
go back to reference Scherr, F. C., & Hulburt, H. M. (2001). The debt maturity structure of small firms. Financial Management, 30(1), 85–111.CrossRef Scherr, F. C., & Hulburt, H. M. (2001). The debt maturity structure of small firms. Financial Management, 30(1), 85–111.CrossRef
go back to reference Schulze, W. S., Lubatkin, M. H., & Dino, R. N. (2003). Toward a theory of agency and altruism in family firms. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(4), 473–490.CrossRef Schulze, W. S., Lubatkin, M. H., & Dino, R. N. (2003). Toward a theory of agency and altruism in family firms. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(4), 473–490.CrossRef
go back to reference Schulze, W. S., Lubatkin, M. H., Dino, R. N., & Buchholtz, A. K. (2001). Agency relationships in family firms: Theory and evidence. Organization Science, 12(2), 99–116.CrossRef Schulze, W. S., Lubatkin, M. H., Dino, R. N., & Buchholtz, A. K. (2001). Agency relationships in family firms: Theory and evidence. Organization Science, 12(2), 99–116.CrossRef
go back to reference Sciascia, S., & Mazzola, P. (2008). Family involvement in ownership and management: Exploring nonlinear effects on performance. Family Business Review, 21(4), 331–345.CrossRef Sciascia, S., & Mazzola, P. (2008). Family involvement in ownership and management: Exploring nonlinear effects on performance. Family Business Review, 21(4), 331–345.CrossRef
go back to reference Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1997). A survey of corporate governance. The Journal of Finance, 52(2), 737–783.CrossRef Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1997). A survey of corporate governance. The Journal of Finance, 52(2), 737–783.CrossRef
go back to reference Stulz, R. M. (1988). Managerial control of voting rights: Financing policies and the market for corporate control. Journal of Financial Economics, 20, 25–54.CrossRef Stulz, R. M. (1988). Managerial control of voting rights: Financing policies and the market for corporate control. Journal of Financial Economics, 20, 25–54.CrossRef
go back to reference Villalonga, B., & Amit, R. (2006). How do family ownership, management, and control affect firm value? Journal of Financial Economics, 80(2), 385–417.CrossRef Villalonga, B., & Amit, R. (2006). How do family ownership, management, and control affect firm value? Journal of Financial Economics, 80(2), 385–417.CrossRef
go back to reference Westhead, P., & Howorth, C. (2006). Ownership and management issues associated with family firm performance and company objectives. Family Business Review, 19(4), 301–316.CrossRef Westhead, P., & Howorth, C. (2006). Ownership and management issues associated with family firm performance and company objectives. Family Business Review, 19(4), 301–316.CrossRef
go back to reference Westhead, P., Howorth, C., & Cowling, M. (2002). Ownership and management issues in first generation and multi-generation family firms. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 14(3), 247–269.CrossRef Westhead, P., Howorth, C., & Cowling, M. (2002). Ownership and management issues in first generation and multi-generation family firms. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 14(3), 247–269.CrossRef
go back to reference Zahra, S. A., & Pearce, J. A. (1989). Boards of directors and corporate financial performance: A review and integrative model. Journal of Management, 15(2), 291–334.CrossRef Zahra, S. A., & Pearce, J. A. (1989). Boards of directors and corporate financial performance: A review and integrative model. Journal of Management, 15(2), 291–334.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
The impact of family CEO’s ownership and the moderating effect of the second largest owner in private family firms
Authors
Limei Che
Pingying Zhang
Publication date
23-06-2016
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Journal of Management and Governance / Issue 3/2017
Print ISSN: 1385-3457
Electronic ISSN: 1572-963X
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-016-9355-3

Other articles of this Issue 3/2017

Journal of Management and Governance 3/2017 Go to the issue