Die vorliegende Meta-Analyse zeigt eindeutig, dass von Familienmitgliedern geführte Familienunternehmen eine schlechtere Performance aufweisen als Unternehmen, die von Managern geleitet werden, die der Inhaberfamilie nicht angehören. Basierend auf uni- und multivariaten Analysen von 270 wissenschaftlichen Publikationen aus 42 verschiedenen Ländern, wurde die Performance von Familienunternehmen im Vergleich zu Nicht-Familienunternehmen untersucht. Das erste robuste Ergebnis zeigt eindeutig, dass Familienunternehmen hinsichtlich der Performance Nicht-Familienunternehmen übertreffen. Dieses Ergebnis ist im Einklang mit den meisten Primärstudien und früheren Meta-Analysen. Das zweite Ergebnis dieser Arbeit kann dem "Finance"-Forschungszweig zugeordnet werden und basiert auf der Unterscheidung von Markt- und Accounting-Performance-Kennzahlen. Markt-Performance-Kennzahlen, welche durch Analysten errechnet werden, zeigen, dass Familienunternehmen Nicht-Familienunternehmen hinsichtlich der Performance unterlegen sind. Dieses Ergebnis steht im Gegensatz zu den Accounting-Performance-Kennzahlen, welche von den Familienunternehmen selbst in ihren von Wirtschaftsprüfern freigegebenen Bilanzen veröffentlicht wurden. Die dritte Forschungsfrage untersucht im Detail, ob die Zusammensetzung des Datensatzes in Primärstudien das Gesamtergebnis in eine bestimmte Richtung verzerrt. Das Ergebnis wird nicht durch Datensätzen mit Unternehmen, welche öffentlich gelistet, im produzieren Gewerbe tätig oder Technologie getriebene Unternehmen, sind getrieben. Kleine und Mittlere Unternehmen (KMU) veröffentlichen kleinere Kennzahlen und reduzieren somit die Höhe der abhängigen Variable. Das vierte Ergebnis gibt eine Übersicht über die Art und Weise der Beteiligung der Familie an der Aufsicht oder dem operativen Geschäft des Unternehmens. Dieses Ergebnis zeigt klar, dass Manager aus Familien einen signifikanten negativen Einfluss auf die Performance des Unternehmens haben. Dies kann auf die Erhaltung des Wohlstandes der Familienmitglieder zurückzuführen sein und somit spielen finanzielle Kennzahlen keine vordergründige Rolle. Die letzte Forschungsfrage untersucht, ob die Performance von Familienunternehmen im Vergleich zu Nicht-Familienunternehmen auch durch institutionelle Faktoren beeinflusst wird. In Europa zeigen die Familienunternehmen im Vergleich zu Nordamerika eine geringere Performance hinsichtlich der Kennzahlen. Das ist darauf zurückzuführen, dass europäische Unternehmen im Vergleich zu nordamerikanischen unterbewertet sind (Caldwell, 07.06.2014). Darüber hinaus zeigen Familienunternehmen im Vergleich zu Nicht-Familienunternehmen eine bessere Performance in eher maskulin geprägten Kulturen. Maskulinität, ist nach Hofstede, gekennzeichnet durch höhere Wettbewerbsorientierung, Selbstbewusstsein, Streben nach Wohlstand und klar differenzierte Geschlechterrollen. Rechtsregime hingegen (Common- oder Civil-Law) spielen im Performance-Zusammenhang von Familienunternehmen keine Rolle. Die Durchsetzbarkeit der Gesetze hat jedoch einen signifikanten positiven Einfluss auf die Performance von Familienunternehmen im Vergleich zu Nicht-Familienunternehmen. Dies ist damit zu begründen, dass die Kosten für Kredite in Länder mit einer sehr guten Durchsetzbarkeit von Gesetzen für Familienunternehmen geringer sind.
This dissertation investigates corporate acquisition decisions that represent important corporate development activities for family and non-family firms. The main research objective of this dissertation is to generate insights into the subjective decision-making behavior of corporate decision-makers from family and non-family firms and their weighting of M&A decision-criteria during the early pre-acquisition target screening and selection process. The main methodology chosen for the investigation of M&A decision-making preferences and the weighting of M&A decision criteria is a choice-based conjoint analysis. The overall sample of this dissertation consists of 304 decision-makers from 264 private and public family and non-family firms from mainly Germany and the DACH-region. In the first empirical part of the dissertation, the relative importance of strategic, organizational and financial M&A decision-criteria for corporate acquirers in acquisition target screening is investigated. In addition, the author uses a cluster analysis to explore whether distinct decision-making patterns exist in acquisition target screening. In the second empirical part, the dissertation explores whether there are differences in investment preferences in acquisition target screening between family and non-family firms and within the group of family firms. With regards to the heterogeneity of family firms, the dissertation generated insights into how family-firm specific characteristics like family management, the generational stage of the firm and non-economic goals such as transgenerational control intention influences the weighting of different M&A decision criteria in acquisition target screening. The dissertation contributes to strategic management research, in specific to M&A literature, and to family business research. The results of this dissertation generate insights into the weighting of M&A decision-making criteria and facilitate a better understanding of corporate M&A decisions in family and non-family firms. The findings show that decision-making preferences (hence the weighting of M&A decision criteria) are influenced by characteristics of the individual decision-maker, the firm and the environment in which the firm operates.
With two-thirds to three-quarters of all companies, family firms are the most common firm type worldwide and employ around 60 percent of all employees, making them of considerable importance for almost all economies. Despite this high practical relevance, academic research took notice of family firms as intriguing research subjects comparatively late. However, the field of family business research has grown eminently over the past two decades and has established itself as a mature research field with a broad thematic scope. In addition to questions relating to corporate governance, family firm succession and the consideration of entrepreneurial families themselves, researchers mainly focused on the impact of family involvement in firms on their financial performance and firm strategy. This dissertation examines the financial performance and capital structure of family firms in various meta-analytical studies. Meta-analysis is a suitable method for summarizing existing empirical findings of a research field as well as identifying relevant moderators of a relationship of interest.
First, the dissertation examines the question whether family firms show better financial performance than non-family firms. A replication and extension of the study by O’Boyle et al. (2012) based on 1,095 primary studies reveals a slightly better performance of family firms compared to non-family firms. Investigating the moderating impact of methodological choices in primary studies, the results show that outperformance holds mainly for large and publicly listed firms and with regard to accounting-based performance measures. Concerning country culture, family firms show better performance in individualistic countries and countries with a low power distance.
Furthermore, this dissertation investigates the sensitivity of family firm performance with regard to business cycle fluctuations. Family firms show a pro-cyclical performance pattern, i.e. their relative financial performance compared to non-family firms is better in economically good times. This effect is particularly pronounced in Anglo-American countries and emerging markets.
In the next step, a meta-analytic structural equation model (MASEM) is used to examine the market valuation of public family firms. In this model, profitability and firm strategic choices are used as mediators. On the one hand, family firm status itself does not have an impact on firms‘ market value. On the other hand, this study finds a positive indirect effect via higher profitability levels and a negative indirect effect via lower R&D intensity. A split consideration of family ownership and management shows that these two effects are mainly driven by family ownership, while family management results in less diversification and internationalization.
Finally, the dissertation examines the capital structure of public family firms. Univariate meta-analyses indicate on average lower leverage ratios in family firms compared to non-family firms. However, there is significant heterogeneity in mean effect sizes across the 45 countries included in the study. The results of a meta-regression reveal that family firms use leverage strategically to secure their controlling position in the firm. While strong creditor protection leads to lower leverage ratios in family firms, strong shareholder protection has the opposite effect.
Some of the largest firms in the DACH region (Germany, Austria, Switzerland) are (partially) owned by a foundation and/or a family office, such as Aldi, Bosch, or Rolex. Despite their growing importance, prior research neglected to analyze the impact of these intermediaries on the firms they own. This dissertation closes this research gap by contributing to a deeper understanding of two increasingly used family firm succession vehicles, through four empirical quantitative studies. The first study focuses on the heterogeneity in foundation-owned firms (FOFs) by applying a descriptive analysis to a sample of 169 German FOFs. The results indicate that the family as a central stakeholder in a family foundation fosters governance that promotes performance and growth. The second study examines the firm growth of 204 FOFs compared to matched non-FOFs from the DACH region. The findings suggest that FOFs grow significantly less in terms of sales but not with regard to employees. In addition, it seems that this negative effect is stronger for the upper than for the middle or lower quantiles of the growth distribution. Study three adopts an agency perspective and investigates the acquisition behavior within the group of 164 FOFs. The results reveal that firms with charitable foundations as owners are more likely to undertake acquisitions and acquire targets that are geographically and culturally more distant than firms with a family foundation as owner. At the same time, they favor target companies from the same or related industries. Finally, the fourth study scrutinizes the capital structure of firms owned by single family-offices (SFOs). Drawing on a hand-collected sample of 173 SFO-owned firms in the DACH region, the results show that SFO-owned firms display a higher long-term debt ratio than family-owned firms, indicating that SFO-owned firms follow trade-off theory, similar to private equity-owned firms. Additional analyses show that this effect is stronger for SFOs that sold their original family firm. In conclusion, the outcomes of this dissertation furnish valuable research contributions and offer practical insights for families navigating such intermediaries or succession vehicles in the long term.
Family firms play a crucial role in the DACH region (Germany, Austria, Switzerland). They are characterized by a long tradition, a strong connection to the region, and a well-established network. However, family firms also face challenges, especially in finding a suitable successor. Wealthy entrepreneurial families are increasingly opting to establish Single Family Offices (SFOs) as a solution to this challenge. An SFO takes on the management and protection of family wealth. Its goal is to secure and grow the wealth over generations. In Germany alone, there are an estimated 350 to 450 SFOs, with 70% of them being established after the year 2000. However, research on SFOs is still in its early stages, particularly regarding the role of SFOs as firm owners. This dissertation delves into an exploration of SFOs through four quantitative empirical studies. The first study provides a descriptive overview of 216 SFOs from the DACH-region. Findings reveal that SFOs exhibit a preference for investing in established companies and real estate. Notably, only about a third of SFOs engage in investments in start-ups. Moreover, SFOs as a group are heterogeneous. Categorizing them into three groups based on their relationship with the entrepreneurial family and the original family firm reveals significant differences in their asset allocation strategies. Subsequent studies in this dissertation leverage a hand-collected sample of 173 SFO-owned firms from the DACH region, meticulously matched with 684 family-owned firms from the same region. The second study focusing on financial performance indicates that SFO-owned firms tend to exhibit comparatively poorer financial performance than family-owned firms. However, when members of the SFO-owning family hold positions on the supervisory or executive board of the firm, there's a notable improvement. The third study, concerning cash holdings, reveals that SFO-owned firms maintain a higher cash holding ratio compared to family-owned firms. Notably, this effect is magnified when the SFO has divested its initial family firms. Lastly, the fourth study regarding capital structure highlights that SFO-owned firms tend to display a higher long-term debt ratio than family-owned firms. This suggests that SFO-owned firms operate within a trade-off theory framework, like private equity-owned firms. Furthermore, this effect is stronger for SFOs that sold their original family firm. The outcomes of this research are poised to provide entrepreneurial families with a practical guide for effectively managing and leveraging SFOs as a strategic long-term instrument for succession and investment planning.