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.
Entrepreneurship is a process of discovering and exploiting opportunities, during which two crucial milestones emerge: in the very beginning when entrepreneurs start their businesses, and in the end when they determine the future of the business. This dissertation examines the establishment and exit of newly created as well as of acquired firms, in particular the behavior and performance of entrepreneurs at these two important stages of entrepreneurship. The first part of the dissertation investigates the impact of characteristics at the individual and at the firm level on an entrepreneur- selection of entry modes across new venture start-up and business takeover. The second part of the dissertation compares firm performance across different entrepreneurship entry modes and then examines management succession issues that family firm owners have to confront. This study has four main findings. First, previous work experience in small firms, same sector experience, and management experience affect an entrepreneur- choice of entry modes. Second, the choice of entry mode for hybrid entrepreneurs is associated with their characteristics, such as occupational experience, level of education, and gender, as well as with the characteristics of their firms, such as location. Third, business takeovers survive longer than new venture start-ups, and both entry modes have different survival determinants. Fourth, the family firm- decision of recruiting a family or a nonfamily manager is not only determined by a manager- abilities, but also by the relationship between the firm- economic and non-economic goals and the measurability of these goals. The findings of this study extend our knowledge on entrepreneurship entry modes by showing that new venture start-ups and business takeovers are two distinct entrepreneurship entry modes in terms of their founders" profiles, their survival rates and survival determinants. Moreover, this study contributes to the literature on top management hiring in family firms: it establishes family firm- non-economic goals as another factor that impacts the family firm- hiring decision between a family and a nonfamily manager.