Jackson State University
Jackson State University
Seydahmet ERCAN
Bulent Ecevit University

Published 2018-04-25

How to Cite

YAZICI, Ömer, MCWILLIAMS, D., & ERCAN, S. (2018). CSR COMPARISON BETWEEN FAMILY BUSINESSES AND NON-FAMILY BUSINESS. Business & Management Studies: An International Journal, 6(1), 256–280. https://doi.org/10.15295/bmij.v6i1.231


This paper is designed to explore whether family businesses outperform nonfamily businesses regarding Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) performance. Upon comparing the CSR performances of 64 top family businesses in the US with CSR performances of the top nonfamily businesses in the US; the results have showed that nonfamily businesses outperform family businesses on CSR. Analysis of four out of five categories of CSR performance resulted in favor of nonfamily businesses and no statistical difference was found in one category. Hence, results show that family businesses are reluctant to corporate social responsibility concern. The result of this study may suggest that family businesses are self-interested; however, some research literature may advise otherwise.  Strong agency problems and having family influence in the top management team composition may be shown as the main reason behind this phenomenon. Also results show that among the family businesses, increased family member presence in the top management has a positive effect on CSR performance. For further analysis and future studies, recommendations are made in the conclusion section.


Download data is not yet available.


  1. Allen, T., & Cohen, S. (1969). Information flow in research and development laboratories. Administrative Science Quarterly, 14: 12-19.
  2. Anderson, R. C., & Reeb, D. M. (2003). Founding-family ownership and family performance: Evidence from the S&P 500. The Journal of Finance, 58(3), 1302–1328.
  3. Andres, C. (2008). Large shareholders and firm performance—An empirical examination of founding-family ownership. Journal of Corporate Finance, 14(4), 431–445.
  4. Barontini, R., & Caprio, L. (2006). The effect of family control on firm value and performance: Evidence from continental Europe. European Financial Management, 12(5), 689–723.
  5. Beehr, T. A., Drexler Jr, J. A., & Faulkner, S. (1997). Working in small family businesses: Empirical comparisons to non-family businesses. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 297-312.
  6. Besser, T. L. (1999), “Community involvement and perceptions of success among small business operators in small towns”, Journal of Small Business Management, 37 (4), 16-29
  7. Besser, T. L., & Miller, N. (2001). Is the good corporation dead? The community social responsibility of small business operators. Journal of Socio-Economics, 30(3), 221-241.
  8. Block, J. H., & Wagner, M. (2010). Corporate social responsibility in large family and founder firms (No. ERS-2010-027-ORG). ERIM Report Series Research in Management.
  9. Block, J. H., Millán, J. M., Román, C., & Zhou, H. (2015). Job satisfaction and wages of family employees. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 39(2), 183-207.
  10. Bouvain, P., Baumann, C., & Lundmark, E. (2013). Corporate social responsibility in financial services: A comparison of Chinese and East Asian banks vis-à-vis American banks. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 31(6), 420-439.
  11. Boyd, B. K., Gove, S., & Hitt, M. A. (2005). Construct measurement in strategic management research: Illusion or reality? Strategic Management Journal, 26(3), 239-257.
  12. Breton, I. L., & Miller, D. (2006). Why do some family businesses out-compete? Governance, long-term orientations, and sustainable capability. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(6), 731-746
  13. Byrne, D., & Wong, T. J. (1962). Racial prejudice, interpersonal attraction, and assumed dissimilarity of attitudes. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 65(4), 246.
  14. Cannella, A. A., & Holcomb, T. R. (2005). A multi-level analysis of the upper-echelons model. In Multi-level issues in strategy and methods (pp. 195-237). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
  15. Carpenter, M. A., & Fredrickson, J. W. (2001). Top management teams, global strategic posture, and the moderating role of uncertainty. Academy of Management Journal, 44(3), 533-545.
  16. Carpenter, M. A., Geletkanycz, M. A., & Sanders, W. G. (2004). Upper echelons research revisited: Antecedents, elements, and consequences of top management team composition. Journal of Management, 30(6), 749-778.
  17. Caselli, F., & Gennaioli, N. (2013). Dynastic management. Economic Inquiry, 51(1), 971-996.
  18. Chrisman, J. J., Chua, J. H., & Litz, R. A. (2004). Comparing the Agency Costs of Family and Non‐Family Firms: Conceptual Issues and Exploratory Evidence. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 28(4), 335-354.
  19. Chrisman, J. J., Chua, J. H., & Steier, L. (2005). Sources and consequences of distinctive familiness: An introduction. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(3), 237-247.
  20. Chrisman, J. J., Chua, J. H., & Steier, L. P. (2011). Resilience of family firms: An introduction. Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 35(6), 1107-1119.
  21. Chrisman, J. J., Chua, J. H., & Zahra, S. A. (2003). Creating wealth in family firms through managing resources: Comments and extensions. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 27(4), 359-365.
  22. 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.
  23. Chrisman, J.J., Chua, J.H., Kellermanns, F., & Chang, E. (2007). Are family managers agents or stewards? An exploratory study in privately held family firms. Journal of Business Research, 60(10), 1030–1038.
  24. Chu, W. (2011). Family ownership and firm performance: Influence of family management, family control, and firm size. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 28(4), 833-851.
  25. Chua, J. H., Chrisman, J. J., & Sharma, P. (1999). Defining the family business by behavior. Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 23(4), 19-39.
  26. Ciocirlan, C. (2008). Analyzing the social responsibility of small, family-owned Business: A Research Agenda. Journal of applied management and Entrepreneurship, 13(4), 86-100.
  27. Corbetta, G. & Salvato, C. (2004). Self-serving or self-actualizing? Models of man and agency costs in different types of family firms: A commentary on comparing the agency costs of family and non-family firms: Conceptual issues and exploratory evidence. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 28(4), 355–362.
  28. Davis, P. S., & Harveston, P. D. (1999). In the founder's shadow: Conflict in the family firm. Family Business Review, 12(4), 311-323.
  29. Deloitte & Touche Study (1999). Are Canadian family businesses an endangered species? The first success readiness survey of Canadian family-owned business. University of Waterloo, ON: Deloitte & Touche Centre for Tax Education and Research.
  30. Demsetz, H., & Lehn, K. (1985). The structure of corporate ownership: Causes and consequences. The Journal of Political Economy, 93(6), 1155-1177.
  31. Déniz, M. D. L. C. D., & Suárez, M. K. C. (2005). Corporate social responsibility and family business in Spain. Journal of Business Ethics, 56(1), 27-41.
  32. Drucker, P. (1974). Management: Tasks, responsibilities, practices. New York: Harper & Row.
  33. Dyer, W. G., & Whetten, D. A. (2006). Family firms and social responsibility: Preliminary evidence from the S&P 500. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(6), 785-802.
  34. Ensley, M. D., & Pearson, A. W. (2005). An exploratory comparison of the behavioral dynamics of top management teams in family and nonfamily new ventures: Cohesion, conflict, potency, and consensus. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(3), 267-284.
  35. Ensley, M. D., Pearson, A. W., & Sardeshmukh, S. R. (2007). The negative consequences of pay dispersion in family and non-family top management teams: An exploratory analysis of new venture, high-growth firms. Journal of Business Research, 60(10), 1039-1047.
  36. Ewing, D.W. (1965). Is nepotism so bad? Harvard Business Review, 43(1), 22.
  37. Finkelstein, S., & Hambrick, D. C. (1990). Top-management-team tenure and organizational outcomes: The moderating role of managerial discretion. Administrative Science Quarterly, 484-503.
  38. Finkelstein, S., & Hambrick, D. C. (1996). Strategic leadership: Top executives and their effects on organizations. Minneapolis: West Publishing.
  39. Gersick, K. E., Davis, J. A., Hampton, M. M. and Lansberg, I. (1997). Generation to Generation: Life Cycles of the Family Business. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
  40. Godfrey, P.C. (2005). The relationship between corporate philanthropy and shareholder wealth: A risk management perspective. Academy of Management Review, 30(4), 777–798.
  41. Godos-Díez, J. L., Fernández-Gago, R., & Martínez-Campillo, A. (2011). How important are CEOs to CSR practices? An analysis of the mediating effect of the perceived role of ethics and social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 98(4), 531-548.
  42. Gomez-Mejia, L. R., Nunez-Nickel, M., & Gutierrez, I. (2001). The role of family ties in agency contracts. Academy of management Journal, 44(1), 81-95.
  43. Gupta, A. K. (1988). Contingency perspectives on strategic leadership: Current knowledge and future research direction. In D. C. Hambrick (Ed.), The executive effect: Concepts and methods for studying top managers: 147-178. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
  44. Habbershon, T. G., & Williams, M. L. (1999). A resource-based framework for assessing the strategic advantages of family firms. Family Business Review, 12(1), 1-25.
  45. Habbershon, T. G., Williams, M., & MacMillan, I. C. (2003). A unified systems perspective of family firm performance. Journal of business venturing, 18(4), 451-465.
  46. Haleblian, J., & Finkelstein, S. (1993). Top management team size, CEO dominance, and firm performance: The moderating roles of environmental turbulence and discretion. Academy of Management Journal, 36(4), 844-863.
  47. Hambrick, D. C., & Mason, P. A. (1984). Upper echelons: The organization as a reflection of its top managers. Academy of management review, 9(2), 193-206.
  48. Hambrick, D. C., Cho, T. S., & Chen, M. J. (1996). The influence of top management team heterogeneity on firms' competitive moves. Administrative science quarterly, 659-684.
  49. Hiebl, M. R. (2012). Risk aversion in family firms: what do we really know?. The Journal of Risk Finance, 14(1), 49-70.
  50. Jenkins, H. (2006). Small business champions for corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 67(3), 241-256.
  51. 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.
  52. Kachaner, N., Stalk, G., & Bloch, A. (2012). What you can learn from family Business. Harvard Business Review, 90(11), 102-106.
  53. Karra, N., Tracey, P., & Phillips, N. (2006). Altruism and agency in the family firm: Exploring the role of family, kinship, and ethnicity. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(6), 861-877.
  54. Katz, R. (1982). The effects of group longevity on project communication and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 27: 81-104.
  55. Kellermanns, F. W., & Eddleston, K. A. (2004). Feuding families: When conflict does a family firm good. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 28(3), 209-228.
  56. Kellermanns, F. W., & Eddleston, K. A. (2007). A family perspective on when conflict benefits family firm performance. Journal of Business Research, 60(10), 1048-1057.
  57. Kotler, P. & Lee, N. (2005). Corporate Social Responsibility: doing the most good for your company and your cause Wiley Publications, New Jersey, USA
  58. Lee, M. S., & Rogoff, E. G. (1996). Research note: Comparison of small businesses with family participation versus small businesses without family participation: An investigation of differences in goals, attitudes, and family/business conflict. Family Business Review, 9(4), 423-437.
  59. Ling, Y., & Kellermanns, F. W. (2010). The effects of family firm specific sources of TMT diversity: The moderating role of information exchange frequency. Journal of Management Studies, 47(2), 322-344.
  60. Litz, R. A. (1995). The family business: Toward definitional clarity. Family Business Review, 8(2), 71-81.
  61. Manner, M. H. (2010). The impact of CEO characteristics on corporate social performance. Journal of business ethics, 93(1), 53-72.
  62. McGuire, J., Dow, S., & Argheyd, K. (2003). CEO incentives and corporate social performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 45(4), 341-359.
  63. McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. (2000). Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: correlation or misspecification? Strategic management journal, 21(5), 603-609.
  64. Miller, D. & Le-Breton-Miller, I. (2005). Managing for the long run: Lessons in competitive advantage from great family businesses. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
  65. Miller, D., Le Breton-Miller, I., Lester, R. H., & Cannella Jr, A. A. (2007). Are family firms really superior performers?. Journal of corporate finance, 13(5), 829-858.
  66. Minichilli, A., Corbetta, G., & MacMillan, I. C. (2010). Top Management Teams in Family‐Controlled Companies: ‘Familiness’, ‘Faultlines’, and Their Impact on Financial Performance. Journal of Management Studies, 47(2), 205-222.
  67. Morck, R. & Yeung, B. (2004). Family control and the rent-seeking society. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 28(4), 391-409
  68. Morck, R. & Yeung, B. (2003). Agency problems in large family business groups. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 27(4), 367–382.
  69. Murray, A. I. (1989). Top management group heterogeneity and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 10(1), 125-141.
  70. Niehm, S.L., Swinney, J. & Miller N.J. (2008). Community Social Responsibility and its consequences for family business performance. Journal of Small Business Management, 46(3), 331-350
  71. Nordqvist, M. (2005). Familiness in top management teams: Commentary on Ensley and Pearson's “an exploratory comparison of the behavioral dynamics of top management teams in family and nonfamily new ventures: Cohesion, conflict, potency, and consensus”. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(3), 285-292.
  72. O’Boyle, E.H., Rutherford, M.W., and Pollack J.M. (2010), Examining the relation between ethical focus and financial performance in family firms: An exploratory study, Family Business Review, 23(4), 310-326
  73. O'Reilly, C. A., III, Caldwell, C., & Barnett, D. (1989). Work group demography, social integration, and turnover. Administrative Science Quarterly, 34: 21-37.
  74. Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F. L., & Rynes, S. L. (2003). Corporate social and financial performance: A meta-analysis. Organization studies, 24(3), 403-441.
  75. Pearson, A. W., & Lumpkin, G. T. (2011). Measurement in Family Business Research: How Do We Measure Up?. Family Business Review, 24(4), 287.
  76. Priem, R.L. (1990). Top management team group factors, consensus and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 11(6), 469–478.
  77. Quazi, A. M., & O'Brien, D. (2000). An empirical test of a cross-national model of corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 25(1), 33-51.
  78. Ramasamy, B., N. H. Ling and H. W. Ting: 2007, ‘Corporate Social Performances and Ethnicity. A Comparison between Malay and Chinese Chief Executives in Malaysia’, International Journal of Cross Cultural Management 7(1), 29–45.
  79. Rhodes, S. R. (1983). Age-related differences in work attitudes and behavior: A review and conceptual analysis. Psychological bulletin, 93(2), 328.
  80. Ryder, N. B. (1985). The cohort as a concept in the study of social change. In Cohort analysis in social research (pp. 9-44). Springer, New York, NY.
  81. 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.
  82. Sharma, P., Chrisman, J. J., & Chua, J. H. (1997). Strategic management of the family business: Past research and future challenges. Family business review, 10(1), 1-35.
  83. Simons, T., Pelled, L. H., & Smith, K. A. (1999). Making use of difference: Diversity, debate, and decision comprehensiveness in top management teams. Academy of management journal, 42(6), 662-673.
  84. Singhapakdi, A., Gopinath, M., Marta, J. K., & Carter, L. L. (2008). Antecedents and consequences of perceived importance of ethics in marketing situations: a study of Thai businesspeople. Journal of Business Ethics, 81(4), 887-904.
  85. Smith, K. G., Smith, K. A., Olian, J. D., Sims, H. P., O’Brannon, D. P. and Scully, J. A. (1994). Top management team demography and process: the role of social integration and communication. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39, 412–38.
  86. Sonfield, M. C., & Lussier, R. N. (2009). Family-member and non-family-member managers in family businesses. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 16(2), 196-209.
  87. Thaler, R. & Shefrin, H. (1981). An economic theory of self-control. Journal of Political Economy, 89(2), 392–406.
  88. Thanetsunthorn, N., & Wuthisatian, R. (2016). Current state of corporate governance: Global business and cultural analysis. Management Research Review, 39(11), 1431-1446.
  89. Thomas, J. (2009). Attitudes and expectations of shareholders: The case of the multi-generation family business. Journal of Management and Organization, 15(3), 346-362
  90. Uhlaner, L. M., van Goor-Balk, H. A., & Masurel, E. (2004). Family business and corporate social responsibility in a sample of Dutch firms. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 11(2), 186-194.
  91. Wagner, W. G., Pfeffer, J., & O'Reilly, C. A., III. (1984). Organizational demography and turnover in top-management groups. Administrative Science Quarterly 29: 74-92.
  92. Waldman, D. A., & Siegel, D. (2008). Defining the socially responsible leader. The Leadership Quarterly, 19(1), 117-131.
  93. Wiersema, M. F., & Bantel, K. A. (1992). Top management team demography and corporate strategic change. Academy of Management journal, 35(1), 91-121.
  94. Zahra, S. A., J. C. Hayton, et al. (2004). "Entrepreneurship in Family vs. Non-Family Firms: A Resource-Based Analysis of the Effect of Organizational Culture." Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice 28(4): 363-381.
  95. Zenger, T. R., & Lawrence, B. S. (1989). Organizational demography: The differential effects of age and tenure distributions on technical communication. Academy of Management Journal, 32(2), 353-376.