Diversity in Family Business: Where Social Goals Collide with Family Socioemotional Wealth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Using a sample of 2,000 largest industrial firms in the U.S, we investigate how family involvement influences corporate diversity and whether a governance mechanism – dual-class share structure – moderates this effect. Contrary to typical socioemotional wealth (SEW) predictions, we argue that family firms will tend to engage less in diversity than nonfamily firms due to family firms’ desire to maintain family control and relatively lenient societal pressure on them. We also argue that the adoption of dual-class share arrangement exacerbates family dominance, thus strengthening the negative impact of family involvement on diversity. The results support our arguments and point out the boundary of SEW when involving issues of diversity. We find that family involvement decreases the level of overall diversity, by both engaging less diversity initiatives and causing more diversity-related concerns. Such negative relationship is more pronounced among family firms adopting a dual-class share structure where family owners gain greater control of business. These findings are very robust and provide important theoretical and policy implications.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".