Financial Decision-Making Beyond Economic Considerations: A Strategic View for Family Firms in India
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study examines economic and non-economic endeavors to explore the association between family involvement and financial decisions within family firms. The non-economic factors of a family drive the need to analyze the impact of socioemotional factors on the financial policies of the family firms. The study explores the impact of family ownership, family management, and family control drawn from agency theory and socioemotional wealth perspectives on the financial decisions of family firms. Our findings in support of the socioemotional wealth perspective show a positive relationship between family ownership and debt financing with a desire to finance growth and avoid control dilution, with an increase in the level of debt. However, the involvement of family members in management and the top management team leads to an adverse relationship between family ownership and debt level, exhibiting the risk-averse behavior of a firm, which drives firms to reduce debt levels. Overall, our findings suggest that the perceptions of the socioemotional wealth theoretical paradigm are important in determining capital structure decisions in family enterprises. The results are resilient to potential endogeneity and heterogeneity difficulties, which may assist scholars and practitioners in assessing capital structure decisions in emerging economies.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".