Are the Sins of the Father the Sins of the Sons, but Not the Daughters? Exploring How Leadership Gender and Generation Impact the Corporate Social Responsibility of Franchise Firms
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review and Hypothesis Development
2.1. Leadership Gender and CSR Activities
2.2. Intergenerational Succession and CSR
2.3. Gender, Intergenerational Succession and CSR
2.4. Conceptual Model of the Study
3. Data
4. Data Analysis and Results
4.1. Stage 1
4.2. Stage 2
5. Discussion
6. Conclusions
6.1. Practical Implications
6.2. Limitations, Recommendations, and Future Research
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
Age Control | Normative CSR | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
PAST FOUNDER’S GENDER | Univariate statistics | Past female founders | Past male founders | ||
Leader’s age | Up to 50 years | F (25.947) = 1. p = 0.000 | 0.795 [0.434; 1.157] SD = 0.815 | −0.353 [−0.578; −0.129] SD = 0.956 | |
50 years and over | F (41.749) = 1 p = 0.000 | 0.893 [0.581; 1.206] SD = 0.722 | −0.249 [−0.424; −0.074] SD = 0.741 | ||
ALL CURRENT LEADER’S GENDER | Univariate statistics | Current female leaders | Current male leaders | ||
Leader’s age | Up to 50 years | F (168.222) = 1. p = 0.000 | 1.237 [1.130; 1.343] SD = 0.300 | −0.528 [−0.691; −0.366] SD = 0.758 | |
50 years and over | F (115.238) = 1. p = 0.000 | 1.236 [1.055; 1.418] SD = 0.486 | −0.338 [−0.491; −0.185] SD = 0.755 | ||
CURRENT FOUNDER’S GENDER | Univariate statistics | Current female founders | Current male leaders | ||
Leader’s age | Up to 50 years | F (86.120) = 1. p = 0.000 | 1.031 [0.74; 1.32] SD = 0.565 | −0.889 [−1.13; −0.65] SD = 0.774 | |
50 years and over | F (57.193) = 1. p = 0.000 | 1.064 [0.64; 1.49] SD = 0.850 | −0.621 [−0.84; −0.40] SD = 0.814 | ||
CURRENT HEIR’S GENDER | Univariate statistics | Current female heirs | Current male heirs | ||
Leader’s age | Up to 50 years | F (20.083) = 1. p = 0.000 | 1.023 [0.63; 1.42] SD = 0.621 | −0.045 [−0.30; 0.21] SD = 0.741 | |
50 years and over | F (2.667) = 1. p = 0.109 | 1.086 [0.66; 1.51] SD = 0.553 | 0.182 [−0.06; 0.42] SD = 0.555 | ||
Age control | Instrumental CSR | ||||
PAST FOUNDER’S GENDER | Univariate statistics | Past female founders | Past male founders | ||
Leader’s age | Up to 50 years | F (1.876) = 1. p = 0.174 | −0.262 [−0.633; 0.109] SD = 0.837 | 0.047 [−0.176; 0.271] SD = 0.951 | |
50 years and over | F (0.000) = 1. p = 0.996 | 0.068 [−0.371; 0.506] SD = 1.01 | 0.069 [−0.175; 0.313] SD = 1.04 | ||
ALL CURRENT LEADER’S GENDER | Univariate statistics | Current female leaders | Current male leaders | ||
Leader’s age | Up to 50 years | F (6.561) = 1. p = 0.012 | −0.387 [−0.620; −0.154] SD = 0.657 | 0.116 [−0.109; 0.341] SD = 1.050 | |
50 years and over | F (0.193) = 1. p = 0.661 | −0.050 [−0.420; 0.321] SD = 0.992 | 0.044 [−0.164; 0.253] SD = 1.034 | ||
CURRENT FOUNDER’S GENDER | Univariate statistics | Current female founders | Current male leaders | ||
Leader’s age | Up to 50 years | F (0.456) = 1. p = 0.502 | −0.477 [−0.91; −0.05] SD = 0.838 | −0.308 [−0.58;−0.04] SD = 0.886 | |
50 years and over | F (0.179) = 1. p = 0.002 | −0.374 [−0.75; 0.00] SD = 0.752 | −0.468 [−0.69; −0.24] SD = 0.846 | ||
CURRENT HEIR’S GENDER | Univariate statistics | Current female heirs | Current male heirs | ||
Leader’s age | Up to 50 years | F (17.179) = 1. p = 0.000 | −0.116 [−0.61; 0.38] SD = 0.781 | 0.414 [0.07; 0.76] SD = 1.027 | |
50 years and over | F (0.625) = 1. p = 0.435 | 0.803 [−0.01; 1.62] SD = 1.060 | 0.505 [0.11; 0.90] SD = 0.917 |
References
- Zafeiropoulou, F.A. The Social Franchise Model: A Systems Approach of the Dynamics of Institutions and Embeddedness in Social Franchise Formation. In Handbook of Research on Franchising; Edward Elgar Publishing: Cheltenham, UK, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Zajko, K.; Bradač Hojnik, B. Social Franchising Model as a Scaling Strategy for ICT Reuse: A Case Study of an International Franchise. Sustainability 2018, 10, 3144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kim, M.-S.; Thapa, B. Relationship of Ethical Leadership, Corporate Social Responsibility and Organizational Performance. Sustainability 2018, 10, 447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Combs, J.G.; Ketchen, D.J., Jr.; Shook, C.L.; Short, J.C. Antecedents and Consequences of Franchising: Past Accomplishments and Future Challenges. J. Manag. 2011, 37, 99–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Withane, S. Franchising and Franchisee Behavior: An Examination of Opinions, Personal Characteristics, and Motives of Canadian Franchisee Entrepreneurs. J. Small Bus. Manag. 1991, 29, 22. [Google Scholar]
- Meiseberg, B.; Ehrmann, T. Lost in Translation? The Prevalence and Performance Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility in Franchising. J. Small Bus. Manag. 2012, 50, 566–595. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chiou, J.; Droge, C. The Effects of Standardization and Trust on Franchisee’s Performance and Satisfaction: A Study on Franchise Systems in the Growth Stage. J. Small Bus. Manag. 2015, 53, 129–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cai, Y.-J.; Chen, Y.; Siqin, T.; Choi, T.-M.; Chung, S.-H. Pay Upfront or Pay Later? Fixed Royal Payment in Sustainable Fashion Brand Franchising. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2019, 214, 95–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gámez-González, J.; Rondan-Cataluña, F.J.; Diez-de Castro, E.C.; Navarro-Garcia, A. Toward an International Code of Franchising. Manag. Decis. 2010, 48, 1568–1595. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brookes, M. The Dynamics and Evolution of Knowledge Transfer in International Master Franchise Agreements. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2014, 36, 52–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Le Bot, C.; Perrigot, R.; Déjean, F.; Oxibar, B. Corporate Social Responsibility in Franchise Chains: Specificities, Insights from French Franchise Chains’ CSD, and Avenues for Future Research. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2022, 66, 102945. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Székely, F.; Knirsch, M. Responsible Leadership and Corporate Social Responsibility: Metrics for Sustainable Performance. Eur. Manag. J. 2005, 23, 628–647. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Waldman, D.A.; Siegel, D.S.; Stahl, G.K. Defining the Socially Responsible Leader: Revisiting Issues in Responsible Leadership. J. Leadersh. Organ. Stud. 2020, 27, 5–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gond, J.-P.; Igalens, J.; Swaen, V.; El Akremi, A. The Human Resources Contribution to Responsible Leadership: An Exploration of the CSR–HR Interface. In Responsible Leadership; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2011; pp. 115–132. [Google Scholar]
- Groves, K.S.; LaRocca, M.A. Responsible Leadership Outcomes via Stakeholder CSR Values: Testing a Values-Centered Model of Transformational Leadership. In Responsible Leadership; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2011; pp. 37–55. [Google Scholar]
- Jell-Ojobor, M. Strategic CSR and the Competitive Advantage of Franchise Firms. In Design and Management of Interfirm Networks; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2019; pp. 91–111. [Google Scholar]
- Meek, W.R.; Sullivan, D.M.; Mueller, J. Gender Differences in Entrepreneurial Relationships within the Franchise Context. J. Dev. Entrep. 2014, 19, 1450026. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thaichon, P.; Weaven, S.; Quach, S.; Bodey, K.; Merrilees, B.; Frazer, L. Female Franchisees—A Lost Opportunity for Franchising Sector Growth? J. Strateg. Mark. 2020, 28, 107–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Diochon, M.; Ghore, Y. Contextualizing a Social Enterprise Opportunity Process in an Emerging Market. Soc. Enterp. J. 2016, 12, 107–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mills, C.E.; Jeremiah, F. Franchising Microbusinesses: Coupling Identity Undoing and Boundary Objects. Int. J. Entrep. Behav. Res. 2020, 27, 231–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hur, W.-M.; Kim, H.; Jang, J.H. The Role of Gender Differences in the Impact of CSR Perceptions on Corporate Marketing Outcomes. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2016, 23, 345–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grosser, K.; Moon, J. CSR and Feminist Organization Studies: Towards an Integrated Theorization for the Analysis of Gender Issues. J. Bus. Ethics 2019, 155, 321–342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kuzey, C.; Fritz, M.M.; Uyar, A.; Karaman, A.S. Board Gender Diversity, CSR Strategy, and Eco-Friendly Initiatives in the Transportation and Logistics Sector. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2022, 247, 108436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Block, J.; Wagner, M. Ownership versus Management Effects on Corporate Social Responsibility Concerns in Large Family and Founder Firms. J. Fam. Bus. Strategy 2014, 5, 339–346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tourky, M.; Kitchen, P.; Shaalan, A. The Role of Corporate Identity in CSR Implementation: An Integrative Framework. J. Bus. Res. 2020, 117, 694–706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Dick, M.; Wagner, E.; Pernsteiner, H. Founder-Controlled Family Firms, Overconfidence, and Corporate Social Responsibility Engagement: Evidence from Survey Data. Fam. Bus. Rev. 2021, 34, 71–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cruz, C.; Justo, R.; Larraza-Kintana, M.; Garces-Galdeano, L. When Do Women Make a Better Table? Examining the Influence of Women Directors on Family Firm’s Corporate Social Performance. Entrep. Theory Pract. 2019, 43, 282–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Khidmat, W.B.; Habib, M.D.; Awan, S.; Raza, K. Female Directors on Corporate Boards and Their Impact on Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR): Evidence from China. Manag. Res. Rev. 2021, 45. ISSN, 2040–8269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Uhlaner, L.M.; van Goor-Balk, H.J.M.; Masurel, E. Family Business and Corporate Social Responsibility in a Sample of Dutch Firms. J. Small Bus. Enterp. Dev. 2004, 11, 186–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Donaldson, T.; Preston, L.E. The Stakeholder Theory of the Corporation: Concepts, Evidence, and Implications. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1995, 20, 65–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, B.; Lee, S. The Impact of Material and Immaterial Sustainability on Firm Performance: The Moderating Role of Franchising Strategy. Tour. Manag. 2020, 77, 103999. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rhou, Y.; Singal, M.; Koh, Y. CSR and Financial Performance: The Role of CSR Awareness in the Restaurant Industry. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2016, 57, 30–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Youn, H.; Song, S.; Lee, S.; Kim, J.-H. Does the Restaurant Type Matter for Investment in Corporate Social Responsibility? Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2016, 58, 24–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jeon, H.J.; Gleiberman, A. Examining the Role of Sustainability and Green Strategies in Channels: Evidence from the Franchise Industry. J. Mark. Theory Pract. 2017, 25, 189–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dant, R.P. A Futuristic Research Agenda for the Field of Franchising. J. Small Bus. Manag. 2008, 46, 91–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dant, R.P.; Perrigot, R.; Cliquet, G. A Cross-Cultural Comparison of the Plural Forms in Franchise Networks: United States, France, and Brazil. J. Small Bus. Manag. 2008, 46, 286–311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gilligan, C.; Attanucci, J. Two Moral Orientations: Gender Differences and Similarities. Merrill-Palmer Q. 1982 1988, 34, 223–237. [Google Scholar]
- Mason, E.S.; Mudrack, P.E. Gender and Ethical Orientation: A Test of Gender and Occupational Socialization Theories. J. Bus. Ethics 1996, 15, 599–604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fumagalli, M.; Ferrucci, R.; Mameli, F.; Marceglia, S.; Mrakic-Sposta, S.; Zago, S.; Lucchiari, C.; Consonni, D.; Nordio, F.; Pravettoni, G. Gender-Related Differences in Moral Judgments. Cogn. Process. 2010, 11, 219–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Frempong, F. Gender and Ethical Conduct of Hotel Employees in Kumasi Metropolis, Ghana. J. Bus. Ethics 2019, 154, 721–731. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tapver, T.; Laidroo, L.; Gurvitš-Suits, N.A. Banks’ CSR Reporting–Do Women Have a Say? Corp. Gov. Int. J. Bus. Soc. 2020, 20, 639–651. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ambrose, M.L.; Schminke, M. Sex Differences in Business Ethics: The Importance of Perceptions. J. Manag. Issues 1999, 11, 454–474. [Google Scholar]
- Trinidad, C.; Normore, A.H. Leadership and Gender: A Dangerous Liaison? Leadersh. Organ. Dev. J. 2005, 26, 574–590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Eagly, A.H. Achieving Relational Authenticity in Leadership: Does Gender Matter? Leadersh. Q. 2005, 16, 459–474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Albaum, G.; Peterson, R.A. Ethical Attitudes of Future Business Leaders: Do They Vary by Gender and Religiosity? Bus. Soc. 2006, 45, 300–321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Simola, S.K.; Barling, J.; Turner, N. Transformational Leadership and Leader Moral Orientation: Contrasting an Ethic of Justice and an Ethic of Care. Leadersh. Q. 2010, 21, 179–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dezsö, C.L.; Ross, D.G. Does Female Representation in Top Management Improve Firm Performance? A Panel Data Investigation. Strateg. Manag. J. 2012, 33, 1072–1089. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ho, S.S.; Li, A.Y.; Tam, K.; Zhang, F. CEO Gender, Ethical Leadership, and Accounting Conservatism. J. Bus. Ethics 2015, 127, 351–370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Tuncdogan, A.; Acar, O.A.; Stam, D. Individual Differences as Antecedents of Leader Behavior: Towards an Understanding of Multi-Level Outcomes. Leadersh. Q. 2017, 28, 40–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bode, C.; Singh, J. Taking a Hit to Save the World? E Mployee Participation in a Corporate Social Initiative. Strateg. Manag. J. 2018, 39, 1003–1030. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Del Alonso-Almeida, M.M.; Fernández de Navarrete, F.C.; Rodriguez-Pomeda, J. Corporate Social Responsibility Perception in Business Students as Future Managers: A Multifactorial Analysis. Bus. Ethics Eur. Rev. 2015, 24, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gilligan, C. In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women’s Development; Harvard University Press: London, UK, 1993. [Google Scholar]
- Elm, D.R.; Kennedy, E.J.; Lawton, L. Determinants of Moral Reasoning: Sex Role Orientation, Gender, and Academic Factors. Bus. Soc. 2001, 40, 241–265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kohlberg, L. Moral Stages and Moralization: The Cognitive-Development Approach. In Moral Development and Behavior: Theory and Research and Social Issues; Holt, Rinehart & Winston: New York, NY, USA, 1976; pp. 31–53. [Google Scholar]
- Gilligan, C. New Maps of Development: New Visions of Maturity. Am. J. Orthopsychiatry 1982, 52, 199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jaffee, S.; Hyde, J.S. Gender Differences in Moral Orientation: A Meta-Analysis. Psychol. Bull. 2000, 126, 703. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Di Martino, S.; Di Napoli, I.; Esposito, C.; Arcidiacono, C. Measuring Care and Justice Moral Orientation: Italian Adaptation and Revision of the MMO-2 Scale. Ethics Behav. 2019, 29, 405–422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- French, W.; Weis, A. An Ethics of Care or an Ethics of Justice. In Business Challenging Business Ethics: New Instruments for Coping with Diversity in International Business; Sójka, J., Wempe, J., Eds.; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2000; pp. 125–136. ISBN 978-0-7923-6586-0. [Google Scholar]
- Moran, B.B. Library Trends 40 (3) 1992: Libraries and Librarians: Meeting the Leadership Challenges of the 21st Century; University of Illinois: Champaign, IL, USA, 1992. [Google Scholar]
- Sheppard, L.D. Gender Differences in Leadership Aspirations and Job and Life Attribute Preferences among US Undergraduate Students. Sex. Roles 2018, 79, 565–577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bass, B.M.; Avolio, B.J.; Atwater, L. The Transformational and Transactional Leadership of Men and Women. Appl. Psychol. 1996, 45, 5–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Burke, S.; Collins, K.M. Gender Differences in Leadership Styles and Management Skills. Women Manag. Rev. 2001, 16, 244–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Druskat, V.U. Gender and Leadership Style: Transformational and Transactional Leadership in the Roman Catholic Church. Leadersh. Q. 1994, 5, 99–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eagly, A.H.; Johannesen-Schmidt, M.C.; Van Engen, M.L. Transformational, Transactional, and Laissez-Faire Leadership Styles: A Meta-Analysis Comparing Women and Men. Psychol. Bull. 2003, 129, 569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- McWilliams, A.; Siegel, D. Corporate Social Responsibility: A Theory of the Firm Perspective. Acad. Manage. Rev. 2001, 26, 117–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Calabrese, A.; Costa, R.; Rosati, F. Gender Differences in Customer Expectations and Perceptions of Corporate Social Responsibility. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 116, 135–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Gigol, T. Gender Differences in Engagement in Unethical Pro-Organizational Behavior—Two Studies in Poland. Sustainability 2020, 13, 39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stedham, Y.; Yamamura, J.H.; Beekun, R.I. Gender Differences in Business Ethics: Justice and Relativist Perspectives. Bus. Ethics Eur. Rev. 2007, 16, 163–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schaap, J.I.; Stedham, Y.; Yamamura, J.H. Casino Management: Exploring Gender-Based Differences in Perceptions of Managerial Work. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2008, 27, 87–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gond, J.-P.; Palazzo, G.; Basu, K. Reconsidering Instrumental Corporate Social Responsibility through the Mafia Metaphor. Bus. Ethics Q. 2009, 19, 57–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De la Déniz, M.C.D.; Suárez, M.K.C. Corporate Social Responsibility and Family Business in Spain. J. Bus. Ethics 2005, 56, 27–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- He, W.; Yu, X. Paving the Way for Children: Family Firm Succession and Corporate Philanthropy in China. J. Bus. Finance Acc. 2019, 46, 1237–1262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Curado, C.; Mota, A. A Systematic Literature Review on Sustainability in Family Firms. Sustainability 2021, 13, 3824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- García-Álvarez, E.; López-Sintas, J.; Saldaña Gonzalvo, P. Socialization Patterns of Successors in First-to Second-Generation Family Businesses. Fam. Bus. Rev. 2002, 15, 189–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, X. Impression Management against Early Dismissal? CEO Succession and Corporate Social Responsibility. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2020, 27, 999–1016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Y.; Xu, S.; Wang, Y. The Consequences of Employees’ Perceived Corporate Social Responsibility: A Meta-Analysis. Bus. Ethics Eur. Rev. 2020, 29, 471–496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Daspit, J.J.; Holt, D.T.; Chrisman, J.J.; Long, R.G. Examining Family Firm Succession from a Social Exchange Perspective: A Multiphase, Multistakeholder Review. Fam. Bus. Rev. 2016, 29, 44–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dou, J.; Zhang, Z.; Su, E. Does Family Involvement Make Firms Donate More? Empirical Evidence from Chinese Private Firms. Fam. Bus. Rev. 2014, 27, 259–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Pan, Y.; Weng, R.; Xu, N.; Chan, K.C. The Role of Corporate Philanthropy in Family Firm Succession: A Social Outreach Perspective. J. Bank. Finance 2018, 88, 423–441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hughes, K.D.; Jennings, J.E.; Brush, C.; Carter, S.; Welter, F. Extending Women’s Entrepreneurship Research in New Directions. Entrep. Theory Pract. 2012, 36, 429–442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Poggesi, S.; Mari, M.; De Vita, L. What’s New in Female Entrepreneurship Research? Answers from the Literature. Int. Entrep. Manag. J. 2016, 12, 735–764. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dean, H.; Larsen, G.; Ford, J.; Akram, M. Female Entrepreneurship and the Metanarrative of Economic Growth: A Critical Review of Underlying Assumptions. Int. J. Manag. Rev. 2019, 21, 24–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Valeri, M.; Katsoni, V. Gender and Tourism: Challenges and Entrepreneurial Opportunities; Emerald Group Publishing: Bingley, UK, 2021. [Google Scholar]
- Chen, S.; Fang, H.C.; MacKenzie, N.G.; Carter, S.; Chen, L.; Wu, B. Female Leadership in Contemporary Chinese Family Firms. Asia Pac. J. Manag. 2018, 35, 181–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xian, H.; Jiang, N.; McAdam, M. Negotiating the Female Successor–Leader Role within Family Business Succession in China. Int. Small Bus. J. 2021, 39, 157–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dwivedi, P.; Joshi, A.; Misangyi, V.F. Gender-Inclusive Gatekeeping: How (Mostly Male) Predecessors Influence the Success of Female CEOs. Acad. Manag. J. 2018, 61, 379–404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ahrens, J.-P.; Landmann, A.; Woywode, M. Gender Preferences in the CEO Successions of Family Firms: Family Characteristics and Human Capital of the Successor. J. Fam. Bus. Strategy 2015, 6, 86–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Virick, M.; Greer, C.R. Gender Diversity in Leadership Succession: Preparing for the Future. Hum. Resour. Manage. 2012, 51, 575–600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Amran, N.A.; Ahmad, A.C. Family Succession and Firm Performance among Malaysian Companies. Int. J. Bus. Soc. Sci. 2010, 1, 193–203. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, C. Daughter Exclusion in Family Business Succession: A Review of the Literature. J. Fam. Econ. Issues 2010, 31, 475–484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, Y.; Qu, H. The Impact of CEO Succession with Gender Change on Firm Performance and Successor Early Departure: Evidence from China’s Publicly Listed Companies in 1997–2010. Acad. Manag. J. 2016, 59, 1845–1868. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tajfel, H.; Turner, J.C. The Social Identity Theory of Inter Group Behavior. In Psychology of Intergroup Relations; Worchel, S., Austin, W.G., Eds.; Nelson Hall: Chicago, IL, USA, 1986. [Google Scholar]
- Turner, J.C. Aself-Categorization Theory. In Rediscovering the Social Group: A Self-categorization Theory; Blackwell: Oxford, UK, 1987; pp. 42–67. [Google Scholar]
- Spanish Franchise Association. Franchising in Spain: National Statistics; Spanish Franchise Association: Madrid, Spain, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Perrigot, R.; Oxibar, B.; Déjean, F. Corporate Social Disclosure in the Franchising Sector: Insights from French Franchisors’ Websites. J. Small Bus. Manag. 2015, 53, 321–339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lloret-Segura, S.; Ferreres-Traver, A.; Hernandez-Baeza, A.; Tomas-Marco, I. Exploratory Item Factor Analysis: A Practical Guide Revised and Updated. An. Psicol. 2014, 30, 1151–1169. [Google Scholar]
- Fuzi, N.M.; Habidin, N.F.; Ong, S.Y.Y. Corporate Social Responsibility Practices in Malaysian Automotive Suppliers: Confirmatory Factor Analysis. Int. J. Bus. Excell. 2018, 15, 222–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mulaik, S.A. The Foundations of Factor Analysis; McGraw Hill: New York, NY, USA, 1972. [Google Scholar]
- Lee, S.; Seo, K.; Sharma, A. Corporate Social Responsibility and Firm Performance in the Airline Industry: The Moderating Role of Oil Prices. Tour. Manag. 2013, 38, 20–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaiser, H.F. An Index of Factorial Simplicity. Psychometrika 1974, 39, 31–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bartlett, M.S. A note on the multiplying factors for various chi square approximation. J. R. Stat. Soc. 1954, 16, 296–298. [Google Scholar]
- Aguilera, R.V.; Rupp, D.E.; Williams, C.A.; Ganapathi, J. Putting the S Back in Corporate Social Responsibility: A Multilevel Theory of Social Change in Organizations. Acad. Manag. Rev. 2007, 32, 836–863. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Chiu, S.-C.; Sharfman, M. Legitimacy, Visibility, and the Antecedents of Corporate Social Performance: An Investigation of the Instrumental Perspective. J. Manag. 2011, 37, 1558–1585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Jamali, D.; Dirani, A. Synergies of CSR and Diversity Management: A Converging Agenda. In Corporate Social Responsibility and Human Resource Management; Edward Elgar Publishing: Cheltenham, UK, 2014; pp. 51–65. ISBN 978-1-78347-636-7. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, E.C. R&D Efficiency and Economic Performance: A Cross-Country Analysis Using the Stochastic Frontier Approach. J. Policy Model. 2007, 29, 345–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Amoroso, S.; Audretsch, D.B. The Role of Gender in Linking External Sources of Knowledge and R&D Intensity. Econ. Innov. New Technol. 2022, 31, 3–19. [Google Scholar]
- Christensen, L.J.; Peirce, E.; Hartman, L.P.; Hoffman, W.M.; Carrier, J. Ethics, CSR, and Sustainability Education in the Financial Times Top 50 Global Business Schools: Baseline Data and Future Research Directions. J. Bus. Ethics 2007, 73, 347–368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kolodinsky, R.W.; Madden, T.M.; Zisk, D.S.; Henkel, E.T. Attitudes about Corporate Social Responsibility: Business Student Predictors. J. Bus. Ethics 2010, 91, 167–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cesaroni, F.M.; Chamochumbi Diaz, G.D.; Sentuti, A. Family Firms and Innovation from Founder to Successor. Adm. Sci. 2021, 11, 54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Strohmeyer, R.; Tonoyan, V.; Jennings, J.E. Jacks-(and Jills)-of-All-Trades: On Whether, How and Why Gender Influences Firm Innovativeness. J. Bus. Ventur. 2017, 32, 498–518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Valeri, M. Organizational Studies: Implications for the Strategic Management; Springer Nature: Berlin, Germany, 2021. [Google Scholar]
Main Contributions | Author |
---|---|
Gender differences in moral orientations | [33,34,35,36,37,50,51,52,53,58] |
Female leadership in CSR | [38] |
Gender differences in CSR orientation | [38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,51,52,61,62,63,64,65,66] |
Gender differences in leadership styles | [55,56,57,58,59,60] |
Succession and CSR processes | [71,72,73,74,75] |
Generational differences in CSR | [26,76,77,78,79] |
Female entrepreneurship | [77,78,83] |
Female succession and CSR | [78,84,86,87,88] |
Male succession and performance | [83,86,89,91] |
Normative CSR 1 (Diversity and Inclusion) | Instrumental CSR 1 (Quality and R&D) | |
---|---|---|
Cronbach Alpha 2 = 0.842 | Cronbach Alpha 2 = 0.928 | |
Disabled employment. My company has special pro-grams for hiring disabled employees/franchisees or has a high reputation as a disabled employer. | 0.732 3 | |
Policies to avoid discrimination against homosexuals and lesbians. My company applies specific policies to avoid discrimination against franchisees/workers who are gay or lesbian. | 0.833 | |
Reconciliation of work and personal life. My company applies programs that favour the reconciliation of work and personal life of franchisees and employees. | 0.826 | |
Other strengths. My company has maintained any other notable commitments to diversity. | 0.851 | |
Quality I. My company has a well-developed long-term quality program, or has a quality program widely recognised as exceptional. | 0.919 | |
Quality II My company has received awards for the quality of its products or services. | 0.869 | |
R&D I. My company is one of the leading companies in its sector in the field of R&D. | 0.911 | |
R&D II. My company invests many resources in R&D projects aimed at improving the quality of its products and services. | 0.950 |
Generational Differences | Founder Leader | Heir Leader |
---|---|---|
Sample (N = 214) | 134 | 80 |
Normative CSR 1 | −0.271 [−0.46; −0.08] (SD = 1.108) | 0.308 [0.13; 0.48] (SD = 0.789) |
Model | F (16.786) = 1, p = 0.000, η2 = 0.073 |
Generational Differences | Founder Leader | Heir Leader |
---|---|---|
Sample (N = 215) | 135 | 80 |
Instrumental CSR 1 | −0.406 [−0.55; −0.26] (SD = 0.840) | 0.405 [0.19; 0.62] (SD = 0.981) |
Model | F (41.162) = 1, p = 0.000 η2 = 0.161 |
Past Founding Leaders: Gender | ||
---|---|---|
Gender Differences | Female | Male |
Sample (N = 188) | 45 | 143 |
Normative CSR | 0.845 [0.62; 1.07] (SD = 0.762) | −0.302 [−0.44; −0.16] (SD = 0.855) |
Model | F (64.774) = 1, p = 0.000, η2 = 0.258 | |
All current leaders: gender | ||
Gender differences | Female | Male |
Sample (N = 245) | 63 | 182 |
Normative CSR | 1.237 [1.14; 1.34] (SD = 0.396) | −0.428 [−0.54; −0.32] (SD = 0.760) |
Model | F (275.724) = 1, p = 0.000, η2 = 0.532 | |
Current leaders who are also founders: gender | ||
Gender differences | Female | Male |
Sample (N = 134) | 35 | 99 |
Normative CSR | 1.048 [0.80; 1.29] (SD = 0.715) | −0.738 [−0.90; −0.58] (SD = 0.804) |
Model | F (134.844) = 1, p = 0.000, η2 = 0.505 | |
Current leaders who are also heirs: gender | ||
Gender differences | Female | Male |
Sample (N = 80) | 21 | 59 |
Normative CSR | 1.05 [0.79; 1.31] (SD = 0.579) | 0.044 [−0.13; 0.22] (SD = 0.679) |
Model | F (36.545) = 1, p = 0.000, η2 = 0.319 |
Past Founding Leaders: Gender | ||
---|---|---|
Gender Differences | Female | Male |
Sample (N = 189) | 45 | 144 |
Instrumental CSR | −0.094 [−0.37; 0.19] (SD = 0.936) | 0.058 [−0.11; 0.22] (SD = 0.992) |
Model | F (0.822) = 1, p = 0.366, η2 = 0.004 | |
All current leaders: gender | ||
Gender differences | Female | Male |
Sample (N = 246) | 63 | 183 |
Instrumental CSR | −0.226 [−0.44; −0.01] (SD = 0.84) | 0.078 [−0.07; 0.23] (SD = 1.04) |
Model | F (4.399) = 1, p = 0.037, η2 = 0.018 | |
Current leaders who are also founders: gender | ||
Gender differences | Female | Male |
Sample (N = 135) | 35 | 100 |
Instrumental CSR | −0.424 [−0.69; −0.15] (SD = 0.785) | −0.399 [−0.57; −0.23] (SD = 0.863) |
Model | F (0.022) = 1, p = 0.882, η2 = 0.000 | |
Current leaders who are also heirs: gender | ||
Gender differences | Female | Male |
Sample (N = 80) | 21 | 59 |
Instrumental CSR | 0.278 [−0.18; 0.73] (SD = 1) | 0.450 [0.19; 0.70] (SD = 0.978) |
Model | F (0.472) = 1, p = 0.494, η2 = 0.006 |
Past Female Founders | ||
---|---|---|
Multivariate Analysis | F = 11.002, p = 0.001; Wilks’ Λ = η2 = 0.564 | |
Gender differences | Female heirs | Male heirs |
Sample (N = 53) | 8 | 45 |
Normative CSR | 1.030 [0.61; 1.45] SD = 0.689 | −0.401 [−0.87; 0.06] SD = 0.502 |
Model | F (23.252) =, p = 0.000 η2 = 0.564 | |
Gender differences | Female heirs | Male heirs |
Sample (N = 53) | 8 | 45 |
Instrumental CSR | 0.125 [−0.49; 0.74] SD = 1.013 | 0.125 [−0.80; 1.05] SD = 1.004 |
Model | F (0.000) =, p = 1.000 η2 = 0.000 | |
Past male founders | ||
Multivariate analysis | F = 8.497, p = 0.001; Wilks’ Λ = η2 = 0.254 | |
Sample (N = 20) | 13 | 7 |
Normative CSR | 1.082 [0.77; 1.40] SD = 0.379 | 0.124 [−0.08; 0.33] SD = 0.679 |
Model | F (14.953) =, p = 0.000 η2 = 0.227 | |
Gender differences | Female heirs | Male heirs |
Sample (N = 20) | 13 | 7 |
Instrumental CSR | 0.525 [−0.31; 1.36] SD = 0.995 | 0.496 [0.20; 0.80] SD = 0.999 |
Model | F (0.006) =, p = 0.940 η2 = 0.000 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Fernández-Muiños, M.; Money, K.; Saraeva, A.; Garnelo-Gomez, I.; Vázquez-Suárez, L. Are the Sins of the Father the Sins of the Sons, but Not the Daughters? Exploring How Leadership Gender and Generation Impact the Corporate Social Responsibility of Franchise Firms. Sustainability 2022, 14, 8574. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14148574
Fernández-Muiños M, Money K, Saraeva A, Garnelo-Gomez I, Vázquez-Suárez L. Are the Sins of the Father the Sins of the Sons, but Not the Daughters? Exploring How Leadership Gender and Generation Impact the Corporate Social Responsibility of Franchise Firms. Sustainability. 2022; 14(14):8574. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14148574
Chicago/Turabian StyleFernández-Muiños, María, Kevin Money, Anastasiya Saraeva, Irene Garnelo-Gomez, and Luis Vázquez-Suárez. 2022. "Are the Sins of the Father the Sins of the Sons, but Not the Daughters? Exploring How Leadership Gender and Generation Impact the Corporate Social Responsibility of Franchise Firms" Sustainability 14, no. 14: 8574. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14148574