Search results

Based on stakeholder, agency and institutional theory, this study aims to examine the role of institutional ownership in the relationship between environmental, social and governance practices and CEO compensation.

Utilizing a fixed-effect panel regression analysis, this research utilized a panel data approach, analyzing data spanning from 2014 to 2021, focusing on US companies listed on the S&P500 stock market index. The dataset encompassed 219 companies, leading to a total of 1,533 observations.

The analysis identified that environmental scores significantly impact CEO equity-linked compensation, unlike social and governance scores. Additionally, it was found that institutional ownership acts as a moderating factor in the relationship between the environmental score and CEO equity-linked compensation, as well as the association between the social score and CEO equity-linked compensation. Interestingly, the direction of these moderating effects varied between the two relationships, suggesting a nuanced role of institutional ownership.

This research makes a unique contribution to the field of corporate governance by exploring the relatively understudied area of institutional ownership's influence on the ESG practices–CEO compensation nexus.

The purpose of this paper is to strive to close the current research gap pertaining to potential implications of the blockchain (BC) for sustainable business models (SBMs) in the agri-food industry.

To answer the research question, the authors utilised the Value Triangle framework by Biloslavo et al. (2018) in order to explore the potential innovation of BC for SBMs in the agri-food industry. Then, the authors apply it to an in-depth exploratory case study of the Placido Volpone winery. The authors draw data from strategic plans, annual reports, corporate website and a semi-structured interview with the winery's founder.

The authors show how BC technology could be a source of SBM innovation in the agri-food industry.

BC technology has the potential to significantly change SBMs. Given the huge set-up investments by the industry, academic research investigating potential implications and supporting companies in their application of BC is needed. This paper explores how the implications of BC as source of innovation on SBMs can be investigated.

The research results of this study can be used by company leaders and managers to support the development of SBMs through the introduction of BC technology in their business activities.

The paper is novel because it investigates the relationship between SBM innovation and BC providing theoretical justification to SBM technological innovation in an agri-food setting. Additionally, the paper provides an empirical application of the framework by Biloslavo et al. (2018) for understanding the development of SBM through BC in the agri-food industry.

This paper aims to explore the role of socioemotional wealth (SEW) in family firms’ (FFs) corporate social responsibility (CSR) engagement and practices. The authors draw on the notion of “Socioemotional endowment” (Gomez-Mejia et al., 2010), to interpret how the different dimensions of the FIBER model impact on the instrumental, moral or relational motives that push companies toward CSR.

The authors develop an integrated framework that analyzes motives of CSR practices (distinguishing between moral, instrumental and relational ones) and dimensions of FF’ SEW. The idea is that it is not possible to analyze the CSR attitude of FFs without distinguishing among the five dimensions of SEW (family control and influence; identification of family members with the firm; binding social ties; emotional attachment; and renewal of family bonds to the firm through dynastic succession).

The authors posit that FFs are particularly likely to engage in instrumental, moral or relational CSR practices depending on the FIBER dimension that they consider as primary reference point to achieve the goal of preserving SEW. In particular, out of the five FIBER dimensions, relational and instrumental motives appear to be more present in firms’ priority, when they deal with CSR activities.

Most of the literature on CSR and FFs concentrates on the differences between family and non-family firms (non-FFs) in approaching social responsible practices. Instead of debating whether FFs are more or less socially responsible than non-family organizations, the authors add to this literature by arguing that it is much more relevant to analyze which approach family firms (as an heterogeneous group) are more likely to adopt in relation to CSR. In so doing, they contribute to FFs studies on sustainability, by demonstrating that CSR engagement can be differently influenced and interpreted through the five dimensions of the FIBER model.