Investment policy in family controlled firms
By Ronald C. Anderson, Augustine Duru, David M. Reeb. 2012
354 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Accounting, Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e0c0a133fe5acadfa32bc73295826cb75b6619ef
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Accounting
- Sadok El Ghoul
- Omrane Guedhami
- Narjess Boubakri
- Najah Attig
- P. Duran
- Nadine H. Kammerlander
- C. Kwok
- Marc van Essen
In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management
- Nadine H. Kammerlander
- P. Duran
- Marc van Essen
- Thomas M. Zellweger
- M. Hiebl
- Narjess Boubakri
- Athanasios Lampousis
- Najah Attig
Citations in the corpus
- Risk aversion in family firms: what do we really know? (2012, background): “Moreover, they themselves may act as non-family minority investors who might actively influence family firms’ risk aversion through directorship positions held in the family firm (Anderson et al., 2012).”
- The Global Financial Crisis, Family Control, and Dividend Policy: The Global Financial Crisis, Family Control, and Dividend Policy (2016, positive): “A large body of literature provides much insight on the impact of family control on firms’ investment decisions (Anderson et al., 2012; Masulis, Pham, and Zein, 2011), cost of equity capital (Boubakri, Guedhami, and Mishra, 2010), agency cost of debt (Anderson, Mansi, and Reeb, 2003), corporate disc”
- National culture and corporate investment (2013, methodology): “Following Anderson et al. (2012), we construct two measures of R&D productivity: (1) the number of patents registered with USPTO, scaled by total R&D expense (or the country’s population) in a country-year; and (2) the number of citations of a country’s patents in a year, scaled by total R&D expense”
- Family Firm Research – A Review (2014, neutral): “Anderson et al. (2003) further investigate the issue from the angle of the cost of debt.”
- Corporate cash holdings: Causes and consequences (2015, positive): “Also, their long-term commitment to the firm lessen agency conflicts with debt holders which induce the firm to undertake safer projects resulting a lower cost of debt financing (Anderson et al., 2003 and Anderson et al., 2012) and both factors tend to reduce the precautionary demand for cash. Howev”
- Doing More with Less: Innovation Input and Output in Family Firms (2016, positive): “…firms have been shown to differ from other firms in organizational behavior such as diversification (G´omez-Mej´ ı a, Makri, & Larraza-Kintana, 2010), internationalization (Zahra, 2003), and investment policies, particularly with respect to investment time horizons (Anderson, Duru, & Reeb, 2012).”