Shareholder capitalism to stakeholder capitalism: Are Indian family firms prepared?

This article was first published in moneycontrol.com, April 18, 2022, Co-authors: Sougata Ray & Navneet Bhatnagar; https://www.moneycontrol.com/news/business/shareholder-capitalism-to-stakeholder-capitalism-are-indian-family-firms-prepared-8371801.html

The debate whether companies should be governed with the sole objective of maximising shareholder value (shareholder capitalism as reflected in the shareholder primacy model advocated by Prof. Milton Friedman) or balancing the interests of multiple stakeholders (stakeholder capitalism as reflected in stakeholder primacy model advocated by Prof. R. Edward Freeman), including shareholders, has been raging for several decades.

Climate disasters, rapidly rising inequalities and COVID-19 have perhaps put to rest the shareholder vs. stakeholder primacy debate and tilted the balance firmly in favour of the latter. Modern corporations, irrespective of ownership, have an obligation to act in the interests of multiple constituents -- viz., ecology, environment, society, and shareholders.

It has been argued in literature, with some empirical validation across country contexts, that family firms are generally more influenced by the ideals of stakeholder capitalism and less by the idea of shareholder capitalism.

Anecdotal evidence in India suggests so. Many times in the past, when there has been the need, family firms in India have risen to the occasion and swiftly aided government and people, be it during the Independence movement, wars, floods, famine or pandemics.

How family firms fare

To measure how family firms fare with various stakeholders, we analysed them on various parameters and found interesting results.

Using a sample of over 6,000 firms, over the last 30 years, we found that family firms underperformed non-family firms in terms of return on assets. This indicates that family firms are, in fact, not very focused on returns. This is congruent with the socio-emotional wealth theory of family firms which suggests that they, at times, compromise on economic gains for non-economic goals of the family. This may not be something non-family shareholders want.

Pledging of shares by family owners is an example. Here, the goals of the family and non-family shareholders may deviate. Pledging of shares enables the family to raise funds against shares as collateral. The funds can be used for the same firm whose shares are pledged or for personal use. This results in a limited downside risk for family shareholders as they have already got the funds, but the minority shareholders risk losing a significant amount of their investments, if margin calls are not met.

Such situations are detrimental to minority shareholders. The behaviour of the dominant shareholders may lead to loss of wealth for other shareholders, and ultimately loss of wealth and control of the firm for dominant shareholders, too.

In the recent past, there has been a significant loss of wealth for all shareholders due to the misguided ambitions and decisions, clubbed with the pledging of shares, by promoters of family firms.

Low scores on social, environment fronts

It is, therefore, not surprising that the governance scores of family firms in the ESG (Environment, Social and Governance) rating, as per Reuters and Sustainalytics data, were found to be lower than those of other firms.

Family firms were also found to have relatively low scores on environment and social categories as well as consolidated ESG parameters. The low social score is somewhat puzzling as family firms in India are known to care for the community in which they operate.

In fact, among a larger sample of firms from a different database, we observed that the CSR spends of family firms are higher than those of non-family firms, suggesting that family firms are more compliant to CSR regulations.

It is important to note that the debate around primacy to shareholders vs stakeholders is not about the reaction of corporations to exigencies or CSR spends. It is not the primacy of other stakeholders over shareholders, but about achieving balance on sustainability principles.

It is not about one heroic act catching media attention, but their every action, every day. It is also not about one bottom line – profit. It is about the triple bottom line – people, planet, profit -- and generating and sharing value for all constituents in a fair and equitable manner.

It is about being purposive without losing focus on profit in day-to-day activities. Therefore, to be a multi-stakeholder-friendly and sustainable organisation, family firms need to adopt the principles of triple bottom line and make ESG their strategic ally. It is no longer an option. It is needed for the long-term sustainability of the firms as well as the business families in order to create and pass on the wealth to the next generation and build and sustain the family legacy.

The authors are from the Thomas Schmidheiny Centre for Family Enterprise, Indian School of Business.