Non-financial Information Reporting of Polish Family and Non-family Companies : a Comparative Analysis

• Autorzy: Olga Martyniuk , Magdalena Gostkowska-Drzewicka

Warianty tytułu

Raportowanie informacji niefinansowych polskich firm rodzinnych i nierodzinnych : analiza porównawcza

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

Cel: Zgodnie z założeniami koncepcji bogactwa społecznie-emocjonalnego, firmy rodzinne przywiązują szczególną uwagę do pozafinansowych aspektów swojej działalności, gdyż wymiar ten jest ściśle utożsamiany z rodzinami właścicieli i ich reputacją. Badanie ma na celu porównanie raportowania informacji niefinansowych polskich firm rodzinnych z ich nierodzinnymi odpowiednikami oraz zbadanie jakości informacji prezentowanych przez obie grupy podmiotów.
Metodyka/podejście badawcze: Do części teoretycznej zastosowano metodę analizy literatury źródłowej oraz metodę analizy opisowej. Dobór spółek stanowiących próbę badawczą został dokonany za pomocą analizy dopasowanych par. Do oceny jakości ujawnień niefinansowych zastosowano analizę treści oraz wskaźnik jakości ujawnień opracowany przez P. Hąbek i R. Wolniak (2016).
Wyniki: Nasze wyniki potwierdzają wstępne założenia o wyższej jakości ujawnień niefinansowych firm rodzinnych w porównaniu z ich nierodzinnymi odpowiednikami. Dotyczy to zarówno istotności, jak i wiarygodności informacji. Dostępność informacji niefinansowych dla interesariuszy zewnętrznych została oceniona nisko zarówno w przypadku firm rodzinnych, jak i nierodzinnych.
Ograniczenia/implikacje badawcze: Badanie ogranicza się do jednego kraju, stąd sugestia przeprowadzenie podobnych badań w innych krajach regionu Europy Środkowo-Wschodniej. Dzięki temu możliwe będzie dokonanie oceny, czy w gospodarkach, które przeszły proces transformacji i przedsiębiorczość rodzinna ma znacznie krótszą historię niż w krajach rozwiniętych, firmy rodzinne również podejmują i promują działania CSR w większym stopniu niż firmy nierodzinne. Badanie dotyczyło wyłącznie spółek giełdowych, pogłębiając wnioski w dalszych badaniach należałoby uwzględnić podmioty z sektora MŚP, który dominuje w większości gospodarek.
Oryginalność/wartość: Ocena jakości raportowania niefinansowego jest rzadko podejmowanym tematem w literaturze dotyczącej raportowania niefinansowego i przedsiębiorstw rodzinnych, a to badanie według naszej najlepszej wiedzy jest pierwszym tego rodzaju w Polsce. (abstrakt oryginalny)

EN

Purpose: According to the principles of the Socioemotional Wealth concept, family firms are particularly attentive to the non-financial aspects of their businesses, as this dimension is closely identified with the owners' families and their reputation. This research aims to identify the approaches maintained by Polish family firms towards their non-financial information reporting in comparison with their non-family counterparts and examine the quality of the information presented.
Methodology/approach: For the theoretical part, the source literature analysis method and the descriptive analysis method were used. The selection of the sample companies was made using a matched-pair analysis. To assess the quality of the ESG disclosures, content analysis and the research design developed by Hąbek and Wolniak (2016) were applied.
Findings: Our empirical study supports the initial assumption that family firms' ESG disclosures are better quality than their non-family counterparts. This applies to both the relevance and credibility of information. The availability of non-financial information to external stakeholders has been rated low for both family and non-family businesses.
Research limitations/implications: The study is limited to one country; hence the suggestion that similar research be conducted in other countries in the CEE region. This will make it possible to assess whether, in economies that have undergone a process of transformation and where family entrepreneurship has a much shorter history than in developed countries, family businesses also undertake and promote CSR activities to a greater extent than non-family firms. The study only focused on listed companies; to strengthen the findings, further research would need to include entities from the SME sector, which dominates most economies.
Originality/value: Quality assessment of non-financial reporting is a rarely addressed topic in the literature on non-financial reporting and family businesses. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to focus on the Polish market. (original abstract)

Słowa kluczowe

PL

Przedsiębiorstwo rodzinne; Sprawozdawczość niefinansowa; Społeczna odpowiedzialność biznesu

EN

Family-owned business; Non-financial reporting; Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)

• Czasopismo: Zeszyty Teoretyczne Rachunkowości
• Rocznik: 2022
• Tom: 46
• Numer: nr 4
• Strony: 69-91

Twórcy

autor

Olga Martyniuk

• University of Gdańsk, Poland

autor

Magdalena Gostkowska-Drzewicka

• University of Gdańsk, Poland

Bibliografia

• Abdullah S.N., Mohamad N.R., Mokhtar M.Z. (2011), Board independence, ownership and CSR of Malaysian large firms, "Corporate Ownership and Control", 8 (2-4), pp. 467-483.
• Aczel A.D., Sounderpandian J. (2017), Statystyka w zarządzaniu, Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN, Warszawa.
• Albers H.-H., Suwala L. (2021), Family firms and corporate spatial responsibilities in Germany: Implication for urban and regional planning and management, [in:] Basco R., Stough R., Suwala L. (eds.), Family Business and Regional Development, Routledge, London, pp. 237-255.
• Ali W., Frynas J.G., Mahmood Z. (2017), Determinants of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Disclosure in Developed and Developing Countries: A Literature Review, "Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management", 24 (4), pp. 273-294.
• Allouche J., Amann B., Jaussaud J., Kurashina T. (2008), The Impact of Family Control on the Performance and Financial Characteristics of Family Versus Nonfamily Businesses in Japan: A Matched-Pair Investigation, "Family Business Review", 21 (4), pp. 315-330.
• Aluchna M., Roszkowska-Menkes M. (2019), Non-financial Reporting. Conceptual Framework, Regulation and Practice, [in:] Długopolska-Mikonowicz A., Przytuła S., Stehr C. (eds.), Corporate Social Responsibility in Poland. CSR, Sustainability, Ethics and Governance, Springer, Cham, pp. 213-236.
• Arena C., Michelon G. (2018), A matter of control or identity? Family firms' environmental reporting decisions along the corporate life cycle, "Business Strategy and the Environment", 27 (8), pp. 1596-1608.
• Baldini M., Maso L.D., Liberatore G., Mazzi F., Terzani S. (2018), Role of Country- and Firm-Level Determinants in Environmental, Social, and Governance Disclosure, "Journal of Business Ethics", 150 (1), pp. 79-98.
• Bansal S., Lopez-Perez M.V., Rodriguez-Ariza L. (2018), Board Independence and Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure: The Mediating Role of the Presence of Family Ownership, "Administrative Sciences", 8 (3), p. 33.
• Barnett T., Kellermanns F.W. (2006), Are We Family and Are We Treated as Family? Non-family Employees' Perceptions of Justice in the Family Firm, "Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice", 30 (6), pp. 837-854.
• Berrone P., Cruz C., Gomez-Mejia L.R. (2012), Socioemotional Wealth in Family Firms: Theoretical Dimensions, Assessment Approaches, and Agenda for Future Research, "Family Business Review", 25 (3), pp. 258-279.
• Berrone P., Cruz C., Gomez-Mejia L.R., Larraza-Kintana M. (2010), Socioemotional Wealth and Corporate Responses to Institutional Pressures: Do Family-Controlled Firms Pollute Less? "Administrative Science Quarterly", 55 (1), pp. 82-113.
• Block J. (2010). Family Management, Family Ownership, and Downsizing: Evidence from S&P 500 Firms, "Family Business Review", 23 (2), pp. 109-130.
• Block J.H., Stiglbauer M., Kühn A.-L., Wagner D. (2015), Corporate social responsibility communication of German family firms: a content analysis, "uwf Umwelt-WirtschaftsForum", 23 (4), pp. 251-257.
• Block J.H., Wagner M. (2014), The effect of family ownership on different dimensions of corporate social responsibility: Evidence from large US firms, "Business Strategy and the Environment", 23 (7), pp. 475-492.
• Bouten L., Everaert P., van Liedekerke L., de Moor L., Christiaens J. (2011), Corporate social responsibility reporting: A comprehensive picture? "Accounting Forum", 35 (3), pp. 187-204.
• Brigham K.H., Lumpkin G.T., Payne G.T., Zachary M.A. (2014), Researching Long-Term Orientation: A Validation Study and Recommendations for Future Research, "Family Business Review", 27 (1), pp. 72-88.
• Brigham K.H., Payne, G.T. (2019), Socioemotional Wealth (SEW): Questions on Construct Validity, "Family Business Review", 32 (4), pp. 326-329.
• Campopiano G., de Massis A. (2015), Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting: A Content Analysis in Family and Non-family Firms, "Journal of Business Ethics", 129 (3), pp. 511-534.
• Canavati S. (2018), Corporate social performance in family firms: a meta-analysis, "Journal of Family Business Management", 8 (3), pp. 235-273.
• Chrisman J.J., Chua J.H., Pearson A.W., Barnett T. (2012). Family Involvement, Family Influence, and Family-Centered Non-Economic Goals in Small Firms, "Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice", 36 (2), pp. 267-293.
• Cruz C., Larraza-Kintana M., Garcés-Galdeano L., Berrone P. (2014), Are Family Firms Really More Socially Responsible? "Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice", 38 (6), pp. 1295-1316.
• De Massis A., Chirico F., Kotlar J., Naldi L. (2014), The Temporal Evolution of Proactiveness in Family Firms: The Horizontal S-Curve Hypothesis, "Family Business Review", 27 (1), pp. 35-50.
• De Massis A., Frattini F., Majocchi A., Piscitello L. (2018), Family firms in the global economy: Toward a deeper understanding of internationalization determinants, processes, and outcomes, "Global Strategy Journal", 8 (1), pp. 3-21.
• Esparza Aguilar J.L. (2019), Corporate social responsibility practices developed by Mexican family and non-family businesses, "Journal of Family Business Management", 9 (1), pp. 40-53.
• European Commission (2009), Overview of Family Business Relevant Issues: Research, Networks, Policy Measures and Existing Studies. Final Report of the Expert Group, European Commission, Directorate-General for Enterprise and Industry, Brussels. Fernando M., Almeida S. (2012), The organizational virtuousness of strategic corporate social responsibility: A case study of the Sri Lankan family-owned enterprise MAS Holdings, "European Management Journal", 30 (6), pp. 564-576.
• Fijałkowska J., Macuda M. (2019), CSR Reporting Practices in Poland, [in:] Długopolska-Mikonowicz A., Przytuła S., Stehr C. (eds.) Corporate Social Responsibility in Poland. CSR, Sustainability, Ethics and Governance, Springer, Cham. pp.195-212.
• Fortanier F., Kolk A., Pinkse J. (2011), Harmonization in CSR Reporting: MNEs and Global CSR Standards, "Management International Review", 51 (5), pp. 665-696.
• Friede G., Busch T., Bassen A. (2015), ESG and financial performance: aggregated evidence from more than 2000 empirical studies, "Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment", 5 (4), pp. 210-233.
• Gavana G., Gottardo P., Moisello A.M. (2017a), The effect of equity and bond issues on sustainability disclosure. Family vs non-family Italian firms, "Social Responsibility Journal", 13 (1), pp. 126-142.
• Gavana G., Gottardo P., Moisello A.M. (2017b), Earnings management and CSR disclosure. Family vs. non-family firms, "Sustainability", 9 (12), 2327.
• Gavana G., Gottardo P., Moisello A.M. (2018), Do Customers Value CSR Disclosure? Evidence from Italian Family and Non-Family Firms, "Sustainability", 10 (5), 1642.
• Gómez-Mejía L.R., Haynes K.T., Núñez-Nickel M., Jacobson K.J.L., Moyano-Fuentes J. (2007), Socioemotional wealth and business risks in family-controlled firms: Evidence from Spanish olive oil mills, "Administrative Science Quarterly", 52 (1), pp. 106-137.
• Hąbek P. (2017). CSR Reporting Practices in Visegrad Group Countries and the Quality of Disclosure, "Sustainability"9 (12), 2322.
• Hąbek P., Wolniak R. (2016), Assessing the quality of corporate social responsibility reports: the case of reporting practices in selected European Union member states, "Quality and Quantity", 50 (1), pp. 399-420.
• Hauck J., Suess-Reyes J., Beck S., Prügl R., Frank H. (2016), Measuring socioemotional wealth in family-owned and -managed firms: A validation and short form of the FIBER Scale, "Journal of Family Business Strategy", 7 (3), pp. 133-148.
• Hendratama T.D., Huang Y.-C. (2022), Corporate Social Responsibility of Family-controlled Firms in Taiwan, "Review of Integrative Business and Economics Research", 11 (2), pp. 36-60.
• Iyer V., Lulseged A. (2013), Does family status impact US firmsʼ sustainability reporting? Sustainability Accounting, "Management and Policy Journal", 4 (2), pp. 163-189.
• Izzo M.F., Ciaburri M. (2018), Why do they do that? Motives and dimensions of family firms' CSR engagement, "Social Responsibility Journal", 14 (3), pp. 633-650.
• Janicka M., Sajnóg A. (2022), The ESG Reporting of EU Public Companies. Does the Company's Capitalisation Matter? "Sustainability", 14 (7), 4279.
• Kahn J.A., Henderson D.A. (2016), Location Preferences of Family Firms: Strategic Decision Making or "Home Sweet Home"? "Family Business Review", 5 (3), pp. 271-282.
• Kashmiri S., Mahajan V. (2013), A Rose by Any Other Name: Are Family Firms Named After Their Founding Families Rewarded More for Their New Product Introductions? "Journal of Business Ethics", 124 (1), pp. 81-99.
• Kashmiri S., Mahajan V. (2014), Beating the recession blues: Exploring the link between family ownership, strategic marketing behavior and firm performance during recessions, "International Journal Of Research In Marketing", 31 (1), pp. 78-93.
• Kawacki M., Kuberska E. (2021), Czy forma i objętość raportu niefinansowego zależą od wielkości przedsiębiorstwa? Badanie na przykładzie spółek WIG20 i mWIG40, "Prace Naukowe Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego we Wrocławiu", 65 (1), pp. 65-83.
• Kotlar J., de Massis A. (2013), Goal Setting in Family Firms: Goal Diversity, Social Interactions, and Collective Commitment to Family-Centered Goals, "Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice", 37 (6), pp. 1-44.
• Kuttner M., Feldbauer-Durstmuller B. (2018), Corporate social responsibility in family firms - status quo and future directions, "International Journal of Business Strategy", 18 (1), pp. 47-68.
• Kuttner M., Feldbauer-Durstmuller B., Mitter, C. (2021), Corporate social responsibility in Austrian family firms: socioemotional wealth and stewardship insights from a qualitative approach, "Journal of Family Business Management", 11 (2), pp. 238-253.
• Leitoniene S., Sapkauskiene, A. (2015), Quality of Corporate Social Responsibility Information, "Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences", 213, pp. 334-339.
• Llach J., Marquegraves P., Bikfalvi A., Simon A., Kraus S. (2012), The innovativeness of family firms through the economic cycle, "Journal of Family Business Management", 2 (2), pp. 96-109.
• Long R.G., Mathews K.M. (2011), Ethics in the Family Firm: Cohesion through Reciprocity and Exchange, "Business Ethics Quarterly", 21 (2), pp. 287-308.
• López-Cózar C., Priede T., Hilliard I. (2014), Family and non-family business differences in corporate social responsibility approaches, "ASEAN Journal of Management and Innovation", 1 (2), pp. 74-85.
• López-González E., Martínez-Ferrero J., García-Meca E. (2019), Corporate social responsibility in family firms: A contingency approach, "Journal of Cleaner Production", 211, pp. 1044-1064.
• Ma L. (2022), Corporate social responsibility reporting in family firms: Evidence from China, "Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance", in press, article number 100730.
• Mariani M.M., Al-Sultan K., de Massis A. (2021), Corporate social responsibility in family firms: A systematic literature review, "Journal of Small Business Management", https://doi.org/10.1080/00472778.2021.1955122.
• Marques P., Presas P., Simon A. (2014), The Heterogeneity of Family Firms in CSR Engagement: The Role of Values, "Family Business Review", 27 (3), pp. 206-227.
• Martyniuk O., Gierusz A. (2016), Location behavior of family firms - evidence of Poland, "Przedsiębiorczość i Zarządzanie", 15 (6, cz. 2), pp. 283-295.
• Matuszak Ł., Różańska E. (2021), Towards 2014/95/EU directive compliance: the case of Poland, "Sustainability Accounting. Management and Policy Journal", 12 (5), pp. 1052-1076.
• Michelon G., Pilonato S., Ricceri F. (2015), CSR reporting practices and the quality of disclosure: An empirical analysis, "Critical Perspectives on Accounting", 33, pp. 59-78.
• Mies A., Neergaard P. (2020), Quality of CSR reporting: Mandatory or voluntary reporting? [in:] Crowther D., Seifi S. (ed.), Governance and Sustainability (Developments in Corporate Governance and Responsibility, vol. 15, Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley, pp. 205-234.
• Morhardt J.E. (2010), Corporate social responsibility and sustainability reporting on the Internet, "Business Strategy and the Environment", 19 (7), pp. 436-452.
• Nekhili M., Nagati H., Chtioui T., Rebolledo C. (2017), Corporate social responsibility disclosure and market value: Family versus nonfamily firms, "Journal of Business Research", 77, pp. 41-52.
• Niehm L.S., Swinney J., Miller N.J. (2008), Community Social Responsibility and Its Consequences for Family Business Performance, "Journal of Small Business Management", 46 (3), pp. 331-350.
• Odom D.L., Chang E.P.C., Chrisman J.J., Sharma P., Steier L. (2018), The most influential family business articles from 2006 to 2013 using five theoretical perspectives, [in:] Memili E., Dibrell C. (eds.), The Palgrave Handbook of Heterogeneity among Family Firms, Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.
• Orzeł B., Wolniak R. (2021), Corporate social responsibility reports on Polish market over the years - comparison and analysis, "Zeszyty Naukowe. Organizacja i Zarządzanie/Politechnika Śląska", 153, pp. 343-356.
• Palma M., Lourenço I.C., Branco M.C. (2021), Web-based sustainability reporting by family companies: the role of the richest European families, "Accounting Forum", 46 (4), pp. 344-368.
• Payne G.T., Brigham K.H., Broberg J.C., Moss T.W., Short J.C. (2011), Organizational Virtue Orientation and Family Firms, "Business Ethics Quarterly", 21 (2), pp. 257-285.
• Pizzi S., del Baldo M., Caputo F., Venturelli A. (2022), Voluntary disclosure of Sustainable Development Goals in mandatory non-financial reports: The moderating role of cultural dimension, "Journal of International Financial Management & Accounting", 33 (1), pp. 83-106.
• Rau S.B., Schneider-Siebke V., Günther C. (2019), Family Firm Values Explaining Family Firm Heterogeneity, "Family Business Review", 32 (2), pp. 195-215.
• Schulze W.S., Lubatkin M.H., Dino R.N. (2003), Toward a theory of agency and altruism in family firms, "Journal of Business Venturing", 18 (4), pp. 473-490.
• Sharma M., Kumar R., Kaur R. (2020), Corporate sustainability and fair market value: A study of Indian family versus non-family firms, "Asia-Pacific Management Accounting Journal", 15 (2), pp. 93-121.
• Szadziewska A., Spigarska E., Majerowska E. (2018), The disclosure of non-financial information by stock-exchange-listed companies in Poland, in the light of the changes introduced by the Directive 2014/95/EU, "Zeszyty Teoretyczne Rachunkowości", 99 (155), pp. 65-95.
• Tamimi N., Sebastianelli R. (2017), Transparency among S&P 500 companies: an analysis of ESG disclosure scores, "Management Decision", 55 (8), pp. 1660-1680.
• Tetrevova L., Patak M., Kyrylenko I. (2019), Web-based CSR communication in post-communist countries, "Applied Economics Letters", 26 (10), pp. 866-871.
• Uhlaner L. M., van Goor-Balk H.J.M., Masurel E. (2004). Family business and corporate social responsibility in a sample of Dutch firms, "Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development", 11 (2), pp. 186-194.
• Vazquez P. (2018), Family Business Ethics: At the Crossroads of Business Ethics and Family Business, "Journal of Business Ethics", 150 (3), pp. 691-709.
• Velte P. (2017), Does ESG performance have an impact on financial performance? Evidence from Germany, "Journal of Global Responsibility", 8(2), pp. 169-178.
• Venturelli A., Fasan M., Pizzi S. (2022), Guest editorial Rethinking non-financial reporting in Europe: challenges and opportunities in revising Directive 2014/95/EU, "Journal of Applied Accounting Research", 23 (1), pp. 1-7.
• Venturelli A., Principale S., Ligorio L., Cosma S. (2021), Walking the talk in family firms. An empirical investigation of CSR communication and practices, "Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management", 28 (1), pp. 497-510.
• Villalonga B., Amit R. (2006), How do family ownership, control and management affect firm value? "Journal of Financial Economics", 80 (2), pp. 385-417.
• Vourvachis P., Woodward T. (2015), Content analysis in social and environmental reporting research: Trends and challenges, "Journal of Applied Accounting Research", 16 (2), pp. 166-195.
• Westhead P., Cowling M. (1998), Family Firm Research: The Need for a Methodological Rethink, "Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice", 23 (1), pp. 31-56.
• Wójcik-Jurkiewicz M. (2017), Role of CSR reporting. Evidence from Poland. "Zeszyty Teoretyczne Rachunkowości", 94 (150), pp. 173-188.
• Wolniak R., Hąbek P. (2016), Quality Assessment of CSR Reports - Factor Analysis, "Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences", 220, pp. 541-547.
• Zainal D. (2017), Quality of Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting (CSRR): The Influence of Ownership Structure and Company Character, "Asian Journal of Accounting Perspectives", 10 (1), 16-35.
• Zarzycka E., Krasodomska J. (2022), Non-financial key performance indicators: what determines the differences in the quality and quantity of the disclosures? "Journal of Applied Accounting Research", 23 (1), pp. 139-162.
• Zarzycka E., Krasodomska J., Dobija D. (2021), Stakeholder Engagement in Corporate Social Practices and Non-Financial Disclosures: A Systematic Literature Review, "Central European Management Journal", 29 (1), pp. 112-135.
• Zellweger T.M., Eddleston K.A., Kellermanns F.W. (2010), Exploring the concept of familiness: Introducing family firm identity, "Journal of Family Business Strategy", 1 (1), pp. 54-63.
• Zeng T. (2020), Corporate social responsibility (CSR) in Canadian family firms, "Social Responsibility Journal", 17 (5), pp. 703-718.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.5604/01.3001.0016.1303