Family Values

I have been following recent public discourse concerning the importance of families and women’s role in families with increasing dismay. To me, it seems unfathomable that in 2024 someone would dare to tell graduating women that homemaking is their "most important" calling, as Kansas City Chiefs kicker Harrison Butker did in his commencement address at Benedictine College. To me, it is heartbreaking that women in the tradwife movement would agree with him. To me, it is terrifying that politicians in China, Hungary, Russia, South Korea, and the US seem willing to sacrifice women's freedom for political goals they argue 'traditional family values' and women's 'traditional virtues' can deliver.

These trends shock me as a woman, but also as a scientist. I do not understand why traditional family values should make society better off. But, as a scientist, I am also willing to be persuaded by evidence. Thus, I took the opportunity of the invitation to be a keynote speaker at the 4th Baltic Family Firm Institute - ECGI Conference to arrive at a more evidence-based position on the topic of family values. 

I used some data from a project with Melsa Ararat and Amir Licht (henceforth AAL) to examine two questions related to the topic of the conference. The first question is whether traditional family values are conducive to (family) business. An extensive literature argues that family businesses help drive economic growth. Of course, a precondition for having a family business is having a family. Thus, it is entirely possible that promoting traditional family values is conducive to family business and hence economic growth. The second and related question is whether women in family businesses are more likely to embody traditional family values.

To address these questions, I directly examined data on values. I first asked what “traditional family values” are. I identified “pro-family” members of the general population who could be expected to hold “traditional family values” in the European Social Survey (ESS). I then asked what values they hold. I then compared the values of “pro-family” individuals with the values of directors and executives in listed family businesses in Sweden and Turkey from AAL and further distinguished between men and women. 

My reasoning behind this exercise was that if being pro-family is associated with the founding of family businesses, one might expect family businesses to display the same “traditional family values” as “pro-family” members of the population. If embodying “women's 'traditional virtues'” is conducive to economic outcomes, one might expect female directors in family businesses to emphasize “traditional family values” even more. 

I classified individuals in the ESS as being pro-family if they strongly agreed that “A person's family should be main priority in life”. To validate this measure I correlated it with individuals’ responses on three other items that plausibly describe women’s traditional roles: “Men should take as much responsibility as women for home and children”, “Women should be prepared to cut down on paid work for sake of family”, and “Men should have more right to job than women when jobs are scarce”. Interestingly, I classified more women as “pro-family” than men.

Consistent with intuition, “pro-family” individuals were significantly more likely to disagree that men should take as much responsibility for home and children, and they were significantly more likely to agree that women should be prepared to cut down on paid work and that they have less right to a job when jobs are scarce.

I then examined the value-profiles of “pro-family” individuals using data on Schwartz human values in the ESS. According to Schwartz’s theory, values are beliefs and principles that guide actions, decisions, and interactions with others. Schwartz proposed a circumplex structure of 10 personal values that can be grouped into four high-level values organized along two axes: self-transcendence vs. self-enhancement and openness-to-change vs. conservation. Individuals who prioritize openness-to-change are more likely to engage in innovative behaviours while those who prioritize conservation values are resistant to change. 

I found that “pro-family” members of the population were more conservation-oriented and less open-to-change. When I compared male and female “pro-family” individuals, women were even more conservation-oriented and less open-to-change than men.

The most striking results emerged when I compared Schwartz values of directors and executives of family businesses in Sweden and Turkey to those of pro-family individuals in Sweden and Turkey. Directors of family businesses were significantly more open-to-change and less conservation-oriented than “pro-family” individuals. The differences between female directors in family businesses and female “pro-family” individuals were especially strong. Indeed, female directors were so “atypical” in their “traditional family values” that they were significantly more open-to-change and less conservation-oriented than male directors of family businesses. 

This evidence suggests to me that family businesses do not embody “traditional family values” and that women in family businesses are not more “traditional” than men in family businesses. In fact, the opposite seems true, which seem important in light of recent arguments that DEI is against the meritocracy.

As an observer of recent business practices, one might be forgiven for thinking that values do not matter in business. Based on work with Amir Licht, I would disagree. Amir and I show that the Schwartz values directors hold are related to their attitudes towards shareholders and stakeholders, which is relevant for understanding another pressing global concern: corporate sustainability.

While much more research needs to be done on family values, the types of values that are conducive to business, and the evolution of values over businesses’ lifecycles, I am now even less convinced that “traditional family values” are good for the economy than I was before. While my sense of dread over current movements persists, recognizing that my intuition accords with evidence is comforting. It helps justify resistance. 

______________

Renée B. Adams is a Professor of Finance at Saïd Business School, University of Oxford, and an ECGI Fellow and Research Member.

This blog is based on a paper presented at the 4th Baltic Family Firm Institute - ECGI Conference, held in Tallinn, Estonia and hosted by Estonian Business School, in collaboration with ECGI. Visit the event page, Steering the Legacy: Governance and Succession in Family Enterprises, to explore more conference-related blogs.

The ECGI does not, consistent with its constitutional purpose, have a view or opinion. If you wish to respond to this article, you can submit a blog article or 'letter to the editor' by clicking here.