Review of Managerial Science

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-024-00776-8

ORIGINAL PAPER

Exploring strategic corporate sustainability management

in family businesses: A systematic literature review

Simone Häußler1 · Patrick Ulrich1

Received: 18 August 2023 / Accepted: 17 May 2024

© The Author(s) 2024

Abstract
The escalating demands from legislative authorities and stakeholders for companies
to adopt corporate sustainability measures underscore the growing importance of
strategic sustainability management. Despite the efforts made by companies in this
domain, the strategic management of sustainability in family businesses remains
an under-researched area. To address this gap, we conducted a systematic literature
review covering the period from 2006 to 2022, on the topic of strategic sustaina-
bility management in family businesses. Our investigation encompasses a content
analysis of 98 relevant studies. Our research question is: “What aspects are taken
into account by family businesses in their corporate sustainability strategies?” We
tackle this issue through a methodological triangulation of qualitative and quanti-
tative methods. Our results yield three clusters of strategies for corporate sustain-
ability in family businesses: (1) Family values and succession planning; Stakeholder
relations and communication; (2) Risk taking, Inventions, and Technologies; and
(3) Entrepreneurship and Intrapreneurship. In addition, we systematically present a
range of descriptive indicators, including the research methodologies applied and
the geographic focus of the published literature. This research contributes signifi-
cant insights for scholars and practitioners alike, providing valuable guidance in this
field. Moreover, our study paves the way for further investigations into the strategies
that influence sustainability within the context of family businesses. By shedding
light on this critical area, we aim to foster a more sustainable and informed approach
to corporate practices among family-owned enterprises.

Keyword Family Firms · Strategic Management · Sustainability Management ·

Literature Review

JEL Classification M14 · O16 · Q01

* Simone Häußler
simone.haeussler@hs-aalen.de
Patrick Ulrich
patrick.ulrich@hs-aalen.de
1
Aalen Institute of Management (AAUF), Aalen University, Aalen, Germany

13
Vol.:(0123456789)
 S. Häußler, P. Ulrich

1 Introduction

The pressure on companies to implement corporate sustainability is increasing from

both the legislature and stakeholders (Tjahjadi et al. 2021). Sustainability manage-
ment is no longer just an individual corporate decision but is increasingly becom-
ing a competitive factor. Given new and stricter requirements (e.g. on the part of
the European Commission to achieve the 2- or preferably 1.5-degree target), com-
panies will be more strongly obliged in the future to disclose their business activities
regarding sustainability (European Parliament Council 2021).
Sustainability can improve consumers’ perceptions of product value (Brut-
tel 2014; Gómez-Ortega et al. 2023). A literature review by Schäufele and Hamm
(2017) indicates that manufacturing and marketing with sustainability attributes is
a promising strategy for quality differentiation. They report that consumers under-
stand sustainability as a quality indicator and are therefore willing to pay more for
sustainable products. Thus, through sustainability, preferences are created and pur-
chasing behavior is influenced, which offers companies a competitive advantage.
Sustainability can also help companies improve their image and generate more
sales and customer loyalty as society takes on more and more social responsibility
(Samudro et al. 2018). Sustainable marketing encompasses both sustainable prod-
ucts and social and economic practices. Addressing each of these elements can have
a positive impact on competition. In a review paper, Batista and Francisco (2018)
identified sustainable strategies of companies and analyzed the competitive advan-
tages resulting from each of the three categories: environmental, economic, and
social strategies. Actions falling under the environmental category are fundamen-
tal to maintaining competitiveness as they result from competitive behaviors and
practices aimed at meeting specific requirements (e. g., the European requirements
for sustainability reporting under the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive)
and achieving the necessary level in developed countries. Conversely, the neglect
of environmental strategies can drastically limit the ability of companies to act and
grow and may result in lost opportunities for long-term investment. In the category
of economic strategies, the indirect economic impacts are the development of new
markets, opportunities for generating new jobs, increased effort toward accessibility,
and adaptation to new economic contexts. The results regarding the social category
show that companies strive to add value to their businesses by valuing and retaining
their talent.
A paradigm shift toward sustainability is evident not only from a practical
standpoint but also from a scientific standpoint. Academic interest in corporate
sustainability issues has intensified in recent years (Pranugrahaning et al. 2021),
but not every form of enterprise has come with a fair balance of scientific results.
Although family businesses make up the most common type of companies listed
in Africa, Asia, Europe, and Latin America (Broccardo et al. 2019; Curado and
Mota 2021), and they are estimated to account for over 70 percent of worldwide
gross domestic product (De Massis et al. 2018; King et al. 2022), there is little
evidence about sustainability management for this type of enterprise. Moreover, a
clear distinction is lacking between family business and other types of companies.

13
Exploring strategic corporate sustainability management…

The main problem is defining what a family business is in the first place, as dif-
ferent definitions of family businesses can be found in the literature. While family
businesses and non-family businesses can be small, medium, or large, they can
also differ concerning their values and practices compared to non-family busi-
nesses (Behringer et al. 2019). Until now, certain core elements such as financial
performance statements, familiarity, and corporate governance in family compa-
nies could be identified and considered in definitions (Astrachan and Zellweger
2008; Frank et al. 2010; Siebels and zu Knyphausen-Aufsess 2012; Harms 2014;
Fries et al. 2019; Baltazar et al. 2023). However, a recent and comprehensive
meta-analysis by Miroshnychenko et al. (2022) notes a possible negative envi-
ronmental performance in companies that define themselves as having family
ownership and management. The inclusion of sustainability in the term “family
business,” in addition to the common characteristics of a family business such
as family goals or vision and a long-term orientation, is essential to a contempo-
rary definition (Miroshnychenko et al. 2022). Given the hitherto less pronounced
but growing interest in the area of sustainability in family businesses (Le Breton-
Miller and Miller 2016; Kammerlander 2022), definitions with a corresponding
focus are once again being addressed. Chua et al. (1999) in their definitions of
the term family business already included the pursuit of a corporate vision in a
sustainable manner and thus serve as a starting point for further research (see
for example Behringer et al. 2019). Concerning the above-mentioned aspects, the
present study adds to the definition of Chua et al. (1999), which still appears to be
up to date:
The family business is a business governed and/or managed intending to
shape and pursue the vision of the business held by a dominant coalition
controlled by members of the same family or a small number of families in
a manner that is potentially sustainable [(importance of social and ecologi-
cal aspects)] across generations of the family or families. (Chua et al. 1999)
Most firms are family firms, but little is known about their approaches to sus-
tainability (Clauß et al. 2022). It seems that despite increasing research in the
area of sustainability, the knowledge of how to manage sustainability is limited in
family businesses (Traxler and Greiling 2023). As López-Pérez et al. (2018) state,
family businesses face complex issues affecting their governance and manage-
ment that differ from those of non-family businesses. The results of their study
suggest that the company profile (a family business vs. a non-family business)
moderates the relationship between sustainability and company performance.
Mariani et al. (2021) conducted a systematic review highlighting that family busi-
nesses and non-family businesses exhibit different behaviors in implementing
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), with some studies indicating higher CSR
performance among family businesses. As the influencing factors with which a
company acts and the resulting adaptation of sustainability or the related perfor-
mance are reported to differ between family businesses and other types of busi-
nesses, it would be of scientific value to analyze which strategies family busi-
nesses adapt to achieve corporate sustainability. Thus, this article focuses on

13
 S. Häußler, P. Ulrich

strategies for corporate sustainability in family businesses and aims to analyze

the latest literature. The research question is: What aspects are taken into account
by family businesses in their corporate sustainability strategies? We expect the
results to provide more clarity on why and how family businesses address the
issue of sustainability and yield further insights into the corresponding content of
the strategies. In addition, we provide detailed insights into the studies considered
by breaking down the results according to geographical focus and the methods
applied.

2 Methods

The literature review is considered a necessary tool for systematically evaluating and
managing a given body of literature for a specific academic inquiry (Tranfield et al.
2003; Becker et al. 2018). Review articles can challenge established assumptions,
identify critical problems and errors, and spark scientific dialogue on a topic (Kraus
et al. 2022). However, we emphasize the systematic literature analysis, as it guar-
antees a high level of impact (Kraus et al. 2024) and transparency due to the struc-
tured implementation and clear presentation of content required. Thus, a system-
atic literature analysis exceeds the possibilities of narrative literature analysis (Hiebl
2023). Moreover, a systematic literature analysis requires a high commitment from
researchers (Sauer and Seuring 2023) and enables them to design flexible databases
of articles that can be easily updated and interrogated (Pickering and Byrne 2014).
With the aim of presenting a clear picture of the strategies relating to sustainability
in family firms in the recent literature, we conducted a systematic literature review
based on the guidelines proposed by Briner and Denyer (2012: 115). We used a sys-
tematic approach to identify relevant studies by combining two of the most compre-
hensive databases of scientific papers, Scopus (2023) and Web of Science (2023). In
a preliminary search process, we searched all literature reviews that dealt with sus-
tainability and family businesses. After reading the papers in full, we brainstormed
relevant keywords and an established a set of exclusion criteria in order to define
clear boundaries.
To this end, the following three limitations were set:

We considered only peer-reviewed scientific journals in English that had a man-

agement focus to ensure the identification of high-quality research and to narrow
the scope of our review,
To capture the current scientific discourse and derive trends for the future, we
focused mainly on the years 2006–2022.
Publications focusing on technical, political, or natural science focus were
excluded.

A custom search string was developed and applied. The multi-part search string
contained two keywords that logically limited the subject area. We searched the
following term in either the abstract or the title: sustaina* (to ensure that the dif-
ferent variations such as “sustainability,” “sustainable development,” “business

13
Exploring strategic corporate sustainability management…

sustainability,” or “business sustainability” were captured). The first keyword was

connected to a second phrase (specifically, “family business*” or “family firms”
or “family enterprise” or “family-controlled firms”). In the first round, a total of
269 hits were achieved. To narrow down the hits in relation to the research ques-
tion, we selected all journals related to management. This left 128 hits. After
we removed the duplicates, 98 hits remained, which were read completely and
subjected to content analysis. Compared to systematic literature analyses with a
relatively similar context, the number of papers found appeared to be appropriate
(for example, compare Morioka and de Carvalho 2016; Aarseth et al. 2017; Lim
et al. 2019; Velte 2022). The authors individually read all of the abstracts and,
if needed, the entire article to screen them for relevance. The selected sources
were then evaluated and analyzed in terms of content. For the literature analysis
and synthesis, a concept matrix based on Webster and Watson (2002) was used
to structure the content of the results. This step is crucial to synthesizing and
organizing a large volume of data and helps to provide an initial impression of the
results. Consecutive steps can then be taken to further evaluate the data. Build-
ing on that initial analysis, we examined the results of the concept matrix using
methodical triangulation (Fig. 1). We then conducted a qualitative content analy-
sis (Mayring 2010: 84) based on the research question “What aspects are taken
into account by family businesses in their corporate sustainability strategies?”
This was followed by a quantitative content analysis to break down the results
according to geographical focus, year of publication, and applied methods (Ben-
ninghaus 2005).
The process model of inductive category formation according to Mayring
(2010: 84) was used to analyze the results, as this method is highly appropri-
ate for the inductive and qualitative investigation of large amounts of data. In
addition, further descriptive analyses were conducted, which provided informa-
tion on the year of publication, the methodology used, and the location of the
study. According to the process model of inductive category formation (Mayring
2010: 84), firstly, the subject of the analysis was defined. The body of literature
consisted of 98 peer- reviewed papers. After that, the level of abstraction was set
and the material revision and formulation of keywords were carried out. This was

Fig. 1  Methodical Triangulation

13
 S. Häußler, P. Ulrich

followed by a revision of the keywords and a final review of the material. The last
step entailed the interpretation and analysis of content.
For the quantitative analysis, descriptive clusters (Benninghaus 2005) were used
to classify the body of literature. Descriptive clusters are groupings or categories
of similar data points or objects that are identified based on common characteris-
tics or attributes. These clusters are often used in statistical data analysis to improve
the structure and organization of large datasets. The content of the literature was
assessed using two questions:

(1) What research methodologies are applied?

(2) Which location is the main focus of the publications?

3 Results

This section presents the results of the literature research. Firstly, the qualitative
results, based on the application of the process model of inductive category forma-
tion, are presented and the research question is answered. Following this, the results
of the quantitative analysis, using descriptive clusters, are revealed. The quantitative
analysis provides information about the indicators (applied methods and geographi-
cal focus of the publication) of the literature.

3.1 Strategies for corporate sustainability management in family businesses

After various stages of processing the material, and running the process model of
inductive category formation, three clusters of strategies were identified, which are
presented in the following:

Family values and succession planning Stakeholder relations and communication

The predominant focus of the analyzed publications revolved around themes con-
cerning the internal and external relationships within family businesses. This aspect
emerges as a pivotal and determining factor concerning sustainability in the con-
text of family enterprises. Understanding and effectively managing the intricate
dynamics between family members, as well as fostering productive collaborations
with external stakeholders, appears to play a central role in shaping the sustainabil-
ity strategies of family businesses. Family values, succession planning, and stake-
holder engagement emerge as factors that influence the extent to which sustainable
practices are integrated into the core operations of these firms. Furthermore, this
emphasis on relationships underscores the significance of transparent communi-
cation and effective governance structures within family businesses. Establishing
clear lines of communication and governance mechanisms can facilitate a shared
vision for sustainability and foster collective commitment to long-term sustainability
goals. For example, when a non- family business is accused of unethical behavior,
it reflects badly on the company, whereas in a family business, it is the reputation
of the family itself that is at stake (Curado and Mota 2021). García‐Sánchez et al.

13
Exploring strategic corporate sustainability management…

(2020) examined this circumstance with an international sample of 956 listed firms
and found that family firms perform a higher level of CSR compared to non-family
firms. A positive relationship between family firms and sustainability is likely to
emerge due to internally driven motivations, such as personal or organizational val-
ues and ideas, that align with ESG (Environment, Social, Governance) criteria (Sun
et al. 2024). Particularly in the case of an impending generational change, the fam-
ily’s values are crucial, especially regarding sustainability issues (Astrachan et al.
2020; Anggadwita et al. 2020). Succession planning (Bozer et al. 2017; Wang et al.
2019; Porfírio et al. 2020; Rodriguez Serna et al. 2022a, b; Rodriguez Serna et al.
2022a) and the associated reorientation about sustainability issues, as well as Stake-
holder relations (Alwadani and Ndubisi 2020; Nguyen et al. 2020), are the most sig-
nificant strategies for family businesses.

Risk taking, Inventions, and Technologies In non-family firms, risk taking refers to
the propensity of the organization to engage in ventures, investments, or strategic
decisions that involve uncertain outcomes and potential exposure to financial, opera-
tional, or reputational hazards. The extent of risk- taking behavior in these firms is
often influenced by factors such as organizational culture, management’s risk appe-
tite, market conditions, and regulatory environments. Successful risk taking in non-
family firms requires a balance between calculated risk assessment and the pursuit
of opportunities that align with the organization’s strategic objectives and risk man-
agement framework. The way that risk is managed differs between family and non-
family firms, as the perception of operational risk positively affects the perception of
financial risk only in family firms (Santos et al. 2022). This circumstance influences
the risk behavior of family firms, especially in times of crisis. As an example, the
conduct of family firms during the COVID-19 pandemic has been studied by several
authors. Anggadwita et al. (2022) identified instances in which family firms during
the COVID-19 pandemic developed and implemented resilience. Chaudhuri et al.
(2022) highlight the important moderating influence of strategic intent for sustaining
family firms in uncertain times. However, apart from times of crisis, disruptive and
new technologies also play a major role, with Kazancoglu et al. (2021) identifying
Industry 4.0 as a driver for family business resources to improve sustainability.

Entrepreneurship and intrapreneurship An entrepreneur is an individual who iden-

tifies and exploits business opportunities, creates innovative ventures, and assumes
significant risk in the pursuit of profit and market success. Entrepreneurs play a cru-
cial role in economies by enhancing and advancing businesses (Gallardo-Vázquez
et al. 2023). In contrast, an intrapreneur operates within an established organiza-
tion, exhibiting entrepreneurial characteristics to drive innovation, develop new
projects, and advance the organization’s objectives while often benefiting from the
organization’s resources and support. Whereas entrepreneurs act independently
and are active within their companies, intrapreneurs are only partially independent
because they work within the company as employees (Cadar and Badulescu 2015).
Both entrepreneurs and intrapreneurs are crucial when it comes to sustainability in
family businesses. Woodfield et al. (2017) explore the linkage between sustainable
entrepreneurship and family firms and argue that family firms go beyond seeking

13
 S. Häußler, P. Ulrich

financial gain and provide non-economic benefits (such as security and employ-
ment) to people and society. Rachmawati et al. (2022) assess family business per-
formance and offer an overview of strategies. They point out that entrepreneurial
orientation and family involvement are important factors in performance appraisal in
family firms. Jamil et al. (2022) explore entrepreneurial qualities that lead to family
business sustainability and indicate four supporting factors (cognitive characteris-
tics, leadership role, motivation, and personality traits). Yet there are also limita-
tions in this regard. Martínez Bobillo et al. (2021) show that efficiency factors in the
design and potentiation of the entrepreneurial orientation and innovation capacity
by family firms are hindered by the institutional (regulatory, legal, labor, and educa-
tional) environment, while more traditional factors such as ownership concentration
and firm size are dominant.

3.2 Quantitative analysis of indicators

After the previous qualitative evaluation of results, the quantitative evaluation and
graphical illustration of indicators are presented below.
Based in the recommendations Curado and Mota (2021) and Herrera and de las
Heras-Rosas (2020), the geographical backgrounds of the publications studied were
systematically collected. It should be mentioned that the naming of a geographical
focus is always closely related to the selection of the research method. A geographi-
cal context is crucial for a case study but not for meta-level investigations, such as a
literature review. For this reason, the number of publications that cannot be assigned
a geographical focus is relatively high (n=33), which left a set of 65 publications.
Among the assignable results, Asia (n=27) and Europe (n=23) are the regions with
the highest number of publications. The emphasis on these regions reflects the grow-
ing interest and prevalence of family businesses in these areas and their significance

Fig. 2  Geographical context of the publications

13
Exploring strategic corporate sustainability management…

in contributing to sustainable development. Only a few publications indicated

Africa, America, Australia, or South America as the geographic context (Fig. 2).
The predominance of Asia and Europe as the geographic focus in most publications
on sustainability in family firms could be attributed to several factors. Firstly, these
regions are home to a significant number of family- owned enterprises, making them
important contributors to the global economy and sustainability discourse. Secondly,
Asia and Europe have witnessed a growing awareness and emphasis on sustainabil-
ity issues, leading to an increased interest in studying sustainable practices within
family businesses in these regions. Lastly, the availability of research funding, aca-
demic resources, and established networks of scholars and institutions in these areas
may have facilitated the production and dissemination of research on this topic.
According to the literature review by Seuring and Müller (2008), five different
research methods were distinguished and each paper (n=98) was assigned to only
one method (Fig. 3). Surveys (n=34) were the most frequently chosen method to
tackle sustainability in family firms, followed by case studies (n=22) and models
(n=19).
The prevalence of surveys as the most commonly used method in papers on sus-
tainability in family firms could be attributed to several factors. First of all, surveys
are well-suited for collecting quantitative data from a large sample of family busi-
nesses, allowing researchers to obtain comprehensive insights into the prevalence
and nature of sustainability practices across a diverse range of companies. Further-
more, surveys provide a structured and standardized approach, enabling research-
ers to ask consistent questions and compare responses systematically. This enhances
the reliability and validity of the findings, making surveys an attractive method for
studying sustainability-related phenomena in family firms. Surveys offer a cost-
effective and efficient means of data collection, particularly when compared to
qualitative methods, which often require extensive time and resources for in-depth
interviews or case studies. As sustainability in family firms remains a burgeoning

Fig. 3  Research methodologies applied

13
 S. Häußler, P. Ulrich

research area, surveys allow researchers to cover a wide range of topics and gather
data from a larger pool of respondents. Lastly, the anonymous nature of surveys can
encourage respondents to provide more honest responses on sensitive topics, such
as internal family dynamics or business strategies. This can lead to a more accurate
representation of the actual practices and challenges faced by family firms concern-
ing sustainability.

4 Discussion

Corporate strategy refers to the strategy used to achieve a company’s goals, i.e. to
implement the company’s policy (Davies 2000). According to Porter (1996), the
[…] “essence of strategy is choosing to perform activities differently than rivals do.”
A strategy can be considered as a means of deciding what actions to pursue (Evered
1983). In terms of corporate strategy, there are specifics in the case of family busi-
nesses. Corporate sustainability strategies encompass deliberate plans and initiatives
aimed at fostering the enduring economic, social, and environmental sustainability
of a company’s operations. These strategies entail a comprehensive evaluation of the
ecological, societal, and economic consequences of business activities, coupled with
the implementation of measures to mitigate adverse impacts and enhance positive
contributions to society and the environment (Eweje 2011).
Various types of sustainability strategies can be identified, each serving distinct
purposes (Baumgartner and Ebner 2010). Introverted strategies focus on risk miti-
gation, adhering to external standards and regulations to safeguard the company
from potential liabilities. Extroverted strategies, on the other hand, emphasize the
building of positive external relationships and securing the social license to oper-
ate effectively. Conservative strategies prioritize eco-efficiency and cleaner produc-
tion as a means of enhancing resource efficiency. Lastly, visionary strategies adopt
a holistic approach, incorporating sustainability considerations across all business
activities. Based on the papers found in our review, we agree with these statements
and emphasize that the inclusion of internal (issues such as family succession) and
external relationships in sustainability strategies should be considered as a matter of
urgency.
Chirapanda (2020) aimed to elucidate the main strategies for family firms to
ensure the successful continuation of their enterprises. The author points out that of
the family firms surveyed, 60 percent agree that corporate and management strate-
gies must be established along with a properly thought-out succession plan (ibid).
In addition to succession planning, conflict strategies are also an important topic in
strategic considerations in family businesses, in contrast to non-family businesses.
Wu et al. (2018) show that managing the level of conflict between family business
board members at an appropriate level by studying the main cause of conflict and
identifying its nature led to better performance and sustainable development of fam-
ily businesses.
As other authors have also recently noted (Henschel et al. 2021), sustainability
issues are a continuously growing trend for family businesses, which can be deduced
from the increasing number of corresponding publications, especially since 2010.

13
Exploring strategic corporate sustainability management…

Although sustainability in family businesses is an under-researched field, there have

been several recent literature reviews that deal with partial aspects. These include
Henschel et al. (2021), who conducted a systematic literature review on the topic
of family businesses and CSR. However, the evaluation method (bibliographic cou-
pling analysis) led to a higher degree of abstraction of the results, with a focus on
thematic connections and the contexts offered by the bibliographic coupling network
visualization. In contrast, the present work goes significantly deeper to qualitatively
explore the topics through inductive category formation.
Regarding the limitations of this work, we note that we have not considered peer-
reviewed literature or literature not published in languages outside of English in the
results of the literature analysis. We acknowledge that there may have been relevant
literature in these sources that could have contributed to the summarized results. In
addition, we limited our search to two digital databases, Scopus and WoS. Although
these databases are extensive, some studies may have been overlooked.

5 Conclusion

Our study offers advice for colleagues and practitioners by highlighting key aspects
of sustainability in family businesses. Future research can be developed on these
topics and solutions can be offered to these companies. The study also gave fam-
ily businesses an insight into potential areas for development and provided an over-
view of three clusters of strategies that have been captured in the recent literature
on sustainable family businesses: (1) Family values and succession planning; Stake-
holder relations and communication (2) Risk taking, Inventions, and Technologies
(3) Entrepreneurship and Intrapreneurship. In addition, we offered insights into the
studies considered by breaking down the results by geographical focus, methods
applied, and year of publication. We recommend that future research be conducted
on the following topics.

(1) Regarding sustainability, strategies for family businesses’ internal as well as

external relationships should be included. Core elements of the studies found
relate internally to the topics of family values and succession planning and
externally to the topics of stakeholder relationships, including maintaining the
good reputation of the family name. We recommend a longitudinal study to
follow up on the core elements identified, focusing on the long-term impact of
sustainability strategies on the performance and resilience of family businesses
and to identify best practices.
(2) A future research direction could be to analyze the possibilities of implementing
sustainability strategies based on company size regarding the resources required
and in particular concerning technologies in the company, associated costs, and
risks for family businesses. This could reveal whether larger family businesses
with more capital, for example, are better able to drive forward technologies in
terms of sustainability development.
(3) Regarding the topic of family businesses and sustainability, it is important to
strike a balance between efficiency/entrepreneurship, family factors, and the

13
 S. Häußler, P. Ulrich

quality characteristics of sustainability. In this context, it would be interesting

to examine the influence of family management structures and dynamics on the
adoption and implementation of sustainability strategies and to analyze how fam-
ily traditions, values, and decision-making processes influence the integration
of sustainability into the core business strategy.

6 Data availability statement

Not applicable.

Funding Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL. The project underlying this
report was funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research under the grant number
03FHP139C. The responsibility for the content of this publication lies with the author.

Declarations
Conflict of interest On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there are no conflicts of
interest, nor any financial or non-financial interests to disclose.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License,
which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long
as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative
Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this
article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line
to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended
use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permis-
sion directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/
licenses/by/4.0/.

References
Aarseth W, Ahola T, Aaltonen K, Økland A, Andersen B (2017) Project sustainability strategies: A sys-
tematic literature review. Int J Project Manage 35(6):1071–1083. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​ijpro​man.​
2016.​11.​006
Alwadani R, Ndubisi NO (2020) Sustainable family business: The role of stakeholder involvement, mind-
ful organizing, and contingent human factors. Int J Manpow 41(7):945–965. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1108/​
IJM-​08-​2019-​0359
Anggadwita G, Profityo WB, Alamanda DT, Permatasari A (2020) Cultural values and their implications
to family business succession: A case study of small Chinese-owned family businesses in Bandung.
Indones J Family Bus Manag 10(4):281–292. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1108/​JFBM-​03-​2019-​0017
Anggadwita G, Permatasari A, Alamanda DT, Profityo WB (2022) Exploring women’s initiatives for
family business resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic. J Family Bus Manag 13(3):714–736.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1108/​JFBM-​02-​2022-​0014
Astrachan JH, Zellweger T (2008) Performance of family firms: A literature review and guidance for
future research. Zeitschrift Für KMU Und Entrep 56(1–2):1–22. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3790/​zfke.​56.1_​
2.​83
Astrachan JH, Astrachan CB, Campopiano G, Baù M (2020) Values, Spirituality, and Religion: Family
Business and the Roots of Sustainable Ethical Behavior. J Bus Ethics 163(4):637–645. https://​doi.​
org/​10.​1007/​s10551-​019-​04392-5

13
Exploring strategic corporate sustainability management…

Baltazar JR, Fernandes CI, Ramadani V, Hughes M (2023) Family business succession and innovation:
a systematic literature review. RMS 17(8):2897–2920. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s11846-​022-​00607-8
Baumgartner RJ, Ebner D (2010) Corporate sustainability strategies: sustainability profiles and maturity
levels. Sustain Dev 18(2):76–89. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1002/​sd.​447
Becker W, Ulrich P, Stradtmann M (2018) Geschäftsmodellinnovationen als Wettbewerbsvorteil mittel-
ständischer Unternehmen. Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden
Behringer S, Ulrich P, Unruh A (2019) Compliance management in family firms: A systematic literature
analysis. Corp Ownersh Control 17(1):140–157. https://​doi.​org/​10.​22495/​cocv1​7i1ar​t13
Benninghaus H (2005) Einführung in die sozialwissenschaftliche Datenanalyse: Buch mit CD- ROM.
Oldenbourg, München
Bozer G, Levin L, Santora JC (2017) Succession in family business: multi-source perspectives. J Small
Bus Enterp Dev 24(4):753–774. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1108/​JSBED-​10-​2016-​0163
Briner RB, Denyer D (2012) Systematic review and evidence synthesis as a practice and scholarship tool.
In: Rousseau DM (ed) The Oxford Handbook of evidence-based management. Oxford University
Press, New York, pp 112–129
Broccardo L, Truant E, Zicari A (2019) Internal corporate sustainability drivers: What evidence from
family firms? A literature review and research agenda. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag
26(1):1–18. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1002/​csr.​1672
Bruttel O (2014) Nachhaltigkeit als Kriterium für Konsumentscheidungen. Ökologisches Wirtschaften
Fachzeitschrift 29(1):41–45. https://​doi.​org/​10.​14512/​OEW29​0141
Cadar O, Badulescu (2015) Entrepreneur, Entrepreneurship and Intrapreneurship. A Literature Review.
The Annals of the University of Oradea: Economic Sciences 2(XXIV): 658–664. https://​mpra.​ub.​
uni-​muenc​hen.​de/​78871/1/​MPRA_​paper_​78871.​pdf. Accessed 15 Aug 2023
Chaudhuri R, Chatterjee S, Kraus S, Vrontis D (2022) Assessing the AI-CRM technology capability for
sustaining family businesses in times of crisis: the moderating role of strategic intent. J Family Bus
Manag 13(1):46–67. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1108/​JFBM-​12-​2021-​0153
Chirapanda S (2020) Identification of success factors for sustainability in family businesses: Case study
method and exploratory research in Japan. J Family Bus Manag 10(1):58–75. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
1108/​JFBM-​05-​2019-​0030
Chua JH, Chrisman JJ, Sharma P (1999) Defining the family business by behavior. Entrep Theory Pract
23(4):19–39. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1177/​10422​58799​02300​402
Clauß T, Kraus S, Jones P (2022) Sustainability in family business: Mechanisms, technologies and busi-
ness models for achieving economic prosperity, environmental quality and social equity. Technol
Forecast Soc Chang 176(1):121450. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​techf​ore.​2021.​121450
Curado C, Mota A (2021) A systematic literature review on sustainability in family firms. Sustainability
13(7):3824. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3390/​su130​73824
Davies W (2000) Understanding strategy. Strategy & Leadership 28(5):25–30. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1108/​
10878​57001​03794​28
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. Glob Strateg J
8(1):3–21. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1002/​gsj.​1199
European Parliament Council (2021) Regulation (EU) 2021/1119 of the European Parliament and of the
Council of 30 June 2021 establishing the framework for achieving climate neutrality and amending
Regulations (EC) No 401/2009 and (EU) 2018/1999 (‘European Climate Law’). Official Journal of
the European Union, L 243/1. https://​eur-​lex.​europa.​eu/​legal-​conte​nt/​EN/​TXT/?​uri=​CELEX:​32021​
R1119. Accessed 15 Aug 2023
Evered R (1983) So what is strategy? Long Range Plan 16(3):57–72. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/​0024-​
6301(83)​90032-8
Eweje G (2011) A shift in corporate practice? Facilitating sustainability strategy in companies. Corp Soc
Responsib Environ Manag 18(3):125–136. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1002/​csr.​268
Frank H, Lueger M, Nosé L, Suchy D (2010) The concept of “Familiness”: Literature review and systems
theory-based reflections. J Fam Bus Strat 1(3):119–130. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​jfbs.​2010.​08.​001
Fries A, Kammerlander N, Leitterstorf M (2019) Leadership Styles and Leadership Behaviors in Family
Firms: A Systematic Literature Review. J Fam Bus Strat 12(1):1–16. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​jfbs.​
2020.​100374
Gallardo-Vázquez D, Herrador-Alcaide TC, de la Cruz S-D (2023) Developing a measurement scale of
corporate socially responsible entrepreneurship in sustainable management. RMS 18:1377–1426.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s11846-​023-​00658-5

13
 S. Häußler, P. Ulrich

García-Sánchez IM, Martín-Moreno J, Khan SA, Hussain N (2020) Socio-emotional wealth and corpo-
rate responses to environmental hostility: Are family firms more stakeholder oriented? Bus Strateg
Environ 30(2):1003–1018. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1002/​bse.​2666
Gómez-Ortega A, Flores-Ureba S, Gelashvili V, Jalón MLD (2023) Users’ perception for innovation and
sustainability management: evidence from public transport. RMS 18:859–882. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
1007/​s11846-​023-​00625-0
Harms H (2014) Review of Family Business Definitions: Cluster Approach and Implications of Hetero-
geneous Application for Family Business Research. Int J Financ Stud 2(3):280–314. https://​doi.​org/​
10.​3390/​ijfs2​030280
Henschel T, Florio C, Jharni S, Stellmacher M (2021) The impact of corporate social responsibility on
advancing the enterprise risk management performance relationship in small and medium-sized
enterprises. J Int Council Small Bus 3(4):321–328. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​00472​778.​2021.​
19551​22
Herrera J, de las Heras-Rosas C (2020) Economic, non-economic and critical factors for the sustain-
ability of family firms. J Open Innov: Technol, Market, Complex 6(4):119. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
3390/​joitm​c6040​119
Hiebl MRW (2023) Sample Selection in Systematic Literature Reviews of Management Research.
Organ Res Methods 26(2):229–261. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1177/​10944​28120​9868
Jamil M, Fadzil AFM, Waqar A, Yaacob MR (2022) Exploring entrepreneurial qualities for the sus-
tainability of family businesses in Pakistan. J Family Bus Manag 13(4):856–872. https://​doi.​org/​
10.​1108/​JFBM-​05-​2022-​0073
Kammerlander N (2022) Family business and business family questions in the 21st century: Who
develops SEW, how do family members create value, and who belongs to the family? J Fam Bus
Strat 13(2):1–7. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​jfbs.​2021.​100470
Kazancoglu Y, Sezer MD, Ozkan-Ozen YD, Mangla SK, Kumar A (2021) Industry 4.0 impacts on
responsible environmental and societal management in the family business. Technol Forecast
Soc Chang 173:121108. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​techf​ore.​2021.​121108
King DR, Meglio O, Gomez-Mejia L, Bauer F, De Massis A (2022) Family business restructuring: A
review and research agenda. J Manage Stud 59(1):197–235. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1111/​joms.​12717
Kraus S, Breier M, Lim WM, Dabić M, Kumar S, Kanbach D et al (2022) Literature reviews as inde-
pendent studies: guidelines for academic practice. RMS 16(8):2577–2595. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
1007/​s11846-​022-​00588-8
Kraus S, Bouncken RB, YelaAránega A (2024) The burgeoning role of literature review articles in
management research: an introduction and outlook. RMS 18:299–314. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​
s11846-​024-​00729-1
Le Breton-Miller I, Miller D (2016) Family firms and practices of sustainability: A contingency view.
J Fam Bus Strat 7(1):26–33. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​jfbs.​2015.​09.​001
Lim S, Pettit S, Abouarghoub W, Beresford A (2019) Port sustainability and performance: A system-
atic literature review. Transp Res Part d: Transp Environ 72:47–64. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​trd.​
2019.​04.​009
López-Pérez ME, Melero-Polo I, Vázquez-Carrasco R, Cambra-Fierro J (2018) Sustainability and
business outcomes in the context of SMEs: Comparing family firms vs. non-family firms. Sus-
tainability 10(11):1–16. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3390/​su101​14080
Mariani MM, Al-Sultan K, De Massis A (2021) Corporate social responsibility in family firms: A sys-
tematic literature review. J Small Bus Manage 61(3):1192–1246. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​00472​
778.​2021.​19551​22
Martínez Bobillo A, Rodríguez Sanz JA, Tejerina Gaite F (2021) Explanatory and predictive drivers
of entrepreneurial orientation and innovation capacity: Evidence from family enterprises. Cuad-
ernos de Gestión 21(2):63–76. https://​hdl.​handle.​net/​10810/​52003. Accessed 15 Aug 2023
Mayring P (2010) Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse – Grundlagen und Techniken. 11., aktualisierte und über-
arbeitete Auflage. Beltz Verlag, Weinheim Basel
Miroshnychenko I, De Massis A, Barontini R, Testa F (2022) Family firms and environmental perfor-
mance: A meta-analytic review. Fam Bus Rev 35(1):68–90. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1177/​08944​86521​
10644​09
Morioka SN, de Carvalho MM (2016) A systematic literature review towards a conceptual framework
for integrating sustainability performance into business. J Clean Prod 136:134–146. https://​doi.​
org/​10.​1016/j.​jclep​ro.​2016.​01.​104

13
Exploring strategic corporate sustainability management…

Nguyen HTT, Costanzo LA, Karatas-Özkan M (2020) Stakeholders’ perceptions of sustainable entre-
preneurship within the context of a developing economy. J Small Bus Manage 61(2):441–480.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​00472​778.​2020.​17964​65
Pickering C, Byrne J (2014) The benefits of publishing systematic quantitative literature reviews for
PhD candidates and other early-career researchers. High Educ Res Dev 33(3):534–548. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​1080/​07294​360.​2013.​841651
Porfírio JA, Felício JA, Carrilho T (2020) Family business succession: Analysis of the drivers of suc-
cess based on entrepreneurship theory. J Bus Res 115:250–257. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​jbusr​es.​
2019.​11.​054
Porter ME (1996) What is strategy? Harvard business review Nov–Dec 74(6):61–78. https://​hbr.​org/​
1996/​11/​what-​is-​strat​egy. Accessed 15 Aug 2023
Pranugrahaning A, Donovan JD, Topple C, Masli EK (2021) Corporate sustainability assessments:
A systematic literature review and conceptual framework. J Clean Prod 295:126385. https://​doi.​
org/​10.​1016/j.​jclep​ro.​2021.​126385
Rachmawati E, Suliyanto S, Suroso A (2022) Direct and indirect effect of entrepreneurial orientation,
family involvement and gender on family business performance. J Family Bus Manag 12(2):214–
236. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1108/​JFBM-​07-​2020-​0064
Rodriguez Serna L, Bowyer DM, Gregory SK (2022) Management control systems. A non- family
stakeholder perspective on the critical success factors influencing continuous stakeholder sup-
port during businesses succession. J Small Bus Enterp Dev 30(2):290–310. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
1108/​JSBED-​09-​2021-​0364
Rodriguez Serna L, Nakandala D, Bowyer D (2022b) Why do eligible successors withdraw from the
succession process in family businesses? A social exchange perspective". J Family Bus Manag
12(4):999–1019. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1108/​JFBM-​04-​2021-​0036
Samudro A, Sumarwan U, Yusuf EZ, Simanjuntak M (2018) Perceived value, social bond, and switch-
ing cost as antecedents and predictors of customer loyalty in the B2B chemical industry context:
A literature review. Int J Market Stud 10(4):124–138. https://​doi.​org/​10.​5539/​ijms.​v10n4​p124
Santos E, Tavares V, Tavares FO, Ratten V (2022) How is risk different in family and non- family
businesses? A comparative statistical analysis during the COVID-19 pandemic. J Family Bus
Manag 12(4):1113–1130. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1108/​JFBM-​10-​2021-​0123
Sauer PC, Seuring S (2023) How to conduct systematic literature reviews in management
research: a guide in 6 steps and 14 decisions. RMS 17:1899–1933. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​
s11846-​023-​00668-3
Schäufele I, Hamm U (2017) Consumers’ perceptions, preferences and willingness-to-pay for wine
with sustainability characteristics: A review. J Clean Prod 147:379–394. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
1016/j.​jclep​ro.​2017.​01.​118
Scopus (2023) https://​www.​scopus.​com/​search/​form.​uri?​displ​ay=​autho​rLook​up#​author. Accessed 15
Aug 2023
Seuring S, Müller M (2008) From a literature review to a conceptual framework for the sustainable
supply chain management. J Clean Prod 16(15):1699–1710. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​jclep​ro.​
2008.​04.​020
Siebels JF, zuKnyphausen-Aufsess D (2012) A review of theory in family business research: The
implications for corporate governance. Int J Manag Rev 14(3):280–304. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
1111/j.​1468-​2370.​2011.​00317.x
Sun J, Pellegrini MM, Dabić M, Wang K, Wang C (2024) Family ownership and control as drivers for
environmental, social, and governance in family firms. RMS 18(4):1015–1046. https://​doi.​org/​
10.​1007/​s11846-​023-​00631-2
Tjahjadi B, Soewarno N, Mustikaningtiyas F (2021) Good corporate governance and corporate sus-
tainability performance in Indonesia: A triple bottom line approach. Heliyon 7(3):1–11. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​heliy​on.​2021.​e06453
Tranfield D, Denyer D, Smart P (2003) Towards a methodology for developing evidence- informed
management knowledge by means of systematic review. Br J Manag 14(3):207–222. https://​doi.​
org/​10.​1111/​1467-​8551.​00375
Traxler AA, Greiling D (2023) Nachhaltigkeitsberichterstattung und -controlling in Familienun-
ternehmen. In: Duller C, Hiebl MRW, Kuttner M, Mayr S, Mitter C (eds) Herausforderungen im
Management von Familienunternehmen. Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden, pp 263–277
Velte P (2022) Which institutional investors drive corporate sustainability? A systematic literature
review. Bus Strateg Environ 32(1):42–71. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1002/​bse.​3117

13
 S. Häußler, P. Ulrich

Wang YZ, Lo FY, Weng SM (2019) Family businesses successors knowledge and willingness on
sustainable innovation: The moderating role of leader’s approval. J Innov Knowl 4(3):188–195.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​jik.​2019.​05.​001
Web of Science (2023) https://​www.​webof​scien​ce.​com/​wos/​woscc/​basic-​search. Accessed 15 Aug
2023
Webster J, Watson R (2002) Analyzing the Past to Prepare for the Future: Writing a Literature Review.
MIS Quarterly 26(2):xiii–xxiii. http://​www.​jstor.​org/​stable/​41323​19
Woodfield P, Woods C, Shepherd D (2017) Sustainable entrepreneurship: another avenue for fam-
ily business scholarship? J Family Bus Manag 7(1):122–132. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1108/​
JFBM-​12-​2015-​0040
Wu M, Zhang L, Imran M, Lu J, Hu X (2018) Conflict coping strategy evolution of top management
team members in China’s family enterprises. Chin Manag Stud 12(2):246–267. https://​doi.​org/​
10.​1108/​CMS-​08-​2017-​0227

Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps
and institutional affiliations.

13