Crisis, culture, and community: insights into family firms’ social actions during COVID-19

Purpose The purpose of this research is to explore the determinants of socially oriented actions by family firms during the COVID-19 pandemic. Specifically, it aims to understand how family involvement, financial resources and cultural dimensions influence their social responsibility initiatives. By analyzing these factors, the study contributes to the literature on family business behavior and corporate social responsibility (CSR) in crisis contexts, offering insights into the unique interplay of family and cultural influences. Design/methodology/approach This study employs a multi-country dataset to investigate the socially oriented responses of family firms during the COVID-19 pandemic. Robust analytical methods are applied to examine the interplay between family involvement, firm financial conditions, and national cultural dimensions. The analysis incorporates firm-level characteristics and cultural factors across diverse national contexts, leveraging quantitative data to draw insights into the behavior and decision-making of family firms in times of crisis. Findings Our study reveals that family ownership fosters socially oriented responses during crises, while the presence of a family CEO is linked to more cautious, survival-focused behavior. Cultural dimensions significantly shape these dynamics: indulgence, short-term orientation and power distance promote greater social engagement, whereas uncertainty avoidance and long-term orientation temper it. Interestingly, firm size and sales impact did not significantly moderate these relationships, underscoring that identity, stewardship, and cultural norms – not resource availability – drive family firms’ crisis responses. These findings highlight the nuanced interplay between family involvement and cultural context in shaping socially responsible actions. Research limitations/implications This study relies on self-reported survey data from a single respondent per firm, raising the possibility of social desirability bias. Hofstede’s cultural framework, while widely used, offers a static view of culture that may not fully capture evolving dynamics during crises. Additionally, the study does not disentangle subgroup differences, such as generational stages or family versus non-family CEOs, which may reveal further heterogeneity. Future research should triangulate self-reports with objective indicators, examine alternative cultural models and explore institutional variables (e.g. government responses) to deepen understanding of family firms' socially oriented behavior under extreme conditions. Practical implications Findings offer guidance for policymakers, business associations and civil society on leveraging family firms’ social potential during crises. Support structures – such as advisory boards or stakeholder councils – can help family CEOs balance survival concerns with broader societal needs. Recognizing cultural influences is crucial: in high power distance or indulgent contexts, targeted initiatives can activate stewardship and community engagement, while in high uncertainty avoidance settings, training and policy messaging can encourage outward-looking actions. Tailoring crisis communication and incentives to cultural logics can improve family firms’ responsiveness, helping societies mobilize these organizations as anchors of resilience in future emergencies. Social implications This study underscores the critical role of family firms as community anchors during crises, showing that their actions are shaped by both family dynamics and cultural values. By identifying when and why family firms engage in socially oriented behaviors, the findings help communities, NGOs and public institutions better mobilize these firms to support vulnerable groups. Understanding cultural drivers – such as stewardship in high power distance contexts or empathy in indulgent societies – can inform policies that foster solidarity and shared responsibility, ultimately enhancing social cohesion and collective resilience in the face of future health, economic or environmental emergencies. Originality/value This study is among the first to examine how family ownership, family management and national culture jointly shape socially oriented responses to a global crisis. Using a large, multi-country dataset, it integrates socioemotional wealth and stewardship perspectives with Hofstede's cultural framework to reveal how identity and cultural context interact in shaping behavior. By distinguishing between family influence in ownership and management, the study uncovers contrasting logics that affect crisis decision-making. These insights advance theory on family firms, enrich cross-cultural research and provide practical guidance for leveraging family firms’ social potential in future emergencies.