What does responsible ownership mean for family-owned businesses operating amid international expansion, generational transitions, intense competition for talent, and constantly evolving market conditions?
That question sat at the heart of the closing roundtable of the Family Firms: Purpose, Economic Performance and Social Impact Conference, held on March 16 on IESE’s Madrid campus.
The discussion brought together leaders of three family-controlled firms operating on a global stage: Sabina Fluxá of Iberostar Group, Paco Riberas of Gestamp, and Gildo Zegna of the Ermenegildo Zegna Group.
Despite differences in industries, ownership structures and competitive challenges, their reflections converged on a strikingly consistent message: responsible ownership is not passive stewardship, but an active, evolving commitment to the long-term health of the company.
Evolving in tandem: company and governance
One of the clearest themes was the need for governance to adapt in line with the company’s evolution.
In the case of Gestamp, Paco Riberas described the company’s shift from a founder-led business without a formal board to a partnership model, and later to a publicly listed company with a board largely composed of independent directors.
Sabina Fluxá offered a different, but equally instructive, perspective of Iberostar’s model: a family group with several branches, cross-shareholdings and multiple boards that has has refined its governance structures over time.
In both cases, governance emerged not as a fixed template but as an adaptive system. Structures that work in one phase of a company’s life may prove insufficient in the next. Against this backdrop, responsible owners are willing to redesign the architecture as growth, complexity or new stakeholders demand it.
At the same time, governance was not framed as a purely defensive exercise. Riberas made the point forcefully: avoiding decisions is not the same as avoiding mistakes.
A board focused solely on compliance or risk containment may fail in a subtler but no less serious way: by not helping the company move when needed.
From supervision to stewardship
Good boards do more than supervise. Effective boards support strategy, challenge management constructively and help companies act with clarity in the long run.
Gildo Zegna reinforced that idea from another angle, noting that no stakeholder—whether family shareholders, board members or public investors—wants surprises. In all cases, trust depends on preparation, transparency and consistency. Clear and consistent lines of communication is key.
The issue of succession
The discussion on succession offered perhaps the most human part of the conversation.
Both Zegna and Fluxá described the transition not as a moment, but as a process. Zegna emphasized the importance of planning the succession process while the outgoing leader still has the energy and enthusiasm to support the next generation.
For her part, Fluxá highlighted the value of a long, natural transition built on open communication, resilience and gradual legitimacy. One of the clearest takeaways came from a personal recollection: her father telling her that neither her surname nor her education would ever be enough.
In other words, leadership cannot simply be inherited—it must be earned. That insight captures a central truth of continuity in family business: generational handovers succeed not when authority is transferred on paper, but when credibility has been built in practice.
The decision to go public
The conversation around public markets added another dimension to responsible ownership. For both Gestamp and Zegna, going public was demanding, but ultimately valuable.
As they noted, launching an IPO brought discipline, visibility and access to new sources of capital, but also new obligations and scrutiny. Neither framed listing as an end in itself.
Rather, they described it as a strategic step that changes the relationship between management, ownership and external stakeholders.
At the same time, public listing becomes a test of family ownership: can a family remain anchored in long-term value creation while operating in an environment that constantly rewards short-term signals?
Their insights suggested that it can, but only if owners are clear about the company’s direction and disciplined in how they communicate it.
The importance of talent and corporate culture
Talent and culture were treated not as secondary concerns, but as central pillars of competitive strength.
Sabina Fluxá described Iberostar’s ongoing investments in employee development, well-being and inclusion across a large and diverse workforce. In the case of Iberostar, employer brand matters as much as customer brand in industries where talent shortages and high attrition are persistent challenges.
Paco Riberas approached the issue from a different angle but arrived at a similar conclusion: in his view, the best way to attract and retain solid talent is not through superficial perks, but through an exciting project—one that is growing, meaningful and gives people room to develop.
His comments also challenged a common stereotype. Family businesses are often seen as less meritocratic, yet he argued that clear values, established rules and a long-term orientation can create exactly the kind of environment in which talent thrives.
Looking toward the future
When the conversation turned to the future, the vocabulary shifted toward disruption, but the underlying logic remained the same.
Zegna spoke of flexibility, agility, speed and the ability to mobilize resources quickly when shocks hit.
Fluxá pointed to environmental risk and artificial intelligence as major forces that will reshape tourism in the years ahead.
Riberas, speaking from the automotive industry, noted that, in the case of Gestamp’s sector, disruption is no longer episodic; it is constant.
The challenge, then, is not to predict every shock, but to build organizations that can respond without losing direction. Across all three perspectives, resilience emerged not as rigidity, but as adaptive capacity rooted in a clear sense of identity.
That may be the deepest takeaway from the roundtable. At their best, family firms are not strong simply because they think in generations rather than quarters. They are strong because they bring together qualities that are often difficult to combine: continuity and change, patience and urgency, identity and reinvention.
Family businesses can professionalize without losing their soul. They can grow without abandoning their purpose. And they can remain committed to the long term without becoming slow or complacent.
In a business environment shaped by uncertainty, that combination may be among the most compelling expressions of responsible ownership.
Homepage image: Vitaly Gariev on Unsplash