A conceptual model diagram illustrating how institutional context influences ESG prioritization in family firms through different isomorphism mechanisms. The diagram starts with the institutional context comparing Canada and Mexico. This context leads to three types of isomorphism: Mimetic Isomorphism, Coercive Isomorphism, and Normative Isomorphism. Mimetic Isomorphism is driven by legitimacy via a shared global ESG template, leading to aggregate and pillar-level ESG convergence. Coercive Isomorphism is influenced by uneven regulatory stringency by domain. Normative Isomorphism is shaped by stakeholder and reputational expectations, which are further influenced by socioemotional wealth factors such as reputation, legitimacy, family control, and continuity. These factors lead to category-level ESG prioritization divergence.Institutional mechanisms linking country context to ESG prioritization in family firms. Note: The figure presents the conceptual model of the study. Institutional context (Canada vs. Mexico) shapes ESG prioritization through three institutional isomorphism mechanisms (DiMaggio and Powell, 1983). Mimetic isomorphism drives convergence in overall ESG reporting, as firms in both countries draw on the same global legitimacy template. Coercive isomorphism, reflecting uneven regulatory stringency across ESG domains, and normative isomorphism, which operates through family firms’ socioemotional wealth considerations (reputation, legitimacy, family control and continuity), jointly drive divergence in ESG prioritization at the category level. Source(s): Author’s own work