The Impact of Gender Diversity on the Performance of Business Teams: Evidence from a Field Experiment

References

• Adams R, Ferreira D. Women in the boardroom and their impact on governance and performance. J. Financial Econom. (2009) 94(2):291–309Crossref, Google Scholar
• Adams R, Funk P. Beyond the glass ceiling: Does gender matter? Management Sci. (2012) 58(2):219–235Link, Google Scholar
• Adams R, Hermalin B, Weisbach M. The role of boards of directors in corporate governance: A conceptual framework and survey. J. Econom. Literature (2010) 48(1):58–107Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ahern K, Dittmar A. The changing of the boards: The impact on firm valuation of mandated female board representation. Quart. J. Econom. (2012) 127(1):137–197Crossref, Google Scholar
• Allen J, van Breugel G, Coenen J, Fouarge D, Meng C, Ramaekers G, van Dijk J, Venhorst V. Afgestudeerden van het HBO tijdens een crisis: Geen verloren generatie. (2009) . Technical report, HBO-raad, Den Haag, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
• Amason A, Shrader R, Tompson G. Newness and novelty: Relating top management team composition to new venture performance. J. Bus. Venturing (2006) 21(1):125–148Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ancona D, Caldwell D. Demography and design: Predictors of new product team performance. Organ. Sci. (1992) 3(3):321–341Link, Google Scholar
• Angrist J, Pischke J. Mostly Harmless Econometrics: An Empiricist's Companion (2008) (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Apesteguia J, Azmat G, Iriberri N. The impact of gender composition on team performance and decision making: Evidence from the field. Management Sci. (2012) 58(1):78–93Link, Google Scholar
• Bell S. Deep-level composition variables as predictors of team performance: A meta-analysis. J. Appl. Psych. (2007) 92(3):595–614Crossref, Google Scholar
• Catalyst Catalyst census of women board directors of the Fortune 1000. (2010) . Technical report, Catalyst, New YorkGoogle Scholar
• Chowdhury S. Demographic diversity for building an effective entrepreneurial team: Is it important? J. Bus. Venturing (2005) 20(6):727–746Crossref, Google Scholar
• De Jong A, de Ruyter K, Wetzels M. Antecedents and consequences of group potency: A study of self-managing service teams. Management Sci. (2005) 51(11):1610–1625Link, Google Scholar
• Desvaux G, Devillard-Hoellinger S, Baumgarten P. Women matter: Gender diversity, a corporate performance driver. (2007) . Technical report, McKinsey & Company, ParisGoogle Scholar
• Dufwenberg M, Muren A. Gender composition in teams. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. (2006) 61(1):50–54Crossref, Google Scholar
• Edwards B, Day E, Arthur W, Bell S. Relationships among team ability composition, team mental models, and team performance. J. Appl. Psych. (2006) 91(3):727–736Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ellison S, Greenbaum J, Mullin W. Diversity, social goods provision, and performance in the firm. (2010) . CESifo. Working Paper 3171, CESifo, Munich, GermanyGoogle Scholar
• Ensley M, Hmieleski K. A comparative study of new venture top management team composition, dynamics and performance between university-based and independent start-ups. Res. Policy (2005) 34(7):1091–1105Crossref, Google Scholar
• Farrell K, Hersch P. Additions to corporate boards: The effect of gender. J. Corporate Finance (2005) 11(2):85–106Crossref, Google Scholar
• Goldberg L. An alternative description of personality: The big five factor structure. J. Personality Soc. Psych. (1990) 59(6):1216–1229Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gul F, Srinidhi B, Ng A. Does board gender diversity improve the informativeness of stock prices? J. Accounting Econom. (2011) 51(3):314–338Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hamilton B, Nickerson J, Owan H. Team incentives and worker heterogeneity: An empirical analysis of the impact of teams on productivity and participation. J. Political Econom. (2003) 111(3):465–497Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hamilton B, Nickerson J, Owan H, Bryson A. Advances in the economic analyses of participatory and labor-managed firms. Diversity and Productivity in Production Teams (2012) 13(Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Bingley, UK) 99–138Google Scholar
• Hansen Z, Owan H, Pan J. The impact of group diversity on performance and knowledge spillover: An experiment in a college classroom. (2006) . Working paper, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
• Hermalin B, Weisbach M. Boards of directors as an endogenously determined institution: A survey of the economic literature. Econom. Policy Rev. (2003) 9(1):7–26Google Scholar
• Herring C. Does diversity pay? Race, gender, and the business case for diversity. Amer. Sociol. Rev. (2009) 74(2):208–224Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hoogendoorn S, van Praag M. Ethnic diversity and team performance: A field experiment. (2012) . IZA Discussion Paper 6731, Institute for the Study of Labor, Bonn, GermanyGoogle Scholar
• Horwitz S, Horwitz I. The effects of team diversity on team outcomes: A meta-analytic review of team demography. J. Management (2007) 33(6):987–1015Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hoxby C. Peer effects in the classroom: Learning from gender and race variation. (2000) . Working paper, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MACrossref, Google Scholar
• Ivanova-Stenzel R, Kuebler D. Gender differences in team work and team competition. J. Econom. Psych. (2011) 32(5):797–808Crossref, Google Scholar
• Karlan D, Valdivia M. Teaching entrepreneurship: Impact of business training on microfinance clients and institutions. Rev. Econom. Statist. (2011) 93(2):510–527Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kremer M. The O-ring theory of economic development. Quart. J. Econom. (1993) 108(3):551–575Crossref, Google Scholar
• Langfred C. Too much of a good thing? Negative effects of high trust and individual autonomy in self-managing teams. Acad. Management J. (2004) 47(3):385–399Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lavy V, Schlosser A. Mechanisms and impacts of gender peer effects at school. Amer. Econom. J.: Appl. Econom. (2011) 3(2):1–33Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lee C, Farh J. Joint effects of group efficacy and gender diversity on group cohesion and performance. Appl. Psych. (2004) 53(1):136–154Crossref, Google Scholar
• LePine J. Team adaptation and postchange performance: Effects of team composition in terms of members' cognitive ability and personality. J. Appl. Psych. (2003) 88(1):27–39Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lewis K. Measuring transactive memory systems in the field: Scale development and validation. J. Appl. Psych. (2003) 88(4):587–604Crossref, Google Scholar
• Matsa D, Miller A. A female style in corporate leadership? Evidence from quotas. (2010) . Discussion paper, Institute for the Study of Labor, Bonn, GermanyGoogle Scholar
• Minniti M, Bygrave W. A dynamic model of entrepreneurial learning. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice (2001) 25(3):5–16Google Scholar
• Niederle M, Vesterlund L. Do women shy away from competition? Do men compete too much? Quart. J. Econom. (2007) 122(3):1067–1101Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nygaard K. Forced board changes: Evidence from Norway. (2011) . Discussion paper, Norwegian School of Economics, Bergen, NorwayGoogle Scholar
• Oliver R, Anderson E. An empirical test of the consequences of behavior- and outcome-based sales control systems. J. Marketing (1994) 58(4):53–67Crossref, Google Scholar
• Oosterbeek H, Van Ewijk R. Gender peer effects in university: Evidence from a randomized experiment. (2010) . Discussion paper, Tinbergen Institute, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
• Oosterbeek H, Van Praag M, IJsselstein A. The impact of entrepreneurship education on entrepreneurship skills and motivation. Eur. Econom. Rev. (2010) 54(3):442–454Crossref, Google Scholar
• Parker S. The Economics of Entrepreneurship (2009) (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pearsall M, Ellis A, Evans J. Unlocking the effects of gender faultlines on team creativity: Is activation the key? J. Appl. Psych. (2008) 93(1):225–234Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pelled L. Demographic diversity, conflict, and work group outcomes: An intervening process theory. Organ. Sci. (1996) 7(6):615–631Link, Google Scholar
• Pelled L, Eisenhardt K, Xin K. Exploring the black box: An analysis of work group diversity, conflict, and performance. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1999) 44(1):1–3Crossref, Google Scholar
• Prat A. Should a team be homogeneous? Eur. Econom. Rev. (2002) 46(7):1187–1207Crossref, Google Scholar
• Richard O, Barnett T, Dwyer S, Chadwick K. Cultural diversity in management, firm performance, and the moderating role of entrepreneurial orientation dimensions. Acad. Management J. (2004) 47(2):255–266Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shane S, Nicolaou N, Cherkas L, Spector D. Genetics, the big five, and the tendency to be self-employed. J. Appl. Psych. (2010) 95(6):1154–1162Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wegge J, Roth C, Neubach B, Schmidt K, Kanfer R. Age and gender diversity as determinants of performance and health in a public organization: The role of task complexity and group size. J. Appl. Psych. (2008) 93(6):1301–1313Crossref, Google Scholar
• Woods D. Female representation on UK boards has risen to 13.6%. HR Magazine (2010) October 5). http://www.hrmagazine.co.uk/hro/news/1018516/female-representation-uk-boards-risen-136Google Scholar
• Woolley A, Chabris C, Pentland A, Hashmi N, Malone T. Evidence for a collective intelligence factor in the performance of human groups. Science (2010) 330(6004):686–688Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zhao H, Seibert S. The big five personality dimensions and entrepreneurial status: A meta-analytical review. J. Appl. Psych. (2006) 91(2):259–271Crossref, Google Scholar