Women Don’t Mean Business? Gender Penalty in Board Composition

References

• Adams RB (2016) Women on boards: The superheroes of tomorrow? Leadership Quart. 27(3):371–386.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Adams RB, Ferreira D (2009) Women in the boardroom and their impact on governance and performance. J. Financial Econom. 94(2):291–309.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Adams RB, Funk P (2012) Beyond the glass ceiling: Does gender matter? Management Sci. 58(2):219–235.Link, Google Scholar
• Adams RB, Gray S, Nowland J (2012) Does gender matter in the boardroom? Evidence from the market reaction to mandatory new director announcements. Working paper, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.Google Scholar
• Ahern KR, Dittmar AK (2012) The changing of the boards: The impact on firm valuation of mandated female board representation. Quart. J. Econom. 127(1):137–197.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ahern KR, Sosyura D (2014) Who writes the news? Corporate press releases during merger negotiations. J. Finance 69(1):241–291.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ahmadjian CL, Robbins GE (2005) A clash of capitalisms: Foreign shareholders and corporate restructuring in 1990s Japan. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 70(3):451–471.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Anderson RC, Reeb DM (2004) Board composition: Balancing family influence in S&P 500 firms. Admin. Sci. Quart. 49(2):209–237.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Associated Press (2014) Honda appoints first woman to board. New York Times (February 24), https://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/25/business/honda-appoints-first-woman-to-board.html.Google Scholar
• Baltagi BH, Wu PX (1999) Unequally spaced panel data regressions with AR(1) disturbances. Econom. Theory 15(6):814–823.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Beaman L, Chattopadhyay R, Duflo E, Pande R, Topalova P (2009) Powerful women: Does exposure reduce bias? Quart. J. Econom. 124(4):1497–1540.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Berman SL, Wicks AC, Kotha S, Jones TM (1999) Does stakeholder orientation matter? The relationship between stakeholder management models and firm financial performance. Acad. Management J. 42(5):488–506.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bertrand M, Black SE, Jensen S, and Lleras-Muney A (2018) Breaking the glass ceiling? The effect of board quotas on female labor market outcomes in Norway. Rev. Econom. Stud. 86(1):191–239.Google Scholar
• Bhagat S, Bolton B (2008) Corporate governance and firm performance. J. Corporate Finance 14(3):257–273.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bhargava A, Franzini L, Narendranathan W (1982) Serial correlation and the fixed effects model. Rev. Econom. Stud. 49(4):533–549.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Black BS, Jang H, Kim W (2006) Does corporate governance predict firms’ market values? Evidence from Korea. J. Law Econom. Organ. 22(2):366–413.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Blackwell M, Iacus SM, King G, Porro G (2009) cem: Coarsened Exact Matching in Stata. Stata J. 9(4):524–546.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bolton P, Samama F (2013) Loyalty-shares: Rewarding long-term investors. J. Appl. Corporate Finance 25(3):86–97.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Borek A, Friesner Z, McGurn P (2017) The impact of shareholder activism on board refreshment trends at S&P 1500 firms. Report, IRRC Institute, New York.Google Scholar
• Broome LL, Conley JM, Krawiec KD (2011) Dangerous categories: Narratives of corporate board diversity. North Carolina Law Rev. 89:759–808.Google Scholar
• Budros A (1997) The new capitalism and organizational rationality: The adoption of downsizing programs, 1979–1994. Soc. Forces 76(1):229–250.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carter, DA, Simkins BJ, Simpson WG (2003) Corporate governance, board diversity, and firm value. Financial Rev. 38(1):33–53.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carter DA, D’Souza F, Simkins BJ, Simpson WG (2010) The gender and ethnic diversity of US boards and board committees and firm financial performance. Corporate Governance 18(5):396–414.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Certo ST (2003) Influencing initial public offering investors with prestige: Signaling with board structures. Acad. Management Rev. 28(3):432–446.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chang EH, Milkman KL, Chugh D, Akinola M (2019) Diversity thresholds: How social norms, visibility, and scrutiny relate to group composition. Acad. Management J. 62(1):144–171.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chatterji AK, Toffel MW (2010) How firms respond to being rated. Strategic Management J. 31(9):917–945.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chatterji AK, Levine DI, Toffel MW (2009) How well do social ratings actually measure corporate social responsibility? J. Econom. Management Strategy 18(1):125–169.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cheng I-H, Hong H, Shue K (2016) Do managers do good with other people’s money? Working paper, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH, http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1962120.Google Scholar
• Cohen BD, Dean TJ (2005) Information asymmetry and investor valuation of IPOs: Top management team legitimacy as a capital market signal. Strategic Management J. 26(7):683–690.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Coombs JE, Gilley KM (2005) Stakeholder management as a predictor of CEO compensation: Main effects and interactions with financial performance. Strategic Management J. 26(9):827–840.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dalton DR, Daily CM, Ellstrand AE, Johnson JL (1998) Meta-analytic reviews of board composition, leadership structure, and financial performance. Strategic Management J. 19(3):269–290.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dasgupta N, Asgari S (2004) Seeing is believing: Exposure to counterstereotypic women leaders and its effect on the malleability of automatic gender stereotyping. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 40(5):642–658.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Davis GF (2009) Managed by the Markets: How Finance Re-Shaped America (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK).Google Scholar
• Davis GF, Thompson TA (1994) A social movement perspective on corporate control. Admin. Sci. Quart. 39(1):141–173.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dawson J, Kersley R, Natella S (2014) The CS Gender 3000: Women in senior management Report, Credit Suisse Research Institute, Zurich.Google Scholar
• Defond ML, Hann RN, Hu X (2005) Does the market value financial expertise on audit committees of boards of directors? J. Accounting Res. 43(2):153–193.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dembosky A (2012) Sandberg is first woman on Facebook board. Financial Times (June 26), https://www.ft.com/content/91c3d364-bf16-11e1-bebe-00144feabdc0.Google Scholar
• Dezső CL, Ross DG (2012) Does female representation in top management improve firm performance? A panel data investigation. Strategic Management J. 33(9):1072–1089.Crossref, Google Scholar
• DiMaggio PJ, Powell WW (1983) The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 26(2):147–160.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dittmar AK (2000) Why do firms repurchase stock? J. Bus. 73(3):331–355.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dobbin F, Jung J (2011) Corporate board gender diversity and stock performance: The competence gap or institutional investor bias. North Carolina Law Rev. 89(3):809–838.Google Scholar
• Donaldson T, Preston LE (1995) The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. Acad. Management Rev. 20(1):65–91.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eagly AH, Karau SJ (2002) Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders. Psych. Rev. 109(3):573–598.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Edelman LB (1992) Legal ambiguity and symbolic structures: Organizational mediation of civil rights law. Amer. J. Sociol. 97(6):1531–1576.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fama EF, Jensen MC (1983) Separation of ownership and control. J. Law Econom. 26(2):301–325.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fanto JA, Solan LM, Darley JM (2011) Justifying board diversity. North Carolina Law Rev. 89(3):901–936.Google Scholar
• Farrell KA, Hersch PL (2005) Additions to corporate boards: The effect of gender. J. Corporate Finance 11(1):85–106.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fernandez-Mateo I, Fernandez RM (2016) Bending the pipeline? Executive search and gender inequality in hiring for top management jobs. Management Sci. 62(12):3636–3655.Link, Google Scholar
• Fich EM (2005) Are some outside directors better than others? Evidence from director appointments by Fortune 1000 firms. J. Bus. 78(5):1943–1972.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fich EM, Shivdasani A (2005) The impact of stock‐option compensation for outside directors on firm value. J. Bus. 78(6):2229–2254.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fich EM, Shivdasani A (2006) Are busy boards effective monitors? J. Finance 61(2):689–724.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fich EM, Shivdasani A (2007) Financial fraud, director reputation, and shareholder wealth. J. Financial Econom. 86(2):306–336.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fiss PC, Zajac EJ (2004) The diffusion of ideas over contested terrain: The (non)adoption of a shareholder value orientation among German firms. Admin. Sci. Quart. 49(4):501–534.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fiss PC, Zajac EJ (2006) The symbolic management of strategic change: Sensegiving via framing and decoupling. Acad. Management J. 49(6):1173–1193.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Flammer C, Kacperczyk A (2015) The impact of stakeholder orientation on innovation: Evidence from a natural experiment. Management Sci. 62(7):1982–2001.Link, Google Scholar
• Freeman RE (1984) Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach (Pitman, Marshfield, MA).Google Scholar
• Gaughan K, Smith EB (2016) Better in the shadows? Media coverage and market reactions to female CEO appointments. Acad. Management Proc. 2016(1):13997.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Graves SB, Waddock SA (1994) Institutional owners and corporate social performance. Acad. Management J. 37(4):1034–1046.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Haslam, SA, Ryan MK, Kulich C, Trojanowski G, Atkins C (2010) Investing with prejudice: The relationship between women’s presence on company boards and objective and subjective measures of company performance. British J. Management 21(2):484–497.Google Scholar
• Heidrick & Struggles (2012) Board of directors survey. Report, Heidrick & Struggles, Chicago.Google Scholar
• Higgins MC, Gulati R (2006) Stacking the deck: The effects of top management backgrounds on investor decisions. Strategic Management J. 27(1):1–25.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ho K (2009) Liquidated: An Ethnography of Wall Street (Duke University Press, Durham, NC).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hoffman LR, Maier NRF (1961) Quality and acceptance of problem solutions by members of homogeneous and heterogeneous groups. J. Abnormal Soc. Psych. 62(2):401–407.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hubbard TD, Christensen DM, Graffin SD (2017) Higher highs and lower lows: The role of corporate social responsibility in CEO dismissal. Strategic Management J. 38(11):2255–2265.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hume N, Aglionby J (2014) Glencore appoints first woman director. Financial Times (June 26), https://www.ft.com/content/9c46d148-fcf8-11e3-bc93-00144feab7de.Google Scholar
• Hwang S, Shivdasani A, Simintzi E (2019) Mandating women on boards: Evidence from the United States. Kenan Institute of Private Enterprise Research Paper 18-34, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill.Google Scholar
• Hymowitz C, Kochkodin B, Ruhle S (2016) Icahn, Loeb, and other activists overlook women for board seats. Bloomberg (March 8), https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-03-08/activists-from-icahn-to-loeb-overlook-women-for-board-positions.Google Scholar
• Iacus SM, King G, Porro G (2011) Multivariate matching methods that are monotonic imbalance bounding. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 106(493):345–361.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ioannou I, Serafeim G (2015) The impact of corporate social responsibility on investment recommendations: Analysts’ perceptions and shifting institutional logics. Strategic Management J. 36(7):1053–1081.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jehn, KA, Northcraft GB, Neale MA (1999) Why differences make a difference: A field study of diversity, conflict, and performance in workgroups. Admin. Sci. Quart. 44(4):741–763.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jensen MC (2002) Value maximization, stakeholder theory, and the corporate objective function. Bus. Ethics Quart. 12(2):235–256.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Joshi A, Neely B, Emrich C, Griffiths D, George G (2015) Gender research in AMJ: An overview of five decades of empirical research and calls to action thematic issue on gender in management research. Acad. Management J. 58(5):1459–1475.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jung J (2015) Shareholder value and workforce downsizing, 1981–2006. Soc. Forces 93(4):1335–1368.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kacperczyk A (2009) With greater power comes greater responsibility? Takeover protection and corporate attention to stakeholders. Strategic Management J. 30(3):261–285.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kanter RM (1977) Some effects of proportions on group life: Skewed sex ratios and responses to token women. Amer. J. Sociol. 82(5):965–990.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kilduff M, Angelmar R, Mehra A (2000) Top management-team diversity and firm performance: Examining the role of cognitions. Organ. Sci. 11(1):21–34.Link, Google Scholar
• King G, Nielsen R (2019) Why propensity scores should not be used for matching. Political Anal., ePub ahead of print May 7, https://doi.org/10.1017/pan.2019.11. Google Scholar
• Koh Y (2016) Pinterest names first female director. Wall Street Journal (May 11), https://www.wsj.com/articles/pinterest-names-first-female-director-1462986001.Google Scholar
• Lau DC, Murnighan JK (1998) Demographic diversity and faultlines: The compositional dynamics of organizational groups. Acad. Management Rev. 23(2):325–340.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lee PM, James EH (2007) She’‐e‐os: Gender effects and investor reactions to the announcements of top executive appointments. Strategic Management J. 28(3):227–241.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Leslie LM (2018) Diversity initiative effectiveness: A typological theory of unintended consequences. Acad. Management Rev., ePub ahead of print October 12, https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2017.0087.Google Scholar
• Litvin DR (1997) The discourse of diversity: From biology to management. Organization 4(2):187–209.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Liu Yu, Wei Z, Xie F (2014) Do women directors improve firm performance in China? J. Corporate Finance 28(October):169–184.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Louis H, White H (2007) Do managers intentionally use repurchase tender offers to signal private information? Evidence from firm financial reporting behavior. J. Financial Econom. 85(1):205–233.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Martin A (2018) The divergent effects of awareness and blindness diversity ideologies for race and gender relations. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Columbia University, New York.Google Scholar
• Matsa DA, Miller AR (2013) A female style in corporate leadership? Evidence from quotas. Amer. Econom. J. Appl. Econom. 5(3):136–169.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mattingly JE, Berman SL (2006) Measurement of corporate social action discovering taxonomy in the Kinder Lydenburg Domini ratings data. Bus. Soc. 45(1):20–46.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McDonnell M-H, King BG (2018) Order in the court: How firm status and reputation shape the outcomes of employment discrimination suits. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 83(1):61–87.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Merton RK (1936) The unanticipated consequences of purposive social action. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 1(6):894–904.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Miller MH, Rock K (1985) Dividend policy under asymmetric information. J. Finance 40(4):1031–1051.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Morgenson G (2014) Not walking the walk on board diversity. New York Times (May 31), https://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/01/business/not-walking-the-walk-on-board-diversity.html.Google Scholar
• Nemeth CJ (1986) Differential contributions of majority and minority influence. Psych. Rev. 93(1):23–32.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Park SH, Westphal JD (2013) Social discrimination in the corporate elite: How status affects the propensity for minority CEOs to receive blame for low firm performance. Admin. Sci. Quart. 58(4):542–586.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pelled LH, Eisenhardt KM, Xin KR (1999) Exploring the black box: An analysis of work group diversity, conflict, and performance. Admin. Sci. Quart. 44(1):1–28.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pletzer JL, Nikolova R, Kedzior KK, Voelpel SC (2015) Does gender matter? Female representation on corporate boards and firm financial performance—A meta-analysis. PLoS One 10(6):e0130005.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Post C, Byron K (2015) Women on boards and firm financial performance: A meta-analysis. Acad. Management J. 58(5):1546–1571.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rau PR, Vermaelen T (2002) Regulation, taxes, and share repurchases in the United Kingdom. J. Bus. 75(2):245–282.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Reuer JJ, Tong TW, Wu C-W (2012) A signaling theory of acquisition premiums: Evidence from IPO targets. Acad. Management J. 55(3):667–683.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ridgeway CL (1991) The social construction of status value: Gender and other nominal characteristics. Soc. Forces 70(2):367–386.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rosenstein S, Wyatt JG (1990) Outside directors, board independence and shareholder wealth. J. Financial Econom. 26(2):175–191.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ryan MK, Haslam SA (2007) The glass cliff: Exploring the dynamics surrounding the appointment of women to precarious leadership positions. Acad. Management Rev. 32(2):549–572.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sandner PG, Block J (2011) The market value of R&D, patents, and trademarks. Res. Policy 40(7):969–985.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sharkey AJ (2014) Categories and organizational status: The role of industry status in the response to organizational deviance. Amer. J. Sociol. 119(5):1380–1433.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sharkey AJ, Bromley P (2015) Can ratings have indirect effects? Evidence from the organizational response to peers’ environmental ratings. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 80(1):63–91.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shin T, You J (2017) Pay for talk: How the use of shareholder-value language affects CEO compensation. J. Management Stud. 54(1):88–117.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shivdasani A, Yermack D (1999) CEO involvement in the selection of new board members: An empirical analysis. J. Finance 54(5):1829–1853.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Skrentny JD (1996) The Ironies of Affirmative Action: Politics, Culture, and Justice in America (University of Chicago Press, Chicago).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Slawinski N, Bansal P (2015) Short on time: Intertemporal tensions in business sustainability. Organ. Sci. 26(2):531–549.Link, Google Scholar
• Smith EB (2011) Identities as lenses: How organizational identity affects audiences’ evaluation of organizational performance. Admin. Sci. Quart. 56(1):61–94.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Smith EB, Chae H (2017) The effect of organizational atypicality on reference group selection and performance evaluation. Organ. Sci. 28(6):1134–1149.Link, Google Scholar
• Stainback K, Kleiner S, Skaggs S (2016) Women in power: Undoing or redoing the gendered organization? Gender Soc. 30(1):109–135.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stuart EA (2010) Matching methods for causal inference: A review and a look forward. Statist. Sci. 25(1):1–21.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Vasi IB, King BG (2012) Social movements, risk perceptions, and economic outcomes. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 77(4):573–596.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Waddock SA, Graves SB (1997) The corporate social performance-financial performance link. Strategic Management J. 18(4):303–319.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wagner HM (2011) The bottom line: Corporate performance and women’s representations on board (2004–2008). Report, Catalyst, New York.Google Scholar
• Welch D, Green J (2015) GM adds former Lockheed executive as fifth female board member. Bloomberg (February 5), https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-02-05/gm-adds-former-lockheed-executive-as-fifth-female-board-member.Google Scholar
• Westphal JD (1999) Collaboration in the boardroom: Behavioral and performance consequences of CEO-board social ties. Acad. Management J. 42(1):7–24.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Westphal JD, Graebner ME (2010) A matter of appearances: How corporate leaders manage the impressions of financial analysts about the conduct of their boards. Acad. Management J. 53(1):15–44.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Westphal JD, Zajac EJ (1994) Substance and symbolism in CEOs’ long-term incentive plans. Admin. Sci. Quart. 39(3):367–390.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Westphal JD, Zajac EJ (1998) The symbolic management of stockholders: Corporate governance reforms and shareholder reactions. Admin. Sci. Quart. 43(1):127–153.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Williams KY, O’Reilly CA III (1998) Demography and diversity in organizations: A review of 40 years of research. Res. Organ. Behav. 20:77–140.Google Scholar
• Yadron D, Wong JC (2016) Apple shareholders reject diversity plan to recruit minorities as company leaders. Guardian (February 26), https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/feb/26/apple-rejects-diversity-plan-minorities-silicon-valley.Google Scholar
• Yermack D (2006) Board members and company value. Financial Markets Portfolio Management 20(1):33–47.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Younge KA, Marx M (2016) The value of employee retention: Evidence from a natural experiment. J. Econom. Management Strategy 25(3):652–677.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Younkin P, Kuppuswamy V (2017) Paying for mirrors or windows? Consumer discrimination and Hollywood films. Acad. Management Proc. 2017(1):12601.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zajac EJ, Westphal JD (1995) Accounting for the explanations of CEO compensation: Substance and symbolism. Admin. Sci. Quart. 40(2):283–308.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zajac EJ, Westphal JD (2004) The social construction of market value: Institutionalization and learning perspectives on stock market reactions. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 69(3):433–457.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zanoni P, Janssens M (2015) The power of diversity discourses at work: On the interlocking nature of diversities and occupations. Organ. Stud. 36(11):1463–1483.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zhu DH, Shen W, Hillman AJ (2014) Recategorization into the in-group: The appointment of demographically different new directors and their subsequent positions on corporate boards. Admin. Sci. Quart. 59(2):240–270.Crossref, Google Scholar