IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/gender/v30y2023i4p1218-1235.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Justice and utility: Approval of gender quotas to increase gender balance in top‐level managements—lessons from Iceland

Author

Listed:
  • Laufey Axelsdóttir
  • Þorgerður J. Einarsdóttir
  • Guðbjörg Linda Rafnsdóttir

Abstract

Despite the adoption of board gender quotas in several countries, little is known about the views on quotas outside the boards. In this article, we expand the dialogue about gender quotas by examining managers' arguments (justice and utility) for quotas as a measure to increase gender balance in top‐level managements. Drawing on a survey of 504 men and women managers in 244 of Iceland's largest companies, we show that social‐justice arguments and utility arguments make a stronger case for gender quotas than individual‐justice arguments. By highlighting the gendered context of arguments and expectations for further influence of gender quotas, we show that men managers' emphasis on liberal individualism and the lack of approval of quotas may hinder more organizational gender equality. We argue for the need to focus on organizational factors and top managers' responsibilities to support further gender balance in top‐level managements.

Suggested Citation

  • Laufey Axelsdóttir & Þorgerður J. Einarsdóttir & Guðbjörg Linda Rafnsdóttir, 2023. "Justice and utility: Approval of gender quotas to increase gender balance in top‐level managements—lessons from Iceland," Gender, Work and Organization, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(4), pages 1218-1235, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:gender:v:30:y:2023:i:4:p:1218-1235
    DOI: 10.1111/gwao.12966
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12966
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/gwao.12966?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mateos de Cabo, Ruth & Terjesen, Siri & Escot, Lorenzo & Gimeno, Ricardo, 2019. "Do ‘soft law’ board gender quotas work? Evidence from a natural experiment," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 611-624.
    2. Adams, Renée B. & Ferreira, Daniel, 2009. "Women in the boardroom and their impact on governance and performance," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(2), pages 291-309, November.
    3. Pauline Cullen & Mary P. Murphy, 2018. "Leading the debate for the business case for gender equality, perilous for whom?," Gender, Work and Organization, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(2), pages 110-126, March.
    4. Cathrine Seierstad & Gillian Warner-Søderholm & Mariateresa Torchia & Morten Huse, 2017. "Increasing the Number of Women on Boards: The Role of Actors and Processes," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 141(2), pages 289-315, March.
    5. David A. Matsa & Amalia R. Miller, 2013. "A Female Style in Corporate Leadership? Evidence from Quotas," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 5(3), pages 136-169, July.
    6. Ulla Eriksson-Zetterquist & David Renemark, 2016. "Can Changes to Gender Equality Be Sustained?," Gender, Work and Organization, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(4), pages 363-378, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Joanna Tyrowicz & Siri Terjesen & Jakub Mazurek, 2017. "All on board? New evidence on board gender diversity from a large panel of firms," GRAPE Working Papers 5, GRAPE Group for Research in Applied Economics.
    2. Paul B. McGuinness & João Paulo Vieito & Mingzhu Wang, 2020. "Proactive government intervention, board gender balance, and stakeholder engagement in China and Europe," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 37(3), pages 719-762, September.
    3. Ferreira, Daniel & Ginglinger, Edith & Laguna, Marie-Aude & Skalli, Yasmine, 2017. "Board Quotas and Director-Firm Matching," CEPR Discussion Papers 12117, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    4. Sarkar, Jayati & Selarka, Ekta, 2021. "Women on board and performance of family firms: Evidence from India," Emerging Markets Review, Elsevier, vol. 46(C).
    5. Mario Daniele Amore & Orsola Garofalo & Alessandro Minichilli, 2014. "Gender Interactions Within the Family Firm," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(5), pages 1083-1097, May.
    6. Xing, Lu & Gonzalez, Angelica & Sila, Vathunyoo, 2021. "Does cooperation among women enhance or impede firm performance?," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(4).
    7. Upadhyay, Arun, 2023. "Rising board gender diversity and incentives of female directors," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    8. Fang,Sheng & Goh,Chorching & Roberts,Mark & Xu,L. Colin & Zeufack,Albert G., 2020. "Female Business Leaders, Business and Cultural Environment, and Productivity around the World," Policy Research Working Paper Series 9275, The World Bank.
    9. Arun Upadhyay, 2014. "Social Concentration on Boards, Corporate Information Environment and Cost of Capital," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(7-8), pages 974-1001, September.
    10. Bøhren, Øyvind & Staubo, Siv, 2014. "Does mandatory gender balance work? Changing organizational form to avoid board upheaval," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 152-168.
    11. Antoine Rebérioux & Gwenaël Roudaut, 2016. "Gender Quota inside the Boardroom: Female Directors as New Key Players?," Working Papers hal-01297884, HAL.
    12. Luca Flabbi & Mario Macis & Andrea Moro & Fabiano Schivardi, 2019. "Do Female Executives Make a Difference? The Impact of Female Leadership on Gender Gaps and Firm Performance," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 129(622), pages 2390-2423.
    13. David A. Matsa & Amalia R. Miller, 2014. "Workforce Reductions at Women-Owned Businesses in the United States," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 67(2), pages 422-452, April.
    14. Andreas Leibbrandt & John A. List, 2018. "Do Equal Employment Opportunity Statements Backfire? Evidence From A Natural Field Experiment On Job-Entry Decisions," NBER Working Papers 25035, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Valeria Gattai & Piergiovanna Natale & Francesca Rossi, 2022. "Board Diversity and Outward FDI: Evidence from Europe," Working Papers 491, University of Milano-Bicocca, Department of Economics, revised Mar 2022.
    16. Gambacorta, Leonardo & Pancotto, Livia & Reghezza, Alessio & Spaggiari, Martina, 2022. "Gender diversity in bank boardrooms and green lending: Evidence from euro area credit register data," CEPR Discussion Papers 17650, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    17. Nina Smith, 2014. "Quota Regulations of Gender Composition on Boards of Directors," ifo DICE Report, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 12(2), pages 42-48, 07.
    18. Lee, Jangwook & Chung, Jiyoon, 2022. "Women in top management teams and their impact on innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    19. Nguyen, Thi Hong Hanh & Ntim, Collins G. & Malagila, John K., 2020. "Women on corporate boards and corporate financial and non-financial performance: A systematic literature review and future research agenda," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    20. Goergen, Marc & Renneboog, Luc, 2014. "Inside the board room," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 1-5.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:gender:v:30:y:2023:i:4:p:1218-1235. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0968-6673 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.