IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/stratm/v44y2023i5p1254-1291.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A rivalry‐based theory of gender diversity

Author

Listed:
  • John Kenneth Mawdsley
  • Lionel Paolella
  • Rodolphe Durand

Abstract

Research Summary We offer a rivalry‐based perspective of gender diversity as a form of competitive action. We theorize that a firm adjusts its senior‐level female representation when they identify business opportunities that may be seized by demonstrating alignment to gender parity expectations. Examining U.S. corporate law firms and potential buyers of their services, we theorize and find that when the buyers of rivals of the focal firm increase their gender diversity, the focal firm responds by increasing its female partner representation. Reinforcing the strategic approach to managing gender diversity, we also show that a focal firm reduces its gender‐related response to rivals' buyers as the opportunity to attract those buyers decreases, and when the focal firm can use racial diversity as a credible substitute for gender diversity. Managerial Summary Do firms increase senior level gender diversity for normative or competitive reasons? We examine this question and test whether firms adjust their gender diversity to align with the gender diversity values of their competitors' clients. Our study shows that U.S. corporate law firms increase their level of female partners when the clients of their stronger competitors increase gender diversity in their executive rank. We also show that firms' gender diversity response weakens when there is a lower probability of luring those clients and when firms can offer racial diversity as a credible alternative signal of pro‐diversity values. Our competitive‐based view of gender diversity encourages managers to consider how and when proactive gender diversity improvement can be a mechanism for improving their firms' market position.

Suggested Citation

  • John Kenneth Mawdsley & Lionel Paolella & Rodolphe Durand, 2023. "A rivalry‐based theory of gender diversity," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(5), pages 1254-1291, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:stratm:v:44:y:2023:i:5:p:1254-1291
    DOI: 10.1002/smj.3466
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.3466
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/smj.3466?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. Violina P. Rindova, 1999. "What Corporate Boards have to do with Strategy: A Cognitive Perspective," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(7), pages 953-975, December.
    2. Jennifer M. Knippen & Wei Shen & Qi Zhu, 2019. "Limited progress? The effect of external pressure for board gender diversity on the increase of female directors," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(7), pages 1123-1150, July.
    3. Olga Hawn & Ioannis Ioannou, 2016. "Mind the gap: The interplay between external and internal actions in the case of corporate social responsibility," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(13), pages 2569-2588, December.
    4. Kristina Dahlin & L. Weingart & P. Hinds, 2005. "Team diversity and information use," Post-Print hal-00480406, HAL.
    5. Rocio Bonet & Peter Cappelli & Monika Hamori, 2020. "Gender differences in speed of advancement: An empirical examination of top executives in the Fortune 100 firms," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(4), pages 708-737, April.
    6. Margaret Peteraf & Mark Shanley, 1997. "Getting To Know You: A Theory Of Strategic Group Identity," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(S1), pages 165-186, July.
    7. Hausman, Jerry & Hall, Bronwyn H & Griliches, Zvi, 1984. "Econometric Models for Count Data with an Application to the Patents-R&D Relationship," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(4), pages 909-938, July.
    8. Mariateresa Torchia & Andrea Calabrò & Morten Huse, 2011. "Women Directors on Corporate Boards: From Tokenism to Critical Mass," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 102(2), pages 299-317, August.
    9. Seth Carnahan & Rajshree Agarwal & Benjamin A. Campbell, 2012. "Heterogeneity in turnover: the effect of relative compensation dispersion of firms on the mobility and entrepreneurship of extreme performers," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(12), pages 1411-1430, December.
    10. Cristian L. Dezsö & David Gaddis Ross, 2012. "Does female representation in top management improve firm performance? A panel data investigation," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(9), pages 1072-1089, September.
    11. Kyle J. Mayer & Deepak Somaya & Ian O. Williamson, 2012. "Firm-Specific, Industry-Specific, and Occupational Human Capital and the Sourcing of Knowledge Work," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(5), pages 1311-1329, October.
    12. Ai, Chunrong & Norton, Edward C., 2003. "Interaction terms in logit and probit models," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 80(1), pages 123-129, July.
    13. Karel Cool & Ingemar Dierickx, 1993. "Abstract," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(1), pages 47-59, January.
    14. Vanessa C. Burbano & John Mamer & Jason Snyder, 2018. "Pro bono as a human capital learning and screening mechanism: Evidence from law firms," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(11), pages 2899-2920, November.
    15. Glenn Hoetker, 2007. "The use of logit and probit models in strategic management research: Critical issues," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(4), pages 331-343, April.
    16. Nile W. Hatch & Jeffrey H. Dyer, 2004. "Human capital and learning as a source of sustainable competitive advantage," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(12), pages 1155-1178, December.
    17. Hall, Bronwyn H & Griliches, Zvi & Hausman, Jerry A, 1986. "Patents and R and D: Is There a Lag?," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 27(2), pages 265-283, June.
    18. Boris Groysberg & Linda-Eling Lee & Ashish Nanda, 2008. "Can They Take It With Them? The Portability of Star Knowledge Workers' Performance," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(7), pages 1213-1230, July.
    19. Isabelle Solal & Kaisa Snellman, 2019. "Women Don’t Mean Business? Gender Penalty in Board Composition," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(6), pages 1270-1288, November.
    20. Namrata Malhotra & Timothy Morris, 2009. "Heterogeneity in Professional Service Firms," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(6), pages 895-922, September.
    21. McDonnell, Mary-Hunter & King, Brayden & Soule, Sarah A., 2015. "A Dynamic Process Model of Private Politics: Activist Targeting and Corporate Receptivity to Social Challenges," Research Papers 3319, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    22. Royston Greenwood & Stan X. Li & Rajshree Prakash & David L. Deephouse, 2005. "Reputation, Diversification, and Organizational Explanations of Performance in Professional Service Firms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(6), pages 661-673, December.
    23. David J. Teece, 2003. "Expert talent and the design of (professional services) firms," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 12(4), pages 895-916, August.
    24. Heejung Byun & Justin Frake & Rajshree Agarwal, 2018. "Leveraging who you know by what you know: Specialization and returns to relational capital," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(7), pages 1803-1833, July.
    25. Mawdsley, John Kenneth & Somaya, Deepak, 2018. "Demand-Side Strategy, Relational Advantage and Partner-Driven Corporate Scope: The Case for Client-Led Diversification," HEC Research Papers Series 1252, HEC Paris.
    26. Erin M. Reid & Michael W. Toffel, 2009. "Responding to public and private politics: corporate disclosure of climate change strategies," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(11), pages 1157-1178, November.
    27. Erin Marie Reid & Michael W. Toffel, 2008. "Responding to Public and Private Politics: Corporate Disclosure of Climate Change Strategies," Harvard Business School Working Papers 09-019, Harvard Business School, revised Jun 2009.
    28. Isabel Fernandez-Mateo & Sarah Kaplan, 2018. "Gender and Organization Science: Introduction to a Virtual Special Issue," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(6), pages 1229-1236, December.
    29. Ashish Arora & Michelle Gittelman & Sarah Kaplan & John Lynch & Will Mitchell & Nicolaj Siggelkow & Cristian L. Dezső & David Gaddis Ross & Jose Uribe, 2016. "Is there an implicit quota on women in top management? A large-sample statistical analysis," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(1), pages 98-115, January.
    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. George Chondrakis & Mari Sako, 2020. "When suppliers shift my boundaries: Supplier employee mobility and its impact on buyer firms' sourcing strategy," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(9), pages 1682-1711, September.
    2. Arjun Mitra & Corinne Post & Steve Sauerwald, 2021. "Evaluating Board Candidates: A Threat-Contingency Model of Shareholder Dissent Against Female Director Candidates," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(1), pages 86-110, January.
    3. Heejung Byun & Joseph Raffiee & Martin Ganco, 2019. "Discontinuities in the Value of Relational Capital: The Effects on Employee Entrepreneurship and Mobility," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(6), pages 1368-1393, November.
    4. Joseph Raffiee, 2017. "Employee Mobility and Interfirm Relationship Transfer: Evidence from the Mobility and Client Attachments of United States Federal Lobbyists, 1998–2014," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(10), pages 2019-2040, October.
    5. Paola Garrone & Luca Grilli & Boris Mrkajic, 2018. "The role of institutional pressures in the introduction of energy‐efficiency innovations," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(8), pages 1245-1257, December.
    6. Olivier Chatain & Philipp Meyer-Doyle, 2017. "Alleviating managerial dilemmas in human-capital-intensive firms through incentives: Evidence from M&A legal advisors," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(2), pages 232-254, February.
    7. Hagedoorn, John & Wang, Ning, 2010. "Is there complementarity or substitutability between internal and external R&D strategies?," MERIT Working Papers 2010-005, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    8. Hagedoorn, John & Wang, Ning, 2012. "Is there complementarity or substitutability between internal and external R&D strategies?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 1072-1083.
    9. Ma, Mingze, 2022. "Gendered performance evaluation in CEO turnover," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    10. Caroline Flammer & Michael W. Toffel & Kala Viswanathan, 2021. "Shareholder activism and firms' voluntary disclosure of climate change risks," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(10), pages 1850-1879, October.
    11. Zsolt Csáfordi & László Lőrincz & Balázs Lengyel & Károly Miklós Kiss, 2020. "Productivity spillovers through labor flows: productivity gap, multinational experience and industry relatedness," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(1), pages 86-121, February.
    12. Ajay Bhaskarbhatla & Luis Cabral & Deepak Hegde & Thomas (T.L.P.R.) Peeters, 2017. "Human Capital, Firm Capabilities, and Innovation," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 17-115/VII, Tinbergen Institute, revised 03 Mar 2020.
    13. Pantic-Dragisic, Svjetlana & Söderlund, Jonas, 2020. "Swift transition and knowledge cycling: Key capabilities for successful technical and engineering consulting?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1).
    14. Adam R. Fremeth & Guy L. F. Holburn & Richard G. Vanden Bergh, 2016. "Corporate Political Strategy in Contested Regulatory Environments," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 1(4), pages 272-284, December.
    15. Isabel‐Maria García‐Sánchez & Nazim Hussain & Sana Akbar Khan & Jennifer Martínez‐Ferrero, 2020. "Managerial entrenchment, corporate social responsibility, and earnings management," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(4), pages 1818-1833, July.
    16. 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).
    17. Rémi BAZILLIER & Sophie HATTE & Julien VAUDAY, 2016. "Is Reputation at Stake When Environmentally Responsible Multinationals Invest Abroad? An Empirical Investigation," LEO Working Papers / DR LEO 2315, Orleans Economics Laboratory / Laboratoire d'Economie d'Orleans (LEO), University of Orleans.
    18. Giovanna Campopiano & Patricia Gabaldón & Daniela Gimenez-Jimenez, 2023. "Women Directors and Corporate Social Performance: An Integrative Review of the Literature and a Future Research Agenda," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 182(3), pages 717-746, January.
    19. Lee, Jaegul & Veloso, Francisco M. & Hounshell, David A., 2011. "Linking induced technological change, and environmental regulation: Evidence from patenting in the U.S. auto industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(9), pages 1240-1252.
    20. Gurneeta Vasudeva & Jennifer W. Spencer & Hildy J. Teegen, 2013. "Bringing the Institutional Context Back In: A Cross-National Comparison of Alliance Partner Selection and Knowledge Acquisition," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(2), pages 319-338, April.

    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:stratm:v:44:y:2023:i:5:p:1254-1291. 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://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/0143-2095 .

    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.