IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijbget/v9y2014i1p91-113.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Women in the board room: one can make a difference

Author

Listed:
  • Judith Lynne Zaichkowsky

Abstract

This empirical study challenges the theory that a 'critical mass' of three or more women at the boardroom table is needed to make a difference. Performance ratings of Canadian publicly traded companies by the Globe and Mail show consistently higher corporate governance scores for companies with more women on their boards of directors. However, while companies that had three or more women on their boards had the highest scores, companies with only one woman on the board scored significantly higher than those with none. There was also no relationship between the number of women on boards of directors and Corporate Knights' social responsibility ratings on a national or global basis. The size of board and the type of industry are other important factors to consider when proposing quotas for female board members.

Suggested Citation

  • Judith Lynne Zaichkowsky, 2014. "Women in the board room: one can make a difference," International Journal of Business Governance and Ethics, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 9(1), pages 91-113.
    • Handle: RePEc:ids:ijbget:v:9:y:2014:i:1:p:91-113
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=62774
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Claudio Nuber & Patrick Velte, 2021. "Board gender diversity and carbon emissions: European evidence on curvilinear relationships and critical mass," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(4), pages 1958-1992, May.
    2. Mark Fuller, 2022. "Wheat and chaff: the degree to which strategic management principles are integrated within corporate social responsibility reporting among large Canadian firms," International Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 1-17, December.
    3. Simona Alfiero & Massimo Cane & Ruggiero Doronzo & Alfredo Esposito, 2018. "Determining characteristics of boards adopting Integrated Reporting," FINANCIAL REPORTING, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2018(2), pages 37-71.
    4. Mariasole Bannò & Emilia Filippi & Sandro Trento, 2023. "Women in top echelon positions and their effects on sustainability: a review, synthesis and future research agenda," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 27(1), pages 181-251, March.
    5. Nguyen, Tuan & Locke, Stuart & Reddy, Krishna, 2015. "Does boardroom gender diversity matter? Evidence from a transitional economy," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 184-202.
    6. Haseeb Ur Rahman & Muhammad Zahid & Amin Jan & Mamdouh Abdulaziz Saleh Al‐Faryan & Khaled Hussainey, 2024. "Is it the mere female directors or their attributes that matter for the quality of corporate sustainability disclosures?," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(2), pages 661-678, February.
    7. 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).
    8. Steffen Keck & Wenjie Tang, 2018. "Gender Composition and Group Confidence Judgment: The Perils of All-Male Groups," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(12), pages 5877-5898, December.
    9. Luís A Nunes Amaral & João A G Moreira & Murielle L Dunand & Heliodoro Tejedor Navarro & Hyojun Ada Lee, 2020. "Long-term patterns of gender imbalance in an industry without ability or level of interest differences," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(4), pages 1-17, April.

    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:ids:ijbget:v:9:y:2014:i:1:p:91-113. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=70 .

    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.