Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T16:47:48.389Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Are there gender-related influences on corporate sustainability? A study of women on boards of directors

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 February 2015

Jeremy Galbreath
Jeremy Galbreath*
Affiliation:
Graduate School of Business, Curtin University, Perth, WA, Australia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study sought to investigate if there is a link between women on boards of directors and corporate sustainability. Using a sample of publicly listed firms from Australia, the results suggest some level of support that a link does exist. Boards that have a strong complement of gender diversity are expected to offer more effective monitoring of agents, as well as offer more stringent enforcement of ethical conduct, thereby minimizing affects of subversion of shareholder funds that can be detrimental to their returns. Accordingly, findings confirm a positive link between women on boards and economic growth. Because of their relational abilities, women on boards are more likely able to engage with multiple stakeholders and respond to their needs, resulting in an avenue for demonstrating social responsiveness, which is confirmed by the results. However, due to their backgrounds and work experiences, sex-based biases and stereotyping might exist in boardrooms with men directors discounting input from women directors on issues relating to environmental quality. The results of this study find that women directors are not significantly associated with environmental quality. Discussion is given to these findings along with paths for future research.

Keywords

corporate governancecorporate sustainabilityboard structuregender diversitywomen
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Management & Organization , Volume 17 , Issue 1 , January 2011 , pp. 17 - 38
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press and Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adams, R., & Ferreira, D. (2009). Women in the boardroom and their impact on governance and performance. Journal of Financial Economics, 94, 291–309.Google Scholar
Aguilera, R. V., Rupp, D. E., Williams, C. A., & Ganapathi, J. (2007). Putting the S back in corporate social responsibility: A multi-level theory of social change in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 32, 836–863.Google Scholar
Aguilera, R. V., Williams, C. A., Conley, J. M., & Rupp, D. E. (2006). Corporate governance and social responsibility: A comparative analysis of the UK and the US. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 14, 147–158.Google Scholar
Arfken, D., Bellar, S., & Helms, M. (2004). The ultimate glass ceiling revisited: The presence of women on corporate boards. Journal of Business Ethics, 50, 177–186.Google Scholar
Arndt, M., & Bigelow, B. (2000). Presenting structural innovation in an institutional environment: Hospitals' use of impression management. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45, 494–522.Google Scholar
Ayuso, S., & Argandoña, A. (2007). Responsible corporate governance: Towards a stakeholder board of directors? Working Paper No. 701, Barcelona: IESE Business School, University of Navarra.Google Scholar
Bacon, B. (2007). The new paradigm of business in society: A purpose beyond product. Melbourne: Paper presented at Business Council of Australia.Google Scholar
Bansal, P. (2001). Building competitive advantage and managing risk through sustainable development. Ivey Business Journal, 66, 47–52.Google Scholar
Bansal, P. (2005). Evolving sustainability: A longitudinal study of corporate sustainable development. Strategic Management Journal, 26, 197–218.Google Scholar
Barney, J. B., & Hansen, M. H. (1994). Trustworthiness as a source of competitive advantage. Strategic Management Journal, 15(Special Issue), 175–190.Google Scholar
Benn, S., & Dunphy, D. (Eds.). (2007). Corporate governance and sustainability. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bettman, J. R., & Weitz, B. A. (1983). Attributions in the board room: Causal reasoning in corporate annual reports. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28, 165–183.Google Scholar
Betz, M., O'Connell, L., & Shepard, J. M. (1989). Gender differences in proclivity for unethical behaviour. Journal of Business Ethics, 8, 321–342.Google Scholar
Beyer, J. M., Chattopadhyay, P., George, E., Glick, W. H., Ogilvie, D., & Pugliese, D. (1997). The selective perceptions of managers revisited. Academy of Management Journal, 40, 716–737.Google Scholar
Bhimani, A., & Soonawalla, K. (2005). From conformance to performance: The corporate responsibilities continuum. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 24, 165–174.Google Scholar
Biggins, J. V. (1999). Making board diversity work. Corporate Board, 20, 11–17.Google Scholar
Bilimoria, D., & Piderit, S. K. (1994). Board committee membership: Effects of sex-based bias. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 1453–1477.Google Scholar
Bonn, I. (2004). Board structure and firm performance: Evidence from Australia. Journal of the Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management, 10, 14–24.Google Scholar
Brennan, N., & McCafferty, J. (1997). Corporate governance practices in Irish companies. Irish Journal of Management, 18, 116–135.Google Scholar
Brown, D. A. H., & Brown, D. L. (2001). Canadian directorship practices 2001. Ottawa: The Conference Board of Canada.Google Scholar
Brown, D. A. H., Brown, D. L., & Anastasopoulos, V. (2002). Women on boards: Not just the right thing…but the “bright” thing. Ottawa: The Conference Board of Canada.Google Scholar
Brown, T. J., & Dacin, P. A. (1997). The company and the product: Corporate associations and consumer product responses. Journal of Marketing, 61, 68–84.Google Scholar
Carroll, A. B. (1979). A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance. Academy of Management Review, 4, 497–505.Google Scholar
Carter, D. A., Simkins, B. J., & Simpson, W. G. (2003). Corporate governance, board diversity and firm value. The Financial Review, 38, 33–53.Google Scholar
Catalyst (2004). The bottom line: Connecting corporate performance and gender diversity. New York: Catalyst.Google Scholar
Catalyst (2005). Women ‘take care’, men ‘take charge’: Stereotyping of US business leaders exposed. New York: Catalyst.Google Scholar
Clarke, T. (2007). The evolution of director's duties: Bridging the divide between corporate governance and corporate social responsibility. Journal of General Management, 32, 79–105.Google Scholar
Clarkson, M. B. E. (1995). A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review, 20, 92–117.Google Scholar
Clarkson, P. M., Li, Y., Richardson, G. D., & Vasvari, F. P. (2008). Revisiting the relation between environmental performance and environmental disclosure an empirical analysis. Accounting, Organisations and Society, 33, 303–327.Google Scholar
Conner, K. R. (1991). A historical comparison of resource-based theory and five schools of thought with industrial organization economics: Do we have a new theory of the firm? Journal of Management 17(Special Issue), 121–154.Google Scholar
Cormier, D., Magnan, M., & Van Velthoven, B. (2005). Environmental disclosure quality in large German companies: Economic incentives, public pressures or institutional conditions? European Accounting Review, 14, 3–39.Google Scholar
Daily, C. M., Certo, S. T., & Dalton, D. R. (1999). A decade of corporate women: Some progress in the boardroom, none in the executive suite. Strategic Management Journal, 20, 93–100.Google Scholar
Davis, I., & Stephenson, E. (2006). Ten trends to watch in 2006. The McKinsey Quarterly: The Online Journal of McKinsey & Co. Available at http://www.bmacewen.com/blog/pdf/McKinsey.2006.January.TenTrends.pdfGoogle Scholar
de Luis-Carnicer, P., Martinez-Sánchez, A., & Pérez-Pérez, M. (2008). Gender diversity in management: Curvilinear relationships to reconcile findings. Gender in Management: An International Journal, 23, 583–597.Google Scholar
Desvaux, G., Devillard-Hoellinger, S., & Baumgarten, P. (2007). Women matter: Gender diversity, a corporate performance driver. Paris: McKinsey & Company.Google Scholar
Devers, C. E., Cannella, A. A. Jr., Reilly, G. P., & Yoder, M. E. (2007). Executive compensation: A multidisciplinary review and recent developments. Journal of Management, 33, 1016–1072.Google Scholar
Dobbin, F., & Sutton, R. C. (1998). The strength of a weak state: The rights movement and the rise of the human resources management divisions. American Journal of Sociology, 104, 441–476.Google Scholar
Doering, D. S., Cassara, A., Layke, C., Ranganathan, J., Revenga, C., Tunstall, D., & Vanasselt, W. (2002). Tomorrow's markets: Global trends and their implications for business. Baltimore, MD: World Resources Institute.Google Scholar
Donaldson, T., & Dunfee, T. W. (1994). Toward a unified conception of business ethics: Integrated social contract theory. Academy of Management Review, 19, 252–284.Google Scholar
Eagly, A. H., Johannesen-Schmidt, M. C., & van Engen, M. (2003). Transformational, transactional and laissez-faire leadership styles: A meta-analysis comparing women and men. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 569–591.Google Scholar
Elkington, J. (1997). Cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of the 21st century business. Oxford: Capstone Publishing.Google Scholar
EOWA (2004). 2004 EOWA Australian census of women in leadership. Canberra: Equal Opportunity for Women in the Workplace Agency.Google Scholar
EOWA (2008). A gender in the boardroom. Canberra: Equal Opportunity for Women in the Workplace Agency.Google Scholar
Fama, E. F. (1980). Agency problems and the theory of the firm. Journal of Political Economy, 88, 288–307.Google Scholar
Fama, E. F., & Jensen, M. C. (1983a). Agency problems and residual claims. Journal of Law and Economics, 26, 327–350.Google Scholar
Fama, E. F., & Jensen, M. C. (1983b). Separation of ownership and control. Journal of Law and Economics, 26, 301–325.Google Scholar
Flynn, P., & Adams, S. (2004). Changes will bring more women to boards. Financial Executive, 20, 32–35.Google Scholar
Francoeur, C., Labelle, R., & Sinclair-Desgagné, B. (2008). Gender diversity in corporate governance and top management. Journal of Business Ethics, 81, 83–95.Google Scholar
Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Funder, D. C., & Ozer, D. J. (1983). Behaviour as a function of situations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 107–112.Google Scholar
Galbreath, J. (2009a). Sustainable development in business: A strategic view. Working paper. Perth: Graduate School of Business, Curtin University.Google Scholar
Galbreath, J. (2009b). Corporate governance practices that address climate change: An exploratory study. Business Strategy and the Environment, 19, 335–350.Google Scholar
Gamble, G., Hsu, K., Kite, D., & Radtke, R. (1995). Environmental disclosures in annual reports and 10K's: An examination. Accounting Horizons, 9, 34–54.Google Scholar
Hackston, D., & Milne, J. J. (1996). Some determinants of social and environmental disclosures in New Zealand companies. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 9, 77–108.Google Scholar
Hair, J. F. Jr., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1995). Multivariate data analysis. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Hart, S. L. (1995). A natural-resource-based view of the firm. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 986–1014.Google Scholar
Hart, S. L., & Ahuja, G. (1996). Does it pay to be green? An empirical study of the relationship between emission reduction and firm performance. Business Strategy and the Environment, 5, 30–37.Google Scholar
Hart, S. L., & Milstein, M. B. (2003). Creating sustainable value. Academy of Management Executive, 17, 56–69.Google Scholar
Hassel, L., Nilsson, H., & Nyquist, S. (2005). The value relevance of environmental performance. European Accounting Review, 14, 41–61.Google Scholar
Hater, J. J., & Bass, B. M. (1988). ‘Superiors’ evaluations and subordinates' perceptions of transformational and transactional leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 695–702.Google Scholar
Hefferman, M. (2002). Exhibit A: The female CEO. Fast Company, 61, 58–66.Google Scholar
Henderson, D. (2005). The role of business in the world of today. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 17, 30–32.Google Scholar
Hendry, K., & Kiel, G. C. (2004). The role of the board in fi rm strategy: Integrating agency and organisational control perspectives. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 12, 500–520.Google Scholar
Hillman, A. J., Cannella, A. A. Jr., & Harris, I. C. (2002). Women and racial minorities in the boardroom: How do directors differ? Journal of Management, 28, 747–763.Google Scholar
Hillman, A. J., & Keim, G. D. (2001). Shareholder value, stakeholder management, and social issues: What's the bottom line? Strategic Management Journal, 22, 125–139.Google Scholar
Hillman, A. J., Keim, G. D., & Luce, R. A. (2001). Board composition and stakeholder performance: Do stakeholder directors make a difference? Business and Society, 40, 295–314.Google Scholar
Hisrich, R. D., & Brush, C. (1984). The woman entrepreneur: Management skills and business problems. Journal of Small Business Management, 22, 30–37.Google Scholar
Holliday, C. O. J., Schmidheiny, S., & Watts, S. P. (2002). Walking the talk: The business case for sustainable development. Geneva: World Business Council for Sustainable Development.Google Scholar
Hosmer, L. T. (1995). Trust: The connecting link between organization theory and philosophical ethics. Academy of Management Review, 20, 379–403.Google Scholar
Ibrahim, N., & Angelidis, J. (1995). The corporate social responsiveness orientation of board members. Journal of Business Ethics, 14, 405–410.Google Scholar
Ilinitch, A., Soderstrom, N., & Thomas, T. (1998). Measuring corporate environmental performance. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 17, 387–408.Google Scholar
Jamali, D., Safieddine, A. M., & Rabbath, M. (2008). Corporate governance and corporate social responsibility synergies and interrelationships. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 16, 443–459.Google Scholar
Jehn, K. A. (1995). A multimethod examination of the benefi ts and detriments of intragroup conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 256–282.Google Scholar
Jehn, K. A., Northcraft, G. B., & Neale, M. A. (1999). Why differences make a difference: A field study of diversity, conflict, and performance in workgroups. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 741–763.Google Scholar
Jensen, M. C. (1986). Agency costs of free cash flow, corporate finance and takeovers. American Economic Review, 76, 323–329.Google Scholar
Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behaviour, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Finance, 3, 305–350.Google Scholar
Kang, H., Cheng, M., & Gray, S. J. (2007). Corporate governance and board composition: Diversity and independence of Australian boards. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 15, 194–207.Google Scholar
Klassen, R. D., & Whybark, D. (1999). The impact of environmental technologies on manufacturing performance. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 599–615.Google Scholar
Konrad, A., Kramer, V., & Erkut, S. (2008). Critical mass: The impact of three or more women, on corporate boards. Organizational Dynamics, 37, 145–167.Google Scholar
Konrad, A., Steurer, R., Langer, M. E., & Martinuzzi, A. (2006). Empirical findings on business-society relations in Europe. Journal of Business Ethics, 63, 89–105.Google Scholar
Krut, R., & Munis, K. (1998). Sustainable industrial development: Benchmarking environmental policies and reports. Greener Management International, 21, 88–98.Google Scholar
Latané, B., & Wolf, S. (1981). The social impact of majorities and minorities. Psychological Review, 88, 438–53.Google Scholar
Lynall, M. D., Golden, B. R., & Hillman, A. J. (2003). Board composition from adolescence to maturity: A multitheoretic view. Academy of Management Review, 28, 416–431.Google Scholar
Maass, A., & Clark, R. D. III (1984). Hidden impact of minorities: Fifteen years of minority influence research. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 428–450.Google Scholar
Mahon, J. F., & Waddock, S. A. (1992). Strategic issues management: An integration of issue life cycle perspectives. Business and Society, 31, 19–33.Google Scholar
Maignan, I., & Ralston, D. A. (2002). Corporate social responsibility in Europe and the U.S.: Insights from businesses' self-presentations. Journal of International Business Studies, 33, 497–514.Google Scholar
Mann, M. E., Bradley, R. S., & Hughes, M. K. (1998). Global-scale temperature patterns and climate forcing over the past six centuries. Nature, 392, 779–787.Google Scholar
Mann, M. E., & Jones, P. D. (2003). Global surface temperatures over the past two millennia. Geophysical Research Letters, 30, CLM 5-1–CLM 5-4.Google Scholar
Mattis, M. (1993). Women directors: Progress and opportunities for the future. Business in the Contemporary World, 5, 140–156.Google Scholar
Mercer Investment Consulting (2006). 2006 fearless forecast. New York: Mercer Investment Consulting.Google Scholar
Miles, M. P., Munilla, L. S., & Darroch, J. (2006). The role of strategic conversations with stakeholders in the formation of corporate social responsibility strategy. Journal of Business Ethics 69, 195–205.Google Scholar
Miller, T., & del Carmen Triana, M. (2009). Demographic diversity in the boardroom: Mediators of the board diversity-firm performance relationship. Journal of Management Studies, 46, 755–786.Google Scholar
Mitchell, R., Agle, B., & Wood, D. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review, 22, 853–886.Google Scholar
Mizik, N., & Jacobson, R. (2003). Trading off between value creation and value appropriation: The financial implications of shifts in strategic emphasis. Journal of Marketing, 67, 63–76.Google Scholar
Montiel, I. (2008). Corporate social responsibility and corporate sustainability. Organisation & Management, 21, 245–269.Google Scholar
Natividad, I. (2005). Women directors and the global company. Directors Monthly, 03 13–15.Google Scholar
Noreen, E. (1988). The economics of ethics: A new perspective on agency theory. Accounting Organisations and Society, 13, 359–369.Google Scholar
Oppenheim, J., Bonini, S., Bielak, D., Kehm, T., & Lacy, P. (2007). Shaping the new rules of competition: UN global compact participant mirror. New York: McKinsey & Company.Google Scholar
Parnell, J. A. (2008). Sustainable strategic management: Construct, parameters, research directions. International Journal of Sustainable Strategic Management, 1, 35–45.Google Scholar
Patten, D. M. (2002). The relation between environmental performance and environmental disclosure: A research note. Accounting, Organisations and Society, 27, 763–773.Google Scholar
Porter, M. E. (1985). Competitive advantage. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2006). Strategy and society: The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 84, 78–92.Google Scholar
Porter, M. E., & Reinhardt, F. L. (2007). A strategic approach to climate. Harvard Business Review, 85, 22–23, 26.Google Scholar
Powell, A., Bagihole, B., & Dainty, A. (2009). How women engineers do and undo gender: Consequences for gender equality. Gender, Work and Organisation, 16, 411–428.Google Scholar
Ricart, J. E., Rodríguez, M. A., & Sánchez, P. (2005). Sustainability in the boardroom: An empirical examination of Dow Jones sustainability world index leaders. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society, 5, 24–41.Google Scholar
Rose, C. (2007). Does female board representation influence firm performance? The Danish evidence. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 15, 404–413.Google Scholar
Rosener, J. B. (1995). America's competitive secret: Utilizing women as a management strategy. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Russo, M. V., & Fouts, P. A. (1997). A resource-based perspective on corporate environmental performance and profitability. Academy of Management Journal, 40, 534–559.Google Scholar
Rust, R., Lemon, K., & Zeithaml, V. A. (2004). Return on marketing: Using customer equity to focus marketing strategy. Journal of Marketing, 68, 109–124.Google Scholar
Salancik, G. R., & Meindl, J. R. (1984). Corporate attributions as strategic illusions of management control. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29, 238–254.Google Scholar
Schein, V. E. (1973). The relationship between sex role stereotypes and requisite management characteristic. Journal of Applied Psychology, 57, 95–105.Google Scholar
Schmidheiny, S. (1992). Changing course: A global business perspective on development and the environment. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Sharma, S. (2000). Managerial interpretations and organisational context as predictors of corporate choice of environmental strategy. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 681–697.Google Scholar
Sharma, S., & Henriques, I. (2005). Stakeholder influences on sustainability practices in the Canadian forest products industry. Strategic Management Journal, 26, 159–180.Google Scholar
Singh, V., Terjesen, S., & Vinnicombe, S. (2008). Newly appointed directors in the boardroom: How do women and men differ? European Management Journal, 26, 48–58.Google Scholar
Steurer, R., Langer, M. E., Konrad, A., & Martinuzzi, A. (2005). Corporations, stakeholders and sustainable development I: A theoretical exploration of business-society relations. Journal of Business Ethics, 61, 263–281.Google Scholar
Stranislaw, J. A. (2007). Climate change and energy security: The future is now. New York: Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu.Google Scholar
Tirole, J. (2001). Corporate governance. Econometrica, 69, 1–35.Google Scholar
Victoria López, M., Garcia, A., & Rodriguez, L. (2007). Sustainable development and corporate performance: A study based on the Dow Jones sustainability index. Journal of Business Ethics, 75, 285–300.Google Scholar
Waddock, S. A., & Graves, S. B. (1997). The corporate social performance-fi nancial performance link. Strategic Management Journal, 18, 303–319.Google Scholar
WCED (1987). Our common future. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Westphal, J. D. (1999). Collaboration in the boardroom: The consequences of social ties in the CEO/board relationship. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 7–24.Google Scholar
Westphal, J. D., & Zajac, E. J. (1998). The symbolic management of stockholders: Corporate governance reforms and shareholder reactions. Administrative Science Quarterly, 43, 127–153.Google Scholar
Williams, S. L. M. (1999). Voluntary environmental and social accounting disclosure practices in the Asia-Pacific region: An international empirical test of political economy theory. The Journal of International Accounting, 34, 1–30.Google Scholar
Williamson, O. E. (1975). Markets and hierarchies: Analysis and antitrust implications. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Williamson, O. E. (1985). The economic institutions of capitalism. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Wilson, M., & Lombardi, R. (2001). Globalization and its discontents. Ivey Business Journal, 66, 69–72.Google Scholar
Zattoni, A., & Cuomo, F. (2009). How independent, competent and incentivized should non-executive directors be? An empirical investigation of good governance codes. British Journal of Management, 21, 63–79.Google Scholar