Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T11:41:54.908Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The impact of gender diversity on performance: The moderating role of industry, alliance network, and family-friendly policies – Evidence from Korea

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 September 2017

Kwang Bin Bae  and
Sheryl Skaggs
Kwang Bin Bae*
Affiliation:
North Carolina Central University, Durham, NC, USA
Sheryl Skaggs
Affiliation:
School of Economic, Political and Policy Sciences, University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson, TX, USA
*
Corresponding author: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study analyzes the effects of gender diversity in management on organizational performance using Korea Workplace Panel Survey data for 2005, 2007, and 2009. Few studies have examined this relationship for firms outside the United States, particularly in Asian countries. Similar to previous research, our findings show that gender diversity in management has a U-shaped relationship with firm productivity. Second, the curvilinear relationship between gender diversity in management and firm productivity is stronger in service-oriented industries relative to manufacturing industries, with the highest level of employee productivity within homogeneous management groups. Third, we include a measure of workplace family-friendly policies to moderate the relationship between gender diversity in management and organizational performance. We find that the U-shaped pattern also holds in firms with a large number of family-friendly policies. This suggests that gender diversity in management has considerable influence on the productivity of Korean firms through interactions with family-friendly policies.

Keywords

gender diversityorganizational performancefamily-friendly policyservice-oriented industrynetwork
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Management & Organization , Volume 25 , Issue 6 , November 2019 , pp. 896 - 913
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press and Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management 2017 

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

Alexander, J., Nuchols, B., Bloom, J., & Lee, S. Y. (1995). Organizational demography and turnover: An examination of multiform and nonlinear heterogeneity. Human Relations, 48(12), 1455–1480.Google Scholar
Ali, M., Kulik, C., & Metz, I. (2011). The gender diversity–performance relationship in services and manufacturing organizations. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 22(7), 1464–1485.Google Scholar
Bae, K. B., & Goodman, D. (2014). The influence of family-friendly policies on turnover and performance in South Korea. Public Personnel Management, 43(4), 520–542.Google Scholar
Bae, K. B., & Kim, D. (2016). The impact of decoupling of telework on job satisfaction in US Federal Agencies: Does gender matter? The American Review of Public Administration, 46(3), 356–371.Google Scholar
Bae, K. B., Sabharwal, M., Smith, A., & Berman, E. (2016). Differences in perceptions of inclusion by gender: A study of public sector employees. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 37(1), 4–22.Google Scholar
Bae, K. B., & Yang, G. (2017). The effects of family-friendly policies on job satisfaction and organizational commitment: A panel study conducted in South Korea. Public Personnel Management, 46(1), 25–40.Google Scholar
Barkema, H. G., Shenkar, O., Vermeulen, F., & Bell, J. H. (1997). Working abroad, working with others: How firms learn to operate international joint ventures. Academy of Management Journal, 40(2), 426–442.Google Scholar
Bell, S. T., Villado, A. J., Lukasik, M. A., Belau, L., & Briggs, A. L. (2011). Getting specific about demographic diversity variable and team performance relationships: A meta-analysis. Journal of Management, 37(3), 709–743.Google Scholar
Blau, P. M. (1977). Inequality and heterogeneity: A primitive theory of social structure. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Bowen, D., & Schneider, B. (1988). Service marketing and management: Implication for organizational behavior. In L. L. Curnmings, & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior (Vol. 10, pp. 43–80). Greenwich: JAI Press.Google Scholar
Burt, R. (1992). Structural holes: The social structure of competition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Chapple, L., & Humphrey, J. E. (2014). Does board gender diversity have a financial impact? Evidence using stock portfolio performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 122(4), 709–723.Google Scholar
Clifton, T. J., & Shepard, E. (2004). Work and family programs and productivity: Estimates applying a production function model. International Journal of Manpower, 25(8), 714–728.Google Scholar
Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128–152.Google Scholar
Crosby, F. J. (1991). Juggling: The unexpected advantages of balancing home and family. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Darmadi, S. (2011). Board diversity and firm performance: The Indonesian evidence. Corporate Ownership and Control Journal, 8, (e-journal). Retrieved October 27, 2016, from https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1727195.Google Scholar
Darmadi, S. (2013). Do women in top management affect firm performance? Evidence from Indonesia. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Effective Board Performance, 13(3), 288–304.Google Scholar
De Carolis, D. M. (2003). Competencies and limitability in the pharmaceutical industry: An analysis of their relationship with firm performance. Journal of Management, 29(1), 27–50.Google Scholar
Dean, J. W., & Snell, S. A. (1991). Integrated manufacturing and job design: Moderating effects of organizational inertia. Academy of Management Journal, 34(4), 776–804.Google Scholar
Drazin, R., & Van de Ven, A. H. (1985). Alternative forms of fit in contingency theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 30(4), 514–539.Google Scholar
Dwyer, S., Richard, O. C., & Chadwick, K. (2003). Gender diversity in management and firm performance: The influence of growth orientation and organizational culture. Journal of Business Research, 56(12), 1009–1019.Google Scholar
Dyer, J., & Singh, H. (1998). The relational view: Cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(4), 660–679.Google Scholar
Earley, C. P., & Mosakowski, E. (2000). Creating hybrid team cultures: An empirical test of transnational team functioning. Academy of Management Journal, 43(1), 26–49.Google Scholar
Ely, R. J., & Thomas, D. A. (2001). Cultural diversity at work: The effects of diversity perspectives on work group processes and outcomes. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46(2), 229–273.Google Scholar
Forbes Insights (2011). Global diversity and inclusion: Fostering innovation through a diverse workforce. Retrieved November 6, 2016, from http://images.forbes.com/forbesinsights/StudyPDFs/Innovation_Through_Diversity.pdf.Google Scholar
Friedman, S. D., & Greenhaus, J. H. (2000). Work and family–allies or enemies?: What happens when business professionals confront life choices. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Frink, D. D., Robinson, R. K., Reithel, B., Arthur, M. M., Ammeter, A. P., Ferris, G. R., Kaplan, D. M., & Morrisette, H. S. (2003). Gender demography and organization performance: A two-study investigation with convergence. Group & Organization Management, 28(1), 127–147.Google Scholar
Frye, N. K., & Breaugh, J. A. (2004). Family-friendly policies, supervisor support, work–family conflict, family–work conflict, and satisfaction: A test of a conceptual model. Journal of Business and Psychology, 19(2), 197–220.Google Scholar
Greene, W. H. (2003). Econometric analysis (5th ed.), Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Gulati, R. (1999). Network location and learning: The influence of network resources and firm capabilities on alliance formation. Strategic Management Journal, 20(5), 397–420.Google Scholar
Haar, J. M., & Roche, M. A. (2010). Family-supportive organization perceptions and employee outcomes: The mediating effects of life satisfaction. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 21(7), 999–1014.Google Scholar
Hagedoorn, J. (1993). Understanding the rationale of strategic technology partnering: Interorganizational modes of cooperation and sectoral differences. Strategic Management Journal, 14(5), 371–385.Google Scholar
Hambrick, D. C., Cho, T., & Chen, J. M. (1996). The influence of top management team heterogeneity on firm’s competitive moves. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(4), 659–684.Google Scholar
Hambrick, D. C., & Mason, P. A. (1984). Upper echelons: The organization as a reflection of its top managers. Academy of Management Review, 9(2), 193–206.Google Scholar
Haythornthwaite, C., & Wellman, B. (1998). Work, friendship, and media use for information exchange in a networked organization. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49(12), 1101–1114.Google Scholar
Hogg, M. A., & Abrams, D. (1988). Social identifications. A social psychology of inter-group relations and group processes. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Holgersson, C. (2013). Recruiting managing directors: Doing homosociality. Gender, Work & Organization, 20(4), 454–466.Google Scholar
Hoobler, J. M., Masterson, C. R., Nkomo, S. M., & Michel, E. J. (2016). The business case for women leaders meta-analysis, research critique, and path forward. Journal of Management, Advance online publication. doi: 0149206316628643.Google Scholar
Jackson, S. E., Schuler, R. S., & Rivero, J. C. (1989). Organizational characteristics as predictors of personnel practices. Personnel Psychology, 42(4), 727–786.Google Scholar
Johnson, A. A. (1995). The business case for work-family programs. Journal of Accountancy, 180(2), 53–59.Google Scholar
Kim, J., & Wiggins, M. E. (2011). Family‐friendly human resource policy: Is it still working in the public sector? Public Administration Review, 71(5), 728–739.Google Scholar
Kim, J. S., & Campagna, A. F. (1981). Effects of flextime on employee attendance and performance: A field experiment. Academy of Management Journal, 24(4), 729–741.Google Scholar
Kossek, E. E., & Ozeki, C. (1999). Bridging the work-family policy and productivity gap: A literature review. Community, Work & Family, 2(1), 7–32.Google Scholar
Kulonda, D. J., & Moates, W. H. Jr. (1986). Operations supervisors in manufacturing and service sectors in the United States: Are they different? International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 6(2), 21–35.Google Scholar
Lawlor, J. (1996). The bottom line on work-family programs. Working Woman-New York, 21, 54–60.Google Scholar
Lee, J. (2015). South Korea wants its women to lean into workforce after childbirth. Bloomberg. Retrieved February 24, 2016, from http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-02-25/challenging-gender-inequality-in-south-korea.Google Scholar
Lee, S. Y., & Hong, J. H. (2011). Does family‐friendly policy matter? Testing its impact on turnover and performance. Public Administration Review, 71(6), 870–879.Google Scholar
Mannix, E., & Neale, M. A. (2005). What differences make a difference? The promise and reality of diverse teams in organizations. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 6(2), 31–55.Google Scholar
McKinsey Global Institute (2015). The power of parity: How advancing women’s equality can add $12 trillion to global growth. Retrieved November 2, 2016, from http://www.mckinsey.com/global-themes/employment-and-growth/how-advancing-womens-equality-can-add-12-trillion-to-global-growth.Google Scholar
Meyer, C. S., Mukerjee, S., & Sestero, A. (2001). Work-family benefits: Which ones maximize profits? Journal of Managerial Issues, 13(1), 28–44.Google Scholar
Miller, D., & Shamsie, J. (1996). The resource-based view of the firm in two environments: The Hollywood film studios from 1936 to 1965. Academy of Management Journal, 39(3), 519–543.Google Scholar
Mills, P. K., & Morris, J. H. (1986). Clients as “Partial” employees of service organizations: Role development in client participation. Academy of Management Review, 11(4), 726–735.Google Scholar
Nguyen, T., Locke, S., & Reddy, K. (2015). Does boardroom gender diversity matter? Evidence from a transitional economy. International Review of Economics & Finance, 37, 184–202.Google Scholar
Noland, M., Moran, T., & Kotschwar, B. R. (2016). Is gender diversity profitable? Evidence from a global survey (Peterson Institute for International Economics Working Paper 16-3). Retrieved from Peterson Institute for International Economics website: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2729348.Google Scholar
O’Neil, R., & Greenberger, E. (1994). Patterns of commitment to work and parenting: Implications for role strain. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 56(1), 101–112.Google Scholar
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2015). OECD employment outlook: Tackling the jobs crisis. Paris: OECD Publications.Google Scholar
Palmer, V. (2006). Simulation of the categorization-elaboration model of diversity and work-group performance. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 9, 1–15.Google Scholar
Pelled, L. H. (1996). Demographic diversity, conflict, and workgroup outcomes: An intervening process theory. Organization Science, 7(6), 615–631.Google Scholar
Pelled, L. H., Eisenhardt, K. M., & Xin, K. R. (1999). Exploring the black box: An analysis of work group diversity, conflict, and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(1), 1–28.Google Scholar
Perry-Smith, J. E., & Blum, T. C. (2000). Work-family human resource bundles and perceived organizational performance. Academy of Management Journal, 43(6), 1107–1117.Google Scholar
Post, C., & Byron, K. (2015). Women on boards and firm financial performance: A meta-analysis. Academy of Management Journal, 58(5), 1546–1571.Google Scholar
Powell, W. W., Koput, K. W., & Smith-Doerr, L. (1996). Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(1), 116–145.Google Scholar
Richard, O. C. (2000). Racial diversity, business strategy, and firm performance: A resource-based view. Academy of Management Journal, 43(2), 164–177.Google Scholar
Richard, O. C., Barnett, T., Dwyer, S., & Chadwick, K. (2004). Cultural diversity in management, firm performance, and the moderating role of entrepreneurial orientation dimensions. Academy of Management Journal, 47(2), 255–266.Google Scholar
Richard, O. C., Murthi, B. P., & Ismail, K. (2007). The impact of racial diversity on intermediate and long‐term performance: The moderating role of environmental context. Strategic Management Journal, 28(12), 1213–1233.Google Scholar
Selden, S. C., & Moynihan, D. P. (2000). A model of voluntary turnover in state government. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 20(2), 63–74.Google Scholar
Schneid, M., Isidor, R., Li, C., & Kabst, R. (2015). The influence of cultural context on the relationship between gender diversity and team performance: A meta-analysis. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 26(6), 733–756.Google Scholar
Schwab, A., Werbel, J. D., Hofmann, H., & Henriques, P. L. (2016). Managerial gender diversity and firm performance: An integration of different theoretical perspectives. Group & Organization Management, 41(1), 5–31.Google Scholar
Statistics Korea (2015). (2017, August 1). Korean standard statistical classification. Retrieved from http://kssc.kostat.go.kr/ksscNew_web/ekssc/main/main.do.Google Scholar
Terjesen, S., Couto, E. B., & Francisco, P. M. (2016). Does the presence of independent and female directors impact firm performance? A multi-country study of board diversity. Journal of Management & Governance, 20(3), 447–483.Google Scholar
Tosi, H. L., & Slocum, J. W. (1984). Contingency theory: Some suggested directions. Journal of Management, 10(1), 9–26.Google Scholar
Tsui, A. S., Egan, T. D., & O’Reilly, C. A. (1992). Being different: Relational demography and organizational attachment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37(4), 549–579.Google Scholar
United Nations (2015). (2017, August 1). The world’s women 2015. Retrieved from https://unstats.un.org/unsd/gender/chapter4/chapter4.html.Google Scholar
Van Dijk, H., Van Engen, M. L., & Van Knippenberg, D. (2012). Defying conventional wisdom: A meta-analytical examination of the differences between demographic and job-related diversity relationships with performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 119(1), 38–53.Google Scholar
Van Knippenberg, D., De Dreu, C. K. W., & Homan, A. C. (2004). Work group diversity and group performance: An integrative model and research agenda. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(6), 1008–1022.Google Scholar
Van Knippenberg, D., & Schippers, M. C. (2007). Work group diversity. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 515–541.Google Scholar
Watson, W. E., Kumar, K., & Michaelsen, L. K. (1993). Cultural diversity’s impact on interaction process and performance: Comparing homogeneous and diverse task groups. Academy of Management Journal, 36(3), 590–602.Google Scholar
Wellalage, N. H., & Locke, S. (2012). Women on board, firm financial performance and agency costs. Asian Journal of Business Ethics, 2(2), 113–127.Google Scholar
Williams, K. Y., & O’Reilly, C. A. (1998). Forty years of diversity research: A review. Research in Organizational Behavior, 20, 77–140.Google Scholar
Wooldridge, J. (2012). Introductory econometrics: A modern approach. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.Google Scholar
Zaheer, A., & Bell, G. G. (2005). Benefiting from network position: Firm capabilities, structural holes, and performance. Strategic Management Journal, 26(9), 809–825.Google Scholar