Do women directors improve firm performance in China?

This paper examines the effect of board gender diversity on firm performance in China's listed firms from 1999 to 2011. We document a positive and significant relation between board gender diversity and firm performance. Female executive directors have a stronger positive effect on firm performance than female independent directors, indicating that the executive effect outweighs the monitoring effect. Moreover, boards with three or more female directors have a stronger impact on firm performance than boards with two or fewer female directors, consistent with the critical mass theory. Finally, we find that the impact of female directors on firm performance is significant in legal person-controlled firms but insignificant in state-controlled firms. This paper sheds new light on China's boardroom dynamics. As governments increasingly contemplate board gender diversity policies, our study offers useful empirical guidance to Chinese regulators on the issue.     

Effects of female directors on gender diversity at lower organization levels and CSR performance: Evidence in Japan

This paper examines the effects of board gender diversity on female representation at lower organization levels and corporate social responsibility (CSR) performance. Using a panel data set of more than 1000 Japanese listed firms from 2005 to 2014, we focus on firms that introduced female directors to their male-dominant boards for the first time and find that the first-introduced female directors are positively associated with a greater number of female officers and managers. The introduction of the first female director is also associated with better CSR performance. Our results are statistically significant and suggest that board gender diversity has an effect on promoting gender diversity at lower levels and CSR performance in listed firms.     

Director gender and mergers and acquisitions

Does director gender influence CEO empire building? Does it affect the bid premium paid for target firms? Less overconfident female directors less overestimate merger gains. As a result, firms with female directors are less likely to make acquisitions and if they do, pay lower bid premia. Using acquisition bids by S&P 1500 companies during 1997–2009 we find that each additional female director is associated with 7.6% fewer bids, and each additional female director on a bidder board reduces the bid premium paid by 15.4%. Our findings support the notion that female directors help create shareholder value through their influence on acquisition decisions. We also discuss other possible interpretations of our findings.     

Female directors: Why are some less informed than others?

We find the limited supply of female directors, rather than gender differences or boardroom biases, can create an informational disadvantage for some female independent directors, as measured by their open market trading profits. The information disparity is largely isolated to firms with abnormally low representation by female directors. Female independent directors who are located further away from the company's headquarters, have less industry experience or have shorter tenure exhibit the most limited information access. Accounting for these obstacles reduces the gender disparity in information. We further find that this information disparity among female independent directors contributes to the variation in their influence on board monitoring. More informed female independent directors are associated with fewer restatements, lower abnormal CEO compensation and higher Tobin's Q. Our results have several policy implications.     

Women in the boardroom and their impact on governance and performance

We show that female directors have a significant impact on board inputs and firm outcomes. In a sample of US firms, we find that female directors have better attendance records than male directors, male directors have fewer attendance problems the more gender-diverse the board is, and women are more likely to join monitoring committees. These results suggest that gender-diverse boards allocate more effort to monitoring. Accordingly, we find that chief executive officer turnover is more sensitive to stock performance and directors receive more equity-based compensation in firms with more gender-diverse boards. However, the average effect of gender diversity on firm performance is negative. This negative effect is driven by companies with fewer takeover defenses. Our results suggest that mandating gender quotas for directors can reduce firm value for well-governed firms.     

Do gender diverse boards enhance managerial ability?

We examine the link between board gender diversity and managerial ability to transform corporate resources into revenue. Drawing on a sample of U.S firms during the period 2001–2016, we find a positive and economically meaningful association between female directors on boards and managerial ability, particularly when female directors are in monitoring roles on the board. The documented effect is stronger when using a tenure weighted measure of female representation on boards; and more pronounced for firms that have three or more women on the board of directors, in line with the critical mass hypothesis. We uncover that critical mass of female directors in monitoring roles is particularly conducive to enhancing managerial ability. Our channel analysis tests further reveal a distinctive tendency of firms with more gender diverse boards to shape the human capital of the firm by promoting managers with more generalist managerial skills. We find consistent results when we employ propensity score matching estimates and difference-in-differences using sudden deaths of female directors as a potential shock to address endogeneity concerns. We discuss implications for theory and policy.     

Does board gender diversity affect corporate cash holdings?

This paper examines whether board gender diversity affects corporate cash holdings using S&P 1500 index firms in the US for the period 2006–2015. We document a significantly negative relationship between board gender diversity and cash holdings. We also find a strong negative effect of female independent directors consistent with monitoring function. Moreover, in accordance with the critical mass theory, we find a negative effect of female directors’ presence and voice on cash holdings. Our findings are robust to alternative econometric specifications, alternative measures of cash holdings and corporate governance, difference‐in‐differences, propensity score matching, and two‐stage least squares. This study offers useful insights into the current global debate on gender diversity and its implications for firms.     

Gender board diversity and the cost of bank loans

We examine the relationship between female board representation and the cost of lending, using a dataset of 13,714 loans from 386 banks matched with 2432 non-financial firms from 1999 to 2013. We find that firms with female directors command lower loan spreads. In addition, female independent directors have a stronger impact on lowering spreads compared to female directors' other attributes. However, as firms build relationships with their lenders this effect becomes less potent. Finally, when we introduce firm-level heterogeneity we document that changes in gender diversity exert a stronger impact on the cost of lending in the case of bank-dependent firms, especially for relationship borrowers.     

The connection between gender diversity and firm performance: Evidence from Taiwan

This paper examines the factors influencing female board membership in Taiwan over the period from 1996 through 2017 and the potential impact of female board representation on firm performance. With 16,477 firm-year observations, our findings show that Taiwanese firms with higher board independence and institutional ownership tend to have lower female board representation. In examining performance implications, the results suggest that board gender diversity is positively associated with firm performance overall. This positive relationship is even stronger in small firms, where female directors may have more influence. In subsample analysis based on lowest and highest ultimate control ownership, we document that the positive impact of board gender diversity is mainly driven by firms that have high ultimate control ownership. Our findings suggest that, in environments with weak corporate governance, female board members may act as effective monitors, especially in smaller firms. Regulators and firms in developing economies with weak corporate governance environment should encourage gender diversity on boards.     

Gender-diverse boards and audit fees: What difference does gender quota legislation make?

We investigate the effect of board (audit committee) gender diversity on audit fees in the French context. We also examine whether the relationship between the proportion of female directors and audit fees is moderated by the enactment of the gender quota law in 2011. We use the system GMM estimation approach on a matched sample of French firms listed in the SBF 120 index between 2002 and 2017. Consistent with the supply-side perspective, we contend that female independent directors and female audit committee members, by improving board monitoring effectiveness, affect the auditor's assessment of audit risk, resulting in lower audit fees. Our findings also document that, by breaking the glass ceiling, the effectiveness of the gender quota law lies not in increasing the proportion of female insider directors, but in boosting the appointment of female independent directors and female audit committee members. Using the difference-in-difference approach, our results reveal that female independent directors and female audit committee members are more willing to assert their monitoring skills after the quota law, leading to lower audit fees. Moving beyond tokenism, we show that, after the quota law, the negative impact on non-audit fees is strengthened only for female independent directors.     

The effect of director experience on acquisition performance

Prior research finds that firms hire directors for their acquisition experience, regardless of acquisition quality (whether their prior acquisitions earned positive or negative announcement returns). Using several short- and long-run measures, we examine the effects of directors’ acquisition experience on the acquisition performance of firms hiring them. We find that board acquisition experience is positively related to subsequent acquisition performance, demonstrating that firms appropriately value experience. Beyond experience itself, however, the quality of directors’ prior acquisitions is also important. Our results suggest that firms may be better served to select directors based upon both past acquisition experience and acquisition performance.     

Women in power with power: The influence of meaningful board representation on default risk

This paper examines the relationship between the presence of female board members and firms' corporate default risk. We find an inverted “U-shaped” relationship for a sample of 917 firms in 19 emerging markets for the period 2005–2019. We also show that, consistent with critical mass theory, boards need to have three or more female directors to significantly reduce default risk. Furthermore, having female directors with an independent role on the board in countries with less familial dominance, or having female directors with a leadership position, significantly reduces default risk. Finally, we find a positive effect of the interaction between a country's gender inequality and board gender diversity on default risk.     

Do board gender quotas affect firm value? Evidence from California Senate Bill No. 826

We examine stock market reactions, direct costs of compliance, and board adjustments to California Senate Bill No. 826 (SB 826), the first mandated board gender diversity quota in the United States. Announcement returns average −1.2% and are robust to the use of multiple methodologies. Returns are more negative when the gap between the mandated number and the pre-SB 826 number of female directors is larger. These negative effects are less severe for firms with a greater supply of female candidates, and for those that can more easily replace male directors or attract female directors. For small firms, the annual direct cost of compliance through board expansion is non-trivial, representing 0.76% of market value. Following SB 826, firms significantly increase female board representation, and the increase is greater for firms in California than control firms in other states.     

Board gender composition and waste management: Cross-country evidence

Extant literature on board gender diversity focuses on the main pillars of sustainability while ignoring the important subdimension – waste management. Using a sample of 8365 firm-year observations for the period 2002–2017 from 37 countries, we provide novel empirical evidence that board gender diversity significantly reduces (increases) waste generation (waste recycling) in firms. We also note that the impact is significant with two or more female directors and is primarily driven by female directors’ independence. Moreover, the relationship is moderated by the masculinity dimension of national culture and sustainable compensation policies. Our analysis also shows that waste management activities of gender-diverse boards accompany the better financial performance. Our findings are robust to several identification strategies and estimation techniques. Our study provides new insights into the governance–sustainability nexus and presents important policy implications for regulators across countries.     

Board gender diversity and firm risk in UK private firms

This research aims to investigate the effect of board gender diversity on private firm risk. Using a sample of 27,352 UK private firms from 2005 to 2017, we report a negative association between board gender diversity and firm risk. In particular, we find that risk reduction is associated with women owner directors who may have a stronger incentive for better risk management. Firm risk is lower (higher) for boards with local (foreign) women directors suggesting that local market knowledge is more valuable for private firms. Lower director busyness in gender diverse boards is the channel that enables women directors to reduce firm risk by directing more attention to fiduciary responsibilities. Additional analysis reveals that more risky, small to medium-sized firms benefit the most from gender-diverse boards. Our findings are robust to alternate risk measurements and endogeneity corrections.     

The role of investment banker directors in M&A

We examine how directors with investment banking experience affect firms? acquisition behavior. We find that firms with investment bankers on the board have a higher probability of making acquisitions. Furthermore, acquirers with investment banker directors experience higher announcement returns, pay lower takeover premiums and advisory fees, and exhibit superior long-run performance. Overall, our results suggest that directors with investment banking experience help firms make better acquisitions, both by identifying suitable targets and by reducing the cost of the deals.     

Rising board gender diversity and incentives of female directors

As board gender diversity rises, it is important to understand the motivations of female independent directors. Focusing on the primary profession of female directors, we distinguish between promotion incentives of those who are senior executives of other firms (CorpFemales) and service/fee incentives of non-executive directors (OtherFemales). We find that OtherFemales hold more directorships and are more likely to miss board meetings. CorpFemales are more likely to serve on audit committees, which likely improves the reporting quality. CorpFemales, as opposed to OtherFemales exhibit higher M&A announcement returns and pay lower takeover premiums, especially when the choice of payment for acquisitions is equity.     

Do Women and Ethnic Minority Directors Influence Firm Value? Evidence from Post‐Apartheid South Africa

Previous studies on the value relevance of board gender and ethnic diversity have produced mixed results. This paper re‐examines this relationship using hand‐collected data of 245 South African listed firms over the period 2008–2013. We document a positive and significant effect of both board gender and ethnic diversity on firm value. We also find that the increase in firm value is greater when boards have three or more women directors. In contrast, ethnic minority directors contribute less to firm value when there are three or more on the board. Furthermore, we document that ethnicity has a concave relationship with firm value, but gender does not. We demonstrate that in better‐governed firms, ethnic diversity is more value relevant than gender diversity. Our results also suggest that financial crisis is associated with the propensity to restructure boards along gender and ethnicity. This paper sheds new light on the effect of board diversity in South African firms as the government increasingly pursues policies aimed at eradicating the effects of apartheid. Our results are robust after controlling for self‐selection and various forms of endogeneity.     

Does mandatory gender balance work? Changing organizational form to avoid board upheaval

Norway is the first, and so far the only, country to mandate a minimum fraction of female and male directors on corporate boards. We find that after a new gender balance law surprisingly stipulated that the firm must be liquidated unless at least 40% of its directors are of each gender, half the firms exit to an organizational form not exposed to the law. This response suggests that forced gender balance is costly. The costs are also firm-specific, because exit is more common when the firm is non-listed, successful, small, young, has powerful owners, no dominating family owner, and few female directors. These characteristics reflect high costs of involuntary board restructuring and low costs of abandoning the exposed organizational form. Correspondingly, certain unexposed firms hesitate to become exposed. Overall, we find that mandatory gender balance may produce firms with inefficient organizational forms or inefficient boards.     

Social Concentration on Boards,Corporate Information Environment and Cost of Capital

Prior evidence on the relationship between demographic diversity in corporate boards and firm performance is mixed. Some studies have found that the relationship between board attributes and firm performance is driven by a firm's information environment. This study examines whether corporate transparency also impacts the relationship between gender and ethnic diversity of directors and firm performance. To test this hypothesis, I use a Herfindahl Index based on directors’ gender and ethnicity to measure board diversity, and an opacity index based on analyst following, analyst forecast error, bid‐ask spread, and share turnover to measure corporate transparency. I find that the cost of capital is positively associated with social concentration on corporate boards and that this premium is larger for highly opaque firms. In further analysis, I find that the interaction of corporate information environment and social concentration on boards is more important for operationally complex firms. Compared with simple firms, operationally complex firms pay a greater premium on their capital if they have a socially concentrated board and an opaque information environment.