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.     

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.     

Gender-diverse board and the relevance of voluntary CSR reporting

In this paper, we focus on voluntary corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosure, and we test the extent to which the value relevance of CSR reporting is affected by the appointment of female directors. Using a sample of French listed companies belonging to the SBF 120 index from 2001 to 2011, we control for differences in firm characteristics between firms with and without female board membership by using propensity score matching. Our results show that high CSR reporting is more relevant in terms of market value for firms with gender-diverse boards than for firms with completely male directors. This finding holds when we use the accounting-based performance measures, namely, return on assets (ROA) and return on equity (ROE). We also highlight that engaging an external assurance provider for CSR reporting is value relevant for firms without female directors but not value relevant for firms with female directors, suggesting a substitute relationship between gender-diverse boards and CSR assurance. Our results are stable when we consider the presence of at least two and three female directors.     

The Impact of Audit Committee Characteristics on CSR Disclosure: An Analysis of Australian Firms

This study examines the influence of audit committee (AC) characteristics on voluntary corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosure in the corporate annual reports of Australian listed firms. It develops hypotheses about the relationship between voluntary CSR disclosure and AC characteristics such as size, frequency of meetings, independence, independent chair, financial expertise and gender diversity. Using multiple regression analysis on data collected from the corporate annual reports of 300 listed firms, the study finds that AC characteristics such as size, frequency of meetings, committee independence and gender diversity have a significant positive influence on the level of CSR disclosure. However, there is no evidence that AC characteristics such as independent chair and members’ financial expertise affect CSR disclosure in Australian firms. Based on an additional analysis, the study also sheds some light on the effect of AC characteristics on environmental disclosure. The findings of this study may be of particular interest to regulators, shareholders, investment analysts and managers in assessing CSR disclosure in annual reports, and in strengthening the monitoring and oversight role of ACs.     

Does gender diversity on banks' boards matter? Evidence from public bailouts

We are the first to examine the impact of gender diversity on banks' boards on the probability and size of public bailouts. Our findings, based on a sample of listed European banks over the period 2005–2017, suggest that banks with more gender-diverse boards are less likely to receive a public bailout and receive a lower amount of bailout funds as a percentage of total assets than banks with less gender-diverse boards. Specifically, an increase by one standard deviation in gender diversity decreases the probability of a bailout by at least 2.44%, a significant reduction considering that the unconditional probability is 18.7%. Gender diversity is also positively related to bank performance, as proxied by ROA and Tobin's Q and with dividend payout ratios, consistent with the hypothesis that female directors are better monitors than male directors. These results are robust to a variety of econometric approaches and provide support for recent reforms in several EU countries regarding gender quotas.     

Board structure and corporate risk taking in the UK financial sector

This paper examines the relationship between board structure and corporate risk taking in the UK financial sector. We show how the board size, board independence and combining the role of CEO and chairperson in boards may affect corporate risk taking in financial firms. Our sample is based on a panel dataset of all publicly listed firms in the UK financial sector, which includes banks, insurance, real estate and financial services companies over a ten year period (2003 − 2012). After controlling for the effects of endogeneity through the application of the dynamic panel generalized method of moments estimator, the findings of this study suggest that the presence of non-executive directors and powerful CEOs in corporate boards reduces corporate risk taking practices in financial firms. The negative relationship can be explained within the agency theory context, where managers are regarded as more risk averse because of the reputational and employment risk. An increased power concentration is therefore expected to enhance the risk aversion behaviour of directors. The findings however, do not show any significant effect of board size on corporate risk taking in financial firms. As this study covers recommendations of the UK Corporate Governance Code on the role of corporate boards in managing firms' risk, the empirical evidence could be useful for corporate governance regulation and policy making.     

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.     

Corporate board and board committee independence,firm performance,and family ownership concentration: An analysis based on Hong Kong firms

This study examines whether the relationship between corporate board and board committee independence and firm performance is moderated by the concentration of family ownership. Based on a sample of Hong Kong firms, we find no significant association between the independence of corporate boards or board committees and firm performance in family firms, whereas board independence is positively associated with firm performance in non-family firms. Additionally, our findings show that the proportion of independent directors on the corporate boards of family firms is lower than that of non-family firms, but we find no significant difference in the representation of independent directors on the key committees of corporate boards between family and non-family firms. Overall, these results suggest that the “one size fits all” approach required by the regulatory authorities for appointing independent directors on corporate boards may not necessarily enhance firm performance, especially for family firms. Thus, the requirement to appoint independent directors to the corporate boards of family firms needs to be reconsidered.     

How do independent directors view corporate social responsibility (CSR)? Evidence from a quasi-natural experiment

We investigate how independent directors view corporate social responsibility (CSR). Exploiting the passage of the Sarbanes-Oxley (SOX) Act and the associated exchange listing requirements as an exogenous regulatory shock, we document that independent directors view CSR activities unfavorably. In particular, firms forced to raise board independence reduce CSR engagement significantly relative to those not required to increase board independence. Our results are consistent with the risk-mitigation view and the agency cost hypothesis where managers over-invest in CSR to mitigate their own exposure to nonsystematic risk. The over-investments in CSR are curbed in the presence of a stronger, more independent, board of directors. Several robustness checks confirm the results, including fixed-effects and random-effects regressions, dynamic panel data analysis, instrumental-variable analysis, propensity score matching, Lewbel's heteroscedastic identification, and Oster's method for coefficient stability. We also confirm the risk-mitigation hypothesis by showing that CSR activities reduce firm risk significantly. Our research design is much less vulnerable to endogeneity and is therefore likely to show a causal effect of board independence on CSR.     

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.     

Columbia Law School Roundtable on A Governance Research Agenda for the Academy

Since Jensen and Meckling's formulation of the theory of “agency costs” in 1976, corporate finance and governance scholars have produced a large body of research that attempts to identify the most important features and practices of effective corporate governance systems. But for all the research that has been done in the past 40 years, many practitioners continue to see a disconnect between theory and practice, between the questions researched and the questions that need to be answered. In this roundtable, Martijn Cremers begins by challenging the conventional view that limiting “agency costs” is the main challenge confronted by boards of directors in representing shareholder interests and, hence, the proper focus of most governance scholarship. Especially in today's economy, with the high values assigned to growth companies, the most important function of corporate governance may instead be to overcome the problem of American “short termism” that he attributes to “inadequate shareholder commitment to long‐term cooperation.” And he buttresses his argument with the findings of his own recent research suggesting that obstacles to the workings of the corporate control market like staggered boards and supermajority voting requirements may actually improve long‐run corporate performance by lengthening the decision‐making horizon of boards and the managements they supervise. Vik Khanna discusses Indian Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) spending and its effects in light of a recent law requiring Indian companies of a certain size to devote at least 2% of their after‐tax profit to CSR initiatives. One unintended effect of this mandate, which took effect in 2010, was that all Indian companies that were spending more than the prescribed 2% of profits cut their expenditure back to that minimum, suggesting that CSR and advertising are substitutes to some extent, and that such legal mandates can discourage CSR spending by early adapters or “leaders.” Nevertheless, Khanna also found evidence of social norms developing in support of CSR, including a spreading perception that such spending can help some companies achieve strategic goals. Jeff Gordon closes by arguing that, to the extent investors are short‐sighted, their short‐sightedness is likely to be justified by their recognition that public company directors have neither the information nor the incentives to do an effective job of monitoring corporate managements. The best solution to the problems with U.S. corporate governance is to replace today's “thinly informed” directors with “activist” directors who more closely resemble the directors of private‐equity owned firms. Such directors would spend far more time with, and be much more knowledgeable about, corporate management and operations—and they would have much more of their personal wealth at stake in the form of company stock.     

Board gender diversity,power, and bank risk taking

Having female board members brings ethical/societal perspectives and new resources to decision making. However, there is lack of evidence on whether it mitigates bank excessive risk-taking; hence, this paper addresses this question. It complements the normative corporate governance literature by combining agency theory and approach/inhibition theory of power from social psychology. For a sample of 195 U.S. commercial banks during 2002–2018, banks invest in more risky assets when female directors perceive the positive rewards of risky investments (in banks that have larger regulatory capital ratios and/or are well-capitalized) and when power shifts away due to CEO equity ownership. On the other hand, banks invest in less risky positions when female directors perceive the penalties inherent in a risky investment during the financial crisis. This paper provides novel evidence on the effect of gender diversity, as a governance mechanism, on risk taking in a social-psychology context. It offers insights on the effect of gender diversity on bank riskiness.     

Tradeoff between corporate investment and CSR: The moderating effect of financial slack,workforce slack,and board gender diversity

This paper investigates the existence of a tradeoff between corporate investment (i.e., tangible and intangible) and corporate social responsibility (CSR) in the presence of the moderating effects of financial slack, human resources slack, and board gender diversity. Based on an international sample of 44,129 firm-year observations between 2005 and 2019, we find that corporate investment leads to significantly lower CSR engagement in all three pillars (i.e., environmental, social, and governance). Furthermore, while financial slack positively moderates between corporate investment and CSR, human resources slack and board gender diversity negatively moderate between corporate investment and CSR. This outcome is robust in terms of endogeneity concerns, alternative sampling, alternative investment proxies, CSR regulations, and timing impacts. Hence, we find the dominance of the shareholders' perspective rather than the stakeholders' perspective. The results outline the tradeoff between corporate investment and CSR and the role of contingencies in this tradeoff relationship.     

The impact of gender diversity on shareholder wealth: Evidence from European bank M&A

We explore the association between board gender diversity and shareholder value creation. Specifically, we investigate the impact of gender diversity on the economic impact of bank mergers and acquisitions (M&A). We employ a multi-year sample of M&A announced by European listed banks and find that: (i) the presence of women on the board of directors has a positive and statistically significant effect on acquirer gains; and (ii) boards with three or more women, or where women represent more than 25% of the board, have a stronger impact on acquirer gains than in the opposite case, consistent with critical mass theory. Moreover, banks with a critical mass of female directors perform better in undertaking value-enhancing M&A after the global financial crisis. Policy makers and practitioners could benefit from the findings by exploiting the advantages of board heterogeneity in terms of gender.     

Minority membership on boards of directors: the case for requiring pictures of boards in annual reports

Affirmative action and diversity continue to be contentious issues in the United States. Financial markets are still reeling from the effects of Enron, WorldCom and other corporate exemplars of corruption and malfeasance. The role of the board of directors in these scandals is the subject of serious and ongoing concern. Weak and/or ineffectual boards are often the consequences of “old-boy networks” and a lack of diversity in membership. This research study argues for an increased presence of gender and race diversity on boards of directors. Empirical evidence is presented that shows a significant increase in the presence of ethnic minorities and females when pictures of board members are included in annual reports. We suggest that requiring pictures of board members in annual reports and regulatory filings would result in a larger presence for gender and race diversity on boards of directors. This requirement is not a significant burden and merely represents compliance with the spirit and intent of the “full disclosure” principle.     

Are CEOs judged on their companies' social reputation?

How consequential is social reputation for a CEO's career? We find that the CEOs of those firms with greater strengths (controversies) on corporate social responsibilities (CSR) are more (less) likely to serve on external boards, and they hold more (fewer) outside directorships. CEOs lose board seats after the media expose their companies in negative environmental and social news. More nuanced analyses show that workplace diversity and supply-chain human rights are most consequential among the social and environmental dimensions of CSR. Our study demonstrates that CEOs are judged on their companies' social reputation in the director labor market. Our results also suggest that social reputation plays an important role in promoting CSR.     

Gender diversity and bank misconduct

This paper investigates whether gender-diverse bank boards can play a role in preventing costly misconduct episodes. We exploit the fines received by European banks from US regulators to reduce endogeneity issues related to supervisory and governance mechanisms. We show that greater female representation significantly reduces the frequency of misconduct fines, equivalent to savings of $7.48 million per year. Female directors are more influential when they reach a critical mass and are supported by women in leadership roles. The mechanism through which gender diversity affects board effectiveness in preventing misconduct stems from the ethicality and risk aversion of the female directors, rather than their contribution to diversity. The findings are robust to alternative model specifications, proxies for gender diversity, reverse causality, country and bank controls, and sub-sample analyses.     

Board structure and market performance: Does one solution fit all?

We investigate the relationship between internal corporate governance and market performance across multiple countries, utilizing a comprehensive data set comprising 77,440 firm observations from 15 European Union countries over the period 2002-2018. Specifically, we examine the impact of board characteristics, including size, independence, gender diversity, CEO duality, and classified boards, on market performance. Our findings reveal that CEO duality is generally negatively related to returns, whereas independent directors and board diversity are positively related to market performance. We observe a positive association between staggered boards and market performance as well as Tobin's Q, aligning with the EU's emphasis on stakeholder investments. Upon analyzing the data at the country level, we identify that the links between board structure and performance vary by country, and there isn't a single variable that is consistently related to market returns or Tobin's Q. These divergent findings indicate that there is no universally applicable corporate governance solution that can be recommended for companies throughout Europe.     

Default Risk Estimation,Bank Credit Risk,and Corporate Governance

This study explores the relationship between credit risks of banks and the corporate governance structures of these banks from the perspective of creditors. The cumulative default probabilities are estimated for a sample of US commercial and savings banks to measure their risk taking behavior. The results show that one year and five year cumulative default probabilities are time‐varying, with a significant jump observed in the year prior to the financial crisis of 2008–09. Generally speaking, corporate governance structures have a greater impact on US commercial banks than on savings institutions. We provide evidence that, after controlling for firm specific characteristics, commercial banks with larger boards and older CFOs are associated with significantly lower credit risk levels. Lower ownership by institutional investors and more independent boards also have lower credit risk levels, although these effects are somewhat less significant. For all the banks in our sample, large board size, older CFO, and less busy directors are associated with lower credit risk levels. When we restrict the sample to consider the joint effects of the governance variables, the results on board size and busy directors are maintained.     

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.