Board diversity attributes and risk-taking
contingency framework of early adopted gender quota
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.23925/2179-3565.2025v16i3p172-185Palabras clave:
Board gender diversity, Board size, Standard deviation, Corporate risk, Mandatory quotaResumen
While countries that early adopted mandatory quota exhibit a marked acceleration in women’s representation on boards, it is noticed that boards also alternatively enlarged by the additive approach. Gender diversity and board size have been jointly analyzed in this study since their interplay is suggested by literature as triggers for gender equality during implementation of quota in early stages. This research investigates the relationship between the two boards’ diversity attributes and corporate risk on selected industries and countries, over 4 years between 2020-2023. Standard deviation with a 5-years overlapping windows is one of the main proxies for risk in finance since it captures the degree of firm’s risk-taking through the volatility of indicators like debt-to-equity sd(DE), return on assets sd(ROA) and operating efficiency sd(OpR), underlying the assumption that riskier corporate operations lead to greater volatility. Using linear regression estimates we find that board gender diversity has a positive influence on the volatility of returns sd(ROA), while board size is positively influencing the operating ratio volatility sd(OpR) on the contingency framework of mandatory quota. Our results support the intergroup contact theory suggesting that women borrow the risk-attitude from their man board-counterparts in their professional roles.
Citas
Adams, R. B., & Funk, P. (2012). Beyond the glass ceiling: Does gender matter ? Management Science, 58, 219–235.
Adams, R., & Ferreira D. (2009). Women în the boardroom and their impact on governance and performance. Journal of Financial Economics, 291-309.
Adams, R., Hermalin, B.E., & Weisbach, M. S. (2010). The Role of Boards of Directors in Corporate Governance: A Conceptual Framework and Survey. Journal of Economic Literature, 48 (1): 58–107.
Ahern, R. K., & Dittmar, K. A. (2012). The Changing of the Boards: The Impact on Firm Valuation of Mandated Female Board Representation. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 127, 137–197.
Alsahali, K. F. (2025). The Role of Gender Equality at the Country Level on the Relationship Between Women’s Board Representation and Sustainability Assurance Adoption. Journal of Risk and Financiaal Management, 18(2), 87.
Anderson, R., Reeb, D.M., Upadhyay, A., & Zhao, W. . (2011). The economics of director heterogeneity. Financial Managementt, 40 (1), 5-38.
Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management , 17(1): 99–120.
Belghitar, Y., & Clark, E. (2015). Managerial risk incentives and investment related agency costs. International Review of Financial Analysis, 38, 191-197.
Berger, A. N., Kick, T., & Schaeck, K. (2014). Executive board composition an bank risk taking. Journal of Corporate Finance, 28, 48-65.
Bernile, G., Bhagwat, V., & Yonker, S. (2018). Board diversity, firm risk, and corporate policies. Journal of Financial Economics, 127(3), 588-612.
Bhat, K. U., Chen, Y., Jebran, K., & Memon, Z. A. (2019). Board diversity and corporate risk: evidence from China. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society, 20(2): 280–293.
Borghans, L., Golsteyn, B.H.H, Heckman,, C. K., & Meijers, H. (2009). Gender Differences in Risk Aversion and Ambiguity Aversion. Journal of the European Economic Association, 7(2-3):649-658.
Brahma, S., Nwafor, C., & Boateng, A. (2021). Board gender diversity and firm performance: The UK evidence. International Journal of Finance and Economics, 26(4), 5704–5719.
Bruna, M., Dang, R., Scotto, M., & Ammari, A. (2019). Does board gender diversity affect firm risk taking? Evidence from the French stock market. Journal of Management and Governance, 23: 915–938.
Carter, D., D’Souza, F. P., Simkins, B. J., & Simpson, W. G. (2007). The Diversity of Corporate Board Committees and Firm Financial Performance. Available at SSRN, 972763.
Carter, D., Simkins, B.J., & Simpson W.G. (2003). Corporate governance, board diversity, and firm value. Financial Review, 38(1):33–53.
Chen, L. H., Gramlich, J., & Houser, K. A. (2017). The effects of board gender diversity on a firm's risk strategies. Accounting and Finance, 59, 991–1031.
Cheng, S. (2008). Board size and the variability of corporate performance. Journal of Financial Economics, 87(1), 157–176.
Croson, R., & Gneezy, U. (2009). Gender differences in preferences. Journal of Economic Literature, 47(2), 448-474.
De Andres, P., Azofra, V., & Lopez, F. (2005). Corporate Boards in OECD Countries: Size, composition, functioning and effectiveness. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 13(2), 197-210.
Eisenberg, T., Sundgren, S., & Wells, M. T. (1998). Larger board size and decreasing firm value in small firms. Journal of Financial Economics, 48(1), 35–54.
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Ahency Theory: An assesment and Review. The Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 57-74.
Faccio, M., Marchica, M. T., & Mura, R. . (2016). CEO gender, corporate risk-taking, and the efficiency of Capital allocation. Journal of Corporate Finance, 39, 193-209.
Fondas, N., & Sassalos, S. (2000). A different voice in the boardroom: How the presence of women directors affects board influence over management. Global Focus, 12, 13–22.
Gupta, V. K., Mortal, S., Chakrabarty, B., Guo, X., & Turban, D. B. (2020). CFO gender and financial statement irregularities. Academy of Management Journal, 63(3), 802–831.
Hambrick, D. (2007). Upper Echelon Theory: An update. Academy of Management Review, 32(2), 334-343.
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.
Harjoto, M., Laksmana, I., & Yang, Y. W. . (2018). Board diversity and corporate investment oversight. Journal of Business Research, 90: 40–47.
Jebran, K., Chen, S., & Zhang, R. . (2020). Board diversity and stock price crash risk. Research in International Business and Finance, 51: 101–122.
Jensen, M. C. (1993). The modern industrial revolution, exit, and the failure of internal control systems. Journal of Finance, 48(3), 831–880.
Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behaviour, Agency Cost and Ownership Structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3, 305-360.
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(2): 194–207.
Kogan, N., & Wallach, M. A. (1964). Risk taking: A study in cognition and personality. New York: Holt.
Konrad, A. M., & Kramer, V. W. (2006). How many women do boards need. Harvard Business Review,, 84, 22.
Levi, M., Li, K., & Zhang, F. (2014). Director gender and mergers and aquisitions. Journal of Corporate Finance, 28, 185–200.
Loukil, N., & Yousfi, O. (2014). Does corporate governance affect stock liquidity in the Tunisian Stock Market. Banks Markets & Investors, 125,35–53.
Matsa, D., & Miller, A. (2013). A Female Style in Corporate Leadership? Evidence from Quotas. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics 2013, 5(3): 136–169.
Maxfield, S., Shapiro, M., Gupta, V., & Hass, S. (2010). Gender and risk: Women, risk taking and risk aversion. Gender in Management: An International Journal, 25, 586–604.
McGrath, J., Berdahl, J., & Arrow, H. (1995). Traits, Expectations, Culture, and Clout: The Dynamics of Diversity in Work Groups. American Psychological Association, Washinton DC, 17-45.
McNulty, T., Florackis, C., & Ormrod, P. (2013). Boards of directors and financial risk during the credit crisis. Corporate Governance (Oxford), 21(1), 58–78.
Palvia, A., Vähämaa, E., & Vähämaa, S. (2015). Are Female CEOs and Chairwomen More Conservative and Risk Averse ? Evidence from the Banking Industry During the Financial Crisis. Journal of Business Research, 131(2): 577-594.
Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L. (2006). A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(5), 751–783.
Saeed, A., Belghitar, Y., & Yousaf, A. . (2016). Firm-level determinants of gender diversity in the boardrooms: Evidence from some emerging economies. International Business Review, 25, 1076–1088.
Saeed, A., Belghitar, Y., & Yousaf, A. (2016). Firm-level determinants of gender diversity in the boardrooms: evidence from some emerging markets. International Business Review, 25 (5), 1076-1088.
Seierstad, C. (2011). Exploring the Norwegian paradox of vertical sex segregation: Strategies and experiences in politics, academia and company boards. 150-186.
Seierstad, C., & Opsahl, T. (2011). For the few not the many ? The effects of affirmative action on presence, prominence, and social capital of female directors in Norway. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 27.
Sila, V., Gonzalez, A., & Hagendorff, J. (2016). Women on board: does boardroom gender diversity affect firm risk? Journal of Corporate Finance, 36, 26-53.
Simionescu, L. N., Gherghina, S.C., Tawil, H., & Sheikha, H. (2021). Does board gender diversity affect firm performance? Empirical evidence from Standard & Poor’s 500 Information Technology Sector. Financial Innovation, 7(1), 1–45.
Smith, N. (2018). Gender quotas on boards of directors. IZA World of Labor, 2018: 7 doi: 10.15185/izawol.7.v2.
Terjesen, S., & Sealy, R. (2016). Board gender quotas: Exploring ethical tensions from a multi-theoretical perspective. Business Ethics, 26,23–65.
Terjesen, S., Francisco, P. M., & Couto, E. B. (2016). Does the presence of independent and female directors impact firm performance? A multi-country study of board diversity. Journal of Management & Governance, 20, 447-483.
Torchia, M., Calabro, A., & Huse, M. (2011). Women directors on corporate boards: From tokenism to critical mass. Journal of Business Ethics, 102(2), 299–317.
Zaccone, M. C., & Argiolas, A. (2024). Is a critical mass of women always enough to improve firm performance? The importance of the institutional context. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society, 24(8), 1–21.
Descargas
Publicado
Número
Sección
Licencia
This Journal is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivers 4.0 International license.
1.The author (s) authorize the publication of the article in the journal;
2.The author (s) warrant that the contribution is original and unpublished and is not in the process of being evaluated in other journal (s);
3. The journal is not responsible for the opinions, ideas and concepts emitted in the texts, as they are the sole responsibility of its author (s);
4. The editors are entitled to make textual adjustments and to adapt the articles to the standards of publication.
