Do women board directors change how companies do business? Firms face growing pressure to appoint more women to their boards of directors, yet little is known about the factors that enable female directors to impact their organizations. This study analyzes the representational thresholds that facilitate women’s leadership in the area of corporate social responsibility. We test the predictions of token theory and critical mass theory to evaluate the ability of women to impact firm outcomes based on their numerical representation on the board of directors. Our analysis focuses on board composition and organizational outcomes in the Fortune 500 from 2001 to 2010. Our findings challenge the theoretical assumptions that solo and token women are unable to exert significant influence over their organizations, and underscore the importance of board diversity for today’s firms.
ArthurMMCookA (2009) Shareholder returns for a Catalyst Award. Group & Organization Management34: 432–448.
8.
BarronL (2003) Ask and you shall receive? Gender differences in negotiators’ beliefs about requests for a higher salary. Human Relations56(6): 635–662.
9.
BearSRahmanNPostC (2010) The impact of board diversity and gender composition on corporate social responsibility and firm reputation. Journal of Business Ethics97(2): 207–221.
10.
BellENkomoS (2001) Our Separate Ways: Black and White Women and the Struggle for Professional Identity. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
11.
BilimoriaD (2006) The relationship between women corporate directors and women corporate officers. Journal of Managerial Issues18(1): 47–61.
12.
BilimoriaDWheelerJ (2000) Women corporate directors: Current research and future directions. In: DavidsonMBurdeR (eds) Women in Management: Current Research Issues. London: Paul Chapman Publishers, 138–163.
13.
BrattonKA (2005) Critical mass theory revisited: The behavior and success of token women in state legislatures. Politics & Gender1(1): 97–125.
14.
BroomeLLConleyJKrawiekK (2011) Dangerous categories: Narrative of corporate board diversity. North Carolina Law Review89(3): 759–808.
15.
BrownDHBrownDLAnastasopoulosV (2002) Women on boards: Not just the right thing … but the ‘bright’ thing. The Conference Board of Canada, Ottawa.
16.
BurkeRMcKeenC (1996) Do women at the top make a difference? Gender proportions and the experiences of managerial and professional women. Human Resources49(8): 1093–1104.
CarrollAB (1991) Corporate social responsibility: Evolution of a definitional construct. Business & Society38(3): 268–295.
19.
CarrollABShabanaKM (2010) The business case for corporate social responsibility: A review of concepts, research and practice. International Journal of Management Reviews12(1): 85–105.
20.
Catalyst (2007) The Double-bind Dilemma for Women in Leadership: Damned If You Do, Doomed If You Don’t. New York: Catalyst.
21.
Catalyst (2011) The Bottom Line: Corporate Performance and Women’s Representation on Boards. New York: Catalyst.
22.
Catalyst (2014) 2013 Catalyst Census: Financial Post 500 Women Board of Directors. New York: Catalyst.
23.
Catalyst (2016) Women CEOs of the S&P 500. New York: Catalyst.
24.
Catalyst (2017) Women on Corporate Boards Globally. New York: Catalyst.
25.
ChamblissEUggenC (2000) Men and women of elite law firms: Reevaluating Kanter’s legacy. Law and Social Inquiry25(1): 41–68.
26.
CohenLBroschakJ (2013) Whose jobs are these? The impact of the proportion of female managers on the number of new management jobs filled by women versus men. Administrative Science Quarterly58(4): 509–541.
27.
CohenPHuffmanM (2007) Working for the woman? Female managers and the gender wage gap. American Sociological Review72(5): 681–704.
28.
CookAGlassC (2011) Leadership change and shareholder value: Market reactions to the appointment of women. Human Resource Management50(4): 501–519.
29.
CookAGlassC (2016) Do women advance equity? The effect of gender leadership composition on LGBT-friendly policies in American firms. Human Relations69(7): 1431–1456.
DahlerupD (2006) The story of the theory of critical mass. Politics & Gender2(4): 511–522.
32.
DaltonDDaltonC (2010) Women and corporate boards of directors: The promise of increased and substantive participation in the post Sarbanes-Oxley era. Business Horizons53: 257–268.
33.
DeckopJRMerrimanKKGuptaS (2006) The effects of CEO pay structure on Corporate Social Performance. Journal of Management32(3): 329–342.
34.
DenissenA (2010) The right tools for the job: Constructing gender meanings and identities in the male-dominated building trades. Human Relations63(7): 1051–1069.
35.
EaglyAHCarliLL (2007) Through the Labyrinth: The Truth About How Women Become Leaders. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
36.
EaglyAHJohannesen-SchmidtMC (2001) The leadership styles of women and men. Journal of Social Issues57(4): 781–797.
37.
EaglyAHKarauSJ (2002) Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders. Psychological Review109(3): 573–598.
38.
EaglyAHJohannesen-SchmidtMCvan EngenML (2003) Transformational, transactional and laissez-faire leadership styles: A meta-analysis comparing women and men. Psychological Bulletin129(4): 569–591.
39.
EaglyAHEatonARoseSMet al. (2012) Feminism and psychology: Analysis of a half-century of research on women and gender. American Psychologist67(3): 211–230.
40.
ElsesserKLeverJ (2011) Does gender bias against female leaders persist? Quantitative and qualitative data from a large-scale survey. Human Relations64(12): 1555–1578.
41.
ElyRJ (1995) Power in demography: Women’s social constructions of gender identity at work. Academy of Management Journal38(3): 589–634.
42.
ErkutSKramerVWKonradAM (2008) Critical mass: Does the number of women on a corporate board make a difference? In: VinnicombeSSinghVBurkeRet al. (eds) Women on Corporate Boards of Directors: International Research and Practice. London: Edward Elgar, 222–232.
43.
EtzkowitzHKemelgorCNeuschatzMet al. (1994) The paradox of critical mass for women in science. Science266(5182): 51–54.
44.
FinkelSE (1995) Causal Analysis with Panel Data. SAGE University Paper Series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.
45.
FinkelsteinSD’AveniRA (1994) CEO duality as a double-edged sword: How boards of directors balance entrenchment avoidance and unity of command. Academy of Management Journal37(5): 1079–1108.
46.
FiskeS (1998) Stereotyping, prejudice and discrimination. In: GilbertDTFiskeSTLindzeyG (eds) Handbook of Social Psychology. New York: McGraw Hill, 357–411.
47.
GlassCCookA (2017, forthcoming) Do women leaders promote change? Analyzing the effect of gender on business practices and diversity initiatives. Human Resource Management.
48.
GlassCCookAIngersollA (2015) Do women leaders promote sustainability? Analyzing the effect of corporate governance composition on environmental performance. Business Strategy & the Environment25(7): 495–511.
49.
HarrisonDAKleinKJ (2007) What’s the difference? Diversity constructs as separation, variety or disparity in organizations. Academy of Management Review32(4): 1199–1228.
50.
HartTASharfmanM (2015) Assessing the concurrent validity of the revised Kinder, Lydenberg, and Domini corporate social performance indicators. Business & Society54(5): 575–598.
51.
HillmanACanellaJrAHarrisI (2002) Women and racial minorities in the boardroom: How do directors differ?Journal of Management28(6): 747–763.
52.
HoggMvan KnippenbergDRastD (2012) Intergroup leadership in organizations: Leading across group and organizational boundaries. Academy of Management Review37(2): 232–255.
53.
HungH (2011) Directors’ roles in corporate social responsibility: A stakeholder perspective. Journal of Business Ethics103(3): 385–402.
54.
HyunEDaegyuYHojinJHongK (2016) Women on boards and corporate social responsibility. Sustainability8(4): 300–326.
55.
IsmailNJemainAA (2007) Handling overdispersion with negative binomial and generalized Poisson regression models. Casualty Actuarial Society Forum (Winter): 103–158.
56.
JaffeeSHydeJS (2000) Gender differences in moral orientation: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin126(5): 703–726.
57.
JoecksJPullKVetterK (2013) Gender diversity in the boardroom and firm performance: What exactly constitutes a ‘critical mass’?Journal of Business Ethics118(1): 61–72.
58.
JoshiARohH (2009) The role of context in work team diversity research: A meta-analytic review. Academy of Management Journal52(3): 599–628.
59.
KanterRM (1977) Men and Women of the Corporation. New York: Basic Books.
60.
Kinder, Lydenberg, Domini Research & Analytics (KLD) Inc. (2006) Getting Started with KLD Stats and KLD’s Ratings Definitions. Boston, MA: KLD.
61.
KnippenbergDDawsonJWestMHomanA (2010) Diversity faultlines, shared objectives and top management team performance. Human Relations64(3): 307–336.
62.
KonradACanningsK (1997) The effects of gender role congruence and statistical discrimination on managerial advancement. Human Relations50(10): 1305–1328.
63.
KonradAPrasadPPringleJ (2006) Handbook of Workplace Diversity. London: SAGE.
64.
KonradAKramerVErkutS (2008) Critical mass: The impact of three or more women on corporate boards. Organizational Dynamics37(2): 145–164.
65.
KonradACanningsKGoldbergC (2010) Asymmetrical demography effects on psychological climate for gender diversity: Differential effects of leader gender and work unit gender composition among Swedish doctors. Human Relations63(11): 1661–1685.
66.
LivingstonRWRosetteASWashingtonEF (2012) Can an agentic Black woman get ahead? The impact of race and interpersonal dominance on perceptions of female leaders. Psychological Science24(2) 354–358.
67.
McCabeACIngramRDato-onMC (2006) The business of ethics and gender. Journal of Business Ethics64(2): 101–116.
68.
McDonaldMLWestphalJD (2013) Access denied: Low mentoring of women and minority first-time directors and its negative effects on appointments to additional boards. Academy of Management Journal56(4): 1169–1198.
69.
MatsaDAMillerAR (2013) A female style of corporate leadership? Evidence from quotas. American Economic Journal5(3): 136–169.
70.
MattinglyJEBermanSL (2006) Measurement of corporate social action: Discovering taxonomy in the Kinder Lydenberg Domini ratings data. Business & Society45: 20–46.
71.
MattisM (2000) Women corporate directors in the United States. In: BurkeRMattisM (eds) Women on Corporate Boards of Directors: International Challenges and Opportunities. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers: 43–56.
72.
MavinSGrancyG (2016) A theory of abject appearance: Women elite leaders’ intra-gender ‘management’ of bodies and appearance. Human Relations69(5): 1095–1120.
O’NeillOO’ReillyC (2011) Reducing the backlash effect: Self-monitoring and women’s promotions. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology84(4): 825–832.
75.
OehmichenJSchrappSWolffM (2017) Who needs experts most? Board industry expertise and strategic change—a contingency perspective. Strategic Management Journal38(3): 645–656.
76.
PelledLHEisenhardtKMXinKR (1999) Exploring the black box: An analysis of work group diversity, conflict and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly44(1): 1–28.
77.
PetersonCAPhilpotJ (2007) Women’s roles on US Fortune 500 boards: Director expertise and committee memberships. Journal of Business Ethics72(2): 177–196.
78.
PostCRahmanNRubowE (2011) Green governance: Boards of directors’ composition and environmental corporate social responsibility. Business & Society50(1): 189–223.
79.
RaeburnNC (2004) Lesbian and Gay Workplace Rights: Changing Corporate America from the Inside Out. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
80.
ScheinVE (2001) A global look at psychological barriers to women’s progress in management. Journal of Social Issues57(4): 675–688.
81.
ScheinVEDavidsonMJ (1993) Think manager, think male. Management Development Review6(3): 24.
82.
Seto-PamiesD (2015) The relationship between women directors and corporate social responsibility. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management22(6): 334–345.
83.
SharfmanM (1996) The construct validity of the Kinder, Lydenberg, Domini social performance ratings data. Journal of Business Ethics15(3): 287–296.
84.
SheridanAMilgateG (2005) Accessing board positions: A comparison of female and male board members’ views. Corporate Governance13(6): 847–855.
85.
ShropshireC (2010) The role of interlocking director and board receptivity in the diffusion of practices. Academy of Management Review35(2): 246–264.
86.
SiegelJILichtANSchwartzSH (2011) Egalitarianism and international investment. Journal of Financial Economics102: 621–642.
87.
SinghV (2008) Transforming boardroom cultures in science, engineering and technology organizations: Final report. Resource Centre for Women in Science, Engineering and Technology, Bradford, UK.
88.
SkaggsS (2008) Producing change or bagging opportunity? The effects of discrimination litigation on women in supermarket management. American Journal of Sociology113(4): 1148–1183.
89.
SkaggsSStainbackKDuncanP (2012) Shaking things up or business as usual? The influence of female corporate executives and board of directors on women’s managerial representation. Social Science Research41(4): 936–948.
90.
StewmanS (1988) Organizational demography. Annual Review of Sociology14: 1–123.
TerjesenSSinghV (2008) Female presence on corporate boards: A multi-country study of environmental context. Journal of Business Ethics83(1): 55–63.
93.
TorchiaMCalabroAHuseM (2011) Women directors on corporate boards: From tokenism to critical mass. Journal of Business Ethics102(2): 299–317.
94.
van DijkHvan EngenMLvan KnippenbergD (2012) Defying conventional wisdom: A meta-analytical examination of the differences between demographic and job-related diversity relationship with performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes119(1): 38–53.
95.
WaddockSA (2003) Myths and realities of social investing. Organization and Environment16(3): 369–380.
96.
WaddockSAGravesSB (1997) The corporate social performance-financial performance link. Strategic Management Journal18(4): 303–319.
97.
WallsJBerroneP (2017, forthcoming) The power of one to make a difference: How informal and formal CEO power affect environmental sustainability. Journal of Business Ethics.
98.
WallsJBerronePPhanP (2012) Corporate governance and environmental performance: Is there really a link?Strategic Management Journal33(8): 885–913.
WeyerB (2007) Explaining the persistence of the glass ceiling for women leaders. Women in Management Review22(6): 482–496.
101.
WilliamsKO’ReillyC (1998) Demography and diversity in organizations: A review of 40 years of research. Research in Organizational Behavior20: 77–140.
102.
WingfieldAH (2013) No More Invisible Men: Race and Gender in Men’s Work. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
103.
YoderJ (1994) Looking beyond numbers: The effects of gender status, job prestige and occupational gender-typing on tokenism processes. Social Psychology Quarterly57(2): 150–159.
104.
ZhangYHouL (2012) The romance of working together: Benefits of gender diversity on group performance in China. Human Relations65(11): 1487–1508.
105.
ZhuDShenW (2016) Why do some outside successions fare better than others? The role of outside CEO’s prior experience with board diversity. Strategic Management Journal37(13): 2695–2708.
106.
ZhuDWestphalJ (2013) How directors’ prior experience with other demographically similar CEOs affects their appointments onto corporate boards and the consequences for CEO compensation. Academy of Management Journal57(3): 791–813.
107.
ZweigenhaftRLDomhoffGW (2011) The New CEOs: Women, African American, Latino and Asian American leaders of Fortune 500 Companies. New York: Rowan and Littlefield.
