This article draws on Acker’s (1990) theory of gendered organizations to investigate the relationship between women’s representation in high-level positions (female board members and female CEOs) and the female employment share within firms. Based on a study of European firms, the findings indicate that female directors, but not female CEOs, have a positive influence on the share of female employees, female-friendly policies, and the impact of these policies on female representation in firms. This study contributes to the literature with an empirical demonstration of the causal impact that having women in top positions can have on female employment. Furthermore, it helps clarify the mechanisms through which women in power influence gender equality in the workplace, and it offers insights for policymakers and firms aiming to promote gender diversity and equality.
AbendrothAnja-KristinMelzerSilviaKalevAlexandraTomaskovic-DeveyDonald. 2017. Women at work: Women’s access to power and the gender earning gap. ILR Review70(1):190–222.
2.
AckerJoan. 1990. Hierarchies, jobs, bodies: A theory of gendered organizations. Gender & Society4:139–58.
3.
AckerJoan. 2009. From glass ceiling to inequality regimes. Sociologie du travail51:199–217.
4.
AdamsRenée B.HermalinBenjamin E.WeisbachMichael S.2010. The role of boards of directors in corporate governance: A conceptual framework and survey. Journal of Economic Literature48:58–107.
5.
AdamsonMariaKelanElisabeth K.2019. ‘Female heroes’: Celebrity executives as postfeminist role models. British Journal of Management30:981–96.
6.
AliMuhammadGrabarskiMiritKonradAlison. 2020. Trickle-down and bottom-up effects of women’s representation in the context of industry gender composition: A panel data investigation. Human Resource Management60:1–22.
7.
AllemandIsabelleBédardJeanBrullebautBénédicteDeschênesJérôme. 2022. Role of old boys’ networks and regulatory approaches in selection processes for female directors. British Journal of Management33(2):784–805.
8.
BernileGennaroBhagwatVineetYonkerScott. 2018. Board diversity, firm risk, and corporate policies. Journal of Financial Economics127:588–612.
9.
BertrandMarianneBlackSandra E.JensenSisselLleras-MuneyAdriana. 2019. Breaking the glass ceiling? The effect of board quotas on female labor market outcomes in Norway. Review of Economic Studies86:191–239.
BosslerMarioMosthafAlexanderSchankThorsten. 2020. Are female managers more likely to hire more female managers? Evidence from Germany. ILR Review73(3):676–704.
12.
CardosoAna RuteWinter-EbmerRudolf. 2010. Mentoring and segregation: Female-led firms and gender wage policies. Industrial and Labor Relations Review64(1):143–63.
13.
CohenPhilip N.HuffmanMatt L.2007. Working for the woman? Female managers and the gender wage gap. American Sociological Review72:681–704.
14.
De LaatKim. 2023. Remote work and post-bureaucracy: Unintended consequences of work design for gender inequality. ILR Review75(1):135–59.
15.
DobbinFrankKimSoohanKalevAlexandra. 2011. You can't always get what you need: Organizational determinants of diversity programs. American Sociological Review76:386–411.
16.
ElyRobin J.1995. The power in demography: Women's social constructions of gender identity at work. Academy of Management Journal38:589–634.
17.
ErkutSumru K.KramerVicki W.KonradAlison M.2008. Critical mass: Does the number of women on a corporate board make a difference? In VinnicombeSusanSinghValBurkeRonald J.BilimoriaDianaHuseMorten (Eds.), Women on Corporate Boards of Directors: International Research and Practice, pp. 222–32. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
GagliarducciStefanoPasermanM. Daniele. 2015. The effect of female leadership on establishment and employee outcomes: Evidence from linked employer-employee data. Research in Labor Economics41:341–72.
20.
GillanStuart L.2006. Recent developments in corporate governance: An overview. Journal of Corporate Finance12:381–402.
HultinMiaSzulkinRyszard. 2003. Mechanisms of inequality: Unequal access to organizational power and the gender wage gap. European Sociological Review19:143–59.
24.
KanterRosabeth M.1977. Men and Women of the Corporation. New York: Basic Books.
25.
KirschAnja. 2018. The gender composition of corporate boards: A review and research agenda. Leadership Quarterly29:346–64.
26.
KonradAlison M.KramerVickiErkutSumru. 2008. Critical mass: The impact of three or more women on corporate boards. Organizational Dynamics37(2):145–64.
27.
MaidaAgataWeberAndrea. 2022. Female leadership and gender gap within firms: Evidence from an Italian board reform. ILR Review75(2):488–515.
28.
MatsaDavid A.MillerAmalia R.2014. Workforce reductions at women-owned businesses in the United States. ILR Review67(2):422–52.
29.
RindfleishJenniferSheridanAlison. 2003. No change from within: Senior women managers’ response to gendered organizational structures. Women in Management Review18:299–310.
30.
RoodmanDavid M.2009. How to do xtabond2: An introduction to difference and system GMM in Stata. Stata Journal9:86–136.
31.
SchiemannFrankTietmeyerRaphael. 2022. ESG controversies, ESG disclosure and analyst forecast accuracy. International Review of Financial Analysis84:102373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irfa.2022.102373
32.
StainbackKevinKleinerSibylSkaggsSheryl. 2016. Women in power: Undoing or redoing the gendered organization?Gender and Society30:109–35.
33.
TateGeoffreyYangLiu. 2015. Female leadership and gender equity: Evidence from plant closure. Journal of Financial Economics117:77–97.
34.
TranPhan H. H.TranThu H.LeeJi-Yong. 2023. How employee share ownership plans impact firms’ market value: A conflict of interest theory approach. European Management Review21(2):358–375.
35.
Valls MartínezMaría del CarmenCervantesPedro Antonio MartínRambaudSalvador Cruz. 2020. Women on corporate boards and sustainable development in the American and European markets: Is there a limit to gender policies?Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management27(6):2642–56.
36.
WintokiM. BabajideLinckJames S.NetterJeffry M.2012. Endogeneity and the dynamics of internal corporate governance. Journal of Financial Economics105:581–606.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
