The magic number: three women on the board

Q2 Business, Management and Accounting
Ashley Salaiz, Leon Faifman
{"title":"The magic number: three women on the board","authors":"Ashley Salaiz, Leon Faifman","doi":"10.1108/jbs-08-2023-0159","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose This study aims to unpack the progress of board gender diversity among the 3,000 largest US listed firms by market capitalization (i.e. Russell 3000 Index). This study extrapolates four classifications of firms based on the number of women in the boardroom: zero women, one or two women, three plus women and gender balanced. The purpose of this study is to examine where progress has and has not been made, why firms plateau and an agenda for the future. Design/methodology/approach This study first provides a summative overview of the literature on the benefits of board gender diversity. It then examines progress according to the four classifications, each of which have theoretical underpinnings for whether or not firms can reap the strategic benefits of gender-diverse boardrooms. Findings Several indices of US publicly traded companies now have women holding between 30% and 33% of the seats in the boardroom. By examining the spread of women on boards according to the four classifications, this study extrapolates three key insights: firms experiencing tokenism (i.e. one or two women in the boardroom) do not have enough women to reap the strategic benefits of diverse boardrooms; firms that have reached a critical mass (three women in the boardroom) are at an impasse and may risk plateauing; and gender-balanced firms are elevated to the status of being role models for other firms. Calls for action and associated action plans accompany these insights. Practical implications This study reminds managers and directors of the strategic benefits of gender-diverse boards and offers three critical insights that boards can use to classify what stage they are at on the path toward board gender equality. Based on their classification, calls for action and action plans offer guidance to firms. Originality/value This study shifts away from focusing on the average percentage of board seats held by women across all firms and offers new insights on the progress that firms have made according to the number of women in their boardroom.","PeriodicalId":55881,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Business Strategy","volume":"47 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Business Strategy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jbs-08-2023-0159","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Business, Management and Accounting","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose This study aims to unpack the progress of board gender diversity among the 3,000 largest US listed firms by market capitalization (i.e. Russell 3000 Index). This study extrapolates four classifications of firms based on the number of women in the boardroom: zero women, one or two women, three plus women and gender balanced. The purpose of this study is to examine where progress has and has not been made, why firms plateau and an agenda for the future. Design/methodology/approach This study first provides a summative overview of the literature on the benefits of board gender diversity. It then examines progress according to the four classifications, each of which have theoretical underpinnings for whether or not firms can reap the strategic benefits of gender-diverse boardrooms. Findings Several indices of US publicly traded companies now have women holding between 30% and 33% of the seats in the boardroom. By examining the spread of women on boards according to the four classifications, this study extrapolates three key insights: firms experiencing tokenism (i.e. one or two women in the boardroom) do not have enough women to reap the strategic benefits of diverse boardrooms; firms that have reached a critical mass (three women in the boardroom) are at an impasse and may risk plateauing; and gender-balanced firms are elevated to the status of being role models for other firms. Calls for action and associated action plans accompany these insights. Practical implications This study reminds managers and directors of the strategic benefits of gender-diverse boards and offers three critical insights that boards can use to classify what stage they are at on the path toward board gender equality. Based on their classification, calls for action and action plans offer guidance to firms. Originality/value This study shifts away from focusing on the average percentage of board seats held by women across all firms and offers new insights on the progress that firms have made according to the number of women in their boardroom.
神奇的数字是:董事会中有三位女性
本研究旨在揭示美国市值最大的3000家上市公司(即罗素3000指数)董事会性别多样性的进展。这项研究根据董事会中女性的数量推断出公司的四种分类:零女性、一名或两名女性、三名以上女性和性别平衡。本研究的目的是研究在哪些方面取得了进展,哪些方面没有取得进展,为什么企业会停滞不前,以及未来的议程。设计/方法/方法本研究首先对有关董事会性别多样性益处的文献进行了总结性概述。然后,它根据四种分类来检查进展,每一种分类都有理论基础,可以说明公司是否可以从性别多元化的董事会中获得战略利益。在美国上市公司的几个指数中,女性在董事会中所占的比例在30%至33%之间。通过根据四种分类检查女性在董事会中的分布情况,本研究推断出三个关键见解:经历象征性(即董事会中有一名或两名女性)的公司没有足够的女性来获得多元化董事会的战略利益;达到临界数量(董事会中有三名女性)的公司陷入僵局,可能面临停滞的风险;性别平衡的公司被提升为其他公司的榜样。行动呼吁和相关的行动计划伴随着这些见解。本研究提醒经理和董事性别多元化董事会的战略利益,并提供了三个关键的见解,董事会可以使用它们来分类他们在实现董事会性别平等的道路上所处的阶段。根据它们的分类,行动呼吁和行动计划为企业提供指导。这项研究不再关注所有公司中女性所占董事会席位的平均百分比,而是对公司根据董事会中女性人数所取得的进展提供了新的见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Business Strategy
Journal of Business Strategy Business, Management and Accounting-Management Information Systems
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: The Journal of Business Strategy publishes articles with a practical focus designed to help readers develop successful business strategies. Articles should say something new or different and may propose a unique perspective. They should not offer prescriptions to CEOs on how to manage, but rather be directed toward middle and senior managers at companies of all sizes and types, as well as consultants and academics who want to think about their businesses in new ways. Coverage: As one of the few journals dedicated to business strategy, JBS defines strategy in the broadest sense and thus covers topics as diverse as marketing strategy, innovation, developments in the global economy, mergers & acquisition integration and human resources. We have a penchant for substantive, provocative and well-written articles. We also like to break the mould and include articles on topics readers are unlikely to find in other business publications.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信