WGSRN: Corporate Governance (Sub-Topic)最新文献

{"title":"Gender Diversity on Malaysian Corporate Boards: A Law and Social Movements Perspective","authors":"V. Chen, M. Welsh, M. Cheong","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3924694","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3924694","url":null,"abstract":"This article provides a unique investigation of the interaction between sociocultural perceptions of women in Malaysia and reforms adopted in that jurisdiction to promote gender diversity on corporate boards. It adopts a law and social movements perspective to better understand the law reforms that have emerged, often amidst fraught interactions between the state and women’s rights activists with their conflicting constructs of gender roles. The article draws on empirical data to shed light on the practical workings of the reforms, ascertaining the perspective of insiders through interviews and examining the composition of boards in 30 of the largest listed companies. While an increase in the representation of women on corporate boards suggests that the reforms have facilitated progress towards gender equality, such progress must be viewed in light of prevalent conservative perspectives of gender roles, and sustained state resistance against women’s rights activists which together mitigate substantive equality.","PeriodicalId":336525,"journal":{"name":"WGSRN: Corporate Governance (Sub-Topic)","volume":"52 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114514503","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Board Diversity: A Response to Professor Fried","authors":"Richard W. Painter","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3824245","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3824245","url":null,"abstract":"In December 2020, Nasdaq asked the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to approve a new rule requiring most Nasdaq-listed companies to have at least one director self-identifying as a woman and another self-identifying as an underrepresented minority or LGBTQ+ or explain why not in their securities disclosure filings. For boards with five or fewer members the benchmark is that they have one diverse member, not two, or explain why not.<br><br>Shortly after Nasdaq released its revised rule, Professor Jesse Fried of Harvard Law School posted on SSRN an eight-page paper strongly criticizing the rule, accusing Nasdaq of misrepresenting empirical studies of the impact of board diversity on firm value to support its proposed rule, and claiming that the proposed rule could destroy shareholder value. This paper responds to Fried.<br><br>Statistical studies of the effect of boardroom diversity on stock price end in a draw for reasons explained in this paper including difficulty controlling for other factors affecting stock price during the event windows. Statistical studies of market reaction to legally mandated board diversity in California and Norway have little explanatory value in predicting the impact on investors of Nasdaq’s more flexible comply or explain rule. This paper concludes that there is no evidence to support Fried’s claim that the Nasdaq rule could harm shareholder value. Instead, overwhelming evidence from studies of boardroom monitoring of management supports the value of boardroom diversity for shareholders. The positive value of boardroom diversity for corporations, shareholders, and society in general is also supported by observations rooted in historical experience, management economics and ethics. <br>","PeriodicalId":336525,"journal":{"name":"WGSRN: Corporate Governance (Sub-Topic)","volume":"28 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126406104","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Testing for Countersignaling in CSR Disclosures: Evidence from the Gender Pay Gap","authors":"June Huang, Shirley Lu","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3708257","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3708257","url":null,"abstract":"How informative is a firm's voluntary disclosure of its gender diversity? We focus on the FTSE 350 and exploit a 2017 UK regulation that mandates public disclosure of detailed gender pay gap (GPG) data. Using a firm's GPG revealed post-mandate to proxy for the firm's true gender diversity, we compare this proxy to a firm's voluntary disclosure on gender diversity in its 2015 annual report. Contrary to the prediction of traditional signaling models, our results show firms with the best GPGs make the least voluntary disclosures, which is consistent with counter-signaling. We hypothesize this result is driven by the existence of a firm's gender diversity reputation and firms with the best GPGs use nondisclosure to signal their confidence in this reputation. In line with the implications of counter-signaling, we find ESG ratings that rely heavily on voluntary disclosure give higher social scores to firms with worse gender pay gaps.","PeriodicalId":336525,"journal":{"name":"WGSRN: Corporate Governance (Sub-Topic)","volume":"35 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"117021230","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The UK Stewardship Code 2010-2020 from Saving the Company to Saving the Planet?","authors":"P. Davies","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3553493","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3553493","url":null,"abstract":"The United Kingdom introduced a Stewardship Code in 2010, followed by a slightly revised iteration in 2012 (the “first version” of the SC). It was premised upon the corporate governance advantages of engagement between institutional investors and corporate boards and was designed to redress what were perceived to be the weaknesses in the model of the monitoring board as revealed during the financial crisis. In short, the institutions were to monitor the monitor. The first version was officially branded as ineffective in a government appointed reviews at the end of 2018. It was recommended that the first version should either be abandoned or revised so as to focus more on the results of engagement. Surprisingly, the Financial Reporting Council chose not only to revise the SC in the hope of making it effective within the engagement framework, but also to expand the Code’s concept of stewardship so as to embrace environmental, social and governance matters (including climate change). This “second version” came into effect at the beginning of 2020. \u0000 \u0000The purpose of this paper is to assess the chances of the second version being more successful than the first. It begins by examining the most plausible reasons for the failure of the first version, by reference to the capacity and the incentives of institutional investors to discharge the engagement function which the first version cast upon them. It concludes that the incentives and capacities were weak. Turning to predictions for the second version, it concludes that, in relation to engagement as envisaged in the first version, the second version has not effectively addressed the causes of the weakness of the first version. However, in relation to ESG factors, especially climate change, there are reasons to expect a more positive impact from the second version, mainly because governmental policy has increased the reputational incentives for institutions to exercise stewardship in this area. These reputational incentives may also be supported by changes in investors’ preferences. Overall, the second version may turn out to operate along the same lines as other changes in society rather than as an isolated reform, as with the first version. However, this optimistic prediction is conditional upon the continuance of the governmental policy and social changes which support the second version of the SC.","PeriodicalId":336525,"journal":{"name":"WGSRN: Corporate Governance (Sub-Topic)","volume":"32 2","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-03-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131745911","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"SEC Regulation S-K and Board Diversity","authors":"Michelle Harding, Zawadi Lemayian","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3223452","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3223452","url":null,"abstract":"In an attempt to address a lack of diversity on corporate boards, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) passed a rule in 2010, requiring firms to disclose whether they consider diversity in the director nomination process, and if so, how the policy’s effectiveness is assessed. The rule does not define the term diversity, leaving it up to each firm to offer its own interpretation. We examine the rule’s effectiveness and find that some firms fail to comply with the rule and do not discuss whether diversity is a factor that is considered in director hiring. Among compliant firms, the most common definitions of diversity are experiential (skills, experience, knowledge) rather than socio-demographic (gender, race, age, geographic background, and representation). We also compare board diversity between compliant and non-compliant firms and do not find differences in the hiring of diverse candidates (women and minorities) as directors following the rule’s introduction, suggesting limited success. Our findings, which are especially salient as the SEC currently considers revising the rule, highlight the importance of adopting a formal definition of the term “diversity” and instituting stricter diversity disclosure guidelines.","PeriodicalId":336525,"journal":{"name":"WGSRN: Corporate Governance (Sub-Topic)","volume":"35 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116517043","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Gender Quota and Firm's Performance: A Focus on Italian and Spanish Companies from EURO STOXX 50","authors":"Bettina C. K. Binder","doi":"10.26595/EAMR.2014.4.1.1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.26595/EAMR.2014.4.1.1","url":null,"abstract":"Gender diversity of management boards is a highly-debated issue worldwide. Aside from its ethical aspect, promoting equality and a greater inclusion is believed to have also positive effects on the financial performance of a company. National campaigns such as the “2020 Women on Boards” in the USA, or the “Women on the Board Pledge for Europe” at European level are just two examples of initiatives which aim at increasing the female percentage in management boards. In addition, some countries also adopted legal quotas to enhance the existence of diverse management boards. In this context, the present study focuses on the EURO STOXX 50 companies and the relationship between the gender composition of their boards and financial performance as measured by Earnings before Taxes (EBT). A special focus is laid on Italy and Spain, as both countries adopted legislative actions for increasing the proportion of women on boards.","PeriodicalId":336525,"journal":{"name":"WGSRN: Corporate Governance (Sub-Topic)","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131118878","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Mothering and Managing: A New Narrative","authors":"Sujit Roy","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3315562","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3315562","url":null,"abstract":"Women have both uterus and brain. That is why women only give birth a child and become a mother. Mothering is the social practice of nurturing and caring for dependent children. Mothering thus is a process which entails a female role for mothers in society. Managing refers to becoming a boss- transition from individual contributor to managing others. It is thus a process of getting things done by an organization to achieve organizational goals. The paper attempts to explore and narrate the emerging relationship between mothering and managing from the perspective of mothers who are professional managers working in private and public sector. The paper examines whether mother-managers see managing as \"male roles'.","PeriodicalId":336525,"journal":{"name":"WGSRN: Corporate Governance (Sub-Topic)","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125806438","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}