关于多样性对公司绩效影响的证据

IF 1.3 3区 社会学 Q3 BUSINESS
Jonathan Klick
{"title":"关于多样性对公司绩效影响的证据","authors":"Jonathan Klick","doi":"10.1111/ablj.12257","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Regulators, legislatures, and advocacy groups assert that diversity improves decision-making in groups when pushing firms to change the way they select managers, officers, and directors. Likewise, consulting firms trumpet diversity as a path to better organizational outcomes, citing impressive-sounding performance differentials between diverse and non-diverse entities. A review of the empirical literature provides a much more uncertain assessment of the evidence for the “business case” for diversity. This literature is dominated by research designs that do little to isolate causal relationships. This review examines many of the most highly cited articles used to support the proposition that diversity improves decision-making and performance within groups or firms, focusing on the credibility of the research designs employed.</p>","PeriodicalId":54186,"journal":{"name":"American Business Law Journal","volume":"62 2","pages":"75-93"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ablj.12257","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The evidence regarding diversity's effect on firm performance\",\"authors\":\"Jonathan Klick\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/ablj.12257\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Regulators, legislatures, and advocacy groups assert that diversity improves decision-making in groups when pushing firms to change the way they select managers, officers, and directors. Likewise, consulting firms trumpet diversity as a path to better organizational outcomes, citing impressive-sounding performance differentials between diverse and non-diverse entities. A review of the empirical literature provides a much more uncertain assessment of the evidence for the “business case” for diversity. This literature is dominated by research designs that do little to isolate causal relationships. This review examines many of the most highly cited articles used to support the proposition that diversity improves decision-making and performance within groups or firms, focusing on the credibility of the research designs employed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54186,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Business Law Journal\",\"volume\":\"62 2\",\"pages\":\"75-93\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ablj.12257\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Business Law Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ablj.12257\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Business Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ablj.12257","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

监管机构、立法机构和倡导团体声称,在推动公司改变选择经理、高管和董事的方式时,多元化有助于改善群体决策。同样,咨询公司也鼓吹多元化是实现更好组织成果的途径,并引用了多元化和非多元化实体之间令人印象深刻的绩效差异。对经验文献的回顾提供了对多样性“商业案例”证据的更不确定的评估。这些文献主要是研究设计,很少孤立因果关系。本综述考察了许多被引用次数最多的文章,这些文章用于支持多样性改善群体或公司内的决策和绩效这一命题,重点关注所采用研究设计的可信度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The evidence regarding diversity's effect on firm performance

Regulators, legislatures, and advocacy groups assert that diversity improves decision-making in groups when pushing firms to change the way they select managers, officers, and directors. Likewise, consulting firms trumpet diversity as a path to better organizational outcomes, citing impressive-sounding performance differentials between diverse and non-diverse entities. A review of the empirical literature provides a much more uncertain assessment of the evidence for the “business case” for diversity. This literature is dominated by research designs that do little to isolate causal relationships. This review examines many of the most highly cited articles used to support the proposition that diversity improves decision-making and performance within groups or firms, focusing on the credibility of the research designs employed.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
16.70%
发文量
17
期刊介绍: The ABLJ is a faculty-edited, double blind peer reviewed journal, continuously published since 1963. Our mission is to publish only top quality law review articles that make a scholarly contribution to all areas of law that impact business theory and practice. We search for those articles that articulate a novel research question and make a meaningful contribution directly relevant to scholars and practitioners of business law. The blind peer review process means legal scholars well-versed in the relevant specialty area have determined selected articles are original, thorough, important, and timely. Faculty editors assure the authors’ contribution to scholarship is evident. We aim to elevate legal scholarship and inform responsible business decisions.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信