上市公司对多样性的参与:年报披露的多司法管辖区研究

Deirdre Ahern, Blanaid Clarke
{"title":"上市公司对多样性的参与:年报披露的多司法管辖区研究","authors":"Deirdre Ahern, Blanaid Clarke","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2306932","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The paper reports the findings of a multi-jurisdictional study on companies’ reporting of diversity practices at board level and below. It involved a review of the 2009, 2010 and 2011 annual reports of listed companies in Australia, Belgium, Norway, Spain and the UK. Some of the questions addressed in this research are: Are companies reporting the existence of corporate diversity policies in their annual reports to shareholders? How do companies define diversity? What reported evidence is there of real promotion of diversity as opposed to tokenism? How do different countries compare in their progress and reporting styles in their annual reports? Is there a difference in reported engagement between jurisdictions with mandatory gender quotas and disclosure requirements and those like Ireland and the UK with “comply or explain” rules?Our research on board composition indicates that a mandatory quota system is more efficient in increasing female representation at board level but that non-binding quotas and diversity reporting requirements lead to progress albeit at a slower pace. Even where women are appointed to boards, there is a noted delay in appointing them to the committee chair level. Statistics concerning gender in middle and senior management are limited. In terms of defining diversity, our research indicates that gender is the most common criteria referred to in all jurisdictions. Other aspects commonly referred to are age, disability and experience. While the existence of diversity policies is commonly reported, this tends to be rather general and imprecise. The majority of companies in the UK, Norway and Belgium do not explain their rationale for reporting diversity although this situation is improving in the UK with the “business case” being cited. In terms of addressing the pipeline issue, our research indicates that in all countries reviewed disclosure of diversity policies in respect of recruitment and promotion is increasing though the figures are not high. In Australia, the UK and Spain, reporting of mentoring and work-life balance policies is also increasing. Networks such as the UK’s Women on Boards are also important to actual and aspiring board members.","PeriodicalId":84919,"journal":{"name":"International demographics","volume":"65 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Listed Companies’ Engagement with Diversity: A Multi-Jurisdictional Study of Annual Report Disclosures\",\"authors\":\"Deirdre Ahern, Blanaid Clarke\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.2306932\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The paper reports the findings of a multi-jurisdictional study on companies’ reporting of diversity practices at board level and below. It involved a review of the 2009, 2010 and 2011 annual reports of listed companies in Australia, Belgium, Norway, Spain and the UK. Some of the questions addressed in this research are: Are companies reporting the existence of corporate diversity policies in their annual reports to shareholders? How do companies define diversity? What reported evidence is there of real promotion of diversity as opposed to tokenism? How do different countries compare in their progress and reporting styles in their annual reports? Is there a difference in reported engagement between jurisdictions with mandatory gender quotas and disclosure requirements and those like Ireland and the UK with “comply or explain” rules?Our research on board composition indicates that a mandatory quota system is more efficient in increasing female representation at board level but that non-binding quotas and diversity reporting requirements lead to progress albeit at a slower pace. Even where women are appointed to boards, there is a noted delay in appointing them to the committee chair level. Statistics concerning gender in middle and senior management are limited. In terms of defining diversity, our research indicates that gender is the most common criteria referred to in all jurisdictions. Other aspects commonly referred to are age, disability and experience. While the existence of diversity policies is commonly reported, this tends to be rather general and imprecise. The majority of companies in the UK, Norway and Belgium do not explain their rationale for reporting diversity although this situation is improving in the UK with the “business case” being cited. In terms of addressing the pipeline issue, our research indicates that in all countries reviewed disclosure of diversity policies in respect of recruitment and promotion is increasing though the figures are not high. In Australia, the UK and Spain, reporting of mentoring and work-life balance policies is also increasing. Networks such as the UK’s Women on Boards are also important to actual and aspiring board members.\",\"PeriodicalId\":84919,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International demographics\",\"volume\":\"65 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International demographics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2306932\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International demographics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2306932","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

本文报告了一项跨司法管辖区研究的结果,该研究针对公司在董事会及以下层面的多元化实践报告。调查涉及对澳大利亚、比利时、挪威、西班牙和英国上市公司2009年、2010年和2011年年报的审查。本研究解决的一些问题是:公司是否在给股东的年度报告中报告了公司多元化政策的存在?公司如何定义多样性?有什么报道的证据表明,真正促进了多样性,而不是象征性的?不同国家在年度报告中的进展和报告风格如何比较?有强制性性别配额和披露要求的司法管辖区,与爱尔兰和英国等有“遵守或解释”规定的司法管辖区,在报告的参与情况上有区别吗?我们对董事会组成的研究表明,强制性配额制度在增加董事会女性代表方面更有效,但非约束性配额和多样性报告要求导致了进步,尽管速度较慢。即使女性被任命为董事会成员,在任命她们担任委员会主席方面也存在明显的延迟。有关中高层管理人员性别的统计数据有限。在定义多样性方面,我们的研究表明,性别是所有司法管辖区最常用的标准。通常提到的其他方面是年龄、残疾和经验。虽然普遍报道存在多样性政策,但这往往是相当笼统和不精确的。英国、挪威和比利时的大多数公司都没有解释他们报告多样性的理由,尽管在英国,这种情况正在改善,理由是“商业案例”。在解决管道问题方面,我们的研究表明,在所审查的所有国家中,招聘和晋升方面的多元化政策披露都在增加,尽管数字并不高。在澳大利亚、英国和西班牙,有关辅导和工作与生活平衡政策的报道也越来越多。英国女性董事会(Women on Boards)等网络对实际的和有抱负的董事会成员也很重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Listed Companies’ Engagement with Diversity: A Multi-Jurisdictional Study of Annual Report Disclosures
The paper reports the findings of a multi-jurisdictional study on companies’ reporting of diversity practices at board level and below. It involved a review of the 2009, 2010 and 2011 annual reports of listed companies in Australia, Belgium, Norway, Spain and the UK. Some of the questions addressed in this research are: Are companies reporting the existence of corporate diversity policies in their annual reports to shareholders? How do companies define diversity? What reported evidence is there of real promotion of diversity as opposed to tokenism? How do different countries compare in their progress and reporting styles in their annual reports? Is there a difference in reported engagement between jurisdictions with mandatory gender quotas and disclosure requirements and those like Ireland and the UK with “comply or explain” rules?Our research on board composition indicates that a mandatory quota system is more efficient in increasing female representation at board level but that non-binding quotas and diversity reporting requirements lead to progress albeit at a slower pace. Even where women are appointed to boards, there is a noted delay in appointing them to the committee chair level. Statistics concerning gender in middle and senior management are limited. In terms of defining diversity, our research indicates that gender is the most common criteria referred to in all jurisdictions. Other aspects commonly referred to are age, disability and experience. While the existence of diversity policies is commonly reported, this tends to be rather general and imprecise. The majority of companies in the UK, Norway and Belgium do not explain their rationale for reporting diversity although this situation is improving in the UK with the “business case” being cited. In terms of addressing the pipeline issue, our research indicates that in all countries reviewed disclosure of diversity policies in respect of recruitment and promotion is increasing though the figures are not high. In Australia, the UK and Spain, reporting of mentoring and work-life balance policies is also increasing. Networks such as the UK’s Women on Boards are also important to actual and aspiring board members.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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