Search results

The objective of this article is to examine and conceptualise gender‐related boardroom dynamics that affect how women can make contributions on corporate boards.

Stories were collected from eight women directors about their experiences from more than 100 corporate boards. Narrative methods were used in the data analysis.

Women as well as men need to understand the power game inside and outside the boardroom. Their contribution depends on the ability and willingness to make alliances with the most influential actors, to spend time on preparations, being present on the most important decision‐making arenas, and to take leadership roles.

The study has implications for theory as well as practice. Process‐oriented theories should be included in studies of boards and governance, and the study showed that boardroom dynamics are not neutral to gender. Concepts and relationships are suggested that should be included in further theory development. The study has also given several practical examples and suggestions on how women can make contributions on corporate boards.

The study has value for developing the role of women directors.

This study seeks to explore how non-executive directors address governance problems on Dutch two-tier boards. Within this board model, challenges might be particularly difficult to address due to the formal separation of management boards' decision-management from supervisory boards' decision-control roles.

Semi-structured interviews and a questionnaire among non-executive directors provide unique insights into three major challenges in the boardrooms of two-tier boards in The Netherlands.

The study indicates that non-executive directors mainly experience challenges in three areas: the ability to ask management critical questions, information asymmetries between the management and supervisory boards and the management of the relationship between individual executive and non-executive directors. The qualitative in-depth analysis reveals the complexity of the contributing factors to problems in the boardroom and the range of process and social interventions non-executive directors use to address boardroom issues with management and the organization of the board.

While policy makers have been largely occupied with the “right” board composition, the results highlight the importance of adequately addressing operational challenges in the boardroom. The results emphasize the importance of a better understanding of board processes and the need of non-executive directors to carefully manage relationships in and around the boardroom.

Whereas most studies have focussed on regulatory initiatives to improve the functioning of boards (e.g. the independence of the board), this study explores how non-executive directors attempt to enhance the effectiveness of boards on which they serve.

Boardroom’s effectiveness has emerged as an issue of considerable importance in the minds of academics and practitioners, particularly in the aftermath of the highly visible corporate governance scandals of the past few decades. The purpose of this paper is to shed new lights on this topic by proposing a robust design framework for boardroom’s effectiveness.

The interpretative investigation is based on semi-structured interviews administered to directors of Fortune 500 firms. The adopted thematic analysis is phenomenology, or the feelings, experiences and perceptions of events as depicted first hand by individuals with significant boardroom’s experience.

Two central findings could be construed from this investigation. First, the optimum boardroom’s configuration is not a universal proposition. In other words, there are no magic recipes, and no one-size fits all approach. Rather, the optimum boardroom’s configuration ought to be framed in light of the overarching needs of the firm in relation to the dynamic forces in the external environment. Second, the design of boardrooms ought to span beyond structural aspects (i.e. the outwardly visible aspects) to also encompass two largely unobserved boardroom’s phenomena, namely, the directorship personal trait factors and the directorship behavioral patterns.

The findings presented herein may be contaminated with cognitive and personal biases, a common and unavoidable occurrence in qualitative research. A more integrative research approach using inductive and deductive techniques would allow for triangulation of results, thus providing an additional dose of validity and relevance to the research findings.

There has been a growing disenchantment about the modus operandi of the board of directors among practitioners, particularly as it pertains to large corporations with diffuse and heterogeneous shareholders and stakeholders. New design guidelines for the board of directors would directly impact on corporate practices.

The design of high performance boardrooms is instrumental to shareholders, policymakers, directors, executives, rank and file employees, suppliers, customers and other direct and indirect stakeholders, as it may help avert future corporate governance mishaps.

As of today, the academic and popular literature has yet to provide unequivocal guidance for the development of high performance boardrooms. This study fills an important gap in the prevailing corporate governance literature by integrating both structural and socio-cognitive factors into the design framework of the board of directors.

This paper aims to explore the impact discourse has on decision making practices within the boardroom and considers how personal proficiency in micro-language use can enhance an individual’s personal efficacy in influencing boardroom decisions. The work uses Habermas’ theory of communicative action to critique board talk, highlighting the need for greater understanding of the power of everyday taken for granted talk in strategy shaping. It illuminates the contribution that human resource development (HRD) professionals can make to the management of such behaviour and minimising dysfunctional behaviour and enabling effective boardroom practices.

Traditional governance theory from a business and organisational perspectives are provided before considering the boardroom environment and HRD’s role. The authors undertake ethnographic research supported by conversation analysis to explore how directors use talk-based interpersonal routines to influence boardroom processes and enact collective decision making. The authors provide one extract of directors’ talk to illustrate the process and demonstrate what the data “looks like” and the insights it holds.

The analysis suggests that the established underlying assumptions and rationale ideologies of corporate governance are misplaced and to understand the workings of corporate governance HRD academics and professionals need to gain deeper insight into the employment of talk within boards. Armed with such insights HRD professionals can become more effective in developing strategies to address dysfunctional leadership and promote good governance practice throughout their organisation.

The work raises a call for HRD to embrace a societal mediation role to help boards to become a catalyst for setting good practice which is strategically aligned throughout the organisation. Such roles require a more dialogical, strategic and critical approach to HRD, and professionals and academics take a more holistic approach to leadership development.

The paper considers the role of the development of HRD interventions that both help individuals to work more effectively within a boardroom environment and support development to shape a boardroom culture that promotes effective governance practice by influencing boardroom practice thereby promoting strong governance and broad social compliance throughout the organisation.

This paper aims to share the findings of investigations into how directors have and should be prepared for their boardroom roles.

The paper draws on the findings of surveys of director development undertaken by the author and others and the author's experience of advising over 100 boards on director and board development.

The findings suggest many directors and boards do not receive the development they require to be more effective in their roles. Trainers and developers interested in addressing their requirements need to understand the development role of the chairman of the board, the distinct nature of director development, obstacles to development at board level, the learning preferences of directors and formal and informal learning options that are available and ask key questions to assess the development context.

The surveys examined have mainly involved UK directors and unitary boards. The situation might be different in other countries. It would be helpful if more studies were undertaken of director and board development in other contexts and involving different board structures, e.g. two‐tier or management and supervisory boards. Directors need a proper induction and must remain current throughout their directorial career. Trainers and developers can address this requirement by a combination of formal and informal means.

The paper highlights the nature of the director development challenge, and that the boardroom represents a key learning environment. The paper should be of value to those who support directors and boards and have an interest in improving the competence of directors and the effectiveness of boards.

The purpose of this paper is to share the findings of investigations into the competences that an effective director should have. It draws upon the findings of surveys of director development undertaken by the author and others and the author's experience of advising over 100 boards on director and board development.

The surveys examined have mainly involved UK directors and unitary boards. The situation might be different in other countries. It would be helpful if more studies were undertaken of director and board development in other contexts and involving different board structures, e.g. two tier or management and supervisory boards.

The findings suggest it is possible to identify, categorize and prioritize the competences that directors require to be more effective in their roles. Trainers and developers interested in addressing directorial competence requirements need to understand the distinction between direction and management, and between deficiencies that require individual and collective action, the boardroom context and concerns directors may themselves have about the assessment of their competences. There are certain questions they need to ask to assess the development requirement.

The competences of individual directors and those of the board as a whole should be periodically reviewed, particularly as the membership of a board changes and it faces new challenges. Trainers and developers can address this requirement by sensitively handling any concerns directors may have about the process used.

The paper highlights the nature of the competences required by a competent director and the challenge of assessing, categorizing, prioritizing and addressing competence deficiencies. The paper should be of value to those who support directors and boards and have an interest in improving the competence of directors and the effectiveness of boards.

This paper aims to present a comprehensive theoretical framework that seeks to explore the impact of cultural, legal and social factors within the external environment on the relationship between women on corporate boards and firm performance. By investigating these boundary conditions, the paper aims to shed light on how these pressures influence the aforementioned relationship.

To build the sample of companies, the authors selected companies listed on the stock exchanges of countries that represent a diverse range of institutional contexts. These contexts encompass countries with individualistic cultures, collectivist cultures, environments with mandatory gender quotas, environments without gender quotas, contexts with substantial progress toward gender equality and contexts with limited progress in achieving gender equality. To test the hypotheses, the authors used linear regression analysis as a primary analytical approach. Furthermore, they used the propensity score matching technique to address potential issues of reverse causality and unobserved heterogeneity.

The findings indicate that the positive influence of a critical mass of women on corporate boards on firm performance is contingent upon the institutional context. Specifically, the authors observed that this relationship is strengthened in institutional contexts characterized by an individualistic culture, whereas it is not as pronounced in collectivist cultural contexts. Furthermore, this research provides compelling evidence that the presence of a critical mass of women on boards leads to enhanced firm performance in institutional settings where gender quotas are not binding, as opposed to settings where such quotas are enforced. Lastly, the results demonstrate that the presence of a critical mass of women on boards is associated with improved firm performance in institutional settings characterized by low progress in achieving gender equality. However, the authors did not observe the same effect in institutional contexts that have made significant strides toward gender equality.

This research offers a unique perspective by investigating the relationship between women’s presence on corporate boards and firm performance across different institutional contexts. In this investigation, the authors recognize that gender diversity on corporate boards is not a one-size-fits-all solution and that its effects can be shaped by the unique institutional contexts in which companies operate.

Over the past decades, growing interest in the behaviour of boards of directors has brought forth empirical studies on actual board behaviour. An important stream within this research followed the model proposed by Forbes and Milliken in 1999 in which the board processes, effort norms, cognitive conflict and the use of knowledge, are hypothesized to influence the performance of boards of directors. This paper aims to take stock of the results from this stream of research. The sometimes inconsistent results, and assumed methodological flaws of this research, leave open the question whether it makes sense to continue with this line of research.

Through a research synthesis of 17 primary studies on (parts of) the model proposed by Forbes and Milliken (1999), this question is addressed directly by clarifying what is known from the research done so far and by identifying possible distorting methodological moderators.

Strong empirical support is found for the effect of effort norms and the use of knowledge and skills on board task performance. The evidence for cognitive conflicts however was found to be inconclusive. Common method and respondent bias seem to be a lesser concern than often stated.

Future studies should not only look closely at the construct validity of conflict, but should also have to account for the multidimensionality of conflicts and the interdependency and endogeneity in the relationship between behaviour and performance in boards.

This is the first paper that systematically integrates and reviews the empirical results of the research following the Forbes and Milliken model and sketches roads for future research on board behaviour.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the mediating role of board effectiveness (understood as the capacity to efficiently manage and control all functions to guarantee the company’s prosperity) in the relationship between board diversity and firm performance.

The authors use partial least squares methodology to test the direct and indirect relationships between gender diversity in boards of directors and business performance.

Although the relationship between the presence of women on the board and the board’s effectiveness is statistically significant, this relationship is negative. However, board effectiveness (measured by the three constructs: strategic control, organizational innovation and decision-making) has a positive and statistically significant effect on business performance. Finally, there is a positive, but not statistically significant, relationship between gender diversity and firm performance.

The study has a small sample size, and most of the boards of directors analyzed are unequal with only a few companies achieving gender parity.

Public institutions must promote actions to achieve a critical mass of women directors and managers, so that women transcend a merely “symbolic” role on a board and are able to develop their skills and characteristics, thereby improving a board’s effectiveness and business performance.

This paper makes a theoretical contribution to the diversity and governance literature by providing a better understanding of the relationship between board gender diversity and firm performance. It considers the influence of women on the board through a holistic framework, analyzing the mediating role of the board’s effectiveness.