Advertisement

Journal of Business Ethics

, Volume 160, Issue 2, pp 445–462 | Cite as

Gender Stereotyping by Location, Female Director Appointments and Financial Performance

  • Ying Li Compton
  • Sok-Hyon KangEmail author
  • Zinan Zhu
Original Paper

Abstract

We investigate whether female board representation and firms’ financial performance are related and whether the relationship differs for firms located in more prejudicial environments. As a proxy for prejudicial environment, we use two geographical indicators: (1) whether a firm is headquartered in a conservative “red” state (which tends to vote for Republican candidates) or in a liberal “blue” state (which tends to vote for Democratic candidates) and (2) whether the firm is located in regions where residents possess more stereotypical attitudes about gender equality. We find that both financial performance and female board representation are lower for firms headquartered in red states when compared to those in blue states, and we find similar results for firms located in regions where residents hold more gender-stereotypical views. However, financial performance improves when female directors are present regardless of the firm’s location. Evidence also shows that the incremental improvement in performance measured by Tobin’s q is greater in red-state than in blue-state companies and in regions where residents hold more gender-stereotypical views. The overall results imply that gender stereotyping holds back financial performance and that female directors help improve financial performance.

Keywords

Firm performance Female directorship Gender stereotyping 

Notes

Acknowledgement

We thank Renee Adams, Bill Baber, Menghai Gao, Peter Glick, Joon Seok Moon, Michael Pevzner, Jason Sloetzer, and colleagues and workshop participants at the George Washington University, Georgetown University, University of Baltimore, 2015 American Accounting Association Annual Meeting, and the European Accounting Association Annual Congress, for helpful comments. We are indebted to two anonymous reviewers and the section editor for their valuable comments and suggestions. We thank The General Social Survey (GSS) which is a project of the independent research organization NORC at the University of Chicago, with principal funding from the National Science Foundation. The authors are listed in alphabetical order.

Funding

This study was not funded by any institutions or interest groups other than the home institution of the respective authors.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that each of them has no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

The authors did not conduct any studies with human participants or animals.

References

  1. Adams, R. B., & Ferreira, D. (2009). Women in the boardroom and their impact on governance and performance. Journal of Financial Economics, 94(2), 291–309.Google Scholar
  2. Adams, R. B., Hermalin, B., & Weisbach, M. (2010). The role of boards of directors in corporate governance: A conceptual framework and survey. Journal of Economic Literature, 48(1), 58–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Adams, R. B., & Kirchmaier, T. (2013). “From female labor force participation to boardroom gender diversity.” Financial market group discussion paper, University of New South Wales and London School of Economics.Google Scholar
  4. Ahern, K. R., & Dittmar, A. K. (2012). The changing of the boards: The impact on firm valuation of mandated female board representation. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 127(1), 137–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Apesteguia, J., Azmat, G., & Iriberri, N. (2012). The impact of gender composition on team performance and decision making: Evidence from the field. Management Science, 58(1), 78–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Arrow, K. J. (1971). The Theory of Discrimination. In O. Ashenfelter and A. Rees (Eds.), Discrimination in Labor Markets, (pp. 3–33). Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Becker, G. S. (1957). The Economics of Discrimination. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  8. Bertrand, M. (2009). CEOs. Annual Review of Economics, 1(1), 121–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bertrand, M., Chugh, D., & Mullanathan, S. (2005). New approach to discrimination: Implicit discrimination. American Economic Review, 95(2), 94–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bilimoria, D. (2000). Building the business case for women corporate directors. In R. J. Burke & M. Mattis (Eds.) Women on Corporate Boards of Directors: International Challenges and Opportunities.Google Scholar
  11. Brammer, S., Millington, A., & Pavelin, S. (2007). Gender and ethnic diversity among UK corporate boards. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 15(2), 393–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Burke, R. J. (1997). ‘Women on corporate boards of directors—a needed resource”. Journal of Business Ethics, 16, 909–915.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Burke, R. J. 2000. “Company size, board size and the number of women directors.” In R. J. Burke & M. C. Mattis (Eds.) Women on Corporate Boards of Directors: International challenges and opportunities.Google Scholar
  14. Campbell, K., & Minguez-Vera, A. (2008). Gender diversity in the boardroom and firm financial performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 83(3), 435–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Carter, D., Simkins, B., & Simpson, W. G. (2003). Corporate governance, board diversity, and firm value. Financial Review, 38, 33–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Di Giuli, A., & Kostovetsky, L. 2012. Are Red or Blue Companies More Likely to go Green? Politics and Corporate Social Responsibility. University of Rochester Working Paper.Google Scholar
  17. Doldor, E., Vinnicombe, S., Gaughan, M., & Sealy, R. (2012). Gender diversity on boards: The appointment process and the role of executive search firms. Equality and Human Rights Commission Research report. p. 85.Google Scholar
  18. Erhardt, N. L., Werbel, J. D., & Shrader, C. B. (2003). Board of director diversity and firm financial performance. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 11(2), 102–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Eyring, A., & Stead, B. A. (1998). Shattering the glass ceiling: Some successful corporate practices. Journal of Business Ethics, 17, 245–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fama, E. F., & French, K. R. (1997). Industry costs of equity. Journal of Financial Economics, 43(2), 153–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Federico, C., & Sidanius, J. (2002). Racism, ideology, and affirmative action revisited: The antecedents and consequences of ‘principled objections’ to affirmative action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(4), 488–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1996). The ambivalent sexism inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(3), 491–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Groysberg, B., & Bell, D. (2013). Dysfunction in the boardroom: Understanding the persistent gender gap at the highest levels. Harvard Business Review, 91(6), 88–95.Google Scholar
  24. Guiso, L., Monte, F., Sapienza, P., & Zingales, L. (2008). Culture, gender, and math. Science, 320(5880), 1164–1165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Guthrie, D., & Roth, L. M. (1999). The state, courts, and equal opportunities for female CEOs in U.S. organizations: Specifying institutional mechanisms. Social Forces, 78(2), 511–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hellerstein, J. K., Neumark, D., & Troske, K. R. (2002). Market forces and sex discrimination. The Journal of Human Resources, 37(2), 353–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hermalin, B., & Weisbach, M. (2003). Boards of directors as an endogenously determined institution: A survey of the economic literature. Economic Policy Review, 9, 7–26.Google Scholar
  28. Hull, C. E., & Rothenberg, S. (2008). Firm performance: The interactions of corporate social performance with innovation and industry differentiation. Strategic Management Journal, 29(7), 781–789.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Janssen, S., Sartore, S. T., & Backes-Gellner, U. (2016). Discriminatory social attitudes and varying gender pay gaps within firms. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 69(1), 253–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. John, K., Knyazava, A., & Knyazava, D. (2011). Does geography matter?: Firm location and corporate dividend policy. Journal of Financial Economics, 101(3), 533–551.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Jost, J. T., Glaser, J. F., Sulloway, F., & Kruglanski, A. (2003). Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 339–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Knyazera, A., Knyazeva, D., & Masulis, R. W. (2013). The supply of corporate directors and board independence. Review of Financial Studies, 26(6), 1561–1605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Matsa, D. A., & Miller, A. R. (2013). A female style in corporate leadership? Evidence from quotas. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 5(3), 136–169.Google Scholar
  34. May, A. M., & McGarvey, M. G. (2017). “Gender, occupational segregation, and the cultural divide: Are red states different than blue states?”. The Review of Regional Studies, 47, 175–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Miller, A. R., & Segal, C. (2016). Do Female Officers Improve Law Enforcement Quality? Effects on Crime Reporting and Domestic Violence. Working paper, University of Virginia and University of Zurich.Google Scholar
  36. Nosek, B. A., Smyth, F. L., Sriram, N., Lindner, N. M., Devos, T., Ayala, A., et al. (2009). National differences in gender-science stereotypes predict national sex differences in science and math achievement. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 106, 10593–10597.Google Scholar
  37. Oakley, J. G. (2000). Gender-based barriers to senior management positions: Understanding the scarcity of female CEOs. Journal of Business Ethics, 27, 321–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Pirinsky, C., & Wang, Q. (2006). Does corporate headquarters location matter for stock returns? Journal of Finance, 61, 1991–2015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Petersen, M. (2009). Estimating standard errors in finance panel data sets: Comparing approaches. Review of Financial Studies,22(1), 435–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Reyna, C., Henry, P. J., Korfmacher, W., & Tucker, A. (2006). Attributional stereotypes as cues for deservingness: Examining the role of principled conservatism in racial policy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 109–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Rose, C. (2007). Does female board representation influence firm performance? The danish evidence. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 15(2), 404–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Servaes, H., & Tamayo, A. (2013). The impact of corporate social responsibility on firm value: The role of customer awareness. Management Science, 59(5), 1045–1061.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Simpson, W. G., Carter, D., & D’Souza, F. (2010). “What do we know about women on boards?”. Journal of Applied Finance, 20(2), 27–39.Google Scholar
  44. Stephenson, K. & Raskow, S. (1993). Female representation in U.S. centralized private sector planning: The case of overlapping directorship. Journal of Economic Issues, 27(2), 459–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Sun, J., Liu, G., & Lan, G. (2011). Does female directorship on audit committees constrain earnings management?. Journal of Business Ethics, 99, 369–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Surroca, J., Tribo, J. A., & Waddock, S. (2010). Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: The role of intangible resources. Strategic Management Journal, 31, 463–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Wetherell, G., Brandt, M. J., & Reyna, C. (2013). Discrimination across the ideological divide: The role of value violations and abstract values in discrimination by liberals and conservatives. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 4(6), 658–667.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Wolfers, J. (2006). Diagnosing discrimination: Stock returns and CEO gender. Journal of the European Economic Association, 4(2–3), 531–541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.U.S. Securities and Exchange CommissionWashingtonUSA
  2. 2.The George Washington University School of BusinessWashingtonUSA
  3. 3.Nanyang Technological UniversitySingaporeSingapore

Personalised recommendations