Gender diversity in the board, women’s leadership and business performance

Purpose: This paper investigates how gender diversity in top management—i.e., boardroom and top management positions—impacts business performance among Colombian public businesses. Design/methodology/approach: Building on the Upper Echelon theory which emphasizes that gender in an important characteristic that influences top management’s decision making, we employ panel data models on a sample of 54 Colombian public businesses for the period 2008-2015 to test the proposed hypotheses relating gender diversity and subsequent business performance. Findings: The results support that gender diversity is positively associated with subsequent business performance. More concretely, we find that the relationship between gender diversity at the top of the corporate hierarchy—in our case, as CEO and in the top management team—and subsequent performance becomes more evident when performance is linked to business operations (ROA), while the positive effect of women’s representation in the boardroom and subsequent performance is significant when performance is measured via shareholder-oriented metrics (ROE). Originality/value: Few studies have addressed the role of gender diversity on performance in developing economies. This study contributes to better understand how gender diversity impacts performance in contexts where women are underrepresented in the top management, and where the appointment of women directors or managers is not driven by regulatory pressures.Peer ReviewedPostprint (author's final draft

Internal representation and factional faultlines as antecedents for board performance in social enterprises

There is an increasing scholarly interest in how social enterprises manage their hybrid nature. As hybrid organizational forms, social enterprises combine mission-driven social goals and revenue generating activities in a variety of organizational constellations and in diverse institutional contexts. Acknowledging the potentially conflicting demands that institutional environments impose on social enterprises there is an increasing research interest in the existence and proliferation of these conflicting demands at the organizational level. Some researchers have pointed to the importance of particular management practices and governance characteristics – such as authority relations and internal representation – as mechanisms to deal with the conflicting demands at the organizational level. This paper adds to this stream of literature by taking into account the organizational level dynamics of internal representation and the proliferation of factional groups in the boards of directors of hybrid organizational forms and their impact on board performance, ultimately influencing the organizational performance

Evaluating the board of directors of financial intermediaries: competencies, effectiveness and performance

This paper proposes a model for analysing the effectiveness of boards of directors of financial intermediaries. The European Union recommends that companies in the Member States annually evaluate the performance of their boards. The degree of effectiveness of a board should be appreciated taking into account the business structure, ownership and institutional model of the firm, on the one hand, and the characteristics of its board, in terms of its composition, structure and skills, on the other hand. This paper also outlines the specificity of the role played by boards of directors in financial intermediaries, also in the light of the industry standards and regulations, and provides an overview of the board assessment methodologies proposed in literature, or developed by listed companies on the Anglo-saxon markets, with a view to considering their applicability to the financial sector. Lastly, and based on the foregoing, the paper proposes a model for diagnosing the conditions that need to be put into place to ensure the suitability of boards of directors and to evaluate the performance of both the board as a whole and the individual directors.Corporate Governance; Board of Directors; Performance

Pathways to Accountability II

This report summarises the results of the 2009-2010 review process on the One World Trust Global Accountability Framework and the piloting of the draft framework during 2011, and presents the full One World Trust Pathways to Accountability II indicator framework. Our work in this field work is motivated by a concern about the persisting weakness and insufficient effectiveness of global organisations from all sectors in responding to the challenge of delivering global public goods to citizens and communities, the very people whom they claim to serve and benefit, and who are most often dependent on them

The Status of Civil Society in Zambia: Challenges and Future Prospects

This report analyses this multi-faceted nature of CSOs, whether formal or informal in nature, in order to gain a greater understanding of the characteristics that make them a valued partner in the development process, the challenges they encounter, and the capabilities most needed to play their expected roles

Governance Structures, Voluntary Disclosures and Public Accountability: The Case of UK Higher Education Institutions

Purpose: We investigate the extent of voluntary disclosures in UK higher education institutions’ (HEIs) annual reports and examine whether internal governance structures influence disclosure in the period following major reform and funding constraints. Design/methodology/approach: We adopt a modified version of Coy and Dixon’s (2004) public accountability index, referred to in this paper as a public accountability and transparency index (PATI), to measure the extent of voluntary disclosures in 130 UK HEIs’ annual reports. Informed by a multi-theoretical framework drawn from public accountability, legitimacy, resource dependence and stakeholder perspectives, we propose that the characteristics of governing and executive structures in UK universities influence the extent of their voluntary disclosures. Findings: We find a large degree of variability in the level of voluntary disclosures by universities and an overall relatively low level of PATI (44%), particularly with regards to the disclosure of teaching/research outcomes. We also find that audit committee quality, governing board diversity, governor independence, and the presence of a governance committee are associated with the level of disclosure. Finally, we find that the interaction between executive team characteristics and governance variables enhances the level of voluntary disclosures, thereby providing support for the continued relevance of a ‘shared’ leadership in the HEIs’ sector towards enhancing accountability and transparency in HEIs. Research limitations/implications: In spite of significant funding cuts, regulatory reforms and competitive challenges, the level of voluntary disclosure by UK HEIs remains low. Whilst the role of selected governance mechanisms and ‘shared leadership’ in improving disclosure, is asserted, the varying level and selective basis of the disclosures across the surveyed HEIs suggest that the public accountability motive is weaker relative to the other motives underpinned by stakeholder, legitimacy and resource dependence perspectives. Originality/value: This is the first study which explores the association between HEI governance structures, managerial characteristics and the level of disclosure in UK HEIs

From Value Protection to Value Creation: Rethinking Corporate Governance Standards for Firm Innovation

A company’s pro-innovation needs are often met by the exploitation of its resources, widely defined. The resource-based theory of the firm provides immense empirical insights into how a firm’s corporate governance factors can contribute to promoting innovation. However, these implications may conflict with the prevailing standards of corporate governance imposed on many securities markets for listed companies, which have developed based on theoretical models supporting a shareholder-centered and agency-based theory of the firm. Although prevailing corporate governance standards can to an extent support firm innovation, tensions are created in some circumstances where companies pit their corporate governance compliance against resource-based needs that promote innovation. In the present context of steady internationalization and convergence in corporate governance standards in global securities markets towards a shareholder-centered agency-based model, we argue that there is a need to provide some room for accommodating the resource-based needs for companies in relation to promoting innovation. We explore a number of options and suggest that the most practicable option would be the development of recognized exceptions that deviate from prevailing corporate governance standards. We further suggest as to how an exceptions-based regime can be implemented in the U.K. and U.S., comparing the rules-based regime in the U.S. with the principles-based regime in the U.K

Board of Directors’ Involvement in Strategic Decision Making Process: Definition and Literature Review.

Over the past few years, research in corporate governance has devoted increased attention to board of directors’ involvement in the strategic decision making process. But in spite of its growing interest, the literature provides theoretical pluralism and mixed empirical results. Indeed, the concept has not been well defined by past studies and there is no consensus about its operationalization. In this paper, we review the literature on board’s involvement in the strategic decision making process and question the definitions of this phenomenon and if an operational measure can be proposed for future research.Board of Directors; Strategic Decision Making Process; Board involvement; Corporate Governance.

Nose In, Fingers Out:Essays on Board-Governance Effectiveness

Boards of directors play a crucial role in the governance of organizations. Board-governance effectiveness therefore is a burgeoning research area. In finding an answer to the question what constitutes good corporate governance, much of the governance literature has been dominated by principal-agent theoretic reasoning. Unfortunately, this has generally failed to materialize in unequivocal findings. The paucity of consistent empirical findings has prompted calls for a richer and more nuanced behaviorally oriented understanding of boards. In this dissertation, I respond to these calls for such a more nuanced understanding of board-governance effectiveness by providing a more socialized, socio-psychological interpretation of what drives board functioning behind the closed doors of the boardroom. Specifically, the social embeddedness perspective I propose emphasizes that boards are social entities and that directors are individuals operating within these social entities. That is, by examining director behavior in a socially situated context and in integrating agency-theoretic insights with a more socialized perspective on boards, this dissertation aims to provide a more in-depth understanding of board functioning. In so doing, a significant contribution of this dissertation is that it offers insights that prompt a rethink of several aspects of the current (under-socialized) perspective on what drives board-governance effectiveness

Organizational Misconduct: Beyond the Principal-Agent Model

This article demonstrates that, at least since the adoption of the Organizational Sentencing Guidelines in 1991, the United States legal regime has been moving away from a system of strict vicarious liability toward a system of duty-based organizational liability. Under this system, organizational liability for agent misconduct is dependant on whether or not the organization has exercised due care to avoid the harm in question, rather than under traditional agency principles of respondeat superior. Courts and agencies typically evaluate the level of care exercised by the organization by inquiring whether the organization had in place internal compliance structures ostensibly designed to detect and discourage such conduct. I argue, however, that any internal compliance-based organizational liability regime is likely to fail because courts and agencies lack sufficient information about the effectiveness of such structures. As a result, an internal compliance-based liability system encourages the implementation of largely cosmetic internal compliance structures that reduce legal liability without reducing the incidence of organizational misconduct. Furthermore, a review of the empirical literature on the effectiveness of internal compliance structures suggests that many organizations have adopted precisely this cosmetic approach to internal compliance. This leads to two potential problems: first, an underdeterrence of organizational misconduct and, second, a proliferation of costly but ineffective internal compliance structures