Journal of Business Ethics

, Volume 97, Issue 2, pp 207–221 | Cite as

The Impact of Board Diversity and Gender Composition on Corporate Social Responsibility and Firm Reputation

  • Stephen BearEmail author
  • Noushi Rahman
  • Corinne Post


This article explores how the diversity of board resources and the number of women on boards affect firms’ corporate social responsibility (CSR) ratings, and how, in turn, CSR influences corporate reputation. In addition, this article examines whether CSR ratings mediate the relationships among board resource diversity, gender composition, and corporate reputation. The OLS regression results using lagged data for independent and control variables were statistically significant for the gender composition hypotheses, but not for the resource diversity-based hypotheses. CSR ratings had a positive impact on reputation and mediated the relationship between the number of women on the board and corporate reputation.


corporate reputation corporate social responsibility board diversity boards of directors gender composition 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.



We thank Alison Konrad for her valuable questions and suggestions to improve this manuscript; we also thank the three anonymous reviewers for their constructive feedback.


  1. Asch, S.: 1955, ‘Opinions and Social Influence’, Scientific American 193, 31-55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bantel, K. and Jackson, S.: 1989, ‘Top Management and Innovations in Banking: Does the Composition of the Top Team make a Difference?’, Strategic Management Journal 10, 107-124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barnett, M.: 2007, ‘Stakeholder Influence Capacity and the Variability of Financial Returns to Corporate Social Responsibility’, Academy of Management Review 32(3), 794-816.Google Scholar
  4. Baron, R. and Kenny, D.: 1986, ‘The Moderator-Mediator Variable Distinction in Social Psychological Research: Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Considerations’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 51(6), 1173-1182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Beckman, C. M. and Haunschild, P. R.: 2002, ‘Network Learning: The Effects of Partners’ Heterogeneity of Experience on Corporate Acquisitions’, Administrative Science Quarterly 47, 92-124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bernardi, R., Bean, D. F., and Weippert, K. M.:2002, ‘Signaling Gender Diversity Through Annual Report Pictures: A Research Note on Image Management. Accounting Auditing & Accountability Journal, 15(4), 609-616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bernardi, R., Bosco, S. and Columb, V. L.: 2009, ‘Does Female Representation on Boards of Directors Associate with the ‘Most Ethical Companies’ list?’, Corporate Reputation Review 12, 270-280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bernardi, R., Bosco, S., & Vassill, K.: 2006, ‘Does Female Representation on Boards of Directors Associate with Fortune’s 100 Best Companies to Work for List?’, Business & Society, 45(2), 235-248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bilimoria, D.: 2000, ‘Building the Business Case for Women Corporate Directors’, in R. Burke and M. Mattis (eds.), Women on Corporate Boards of Directors: International Challenges and Opportunities (Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht), pp. 25–40.Google Scholar
  10. Bontis, N., Booker, L. D. and Serenko, A.: 2007, ‘The Mediating Effect of Organizational Reputation on Customer Loyalty and Service Recommendation in the Banking Industry’, Management Decision 45, 1426-1445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Boyd, B.: 1990, ‘Corporate Linkages and Organizational Environment: A Test of the Resourcce Dependence Model’, Strategic Management Journal 11, 419-430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Brammer, S., Millington, A. and Pavelin, S.: 2009, ‘Corporate Reputation and Women on the Board’, British Journal of Management 20(1), 17-29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Branco, M. and Rodrigues, L. C.: 2006, ‘Corporate Social Responsibility and Resource-Based Perspectives’, Journal of Business Ethics, 69, 111-132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Brewer, M. B. and Kramer, R. M.: 1985, ‘The Psychology of Intergroup Attitudes and Behavior’, Annual Review of Psychology, 36, 219-243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Brown, B. and Perry, S.: 1995, ‘Some Additional Thoughts on Halo-Removed Fortune Residuals’, Business & Society 34(2), 236-241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Carpenter, M. A. and Westphal, J. D.: 2001, ‘The Strategic Context of External Network Ties: Examining the Impact of Director Appointments on Board Involvement in Strategic Decision Making’, Academy of Management Journal 44, 639-660.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Daily, C. M. and D. R. Dalton: 2003, ‘Women in the Boardroom: A Business Imperative’, Journal of Business Strategy 24(5), 8–9.Google Scholar
  18. DiTomaso, N. and C. Post: 2007, ‘Diversity’, in S. R. Clegg and J. Bailey (eds.), International Encyclopedia of Organization Studies (Sage, Thousand Oaks), pp. 397–401.Google Scholar
  19. Donker, H., Poff, D. and Zahir, S.: 2008, ‘Corporate Values, Codes of Ethics, and Firm Performance: A Look at the Canadian Context’, Journal of Business Ethics 82(3), 527-537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dowling, G.: 2006, ‘How Good Corporate Reputations Create Corporate Value’, Corporate Reputation Review 9, 134-143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Eagly, A. H., Johannesen-Schmidt, M. C. and van Engen, M. L.: 2003, ‘Transformational, Transactional, and Laissez-Faire Leadership Styles: A Meta-Analysis Comparing Women and Men’, Psychological Bulletin 129(4), 569-591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Eagly, A. H. and Johnson, B. T.: 1990, ‘Gender and Leadership Style: A Meta-Analysis’, Psychological Bulletin, 108(2), 233-256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Eisenhardt, K.: 1989, ‘Agency Theory: An Assessment and Review’, Academy of Management Review 14(1), 57–74.Google Scholar
  24. Ellen, P. S., Webb, D. J. and Mohr, L. A.: 2006, ‘Building Corporate Associations: Consumer Attributions for Corporate Socially Responsible Programs’, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 34, 147-157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Erkut, S., Kramer, V. W. and Konrad, A. M.: 2008, ‘Critical Mass: Does the Number of Women on a Corporate Board Make a Difference?’ in S. Vinnicombe, R. J. Burke, D. Bilimoria, and M. Huse (eds.), Women On Corporate Boards of Directors: International Research and Practice (Edward Edgar, Cheltenham, UK), pp. 350-366.Google Scholar
  26. Fama, E. F. and Jensen, M. C.: 1983, ‘Agency Problems and Residual Claims’, Journal of Law & Economics 26(2), 327-350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Fombrun, C. J.: 2006, ‘Corporate Governance’, Corporate Reputation Review 8, 267-271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Fombrun, C. J. and N. A. Gardberg: 2000, ‘Opportunity Platforms Safety Nets: Corporate Citizenship and Reputational Risk’, Business & Society Review 105(1), 85–106.Google Scholar
  29. Fombrun, C. and Shanley, M.: 1990, ‘What’s in a Name? Reputation Building and Corporate Strategy’, Academy of Management Journal 33, 233-258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Fryxell, G. and Wang, J.: 1994, ‘The Fortune Corporate ‘Reputation’ Index: Reputation for What?’, Journal of Management 20(1), 1-14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Gardberg, N. A. and Fombrun, C. J.: 2006, ‘Corporate Citizenship: Creating Intangible Assets Across Institutional Environments’, Academy of Management Review 31, 329-346.Google Scholar
  32. Gatewood, R. D., Gowan, M.A. and Lautenschlager, G. J.: 1993, ‘Corporate Image, Recruitment Image and Initial Job Choice’, Academy of Management Journal 36, 414-427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Harrison, D. A. and Klein, K. J.: 2007, ‘What’s the Difference? Diversity Constructs as Variety, or Disparity in Organizations’, Academy of Management Review 32, 1199-1228.Google Scholar
  34. Hillman, A. J., Cannella Jr, A. A., Harris, I. C.: 2002, ‘Women and Racial Minorities in the Boardroom: How do Directors Differ?’, Journal of Management 28, 747-763.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hillman, A. J., Cannella, Jr. A. A. and Paetzold, R. I.: 2000, ‘The Resource Depenedence Role of Corporate Directors: Strategic Adaptation of Board Composition in Response to Environmental Change’, Journal of Management Studies 37, 235-255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Hillman, A. J. and Dalziel, T.: 2003, ‘Boards of Directors and Firm Performance: Integrating Agency and Resource Dependence Perspectives’, Academy of Management Review 28, 383-396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Jensen, M. and Meckling, W.: 1976, ‘Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs and Ownership Structure’, Journal of Financial Economics 3(4), 305-360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Johnson, R. A. and Greening, D. W.: 1999, ‘The effects of Corporate Governance and Institutional Ownership Types on Corporate Social Performance’, Academy of Management Journal 42(5), 564-576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Joshi, A. and Roh, H.: 2009, ‘The Role of Context in Work Team Diversity Research: A Meta-Analytic Review’, Academy of Management Journal 52(3), 599-628.Google Scholar
  40. Kakabadse, A.: 2007, ‘Being Responsible: Boards are Reexamining the Bottom Line’, Leadership in Action 27(1), 3-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kanter, R. M.: 1997a, Men and Women of the Corporation, (Basic Books, New York, NY).Google Scholar
  42. Kanter, R. M.: 1977b ‘Some Effects of Proportions on Group Life: Skewed Sex Ratios and Responses to Toke Women’, American Journal of Sociology, 82(5), 965-990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Konrad, A., Kramer, V. and Erkut, S.: 2008, ‘Critical Mass: The Impact of Three or More Women on Corporate Boards’, Organizational Dynamics 37(2), 145-164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Kramer, V. W., A. Konrad and S. Erkut: 2006, ‘Critical Mass on Corporate Boards: Why Three or More Women Enhance Governance’, Report No. WCW 11, Wellesley Centers for Women, Wellesley, MA.Google Scholar
  45. Lord, C. G and Saenz, D. S.: 1985, ‘Memory Deficits and Memory Surfeits: Differential Cognitive Consequences of Tokenism for Tokens and Observers’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 49, 918-926.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Mattingly, J. and Berman, S.: 2006, ‘Measurement of Corporate Social Action: Discovering Taxonomy in the Kinder Lydenburg Domini Ratings Data’, Business & Society 45(1), 20-46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. McCorkindale, T.: 2008, ‘Does Familiarity Breed Contempt?: Analyses of the Relationship among Company Familiarity, Company Reputation, Company Citizenship, and Company Personality on Corporate Equity’, Public Relations Review 34, 392-395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. McGuire, J. B., Sundgren, A. and Schneeweis, T.: 1988, ‘Corporate Social Responsibility and Firm Financial Performance’, Academy of Management Journal 31, 854-872.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Nemeth, C. J.: 1986, ‘Differential Contributions of Majority and Minority Influence’, Psychological Review, 93(1), 23-32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Pfau, M., Haigh, M., Sims, J. and Wigley, S.: 2008, ‘The Influence of Corporate Social Responsibility Campaigns on Public Opinion’, Corporate Reputation Review 11(2), 145-154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Pfeffer, J.: 1972, ‘Size and Composition of Corporate Boards of Directors: The Organization and its Environment’, Administrative Science Quarterly 17, 218-228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Pfeffer, J. and Salancik, G.: 1978, The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective, (Harper & Row, NY, NY).Google Scholar
  53. Poff, K. and Hamill, J.: 2008, ‘How Focused are the World’s Top-Rated Business Schools on Educating Women for Global Management?’, Journal of Business Ethics 83(1), 65-83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Post, C., N. Rahman and E. Rubow: 2011, ‘Diversity in the Composition of Board of Directors and Environmental Corporate Social Responsibility (ECSR)’, Business & Society 49 (forthcoming).Google Scholar
  55. Preacher, K. and A. Hayes: 2004, ‘SPSS and SAS Procedures for Estimating Indirect Effects in Simple Mediation Models’, Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers 36(4), 717–731.Google Scholar
  56. Ragins, B.: 1998, ‘Gender Gap in the Executive Suite: CEOs and Female Executives Report on Breaking the Glass Ceiling’, Academy of Management Executive 12(1), 28–42.Google Scholar
  57. Ramirez, S. A.: 2003, ‘A Flaw in the Sarbanes-Oxley Reform: Can Diversity in the Boardroom Quell Corporate Corruption?’, St. John’s Law Review 77(4), 837-866.Google Scholar
  58. Riordan, C. M., Gatewood, R. D. and Bill, J. B.: 1997, ‘Corporate Image: Employee Reactions and Implications for Managing Corporate Social Performance’, Journal of Business Ethics 16, 401-412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Rudman, L. A. and Glick, P.: 2001, ‘Prescriptive Gender Stereotypes and Backlash Toward Agentic Women’, Journal of Social Issues, 57(4), 743-762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Russo, M. V. and Fouts, P. A.: 1997, ‘A Resource-based Perspective on Corporate Environmental Performance and Profitability’, Academy of Management Journal 40, 534-559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Sellers, P.: 2007, ‘Women on Boards (Not!)’, Fortune 156(8), 105-105.Google Scholar
  62. Singh, V., Terjesen, S. and Vinnicombe, S.: 2008, ‘Newly Appointed Directors in the Boardroom: How do Women and Men Differ’, European Management Journal 26(1), 48-58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Vanhamme, J. and Grobben, B.: 2009, ‘“Too Good to be True!”. The Effectiveness of CSR History in Countering Negative Publicity’, Journal of Business Ethics 85, 273-283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Wang, J. and Coffey, B.: 1992, ‘Board Composition and Corporate Philanthropy’, Journal of Business Ethics 11(10), 771-778.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Westphal, J. D. and Zajac, E. J.: 1995, ‘Who Shall Govern? CEO/Board Power, Demographic Similarity, and New Director Selection’, Administrative Science Quarterly 40, 60-83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Williams, R. J.: 2003, ‘Women on Corporate Boards of Directors and their Influence on Corporate Philanthropy’, Journal of Business Ethics 42, 1-10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Pace UniversityNew YorkU.S.A.
  2. 2.Lehigh UniversityBethlehemU.S.A.

Personalised recommendations