Skip to main content

Women and Employee-Elected Board Members, and Their Contributions to Board Control Tasks

Abstract

We present results from a study about women and employee-elected board members, and fill some of the gaps in the literature about their contribution to board effectiveness. The empirical data are from a unique data set of Norwegian firms. Board effectiveness is evaluated in relation to board control tasks, including board corporate social responsibility (CSR) involvement. We found that the contributions of women and employee-elected board members varied depending on the board tasks studied. In the article we also explored the effects of the esteem of the women and employee-elected board members, and we used creative discussions in the boardroom as a mediating variable. Previous board research, including research about women and employee-elected directors, questions if the board members contribute to board effectiveness. The main message from this study is that it may be more important to ask how, rather than if, women and employee-elected board members contribute, and we need to open the black box of actual board behavior to explore how they may contribute.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  • Arfken, D.E., Bellar, S. L., & Helms, M. M. (2004). The ultimate glass ceiling revisited: The presence of women on corporate boards. Journal of Business Ethics, 50, 177–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baysinger, B., & Hoskisson, R. E. (1990). The composition of boards of directors and strategic control: Effects on corporate strategy. Academy of Management Review, 15, 72–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bilimoria, D. (2000). Building the business for women directors. In R.J. Burke, & M. C. Mattis (eds.), Women on corporate boards: International challenges and opportunities (pp 25–40). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blair, M. (1995). Ownership and control. Rethinking corporate governance for the twenty-first century. Washington DC: The Brookings Institution.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blair, M., & Stout, L. (2001). Corporate accountability: Director accountability and the mediating role of the corporate board. Washington University Law Quarterly, 79, 403–447.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brodbeck, F. C., Kerschreiter, R., Schulz-Hardt, A. M. S. (2007). Group decision making under conditions of distributed knowledge: The information asymmetries model. Academy of Management Review, 32, 459–479.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burgess, Z., & Tharenou, P. (2002). Women board directors: Characteristics of the few. Journal of Business Ethics, 37, 39–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burke, R. J., & Mattis, M. (2005). Supporting women’s career advancement: Challenges and opportunities. Chetlenham, UK: Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bøhren, ø. and R. ø. Strøm: 2005, The Value Creating Board: Theory and Evidence. Norwegian School of Management, Research Report 8/2005 (BI, Oslo)

  • Cadbury, A. (2002). Corporate governance and chairmanship. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carly, M.: 2005, Board-Level Employee Representatives in Nine Countries: A Snapshot. Transfer 2/2005 (ETUI-RHS, Brussel)

  • Catalyst. (2004). The bottom line: Connecting corporate performance and gender diversity. New York: Catalyst.

    Google Scholar 

  • Catalyst. (2005). The CEO view: Women on corporate boards. New York: Catalyst.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coffey, B. S., & Wang, J. (1998). Board diversity and managerial control as predictors of corporate social performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 17 , 1595–1603.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daily, C. M., Certo, S. T., & Dalton, D. R. (1999). A decade of corporate women: Some progress in the boardroom, none in the executive suite. Strategic Management Journal, 20 , 93–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daily, C. M., & Dalton, D. R. (2003). Women in the boardroom: A business imperative. Journal of Business Strategy, 24(5), 8–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daily, C., Dalton, D., & Cannella, A. (2003). Corporate governance: Decades of dialogue and data. Academy of Management Review, 28, 371–382.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engelstad, P. H., & Qvale, T. U. (1997). Innsyn og innflytelse: Styre og bedriftsforsamling. Oslo: Tiden Norsk Forlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erhardt, N.L., Werbel, J.D., & Schrader, C·B. (2003). Board of directors diversity and firm financial performance. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 11, 102–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forbes, D. P., & Milliken, F. J. (1999). Cognition and corporate governance: Understanding boards of directors as strategic decision-making groups. Academy of Management Review, 24, 489–505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghoshal, S. (2005). Bad management theories are destroying good management practices. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4, 75–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, J. N., & Roe, M. (2004). Convergence and persistence in corporate governance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grandori, A. (Ed.) (2004). Corporate Governance and Firm Organisation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grosser, K., & Moon, J. (2005). Gender mainstreaming and corporate social responsibility: Reporting workplace issues. Journal of Business Ethics, 62, 327–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hammer, T. H., Curral, S. C., & Stern, R. N. (1991). Worker representation on boards of directors: A study of competing roles. Industrial and Labor Relation Review, 44, 661–680.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hillman, A. J., & Dalziel, T. (2003). Board of directors and firm performance: Integrating agency and resource dependence perspectives. Academy of Management Review, 28, 383–396.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huse, M. (2005). Accountability and creating accountability: A framework for exploring behavioural perspectives on boards and governance. British Journal of Management, 16, s65–s79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huse, M. (2007). Boards, governance and value creation: The human side of corporate governance. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huse, M. (Ed.) (2009). The value creating board: Corporate governance and organizational behaviour. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huse, M., Minichilli, A., & Schøning, M. (2005). The value of process-oriented boardroom dynamics. Organizational Dynamics, 34, 285–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huse, M., & Solberg, A. G. (2006). Gender related boardroom dynamics: How women make and can make contributions on corporate boards. Women in Management Review, 21 , 113–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ibrahim, N.A., & Angelides, J.P. (1994). Effect of board members’ gender on corporate social responsiveness orientation. Journal of Applied Business Research, 10, 35–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnsen, S.: 1991, ‹Mer makt til de ansatte’, Dagens Næringsliv, Oslo, 9 January, p. 12

  • Judge, W. Q., Jr., & Zeithaml, C. P. (1992).Institutional and strategic choice perspectives on board involvement in the strategic decision process. Academy of Management Journal, 35, 766–794.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jürgens, U., Sadowski, D., Schuppert, G.F., & Weiss, M. (Eds.) (2007). Perspektiven der Corporate Governance: Bestimmungsfaktoren unternehmerisher Entscheidungsprozesse und Mitwirkung der Arbeitnehmer. Berlin: Nomos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kochan, T. A. (2003). Restoring trust in American corporations: Addressing the root cause. Journal of Management and Governance, 7, 223–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kramer, V. W., A. M. Konrad and S. Erkut: 2006, Critical Mass on Corporate Boards: Why Three or More Women Enhance Governance. Report No. 11 (Wellesley Centers for Women, Wellesley, MA)

  • Leblanc, R., & Gillies, J. (2005). Inside the boardroom: How boards really work and the coming revolution in corporate governance. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Letendre L. (2004). The dynamics of the boardroom. Academy of Management Executive, 18 (1), 101–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levinson, K.: 2001, Anställdas representation i foretaksstyrelser. Arbeidsmarknad & Arbeidsliv, 2001/2 (Arbetslivsinstitutet, Stockholm)

  • Loden, M. (1985). Feminine leadership or how to succeed in business without being one of the boys. Times Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCabe, A. C., Ingram, R., & Dato-on, M. C. (2006). The business ethics and gender. Journal of Business Ethics, 64, 101–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McInerney-Lacomb, N., Bilimoria, D., & Salipante, P. F. (2008). Championing the discussion of tough issues : How women corporate directors contribute to board deliberations. In S. Vinnicombe, V.Singh, R. Burke, D. Bilimoria, & M. Huse (Eds.) Women on corporate boards: Research and practice. London: Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • McNulty, T., & Pettigrew, A. (1999). Strategists on the board. Organisation Studies, 20, 47–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milliken, F.J., & Martin, L. L. (1996). Searching for common treads: Understanding the multiple effects of diversity in organizational groups. Academy of Management Review, 21, 402–433.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Minichilli, A., & Hansen, C. (2007). The board advisory tasks in small firms and the event of crises. Journal of Management and Governance, 11, 5–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearce, J. A., & Zahra, S. A. (1991). The relative power of the CEOs and boards of directors: Associations with corporate performance. Strategic Management Journal, 12, 135–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pettigrew, A. (1992). On studying managerial elites. Strategic Management Journal 13, s163–s182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pugliese, A., & Wenstøp, P. Z. (2007). Board members’ contribution to strategic decision-making in small firms. Journal of Management and Governance, 11, 383–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pye, A. (2004). The importance of context and time for understanding board behavior: Some lessons from social capital research”, International Studies of Management and Organization, 34 (2), 63–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Randøy, T., S. Thomsen and L. Oxelheim: 2006, A Nordic Perspective on Board Diversity (NICe-Report, Oslo)

  • Ravasi, D., & Zattoni, A. (2006). Exploring the political side of board involvement in strategy: a study of mixed-ownership institutions. Journal of Management Studies, 43, 1673–1703.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rindova, V. (1999). What corporate boards have to do with strategy: A contingency perspective. Journal of Management Studies, 36, 953–975.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, J., McNulty, T., & Stiles, P. (2005). Beyond agency conceptions of the work of the non-executive director: Creating accountability in the boardroom. British Journal of Management, 16, s5–s26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, G., & Dechant, K. (1997). Building a business case for diversity. Academy of Management Executive, 11 (3), 21–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose, C. (2007). Does female board representation influence firm performance? The Danish evidence. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 15, 404–413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosener, J.B. (1990). Way women lead. Harvards Business Review, 68, 119–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosener, J.B. (1995). America’s competitive secret: Utilizing women as management strategy. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruigrok, W., Peck, S., & Tacheva, S. (2007). Nationality and gender diversity on Swiss corporate boards. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 15, 546–557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, M. S., Dunfee, T.W., & Kline, M.J. (2005). Tone at the top: An ethical code for directors?. Journal of Business Ethics, 58, 79–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Selby, C·C. (2000). From male locker room to co-ed board room: A twenty-five year perspective. In R. Burke, & M. Mattis (Eds.) Women on corporate board of directors. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sellevoll, T., M. Huse and C. Hansen: 2007, The Value Creating Board: Results from the ‹Follow-Up Surveys’ 2005/2006 in Norwegian Firms. Norwegian School of Management Research Report 2/2007 (BI, Oslo)

  • Simons, T., Pelled, H.L., & Smith, K. (1999). Making use of differences: Diversity, debate and decision comprehensiveness in top management teams. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 662–673.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singh, V., & Vinnicombe, S. (2003a). The 2002 female FTSE index and women directors. Women in Management Review, 18, 349–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singh, V. and S. Vinnicombe: 2003b, Women Pass a Milestone: 101 Directorships on the FTSE 100 Boards – The Female Report 2003. Report from Centre for developing women business leaders. Cranfield School of Management, Cranfield

  • Singh, V., & Vinnicombe, S. (2004). Why so few women directors in top UK boardrooms? Evidence and theoretical explanations. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 12, 479–488.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singh, V.,Vinnicombe, S., & Johnson, P. (2001). Women directors on top UK boards. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 9, 206–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stiles, P., & Taylor, B. (2001). Boards at work: How directors view their roles and responsibilities. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sundaramurthy, C., & Lewis, M. (2003). Control and collaboration: Paradoxes of governance. Academy of Management Review, 28, 397–415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tacheva, S. and M. Huse: 2006, ‹Women Directors and Board Task Performance: Mediating and Moderating Effects of Board Working Style’, in Boards and Governance. Best Paper Proceedings European Academy of Management, May 2006, pp. 103–120

  • Taylor, R.: 2005, Industrial Democracy and the European Traditions. Transfer 2/2005 (ETUI-RHS, Brussels)

  • Useem, M. (1984). Inner circle: Large corporations and the rise of business political activity in the U.S. and U.K. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van den Heuvel, J., van Gils, A., & Voordeckers, W. (2006). Board roles in small and medium-sized family businesses: Performance and importance. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 14, 467–485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Ees, H., van der Laan, G., & Postma, T.J.B.M. (2008). Effective board behavior in the Netherlands. European Management Journal, 26, 84–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westphal, J. D., & Milton, L.P. (2000). How experience and network ties affect the influence of demographic minorities on corporate boards. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45, 366–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, R.J. (2003). Women on corporate boards of directors and their influence on corporate philanthropy. Journal of Business Ethics, 42, 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S., & Pearce, J. A. (1989). Boards of directors and corporate financial performance: A review and integrative model. Journal of Management, 15, 291–334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zona, F., & Zattoni, A. (2007). Beyond the black box of demography: Board processes and task effectiveness within Italian firms. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 15, 852–864.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Morten Huse.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Huse, M., Nielsen, S.T. & Hagen, I.M. Women and Employee-Elected Board Members, and Their Contributions to Board Control Tasks. J Bus Ethics 89, 581–597 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-008-0018-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-008-0018-4

Keywords

  • boards of directors
  • corporate social responsibility
  • women directors
  • employee-elected directors
  • board control tasks
  • esteem
  • creative discussions