Advertisement

The Effects and the Mechanisms of Board Gender Diversity: Evidence from Financial Manipulation

  • Aida Sijamic Wahid
Original Paper

Abstract

This study examines the impact of board gender diversity on financial misconduct. The findings suggest firms with gender-diverse boards commit fewer financial reporting mistakes and engage in less fraud. The findings hold after accounting for the potentially endogenous nature of board demographic characteristics via instrumental variable approach. Furthermore, the findings are consistent in pre- and post-regulation (Sarbanes–Oxley) periods and hold for firms with good and bad governance. The findings do not seem driven by differences in effort or quality, in terms of independence and expertise, of female and male directors. The benefit derived from increasing the number of female directors on corporate boards seems to diminish at higher levels of gender diversity, indicating that impact of gender diversity on decreasing the likelihood of financial misconduct may be a result of a change to board group dynamics.

Keywords

Corporate governance Board of directors Gender Board composition Board diversity Accounting quality Restatement 

JEL Classification

G10 G30 G38 J10 J16 M41 

Notes

Acknowledgements

I gratefully acknowledge financial and research support at Harvard Business School and Rotman School of Management at the University of Toronto. I think seminar participants at Harvard University and University of Toronto

Funding

There are no funding sources to report; all data are obtained from publicly available sources or accessed via subscription-based databases paid for by the research funds provided by the University.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

I declare that I have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

References

  1. Adams, R. B., & Ferreira, D. (2009). Women in the boardroom and their impact on governance and performance. Journal of Financial Economics, 94, 291–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ahern, K., & Dittmar, A. K. (2012). The changing of the boards: The impact on firm valuation of mandated female board representation. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 127(1), 137–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bantel, K., & 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
  4. Becker, B., Cronqvist, H., & Fahlenbrach, R. (2011). Estimating the effects of large shareholders using a geographic instrument. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 46, 907–942.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Byrd, J., & Hickman, K. (1992). Do outside directors monitor managers? evidence from tender offer bids. Journal of Financial Economics, 32, 195–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cambell, K., & Minguez-Vera, A. (2008). Gender diversity in the boardroom and firm financial performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 83, 435–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Carter, D. A., Simkins, B. J., & Simpson, W. G. (2003). Corporate governance, board diversity, and firm value. The Financial Review, 38, 33–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Collins, D., Masli, A., Reitenga, A. L., & Sanchez, J. M. (2009). Earnings restatements, the Sarbanes–Oxley Act, and the disciplining of chief financial officers. Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Finance, 24(1), 1–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Core, J. E., Holthausen, R. H., & Larcker, D. F. (1999). Corporate governance, chief executive officer compensation, and firm performance. Journal of Financial Economics, 51, 371–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Desai, H., Hogan, C. E., & Wilkins, M. S. (2006). The reputational penalty for aggressive accounting: Earnings restatements and management turnover. The Accounting Review, 81, 83–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dyck, A., Morse, A., & Zingales, L. (2010). Who blows the whistle on corporate fraud? Journal of Finance, 65, 2213–2253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Earley, P. C., & Mosakowski, E. (2000). Creating hybrid team cultures: An empirical test of transnational team functioning. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 26–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ely, R. J. (1994). The effects of organizational demographics and social identity on relationships among professional women. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39, 203–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ertimur, Y., Ferri, F., & Maber, D. (2012). Reputation penalties for poor monitoring of executive pay: Evidence from option backdating. Journal of Financial Economics, 104, 118–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Feroz, E. H., Park, K. J., & Pastena, V. (1991). The financial and market effects of the SEC’s accounting and auditing enforcement releases. Journal of Accounting Research, 29, 107–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Files, R., Swanson, E. P., & Tse, S. Y. (2009). Stealth disclosure of accounting restatements. The Accounting Review, 84, 1495–1520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Forbes, D., & Milliken, F. (1999). Cognition and corporate governance: Understanding boards of directors as strategic decision-making groups. The Academy of Management Review, 24(3), 489–505.Google Scholar
  18. Francis, B., Hasan, I., Park, J. C., & Qiang, W. (2015). Gender differences in financial reporting decision making: Evidence from accounting conservatism. Contemporary Accounting Research, 32(3), 1285–1318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gompers, P. A., Ishii, J. L., & Metrick, A. (2003). Corporate governance and equity prices. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118, 107–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Grundfest, J. A. (1993). Zen and the art of securities regulation. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 5, 4–8.Google Scholar
  21. Gul, F. A., Srinidhi, B., & Ng, A. C. (2011). Does board gender diversity improve the informativeness of stock prices? Journal of Accounting and Economics, 51, 314–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hennes, K. M., Leone, A. J., & Miller, B. P. (2008). The importance of distinguishing errors from irregularities in restatement research: The case of restatements and CEO/CFO turnover. The Accounting Review, 83(6), 1487–1519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hicks, R., & D. Tingley. (2012). Mediation: Stata module for causal mediation analysis and sensitivity analysis. Available at: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:boc:bocode:s457294.
  24. Hoffman, L. R. (1959). Homogeneity of member personality and its effect on group problem-solving. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 58(1), 27–32.Google Scholar
  25. Hoffman, L. R. & Maier, N. R. F. (1961). Quality and acceptance of problem solutions by members of homogeneous and heterogeneous groups. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 62(2), 401–407.Google Scholar
  26. Hoitash, U. (2011). Should independent board members with social ties to management disqualify themselves from serving on the board? Journal of Business Ethics, 99(3), 399–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Imai, K., Keele, L., & Tingley, D. (2010). A general approach to causal mediation analysis. Psychological Methods, 15, 309–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Jehn, K., Northcraft, G., & Neale, M. (1999). Why differences make a difference: A field study of diversity, conflict, and performance in workgroups. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(4), 741–763.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Karpoff, J. M., Lee, D. S., & Martin, G. S. (2008). The cost to firms of cooking the books. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 43(4), 581–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Klein, A. (2002). Audit committee, board of director characteristics, and earnings management. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 33, 375–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lipton, M., D. A. Neff, A. R. Brownstein, S. A. Rosenblum, A. O. Emmerich, & S. A. Fain. (2011). Risk management and the board of directors. Bank and Corporate Governance Law Reporter, 45(6), 793–799.Google Scholar
  32. Mason, E. Sharon, & Mudrack, P. E. (1996). Gender and ethical orientation: A test of gender and occupational socialization theories. Journal of Business Ethics, 15, 559–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Morck, R., Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1988). Management ownership and market valuation: An empirical analysis. Journal of Financial Economics, 20(1–2), 293–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Murphy, D., Shrieves, R. E., & Tibbs, S. L. (2009). Understanding the penalties associated with corporate misconduct: An empirical examination of earnings and risk. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 44(1), 55–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. O’Connor, M. A. (2003). The Enron Board: The perils of groupthink. University of Cincinnati Law Review, 71, 1233.Google Scholar
  36. Palmrose, Z., & Scholz, S. (2004). The circumstances and legal consequences of non-GAAP reporting: Evidence from restatements. Contemporary Accounting Research, 21, 139–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Perrault, E. (2015). Why does board gender diversity matter and how do we get there? The role of shareholder activism in deinstitutionalizing old boys’ networks. Journal of Business Ethics, 128, 149–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Robinson, G., & Dechant, K. (1997). Building a business case for diversity. The Academy of Management Executive (1993-2005), 11(3), 21–31.Google Scholar
  39. Schwab, A., Werbel, J. D., Hofmann, H., & Henriques, P. L. (2016). Managerial gender diversity and firm performance: An integration of different theoretical perspectives. Group and Organization Management, 41(1), 5–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Shrout, P. E., & Bolger, N. (2002). Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods, 7, 422–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Simons, T. L., & Peterson, R. S. (2000). Task conflict and relationship conflict in top management teams: The pivotal role of intragroup trust. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(1), 102–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Smith, L. P., & Oakley, E. F., III. (1997). Gender-related differences in ethical and social values of business students: Implications for management. Journal of Business Ethics, 16, 37–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Sonnenfeld, J. A. (2002). What makes great boards great. Harvard Business Review, 80, 106.Google Scholar
  44. Srinidhi, B., Gul, F. A., & Tsui, J. (2011). Female directors and earnings quality. Contemporary Accounting Research, 28, 1610–1644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Srinivasan, S. (2005). Consequences of financial reporting failure for outside directors: Evidence from accounting restatements and audit committee members. Journal of Accounting Research, 43, 291–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Staiger, D., & Stock, J. H. (1997). Instrumental variables regression with weak instruments. Econometrica, 65, 557–586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Stock, J. H., & Yogo, M. (2005). Testing for weak instruments in linear IV regressions. In D. W. K. Andrews (Ed.), Identification and inference for econometric models (pp. 80–108). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Sutton, R. I., & Galunic, D. C. (1996). Consequences of public scrutiny for leaders and their organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 18, 201–250.Google Scholar
  49. Terjesen, S., Singh, V., & Vinnicombe, S. (2009). Do women still lack the ‘right’ kind of human capital for directorships of FTSE 100 corporate boards? Women on Corporate Boards of Directors: International Research and Practice.. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
  50. Thiruvadi, S. (2012). Gender differences and audit committee diligence. Gender in Management, 2012, 366–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Triana, M., Miller, T. L., & Trzebiatowski, T. M. (2014). The double-edged nature of board gender diversity: Diversity, firm performance, and the power of women directors as predictors of strategic change. Organization Science, 25(2), 609–632.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Van den Steen, E. (2010). Culture clash: The costs and benefits of homogeneity. Management Science, 56(10), 1718–1738.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Van Knippenberg, D., De Dreu, C., & Homan, A. (2004). Work group diversity and group performance: An integrative model and research agenda. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 1008–1022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Wall, V. D., Jr., & Nolan, L. (1986). Perceptions of inequity, satisfaction, and conflict in task-oriented groups. Human Relations, 39(11), 1033–1051.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Weisbach, M. S. (1998). Outside directors and CEO turnover. Journal of Financial Economics, 20, 431–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Williamson, O. E. (1983). Organizational form, residual claimants and corporate control. Journal of Law and Economics, 26, 351–366.Google Scholar
  57. Williams, K., & O’Reilly, C. (1998). Forty years of diversity research: A review. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (pp. 77–140). Greenwich: JAI Press.Google Scholar
  58. Zatzick, C. D., Elvira, M. M., & Cohen, L. E. (2003). When is more better? The effects of racial composition on voluntary turnover. Organization Science, 14(5), 483–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Rotman School of ManagementUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations