Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Women Directors and Corporate Social Performance: An Integrative Review of the Literature and a Future Research Agenda

  • Review Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper presents a literature review offering a thorough and critical systematization of articles investigating the influence of women directors on corporate social performance (CSP). We review the state-of-the-art literature in terms of its key assumptions, theories, and conceptualization of CSP. Our analysis shows a misfit between the theorization and operationalization of gender diversity, especially in quantitative empirical studies, which represent the majority of articles. In our overview of both conceptual and empirical studies, we identified three main theoretical dimensions, which are contingent upon board-level and institution-level dimensions. Based on our proposed framework, we call for future researchers to focus on novel research questions and innovative research designs to investigate women’s contributions to CSP and challenge the theoretical assumptions about the role of women on boards.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adams, R. B., de Haan, J., Terjesen, S., & van Ees, H. (2015). Board diversity: Moving the field forward. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 23(2), 77–82. https://doi.org/10.1111/corg.12106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aguilera, R., Florackis, C., & Kim, H. (2016). Advancing the corporate governance research agenda. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 24(3), 172–180. https://doi.org/10.1111/corg.12167

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alvesson, M., & Sandberg, J. (2020). The problematizing review: A counterpoint to Elsbach and Van Knippenberg’s argument for integrative reviews. Journal of Management Studies, 57(6), 1290–1304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Armitage, S., Hou, W., Sarkar, S., & Talaulicar, T. (2017). Corporate governance challenges in emerging economies. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 25(3), 148–154. https://doi.org/10.1111/corg.12209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banaji, M. R., Hardin, C., & Rothman, A. J. (1993). Implicit stereotyping in person judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65(2), 272–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bear, S., Rahman, N., & Post, C. (2010). The impact of board diversity and gender composition on corporate social responsibility and firm reputation. Journal of Business Ethics, 97(2), 207–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Becker, J., Ayman, R., & Korabik, K. (2002). Discrepancies in self/subordinates’ perceptions of leadership behavior: Leader’s gender, organizational context, and leader’s self-monitoring. Group and Organization Management, 27(2), 226–244. https://doi.org/10.1177/10501102027002004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beji, R., Yousfi, O., Loukil, N., & Omri, A. (2020). Board diversity and corporate social responsibility: Empirical evidence from France. Journal of Business Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-020-04522-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Amar, W., Chang, M., & McIlkenny, P. (2017). Board gender diversity and corporate response to sustainability initiatives: Evidence from the carbon disclosure project. Journal of Business Ethics, 142(2), 369–383. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2759-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Block, J. H., Miller, D., & Wagner, D. (2014). Bayesian methods in family business research. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 5(1), 97–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonet, R., Cappelli, P., & Hamori, M. (2020). Gender differences in speed of advancement: An empirical examination of top executives in the fortune 100 firms. Strategic Management Journal, 41(4), 708–737.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boulouta, I. (2013). Hidden connections: The link between board gender diversity and corporate social performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 113(2), 185–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, P., Beekes, W., & Verhoeven, P. (2011). Corporate governance, accounting and finance: A review. Accounting & Finance, 51(1), 96–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Byron, K., & Post, C. (2016). Women on Boards of Directors and Corporate Social Performance: A meta-analysis. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 24(4), 428–442. https://doi.org/10.1111/corg.12165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chakrabarty, S., & Bass, A. E. (2014). Corporate governance in microfinance institutions: Board composition and the ability to face institutional voids. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 22(5), 367–386. https://doi.org/10.1111/corg.12071

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chiu, S. C., & Sharfman, M. (2018). Corporate social irresponsibility and executive succession: An empirical examination. Journal of Business Ethics, 149(3), 707–723. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3089-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, L. J., Mackey, A., & Whetten, D. (2014). Taking responsibility for corporate social responsibility: The role of leaders in creating, implementing, sustaining, or avoiding socially responsible firm behaviors. Academy of Management Perspectives, 28(2), 164–178. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2012.0047

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cook, A., & Glass, C. (2016). Do women advance equity? The effect of gender leadership composition on LGBT-friendly policies in American firms. Human Relations, 69(7), 1431–1456. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726715611734

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cook, A., & Glass, C. (2018). Women on corporate boards: Do they advance corporate social responsibility? Human Relations, 71(7), 897–924.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cruz, C., Justo, R., Larraza-Kintana, M., & Garcés-Galdeano, L. (2019). When do women make a better table? Examining the influence of women directors on family firm’s corporate social performance. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 43(2), 282–301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daily, C. M., Dalton, D. R., & Cannella, A. A., Jr. (2003). Corporate governance: Decades of dialogue and data. Academy of Management Review, 28(3), 371–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Due Billing, Y., & Alvesson, M. (2000). Questioning the notion of feminine leadership: A critical perspective on the gender labelling of leadership. Gender, Work & Organization, 7(3), 144–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Durisin, B., & Puzone, F. (2009). Maturation of corporate governance research, 1993–2007: An assessment. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 17(3), 266–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H. (1997). Sex differences in social behavior: Comparing social role theory and evolutionary psychology. American Psychologist, 52(12), 1380–1383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H., & Karau, S. J. (2002). Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders. Psychological Review, 109(3), 573–598.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elm, D. R., Kennedy, E. J., & Lawton, L. (2001). Determinants of moral reasoning: Sex role orientation, gender, and academic factors. Business & Society, 40(3), 241–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elsbach, K. D., & van Knippenberg, D. (2020). Creating high-impact literature reviews: An argument for ‘integrative reviews.’ Journal of Management Studies, 57(6), 1277–1289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elstad, B., & Ladegard, G. (2012). Women on corporate boards: Key influencers or tokens? Journal of Management & Governance, 16(4), 595–615.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erkut, S., Kramer, V. W., & Konrad, A. M. (2008). Critical mass: Does the number of women on a corporate board make a difference. In S. Vinnicombe, V. Singh, R. J. Burke, D. Bilimoria, & M. Huse (Eds.), Women on corporate boards of directors: International research and practice (pp. 222–232). Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Filatotchev, I., & Nakajima, C. (2014). Corporate governance, responsible managerial behavior, and corporate social responsibility: Organizational efficiency versus organizational legitimacy? Academy of Management Perspectives, 28(3), 289–306. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2014.0014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finegold, D., Benson, G. S., & Hecht, D. (2007). Corporate Boards and Company Performance: Review of research in light of recent reforms. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 15(5), 865–878. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8683.2007.00602.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher, J. K. (2004). The paradox of postheroic leadership: An essay on gender, power, and transformational change. The Leadership Quarterly, 15(5), 647–661.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Francoeur, C., Labelle, R., Balti, S., & Bouzaidi, S. E. (2019). To what extent do gender diverse boards enhance corporate social performance? Journal of Business Ethics, 155(2), 343–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gabaldon, P., de Anca, C., Mateos de Cabo, R., & Gimeno, R. (2016). Searching for women on boards: An analysis from the supply and demand perspective. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 24(3), 371–385. https://doi.org/10.1111/corg.12141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gagné, M., & Deci, E. L. (2005). Self-determination theory and work motivation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26(4), 331–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galbreath, J. (2016). When do board and management resources complement each other? A study of effects on corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 136(2), 281–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gentry, W. A., Clark, M. A., Young, S. F., Cullen, K. L., & Zimmerman, L. (2015). How displaying empathic concern may differentially predict career derailment potential for women and men leaders in Australia. The Leadership Quarterly, 26(4), 641–653.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilligan, C. (1993). In a different voice: Psychological theory and women’s development. Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Glass, C., & Cook, A. (2016). Leading at the top: Understanding women’s challenges above the glass ceiling. The Leadership Quarterly, 27(1), 51–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glass, C., Cook, A., & Ingersoll, A. R. (2016). Do women leaders promote sustainability? Analyzing the effect of corporate governance composition on environmental performance. Business Strategy and the Environment, 25(7), 495–511.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goyal, R., Kakabadse, N., Kakabadse, A., & Talbot, D. (2021). Female board directors’ resilience against gender discrimination. Gender, Work & Organization. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12669

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grijalva, E., & Harms, P. D. (2014). Narcissism: An integrative synthesis and dominance complementarity model. Academy of Management Perspectives, 28(2), 108–127. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2012.0048

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grosser, K. (2016). Corporate social responsibility and multi-stakeholder governance: Pluralism, feminist perspectives and women’s NGOs. Journal of Business Ethics, 137(1), 65–81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2526-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grosvold, J., & Brammer, S. (2011). National institutional systems as antecedents of female board representation: An empirical study. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 19(2), 116–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hafsi, T., & Turgut, G. (2013). Boardroom diversity and its effect on social performance: Conceptualization and empirical evidence. Journal of Business Ethics, 112(3), 463–479.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hambrick, D. C., & Mason, P. A. (1984). Upper echelons: The organization as a reflection of its top managers. Academy of Management Review, 9(2), 193–206. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1984.4277628

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harjoto, M., & Laksmana, I. (2018). The impact of corporate social responsibility on risk taking and firm value. Journal of Business Ethics, 151(2), 353–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harjoto, M., Laksmana, I., & Lee, R. (2015). Board diversity and corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 132(4), 641–660.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hernandez Bark, A. S., Escartín, J., Schuh, S. C., & van Dick, R. (2016). Who leads more and why? A mediation model from gender to leadership role occupancy. Journal of Business Ethics, 139(3), 473–483. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2642-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hillman, A. J., Cannella, A. A., Jr., & Harris, I. C. (2002). Women and racial minorities in the boardroom: How do directors differ? Journal of Management, 28(6), 747–763.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hillman, A. J., Shropshire, C., Albert, A., & Cannella, J. (2007). Organizational predictors of women on corporate boards. Academy of Management Journal, 50(4), 941–952.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hillman, A. J., Withers, M. C., & Collins, B. J. (2009). Resource dependence theory: A review. Journal of Management, 35(6), 1404–1427. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206309343469

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ho, S. S. M., Li, A. Y., Tam, K., & Zhang, F. (2015). CEO gender, ethical leadership, and accounting conservatism. Journal of Business Ethics, 127(2), 351–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoang, T. C., Abeysekera, I., & Ma, S. (2018). Board diversity and corporate social disclosure: Evidence from Vietnam. Journal of Business Ethics, 151(3), 833–852.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hooijberg, R., Hunt, J. G., & Dodge, G. E. (1997). Leadership complexity and development of the leaderplex model. Journal of Management, 23(3), 375–408. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639702300305

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoyt, C. L., Johnson, S. K., Murphy, S. E., & Skinnell, K. H. (2010). The impact of blatant stereotype activation and group sex-composition on female leaders. The Leadership Quarterly, 21(5), 716–732.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Humphrey, R. (1985). How work roles influence perception: Structural-cognitive processes and organizational behavior. American Sociological Review, 50(2), 242–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huse, M., Nielsen, S. T., & Hagen, I. M. (2009). Women and employee-elected board members, and their contributions to board control tasks. Journal of Business Ethics, 89(4), 581–597.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hwang, S., Shivdasani, A., & Simintzi, E. (2018). Mandating women on boards: Evidence from the United States. Kenan Institute of Private Enterprise Research Paper No. 18-34. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3265783

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iannotta, M., Gatti, M., & Huse, M. (2016). Institutional complementarities and gender diversity on boards: A configurational approach. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 24(4), 406–427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ibarra, H. (1992). Homophily and differential returns: Sex differences in network structure and access in an advertising firm. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37(3), 422–447. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393451

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Javidan, M., Bullough, A., & Dibble, R. (2016). Mind the gap: Gender differences in global leadership self-efficacies. Academy of Management Perspectives, 30(1), 59–73. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2015.0035

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, R. A., & 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kabongo, J. D., Chang, K., & Li, Y. (2013). The impact of operational diversity on corporate philanthropy: An empirical study of U.S. companies. Journal of Business Ethics, 116(1), 49–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kalysh, K., Kulik, C. T., & Perera, S. (2016). Help or hindrance? Work–life practices and women in management. The Leadership Quarterly, 27(3), 504–518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Katmon, N., Mohamad, Z. Z., Norwani, N. M., & Al Farooque, O. (2019). Comprehensive board diversity and quality of corporate social responsibility disclosure: Evidence from an emerging market. Journal of Business Ethics, 157(2), 447–481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klettner, A., Clarke, T., & Boersma, M. (2016). Strategic and regulatory approaches to increasing women in leadership: Multilevel targets and mandatory quotas as levers for cultural change. Journal of Business Ethics, 133(3), 395–419. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2069-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knippen, J. M., Shen, W., & Zhu, Q. (2019). Limited progress? The effect of external pressure for board gender diversity on the increase of female directors. Strategic Management Journal, 40(7), 1123–1150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Konrad, A. M., Kramer, V., & Erkut, S. (2008). The impact of three or more women on corporate boards. Organizational Dynamics, 37(2), 145–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liao, L., Lin, T., & Zhang, Y. (2018). Corporate board and corporate social responsibility assurance: Evidence from China. Journal of Business Ethics, 150(1), 211–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liedtka, J. M. (1996). Feminist morality and competitive reality: A role for an ethic of care? Business Ethics Quarterly, 6(2), 179–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maak, T., Pless, N. M., & Voegtlin, C. (2016). Business statesman or shareholder advocate? CEO responsible leadership styles and the micro-foundations of political CSR. Journal of Management Studies, 53(3), 463–493. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macaulay, C. D., Richard, O. C., Peng, M. W., & Hasenhuttl, M. (2018). Alliance network centrality, board composition, and corporate social performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 151(4), 997–1008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marquardt, C., & Wiedman, C. (2016). Can shareholder activism improve gender diversity on corporate boards? Corporate Governance: An International Review, 24(4), 443–461. https://doi.org/10.1111/corg.12170

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, J. (2007). The gendering of leadership in corporate social responsibility. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 20(2), 165–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Cabo, R. M., Grau, P., Gimeno, R., & Gabaldón, P. (2021). Shades of power: Network links with gender quotas and corporate governance codes. British Journal of Management. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12454

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mavin, S., & Grandy, G. (2016). A theory of Abject Appearance: Women elite leaders’ intra-gender ‘management’ of bodies and appearance. Human Relations, 69(5), 1095–1120. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726715609107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van der Duijn, M., Schouten, C., Graafland, J., & Kaptein, M. (2014). Religiosity, CSR attitudes, and CSR behavior: An empirical study of executives’ religiosity and CSR. Journal of Business Ethics, 123(3), 437–459. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1847-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCabe, M. B. (2017). Social media marketing strategies for career advancement: An analysis of LinkedIn. Journal of Business and Behavioral Sciences, 29(1), 85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Monzani, L., Hernandez Bark, A. S., van Dick, R., & Peiró, J. M. (2015). The synergistic effect of prototypicality and authenticity in the relation between leaders’ biological gender and their organizational identification. Journal of Business Ethics, 132(4), 737–752. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2335-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nadeem, M. (2020a). Corporate governance and supplemental environmental pojects: A restorative justice approach. Journal of Business Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-020-04561-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nadeem, M. (2020b). Does board gender diversity influence voluntary disclosure of intellectual capital in initial public offering prospectuses? Evidence from China. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 28(2), 100–118. https://doi.org/10.1111/corg.12304

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naumovska, I., Wernicke, G., & Zajac, E. J. (2020). Last to come and last to go? The complex role of gender and ethnicity in the reputational penalties for directors linked to corporate fraud. Academy of Management Journal, 63(3), 881–902.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nekhili, M., Chakroun, H., & Chtioui, T. (2016). Women’s leadership and firm performance: Family versus nonfamily firms. Journal of Business Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3340-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen, S., & Huse, M. (2010). The contribution of women on boards of directors: Going beyond the surface. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 18(2), 136–148. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8683.2010.00784.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Patriotta, G. (2020). Writing impactful review articles. Journal of Management Studies, 57(6), 1272–1276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Post, C., Rahman, N., & McQuillen, C. (2015). From board composition to corporate environmental performance through sustainability-themed alliances. Journal of Business Ethics, 130(2), 423–435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rao, K., & Tilt, C. (2016). Board composition and corporate social responsibility: The role of diversity, gender, strategy and decision making. Journal of Business Ethics, 138(2), 327–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rigolini, A., & Huse, M. (2021). Women and multiple board memberships: Social capital and institutional pressure. Journal of Business Ethics, 169(3), 443–459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodriguez-Dominguez, L., Gallego-Alvarez, I., & Garcia-Sanchez, I. M. (2009). Corporate governance and codes of ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 90(2), 187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruderman, M. N., Ohlott, P. J., Panzer, K., & King, S. N. (2002). Benefits of multiple roles for managerial women. Academy of Management Journal, 45(2), 369–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sawyer, J. E., Houlette, M. A., & Yeagley, E. L. (2006). Decision performance and diversity structure: Comparing faultlines in convergent, crosscut, and racially homogeneous groups. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 99(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2005.08.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schiehll, E., & Martins, H. C. (2016). Cross-national governance research: A systematic review and assessment. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 24(3), 181–199. https://doi.org/10.1111/corg.12158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schuh, S. C., Hernandez Bark, A. S., Van Quaquebeke, N., Hossiep, R., Frieg, P., & Van Dick, R. (2014). Gender differences in leadership role occupancy: The mediating role of power motivation. Journal of Business Ethics, 120(3), 363–379. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1663-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, Volumen 25 (pp. 1–65). Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seierstad, C., Warner-Søderholm, G., Torchia, M., & Huse, M. (2017). Increasing the number of women on boards: The role of actors and processes. Journal of Business Ethics, 141(2), 289–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaukat, A., Qiu, Y., & Trojanowski, G. (2016). Board attributes, corporate social responsibility strategy, and corporate environmental and social performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 135(3), 569–585. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2460-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheridan, A., & Milgate, G. (2005). Accessing board positions: A comparison of female and male board members’ views. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 13(6), 847–855. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8683.2005.00475.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singh, V., Terjesen, S., & Vinnicombe, S. (2008). Newly appointed directors in the boardroom: How do women and men differ? European Management Journal, 26(1), 48–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stevenson, R. M., & Josefy, M. (2019). Knocking at the gate: The path to publication for entrepreneurship experiments through the lens of gatekeeping theory. Journal of Business Venturing, 34(2), 242–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strand, R. (2014). Strategic leadership of corporate sustainability. Journal of Business Ethics, 123(4), 687–706. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-2017-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strøm, R. Ø., D’Espallier, B., & Mersland, R. (2014). Female leadership, performance, and governance in microfinance institutions. Journal of Banking & Finance, 42, 60–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. The Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of inter-group conflict. In W. G. Austin, & W. S (Eds.), The social psychology of inter-group relations (pp. 33–47). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.

  • Terjesen, S., Aguilera, R. V., & Lorenz, R. (2015). Legislating a woman’s seat on the board: Institutional factors driving gender quotas for boards of directors. Journal of Business Ethics, 128(2), 233–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Terjesen, S., Sealy, R., & Singh, V. (2009). Women directors on corporate boards: A review and research agenda. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 17(3), 320–337. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8683.2009.00742.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thatcher, S. M. B., & Patel, P. C. (2012). Group faultlines: A review, integration, and guide to future research. Journal of Management, 38(4), 969–1009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tomkins, L., & Simpson, P. (2015). Caring leadership: A heideggerian perspective. Organization Studies, 36(8), 1013–1031. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840615580008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torchia, M., Calabro, A., Gabaldon, P., & Kanadli, S. B. (2018). Women directors contribution to organizational innovation: A behavioral approach. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 34(2), 215–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torchia, M., Calabrò, A., & Huse, M. (2011). Women directors on corporate boards: From tokenism to critical mass. Journal of Business Ethics, 102(2), 299–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tranfield, D., Denyer, D., & Smart, P. (2003). Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. British Journal of Management, 14(3), 207–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Veltrop, D. B., Hermes, N., Postma, T. J., & de Haan, J. (2015). A tale of two factions: Why and when factional demographic faultlines hurt board performance. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 23(2), 145–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watkins, M. B., Simmons, A., & Umphress, E. (2019). It’s not Black and White: Toward a contingency perspective on the consequences of being a token. Academy of Management Perspectives, 33(3), 334–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webb, E. (2004). An examination of socially responsible firms’ board structure. Journal of Management and Governance, 8(3), 255–277.

    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), 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wood, D. J. (1991). Social issues in management: Theory and research in corporate social performance. Journal of Management, 17(2), 383–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yukl, G. (1989). Managerial leadership: A review of theory and research. Journal of Management, 15(2), 251–289. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920638901500207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, J. Q., Zhu, H., & Ding, H.-B. (2013). Board composition and corporate social responsibility: An empirical investigation in the post sarbanes-Oxley Era. Journal of Business Ethics, 114(3), 381–392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, X.-A., Li, N., Ullrich, J., & van Dick, R. (2015). Getting everyone on board: The effect of differentiated transformational leadership by CEOs on top management team effectiveness and leader-rated firm performance. Journal of Management, 41(7), 1898–1933.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

Research reported in this paper was partially funded by MCIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033. Grant No. PID2020-115982RB-C22".

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Management, Information and Production Engineering & CYFE (Center for Young and Family Enterprise), University of Bergamo, Via Pasubio 7/B, 24044, Dalmine, BG, Italy

    Giovanna Campopiano

  2. Department of Economics, IE Business School, IE University, C/ Maria de Molina, 13, 28006, Madrid, Spain

    Patricia Gabaldón

  3. Fakultät Wirtschaftswissenschaften, Technical University of Dortmund, Friedrich-Wöhler-Weg 6, 44227, Dortmund, Germany

    Daniela Gimenez-Jimenez

Authors
  1. Giovanna Campopiano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Patricia Gabaldón
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Daniela Gimenez-Jimenez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Patricia Gabaldón.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose. The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare that are relevant to the content of this article. All authors certify that they have no affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest or non-financial interest in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript. The authors have no financial or proprietary interests in any material discussed in this article.

Ethics approval

This is an observational study. No ethical approval is required.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Campopiano, G., Gabaldón, P. & Gimenez-Jimenez, D. Women Directors and Corporate Social Performance: An Integrative Review of the Literature and a Future Research Agenda. J Bus Ethics 182, 717–746 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-021-04999-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-021-04999-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation