Keywords

1 Introduction and Background of Research

Over the past two decades, the topic of gender quotas on corporate boards has gained significant research traction, ever since Norway instituted the first law stipulating a gender ratio on boards in 2003 [1]. Numerous countries have enacted policies to address the underrepresentation of women on corporate boards, incorporating both voluntary or mandatory quotas into their corporate governance frameworks [2]. Since the implementation of these quotas, scholarly interest has been piqued regarding the possible effects and changes these quotas might bring in various spheres. While the majority of studies explores the correlation between gender quotas and company performance, some delve into the association with corporate social performance, and a smaller subset investigate the implications for workplace policies and female promotions [3,4,5].

Multiple literature reviews have emphasized the necessity of gender balance on boards for economic advancement and potential corporate benefits. These reviews highlight the substantial contributions of women to both financial and non-financial aspects of corporate performance, even amidst gender-related challenges. Such reviews also propose that policy actions could extend from specific appointment regulations to advancing women's managerial careers, with the effects of board gender composition shaped by both female directors' actions and stakeholder interpretations [6, 7]. A recent review has noted that women considerably contribute to financial and non-financial performance of corporations, despite facing gender-related hindrances to board membership. Influences on the appointment of female directors were classified into four levels: country, firm, social, and individual [8]. Other reviews have suggested that, despite not being a foolproof solution, quotas could represent a significant stride towards achieving better gender balance in the boardroom and broader inclusion of women in leadership positions [9]. However, significant disparities persist in representation, compensation, and promotional opportunities for women, suggesting the need for ongoing research and initiatives focusing on gender equality and inclusion [10]. Another review indicated that board gender diversity has a mixed effect on financial performance, but a positive relationship with internal and social performance, with the relationship being influenced by factors like women's education, professional experience, the firm's innovation strategy, and cultural dimensions such as gender equality, low power distance, and low uncertainty avoidance, which positively influence women's representation in global leadership roles [11].

Reviewing the current studies, it's clear that the majority have targeted firm-level and country-level to examine the subject of corporate board composition and the implications of gender quota legislation [8,9,10, 12,13,14,15]. Additionally, the studies mainly concentrate on the economic aspect of performance of the companies or sectors and how countries worldwide adopt soft or mandatory quotas. The researchers typically employ quantitative methodology using data from databases and other sources [6, 11, 16, 17]. However, there seems to be a gap in the current research field, with a noticeable dearth of studies using interviews and surveys for gathering quantitative and qualitative primary data and even fewer studies using mixed method approaches [7, 18]. Considering these observations, the objective of this paper is to explore any advancements made the past five years with respect to the influence of applying gender quotas in corporate boards, from non-direct viewpoints -such as on a firm’s environmental/social performance, the diffusion of gender equality across firm levels, and individual perceptions- and going deeper than just the direct economic implications. Additionally, we intend to highlight those studies that utilize quantitative and qualitative primary data or mixed methodologies.

2 Methodology

According to Tranfield [19] the systematic review consolidates collective knowledge by facilitating theoretical synthesis across various fields and subfields. We follow the guidelines for conducting a systematic review proposed in literature [8, 19, 20]. We aimed to investigate whether any progress has been made the last five years regarding the impact of gender quota application in corporate boards from other indirect perspectives and delve beyond the immediate economic aspect. In order to identify the existence of such studies we devised the following research questions:

RQ1: Apart from the topic of financial performance, which other research themes are addressed in prior literature concerning corporate boards and gender quotas impact?

RQ2: Does prior literature on corporate boards and gender quotas feature studies using quantitative or qualitative primary data or mixed methods?

We chose the Scopus database for collecting our sample studies due to its extensive size, credible standing, and the high quality of its papers. In alignment with our research area, we employed the keywords “corporate and boards” along with “gender and quotas” to assemble the studies for our review. This initial search yielded a sample of 249 papers.

We applied the following criteria to decide if a paper should be included: (1) year range 2018–2023, (2) subject area: business, management, accounting, economics, finance, social sciences, (3) document type: article, (4) language: English. Following these criteria, the sample size was trimmed down to 138 papers. We then reviewed the abstracts and discarded 92 articles that seemed irrelevant based on our search terms (primary quantitative/qualitative research, non-financial approach, individual perceptions) and research questions. Subsequently, we reviewed the full-text articles, and we excluded 12 as we didn’t have access to the full-text. We also eliminated 24 articles as they didn't relate to our search terms since they adhered to a quantitative methodology using data from databases and not from surveys or interviews. Eventually, a set of 10 eligible studies remained, which are ready for the next steps of review, data extract and analysis.

3 Analysis and Findings

Table 1 presents the main characteristics of the sample studies based on our research questions. We identify only two studies applied a mixed-methods approach [21, 22] and the rest relied on quantitative methods. In most studies the data collection was sourced from databases. However, one study implemented surveys for data collection [23], while another used a combination of interviews and databases [22] and only one study utilized data gathered from corporate annual reports [21].

Table 1 Main characteristics of the studies
Full size table

We can categorize the themes addressed in the prior literature concerning corporate boards and gender quotas under a broader thematic grouping such as individual level, organizational level, and societal level [7, 24].

Regarding the individual level, Dalvit et al. [25] show that an increase in female representation in top management positions results in higher employment and reduced wage gaps for women in the upper echelons of the firm but has limited trickle-down effects on lower layers. However, Rebérioux and Roudaut [26] argue that despite these strides, the persistence of discriminatory behaviors and stereotypes restricts female directors from accessing monitoring committee roles and results in lower remuneration compared to male counterparts, indicating the continuation of a “glass ceiling”. Concerning the organizational level, De Masi et al. [27] also found that boards with more than 33% women were more effective in monitoring tasks due to the unique knowledge and skills women bring to the table. Another study [28] adds that gender diversity proportionally impacts board task performance in strategy and monitoring, although not in advisory tasks. Other research [29] highlights that mandatory gender quotas could result in a shift in priorities, with increased frequency of internal committee meetings and less overall board meetings. On the other hand [22] found that despite high compliance to the Norwegian board quota policy, it did not result in broader gender equality, suggesting the need for more comprehensive policy interventions. Researchers noted that enforced gender quotas led to more comprehensive discussions and improved decision-making within boards, even changing initial negative attitudes towards quotas among male directors over time [23]. This demonstrates the broader societal impact of gender diversity initiatives beyond just board composition. Research demonstrates several benefits of gender-diverse boards for organizations. Finally relating to the societal level, Kordsachia et al. [30] found a strong correlation between gender diversity on boards and a decrease in corporate carbon emissions, reflecting enhanced environmental risk management. Similarly, Jouber [31] established that having at least three women in top management teams correlates positively with improved Corporate Social Performance. Additionally [21] observed that the introduction of a gender quota law in Italy led to increased corporate attention to gender equality issues even before changes in board composition.

4 Discussion and Future Research

Our findings provide answers to the research questions posed in our study. Regarding the RQ1, it was determined that the most prevalent issues examined were related to economic aspect and then some researchers were interested to explore the connection between gender quotas and environmental concerns, such as carbon emissions and corporate social responsibility. Others focused on matters concerning the board of directors, such as their performance and obligations. Finally, some studies were directed towards understanding the broader promotion of equality, with particular attention to the equitable advancement of women.

Concerning the RQ2, our findings point to the conclusion that current research predominantly relies on quantitative methods, utilizing data primarily from existing databases. There is a noticeable absence of qualitative or mixed-method approaches that employ tools such as interviews and questionnaires. These findings are aligned with the previous reviews [7, 8, 11, 18].

Furthermore, our review noticed that the application of gender quotas in corporate boards have led to changes at the individual, organizational, and societal levels with an overall impression of a positive effect. Our approach paves the way for more in-depth study of the topic, and it could be a possible trigger to shape practices and initiatives at the organizational level and encourage individual actions and attitudes that support gender diversity and equality. Moreover, our study could be useful for the future research especially for those that might focus to employ tools like surveys and interviews, because these tools allow researchers to gather detailed, individual responses and perceptions, getting in-depth understanding of a complex issue like the impact of gender quotas.

5 Conclusions and Limitations

Our review on gender quotas applied on corporate boards, uncovers an overall impression of a positive effect at individual, organizational, and societal levels, such as improved board performance, environmental concerns, broader promotion of equality, but also notes obstacles such as the “glass ceiling”. The review identifies a preference for quantitative methods and highlights the need for more qualitative or mixed-method approaches and emphasizes the complexity of the subject, pointing to the need for further exploration and offering valuable direction for scholars, policy framers, and business leaders. The study has several limitations. For collecting our sample articles, we chose one database and the review spanned only the most recent five-year period. Additionally, we limited our collection to papers composed in the English language. Gender quotas are a step in the right direction, real empowerment comes from recognizing and valuing women’s unique skills and the journey of women's empowerment begins from educational challenges and culminating in leadership roles, both academia and businesses must prioritize initiatives like skills development, mentorship and inclusive hiring, transcending mere numerical representation [32,33,34]. Higher education could well put emphasis on issues of equality and inclusion [35,36,37].