Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Do women directors contribute to R&D? The role of critical mass and expert power

  • Published:
Journal of Management and Governance Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A Correction to this article was published on 04 July 2020

This article has been updated

Abstract

The paper provides insights into the implications for innovation input of having women on company boards. It sheds light on the effects of critical mass and expert power of women directors, and the moderating role played by female CEOs. Drawing on a sample of Italian companies in the high-tech industry, the study shows that having women on the board positively affects innovation input, measured as R&D spending, but only when they reach a critical mass. This result highlights that having a critical mass of women directors can limit the biases of other board members and improve women’s ability to influence innovation. The analyses also show that the expert power of women directors has positive implications for R&D spending. More mature and powerful women can improve board decision-making by providing new ideas and perspectives that may prompt company innovation. Finally, the presence of a woman as CEO positively moderates the relationships between innovation input and both critical mass and expert power of women directors. The results therefore support the idea that CEO-board gender similarity may encourage the commitment of women directors and foster company innovation.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Change history

Notes

  1. Alternative board systems are one-tier and two-tier systems. The one-tier system assigns managerial power to the board of directors appointed by shareholders, and administrative duties to the internal auditing committee, whose members are selected from independent and professional directors. The two-tier system assigns administrative auditing power to a board of surveillance elected by shareholders, and managerial power to a board of directors appointed by the board of surveillance.

References

  • Abdullah, S. N. (2014). The causes of gender diversity in Malaysian large firms. Journal of Management and Governance, 18(4), 1137–1159.

    Google Scholar 

  • Adams, R., Bessant, J., & Phelps, R. (2006). Innovation management measurement: A review. International Journal of Management Reviews, 8(1), 21–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Adams, R. B., & Ferreira, D. (2007). A theory of friendly boards. The Journal of Finance, 62(1), 217–250.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alvaro, S., Ciccaglioni, P., & Siciliano, G. (2013). L’autodisciplina in materia di corporate governance. Quaderni Giuridici. CONSOB – Commissione Nazionale per le Società e la Borsa-. Retrieved from http://www.consob.it/documenti/Pubblicazioni/Quaderni_giuridici/qg2.pdf.

  • Amason, A. C. (1996). Distinguishing the effects of functional and dysfunctional conflict on strategic decision making. Academy of Management Journal, 39(1), 123–148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arena, C., Cirillo, A., Mussolino, D., Pulcinelli, I., Saggese, S., & Sarto, F. (2015). Women on board: Evidence from a masculine industry. Corporate Governance, 15(3), 339–356.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashforth, B. E., & Mael, F. (1989). Social identity theory and the organization. Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 20–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barker, R. M. (2010). Corporate governance, competition, and political parties. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bilimoria, D., & Piderit, S. K. (1994). Qualifications of corporate board committee members. Group & Organization Management, 19(3), 334–362.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birindelli, G., Iannuzzi, A. P., & Savioli, M. (2019). The impact of women leaders on environmental performance: Evidence on gender diversity in banks. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 26(6), 1485–1499.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brieger, S. A., Francoeur, C., Welzel, C., & Ben-Amar, W. (2019). Empowering women: The role of emancipative forces in board gender diversity. Journal of Business Ethics, 155(2), 495–511.

    Google Scholar 

  • Broadbridge, A., & Simpson, R. (2011). 25 years on: Reflecting on the past and looking to the future in gender and management research. British Journal of Management, 22(3), 470–483.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brodbeck, F. C., Kerschreiter, R., Mojzisch, A., & Schulz-Hardt, S. (2007). Group decision-making under conditions of distributed knowledge: The information asymmetries model. Academy of Management Review, 32(2), 459–479.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruna, M. G., Dang, R., Scotto, M. J., & Ammari, A. (2019). Does board gender diversity affect firm risk-taking? Evidence from the French stock market. Journal of Management and Governance, 23(4), 915–938.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bunderson, J. S., & Sutcliffe, K. M. (2002). Comparing alternative conceptualizations of functional diversity in management teams: Process and performance effects. Academy of Management Journal, 45(5), 875–893.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burke, R. J. (1994). Women on corporate boards of directors. Views of Canadian Chief Executive Officers. Women in Management Review, 9(5), 3–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, K., & Mínguez-Vera, A. (2008). Gender diversity in the boardroom and firm financial performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 83(3), 435–451.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, K., & Mínguez-Vera, A. (2010). Female board appointments and firm valuation: Short and long-term effects. Journal of Management and Governance, 14(1), 37–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chau, V. S., & Quire, C. (2018). Back to the future of women in technology: Insights from understanding the shortage of women in innovation sectors for managing corporate foresight. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 30(6), 747–764.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, H. L., & Hsu, W. T. (2009). Family ownership, board independence, and R&D investment. Family Business Review, 22(4), 347–362.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, G., Liu, C., & Tjosvold, D. (2005). Conflict management for effective top management teams and innovation in China. Journal of Management Studies, 42(2), 277–300.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, L. T., Chan, R. Y., & Leung, T. Y. (2010). Management demography and corporate performance: Evidence from China. International Business Review, 19(3), 261–275.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cirillo, A., Ossorio, M., & Pennacchio, L. (2019). Family ownership and R&D investment: The moderating role of banks and private equity. Management Decision, 57(7), 1675–1694.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cleveland, J. N., Stockdale, M., & Murphy, K. R. (2000). Women and men in organizations: Sex and gender issues at work. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Combs, J. G., Ketchen, D. J., Jr., Perryman, A. A., & Donahue, M. S. (2007). The moderating effect of CEO power on the board composition–firm performance relationship. Journal of Management Studies, 44(8), 1299–1323.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cortesi, A., Tettamanzi, P., & Corno, F. (2009). Empirical evidence on internal control systems and corporate governance in Italy. Journal of Management and Governance, 13(1–2), 75–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coughlan, A. (2002). Women in management in Ireland. Dublin: Irish Business Employer’s Confederation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daily, C. M., & Dalton, D. R. (2003). Women in the boardroom: A business imperative. Journal of Business strategy, 24(5). https://doi.org/10.1108/jbs.2003.28824eaf.002.

  • Daily, C. M., & Johnson, J. L. (1997). Sources of CEO power and firm performance: A longitudinal assessment. Journal of Management, 23(2), 97–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Damanpour, F. (2010). An integration of research findings of effects of firm size and market competition on product and process innovations. British Journal of Management, 21(4), 996–1010.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Andrés, P., & Rodríguez, J. A. (2011). Corporate boards in high-tech firms. The Spanish Review of Financial Economics, 9(2), 69–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Jong, H. W. (1997). The governance structure and performance of large European corporations. Journal of Management and Governance, 1(1), 5–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Massis, A., Frattini, F., & Lichtenthaler, U. (2013). Research on technological innovation in family firms: Present debates and future directions. Family Business Review, 26(1), 10–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Vita, L., & Magliocco, A. (2018). Effects of gender quotas in Italy: A first impact assessment in the Italian banking sector. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 38(7–8), 673–694.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dezsö, C. L., & Ross, D. G. (2012). Does female representation in top management improve firm performance? A panel data investigation. Strategic Management Journal, 33(9), 1072–1089.

    Google Scholar 

  • Díaz-García, C., González-Moreno, A., & Jose Sáez-Martínez, F. (2013). Gender diversity within R&D teams: Its impact on radicalness of innovation. Innovation, 15(2), 149–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H., & Carli, L. L. (2007). Women and the labyrinth of leadership. Harvard Business Review, 85(9), 62–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elmagrhi, M. H., Ntim, C. G., Elamer, A. A., & Zhang, Q. (2019). A study of environmental policies and regulations, governance structures, and environmental performance: The role of women directors. Business Strategy and the Environment, 28(1), 206–220.

    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. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finkelstein, S. (1992). Power in top management teams: Dimensions, measurement, and validation. Academy of Management Journal, 35(3), 505–538.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finkelstein, S., Hambrick, D. C., & Cannella, A. A. (2009). Strategic leadership: Theory and research on executives, top management teams, and boards. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finkelstein, S., & Mooney, A. C. (2003). Not the usual suspects: How to use board process to make boards better. Academy of Management Perspectives, 17(2), 101–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiske, S., & Taylor, S. (1991). Social cognition (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fondas, N., & Sassalos, S. (2000). A different voice in the boardroom: How the presence of women directors affects board influence over management. Global Focus, 12(2), 13–22.

    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(3), 489–505.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fryxell, G. E., & Lerner, L. D. (1989). Contrasting corporate profiles: Women and minority representation in top management positions. Journal of Business Ethics, 8(5), 341–352.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galia, F., & Zenou, E. (2012). Board composition and forms of innovation: Does diversity make a difference? European Journal of International Management, 6(6), 630–650.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gavious, I., Segev, E., & Yosef, R. (2012). Women directors and earnings management in high-technology firms. Pacific Accounting Review, 24(1), 4–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gharbi, S., Sahut, J. M., & Teulon, F. (2014). R&D investments and high-tech firms’ stock return volatility. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 88, 306–312.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glass, C., & Cook, A. (2018). Do women leaders promote positive change? Analyzing the effect of gender on business practices and diversity initiatives. Human Resource Management, 57(4), 823–837.

    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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Golden, B. R., & Zajac, E. J. (2001). When will boards influence strategy? Inclination × power = strategic change. Strategic Management Journal, 22(12), 1087–1111.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greed, C. (2000). Women in the construction professions: Achieving critical mass. Gender, Work & Organization, 7(3), 181–196.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths, M., Moore, K., & Richardson, H. (2007). Celebrating heterogeneity? A survey of female ICT professionals in England. Information, Community and Society, 10(3), 338–357.

    Google Scholar 

  • Groysberg, B., & Bell, D. (2013). Dysfunction in the boardroom. Harvard Business Review, 91(6), 89–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gujarati, D. N. (2004). Basic econometrics. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate data analysis: With readings (4th ed.). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hambrick, D. C. (2007). Upper echelons theory: An update. Academy of Management Review, 32(2), 334–343.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haynes, K. T., & Hillman, A. (2010). The effect of board capital and CEO power on strategic change. Strategic Management Journal, 31(11), 1145–1163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heyden, M. L., Reimer, M., & Van Doorn, S. (2017). Innovating beyond the horizon: CEO career horizon, top management composition, and R&D intensity. Human Resource Management, 56(2), 205–224.

    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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hogg, M. A., & Terry, D. I. (2000). Social identity and self-categorization processes in organizational contexts. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 121–140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huse, M., Hoskisson, R., Zattoni, A., & Viganò, R. (2011). New perspectives on board research: Changing the research agenda. Journal of Management and Governance, 15(1), 5–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huse, M., & Solberg, A. G. (2006). Gender-related boardroom dynamics: How Scandinavian women make and can make contributions on corporate boards. Women in Management Review, 21(2), 113–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ibrahim, N. A., & Angelidis, J. P. (1994). Effect of board members’ gender on corporate social responsiveness orientation. Journal of Applied Business Research, 10(1), 35–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iseke, A., & Pull, K. (2019). Female executives and perceived employer attractiveness: On the potentially adverse signal of having a female CHRO rather than a female CFO. Journal of Business Ethics, 156(4), 1113–1133.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joecks, J., Pull, K., & Vetter, K. (2013). Gender diversity in the boardroom and firm performance: What exactly constitutes a “critical mass? Journal of Business Ethics, 118(1), 61–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanadli, S. B., Torchia, M., & Gabaldon, P. (2018). Increasing women’s contribution on board decision-making: The importance of chairperson leadership efficacy and board openness. European Management Journal, 36(1), 91–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanfer, R., & Ackerman, P. L. (2004). Aging, adult development, and work motivation. Academy of Management Review, 29(3), 440–458.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanter, R. M. (1977). Men and women of the corporation. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanter, R. M. (1987). Men and women of the corporation revisited. Management Review, 76(3), 14–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, N., & Kim, E. (2015). Board capital and exploration: From a resource provisional perspective. Management Decision, 53(9), 2156–2174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Konrad, A. M., & Kramer, V. (2006). How many women do boards need. Harvard Business Review, 84(12), 22.

    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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kramer, V. W., Konrad, A. M., Erkut, S., & Hooper, M. J. (2006). Critical mass on corporate boards: Why three or more women enhance governance. Wellesley: Wellesley Centers for Women.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuo, H. C., Wang, L. H., & Yeh, L. J. (2018). The role of education of directors in influencing firm R&D investment. Asia Pacific Management Review, 23(2), 108–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1998). Law and finance. Journal of Political Economy, 106(6), 1113–1155.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewellyn, K. B., & Muller-Kahle, M. I. (2019). The corporate board glass ceiling: The role of empowerment and culture in shaping board gender diversity. Journal of Business Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04116-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lim, E. N. (2015). The role of reference point in CEO restricted stock and its impact on R&D intensity in high-technology firms. Strategic Management Journal, 36(6), 872–889.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lu, J., & Herremans, I. M. (2019). Board gender diversity and environmental performance: An industries perspective. Business Strategy and the Environment, 28(7), 1449–1464.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lückerath-Rovers, M. (2013). Women on boards and firm performance. Journal of Management and Governance, 17(2), 491–509.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lynall, M. D., Golden, B. R., & Hillman, A. J. (2003). Board composition from adolescence to maturity: A multitheoretic view. Academy of Management Review, 28(3), 416–431.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mahadeo, J. D., Soobaroyen, T., & Hanuman, V. O. (2012). Board composition and financial performance: Uncovering the effects of diversity in an emerging economy. Journal of Business Ethics, 105(3), 375–388.

    Google Scholar 

  • Melis, A. (2000). Corporate governance in Italy. Corporate Governance: An international review, 8(4), 347–355.

    Google Scholar 

  • Melis, A. (2004). On the role of the board of statutory auditors in Italian listed companies. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 12(1), 74–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mertens, W., Pugliese, A., & Recker, J. (2017). Quantitative data analysis. A companion for accounting and information systems research. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Midavaine, J., Dolfsma, W., & Aalbers, R. (2016). Board diversity and R&D investment. Management Decision, 54(3), 558–569.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, T., & Triana, M. D. C. (2009). Demographic diversity in the boardroom: Mediators of the board diversity–firm performance relationship. Journal of Management Studies, 46(5), 755–786.

    Google Scholar 

  • Munari, F., Oriani, R., & Sobrero, M. (2010). The effects of owner identity and external governance systems on R&D investments: A study of Western European firms. Research Policy, 39(8), 1093–1104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen, S., & Huse, M. (2010). Women directors’ contribution to board decision-making and strategic involvement: The role of equality perception. European Management Review, 7(1), 16–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pangestu, S., Gunawan, S., & Wijaya, J. S. (2019). The presence and characteristics of women directors: How they influence firm performance. Indonesian Journal of Business and Entrepreneurship, 5(1), 13–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Post, C., & Byron, K. (2015). Women on boards and firm financial performance: A meta-analysis. Academy of Management Journal, 58(5), 1546–1571.

    Google Scholar 

  • Potter, M., & Hill, M. (2009). Women into non-traditional sectors: Addressing gender segregation in the Northern Ireland workplace. Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 61(2), 133–150.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pugliese, A., Bezemer, P. J., Zattoni, A., Huse, M., Van den Bosch, F. A., & Volberda, H. W. (2009). Boards of directors’ contribution to strategy: A literature review and research agenda. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 17(3), 292–306.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reagans, R., & Zuckerman, E. W. (2001). Networks, diversity, and productivity: The social capital of corporate R&D teams. Organization Science, 12(4), 502–517.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rossi, F., & Cebula, R. J. (2015). Does the board of directors affect the extent of corporate R&D? Evidence from Italian listed companies. Economics Bulletin, 35(4), 2567–2580.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruiz-Jiménez, J. M., & Fuentes-Fuentes, M. D. M. (2016). Management capabilities, innovation, and gender diversity in the top management team: An empirical analysis in technology-based SMEs. BRQ Business Research Quarterly, 19(2), 107–121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruiz-Jiménez, J. M., Fuentes-Fuentes, M. D. M., & Ruiz-Arroyo, M. (2016). Knowledge combination capability and innovation: The effects of gender diversity on top management teams in technology-based firms. Journal of Business Ethics, 135(3), 503–515.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sáenz, J., Aramburu, N., & Rivera, O. (2009). Knowledge sharing and innovation performance: A comparison between high-tech and low-tech companies. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 10(1), 22–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarto, F., Saggese, S., Viganò, R., & Mauro, M. (2019). Human capital and innovation: Mixing apples and oranges on the board of high-tech firms. Management Decision, 58(5), 897–926.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sattayaraksa, T., & Boon-itt, S. (2018). The roles of CEO transformational leadership and organizational factors on product innovation performance. European Journal of Innovation Management, 21(2), 227–249.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz-Ziv, M. (2017). Gender and board activeness: The role of a critical mass. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 52(2), 751–780.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simsek, Z. (2007). CEO tenure and organizational performance: An intervening model. Strategic Management Journal, 28(6), 653–662.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, R. A. (2002). Race, gender, and authority in the workplace: Theory and research. Annual Review of Sociology, 28(1), 509–542.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tanford, S., & Penrod, S. (1984). Social influence model: A formal integration of research on majority and minority influence processes. Psychological Bulletin, 95(2), 189.

    Google Scholar 

  • Terjesen, S., Couto, E. B., & Francisco, P. M. (2016). Does the presence of independent and women directors impact firm performance? A multi-country study of board diversity. Journal of Management and Governance, 20(3), 447–483.

    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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tihanyi, L., Ellstrand, A. E., Daily, C. M., & Dalton, D. R. (2000). Composition of the top management team and firm international diversification. Journal of Management, 26(6), 1157–1177.

    Google Scholar 

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

    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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Triana, M. D. C., Miller, T. L., & Trzebiatowski, T. M. (2013). 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyrowicz, J., Terjesen, S., & Mazurek, J. (2020). All on board? New evidence on board gender diversity from a large panel of European firms. European Management Journal. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2020.01.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Der Vegt, G. S., & Bunderson, J. S. (2005). Learning and performance in multidisciplinary teams: The importance of collective team identification. Academy of Management Journal, 48(3), 532–547.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Knippenberg, D., & Schippers, M. C. (2007). Work group diversity. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 515–541.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, M., & Kelan, E. (2013). The gender quota and female leadership: Effects of the Norwegian gender quota on board chairs and CEOs. Journal of Business Ethics, 117(3), 449–466.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watts, J. H. (2009). Allowed into a man’s world’ meanings of work–life balance: Perspectives of women civil engineers as ‘minority’ workers in construction. Gender, Work & Organization, 16(1), 37–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Westphal, J. D., & Khanna, P. (2003). Keeping directors in line: Social distancing as a control mechanism in the corporate elite. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(3), 361–398.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zaccaro, S. J., & Klimoski, R. (2002). Special issue introduction: The interface of leadership and team processes. Group and Organization Management, 27, 4–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zattoni, A., & Pugliese, A. (2019). Opening the black box of boards of directors: Taking stock of recent studies on board dynamics. In J. Gabrielsson, W. Khlif, & S. Yamak (Eds.), Research handbook on boards of directors. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.

    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(5), 852–864.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Economics, Management, Institutions, University of Naples “Federico II”, Via Cinthia, Monte S. Angelo, 80126, Naples, Italy

    Sara Saggese, Fabrizia Sarto & Riccardo Viganò

Authors
  1. Sara Saggese
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Fabrizia Sarto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Riccardo Viganò
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sara Saggese.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

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

The original version of this article was revised: In the original publication of the article, Fig. 1 was incorrectly published.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Saggese, S., Sarto, F. & Viganò, R. Do women directors contribute to R&D? The role of critical mass and expert power. J Manag Gov 25, 593–623 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-020-09513-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-020-09513-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation