Gender Composition of the Upper Echelons and Firm Sustainability Performance: an Examination of Istanbul Stock Exchange Companies

doi:10.1017/9781108579360.015

13 - Gender Composition of the Upper Echelons and Firm Sustainability Performance: an Examination of Istanbul Stock Exchange Companies

from Part II - CSR and Sustainable Development Cross-Country Studies

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 18 December 2019

F. Pinar Acar and

Edited by

Franklin N. Ngwu and

Onyeka Osuji: Affiliation:
University of Essex
Franklin N. Ngwu: Affiliation:
Pan-Atlantic University, Nigeria
Dima Jamali: Affiliation:
American University of Beirut

Book contents

Get access

Summary

The chapter examines the link between upper echelons gender composition and firm sustainability performance. Gender composition is considered as the level of women on TMTs and boards. Specifically, it is considered whether presence of three or more women on company boards as well as TMTs influence sustainability performance. Thereby, the study incorporates new theoretical developments by conceptualizing gender level using critical mass concept. The sample also consists of top performing 100 firms in Istanbul Stock Exchange (ISE) known as BIST 100. A dataset containing information of BIST 100 companies’ TMT members, board of directors, CEOs, as well as firm size, profitability, sustainability performance, and industry among others were constructed by using the data provided in PDP (Public Disclosure Platform). The findings of the study indicate that critical mass of women on board of directors is important for sustainability performance. In line with token theory and critical mass proposition, in the present sample, having three or more women directors on boards of directors improves the sustainability performance of companies.

Keywords

Corporate Governance Critical Mass Theory Gender Sustainability Team Composition Turkey Upper Echelons

Information

Type: Chapter
Information: Corporate Social Responsibility in Developing and Emerging Markets
Institutions, Actors and Sustainable Development
, pp. 258 - 278

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108579360.015 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Ancona, D. G., Caldwell, D. F. (1992). Demography and design: Predictors of new product team performance. Organization Science, 3, 321–341.Google Scholar

Arat, Y. (2010). Religion, politics and gender equality in Turkey: Implications of a democratic paradox Third World Quarterly, 31, 869–884.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Aycan, Z. (2004). Key success factors for women in management in Turkey. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 53, 453–477.CrossRef Google Scholar

Aycan, Z., Kanungo, R. N., Mendonca, M., Yu, K., Deller, J., Stahl, G. and Kurshid, A. (2000). Impact of culture on human resource management practices: A 10-country comparison. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 49, 192–221.Google Scholar

Bansal, P. (2005). Evolving sustainably: A longitudinal study of corporate sustainable development. Strategic Management Journal, 26(3), 197–218.CrossRef Google Scholar

Bantel, K. A., Jackson, S. E. (1989). Top management and innovations in banking: Does the composition of the top team make a difference? Strategic Management Journal, 10, 107–12.CrossRef Google Scholar

Barsade, S. G., Ward, A. J., Turner, J. D. F. and Sonnenfeld, J. A. (2000). To your heart’s content: a model of affective diversity in top management teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45, 802–836.Google Scholar

Barton, D. (2011). Capitalism for the long term. Harvard Business Review 89, 84–91.Google Scholar

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

Bell, S. T. (2007). Deep-level composition variables as predictors of team performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 595–615.Google Scholar

Bell, S. T., Villado, A. J., Lukasik, M. A., Belau, L. and Briggs, A. L. (2011). Getting specific about demographic diversity variable and team performance relationships: A meta-analysis. Journal of Management, 37, 709–743.CrossRef Google Scholar

Borsa Istanbul (2018). BIST Sustainability Index. available at www.borsaistanbul.com/en/indices/bist-stock-indices/bist-sustainability-index, accessed April 18, 2018.Google Scholar

Boulouta, I. (2013). Hidden connections: The link between board gender diversity and corporate social performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 113(2), 185–97.Google Scholar

Bowen, H. R. (1953). Social Responsibilities of the Businessman. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar

Campbell, J. L. (2007). Why would corporations behave in socially responsible ways? An institutional theory of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 32(2), 946–967.Google Scholar

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

Cannella, A. A., Park, J. and Lee, H. (2008). Top management team functional background diversity and firm performance: Examining the roles of team member co-location and environmental uncertainty. Academy of Management Journal, 51(4), 197–237.Google Scholar

Capital Market Boards of Turkey (Sermaye Piyasası Kurulu) (2011). Kurumsal yönetim ilkelerinin belirlenmesine ve uygulanmasina ilişkin tebliğ.Google Scholar

Carpenter, M. A. (2002). The implications of strategy and social context for the relationship between top management team heterogeneity and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 23, 275–284.CrossRef Google Scholar

Carpenter, M. A. and Fredrickson, J. W. (2001). Top management teams, global strategic posture, and the moderating role of uncertainty. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 533–545.CrossRef Google Scholar

Carpenter, M. A., Geletkanycz, M. A. and Sanders, W. G. (2004). Upper echelons research revisited: Antecedents, elements, and consequences of top management team composition. Journal of Management, 30, 749–778.CrossRef Google Scholar

Chen, H. (2014). Board capital, CEO power and R&D investment in electronics firms. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 22(5), 422–436.Google Scholar

Chuang, T., Nakatani, K. and Zhou, D. (2009) An exploratory study of the extent of information technology adoption in SMEs: An application of upper echelon theory. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 22, 183–196.CrossRef Google Scholar

Cook, A. and Glass, C. (2017). Women on corporate boards: Do they advance corporate social responsibility? Human Relations, 71(7), 897–924.CrossRef Google Scholar

Crane, A. and Matten, D. (2007). Business ethics. Managing corporate citizenship and sustainability in the age of globalization, 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Datta, D. K., Gutherie, J. P. and Wright, P. M. (2005). Human resource management and labor productivity: Does industry matter? Academy of Management Journal, 48(1), 135-145.Google Scholar

DeBakker, F., Groenewegen, P. and DenHond, F. (2005). A bibliometric analysis of 30 years of research and theory on corporate social responsibility and corporate social performance. Business and Society, 44(3), 283–317.Google Scholar

Drucker, P. F. (1984). The new meaning of corporate social responsibility. California Management Review, 26(2), 53–63.CrossRef Google Scholar

Eagly, A. H. (1987). Gender differences in social behavior: A social-role interpretation. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Eagly, A. H. and Carli, L. (2003). The female leadership advantage: An evaluation of the evidence. The Leadership Quarterly, 14, 807–834.Google Scholar

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

Eisenhardt, K. M., Kahwajy, J. L. and Bourgeois, L. J. (1997). Conflict and strategic choice: How top management teams disagree. California Management Review, 39(2), 42–62.Google Scholar

Erkut, S., Kramer, V. W. and Konrad, A. M. (2008). Critical mass: Does the number of women on a corporate board make a difference? In Vinnicombe, S., Singh, V., Burke, R., Bilimoria, D. and Huse, M, eds., Women on Corporate Boards of Directors: International Research and Practice, London: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar

Escriba-Esteve, A., Sanchez-Peinado, L. and Sanchez-Peinado, E. (2009). The influence of top management teams in the strategic orientation and performance of small and medium-sized enterprises. British Journal of Management, 20, 581–97.Google Scholar

European Professional Women’s Network (2008). 3rd European PWN Board Women Monitor.Google Scholar

European Union [EU] (2016). Corporate social responsibility for All Project Turkey, Sustainability Reporting National Review Report.Google Scholar

Finkelstein, S. and Hambrick, D. C. (1996). Strategic leadership: Top executives and their effects on organizations. Minneapolis/St. Paul: West.Google Scholar

Finkelstein, S., Hambrick, D. C. and 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., Whitehead, J. and Campbell, A. (2009). What drives leaders to make bad decisions? Leader to leader, 53, 52–58.Google Scholar

Fombrun, C. J. (2006). Corporate governance. Corporate Reputation Review, 8, 267–271.Google Scholar

Forbes, D. and Milliken, F. (1999). Cognition and corporate governance: Understanding boards of directors as strategic decision‐making groups. Academy of Management Review, 24(3), 489‐505.CrossRef Google Scholar

Galbreath, J. (2011). Are there gender-related influences on corporate sustainability? A study of women on boards of directors. Journal of Management and Organization, 17(1), 17–38.Google Scholar

Gamerschlag, R., Moller, K. and Verbeeten, F. (2011). Determinants of voluntary CSR disclosure: Empirical evidence from Germany. Review of Managerial Science, 5(2–3), 233–262.Google Scholar

García-Meca, E., García-Sánchez, I. M. and Martínez-Ferrero, J. (2015). Board diversity and its effects on bank performance: An international analysis. Journal of Banking and Finance, 53, 202–214.Google Scholar

García-Retamero, R. and López-Zafra, E. (2006). Prejudice against women in male-congenial environments: Perceptions of gender role congruity in leadership. Sex Roles, 55 (1–2), 51–61.Google Scholar

Glass, C., Cook, A. and 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, 495–511.Google Scholar

Glick, P. and Fiske, S. T. (2007). Sex discrimination: The psychological approach. In Crosby, F. J., Stockdale, M. S. and Ropp, S. A., eds., Sex discrimination in the workplace. Malden: Blackwell 155–187.Google Scholar

Glick, P., Fiske, S. T. et al., (2000). Beyond prejudice as simple antipathy: Hostile and Benevolent sexism across cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79 , 763–775.Google Scholar

Glick, P., Sakalli-Uğurlu, N., Akbas, G., Orta, I.M. and Ceylan, S. (2016). Why do women endorse honor beliefs? Ambivalent sexism and religiosity as predictors. Sex Roles, 75, 543–554.CrossRef Google Scholar

Glick, P., Wilk, K. and Perreault, M. (1995). Images of occupations: Components of gender and status in occupational stereotypes. Sex Roles, 32, 565–582.Google Scholar

Golden, B. R. and Zajac, E. J. (2001). When will boards influence strategy? Inclination power strategic change. Strategic Management Journal, 22, 1087–1111.Google Scholar

Gray, R., Javad, M., Power, D. M. and Sinclair, C. D. (2001). Social and environmental disclosure and corporate characteristics: A research note and extension. Journal of Business Finance & Account, 28(3–4), 327–356.Google Scholar

Hambrick, D. (1989). Guest editor’s introduction: Putting top managers back in the strategy picture. Strategic Management Review, 10, 5–15.Google Scholar

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

Hambrick, D. and Mason, P. (1984). Upper echelons: the organization as a reflection of its top managers. Academy of Management Review, 9(2), 193–206.Google Scholar

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

Heilman, M. E. (1997). Gender discrimination and the affirmative action remedy: The role of gender stereotypes. Journal of Business Ethics, 16, 877–889.Google Scholar

Heilman, M. E. (2001). Description and prescription: How gender stereotypes prevent women’s ascent up the organizational ladder. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 657–674.CrossRef Google Scholar

Heilman, M. E. and Okimoto, T. G. (2007). Why are women penalized for success at male tasks? The implied communality deficit. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 81–92.Google Scholar

Hermann, P. and Datta, D. K. (2005). Relationships between top management team Characteristics and international diversification: An empirical investigation. British Journal of Management, 16(1), 69–78.Google Scholar

Holme, R. and Watts, P. (2000). Corporate social responsibility: Making good business sense. Geneva: The World Business Council for Sustainable Development.Google Scholar

Horwitz, S. K. and Horwitz, I. B. (2007). The effects of team diversity on team outcomes: a meta-analytic review of team demography. Journal of Management, 33, 987–1015.Google Scholar

Hoskisson, R. E., Eden, L., Lau, C. M. and Wright, M. (2000). Strategy in emerging economies. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 249–267.Google Scholar

House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P. W. and Gupta, V. eds., (2004). Culture, leadership, and organizations: The globe study of 62 societies. California: Sage Publications, Inc.Google Scholar

International Finance Corporation (2011). Focus: Women on Boards; A Conversation with Male Directors. A Global Corporate Governance Forum Publication.Google Scholar

International Labor Office [ILO] (1999). Worst Forms of Child Labor Convention. No. 182.Google Scholar

International Labor Office (1958). Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention. No. 111.Google Scholar

International Labor Office (1951). Equal Remuneration Convention. No. 100.Google Scholar

International Labor Office (1949). Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention. No. 98.Google Scholar

Jackson, S. E., Joshi, A. and Erhardt, N. L. (2003). Recent research on group and organizational diversity: SWOT analysis and implications. Journal of Management, 29, 801–830.Google Scholar

Jehn, K. A., Northcraft, G. B. and Neale, M. A. (1999). Why differences make a difference: A field study of diversity, conflict and performance in workgroups. Administrative Science Quarterly 44(4), 741–763.Google Scholar

Kanter, R. M. (1977). Some effects of proportions on group life. American Journal of Sociology, 82(5), 965–990.Google Scholar

Karakitapoğlu-Aygün, Z. and İmamoğlu, E. O. (2002). Value domains of Turkish adults and university students. The Journal of Social Psychology, 142, 333–351.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Khan, Z., Lew, Y. K. and Park, B. (2015). Institutional legitimacy and norms-based CSR marketing practices: Insights from MNCs operating in a developing economy. International Marketing Review, 32(5), 463–491.Google Scholar

Khanna, T., Palepu, K. G. and Sinha, J. (2005). Strategies that fit emerging markets. Harvard Business Review, 83(6), 63–74.Google Scholar

Kidder, D. L. and Parks McLean, J. (2001). The good soldier: Who is she? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 228, 939–959.Google Scholar

Kirsch, A. (2018). The gender composition of corporate boards: A review and research agenda. The Leadership Quarterly, 29, 346–364.Google Scholar

Kochan, T., Bezrukova, K., Ely, R., Jackson, S., Joshi, A., Jehn, K. and Thomas, D. (2003). The effects of diversity on business performance: Report of the diversity research network. Human Resource Management, 42, 3–21.Google Scholar

Konrad, A. M., Kramer, V. and Erkut, S. (2008). Critical mass: The impact of three or more women on corporate boards. Organizational Dynamics, 37(2), 145–164.Google Scholar

Kolk, A. (2005). Environmental reporting by multinationals from the Triad: Convergence or divergence. Management International Review, 45(1), 145–167.Google Scholar

Kumra, S. and Vinnicombe, S. (2008). A study of the promotion to partner process in a professional services firm: How women are disadvantaged. British Journal of Management, 19, S65–S74.Google Scholar

Lawrence, B. S. (1997). The black box of organizational demography. Organization Science, 8, 1–22.CrossRef Google Scholar

Levine, J. M. and Moreland, R. L. (1990). Progress in small group research. Annual Review of Psychology, 41, 585–634.Google Scholar

Lin, C. (2008). Clarifying the relationship between organizational citizenship behaviors, gender, and knowledge sharing in workplace organizations in Taiwan. Journal of Business and Psychology, 22, 241–250.Google Scholar

Lindgreen, A., Maon, F., Reast, J. and Yani-De-Soriano, M. (2012). Guest editorial: Corporate social responsibility in controversial industry sectors. Journal of Business Ethics, 110(4), 393–395.Google Scholar

McWilliams, A. and Siegel, D. (2001). Corporate social responsibility: A theory of the firm perspective. Academy of Management Review, 26(1), 117–127.Google Scholar

Michel, J. G. and Hambrick, D. C. (1992). Diversification posture and top management team characteristics. Academy of Management Journal, 35, 9–37.Google Scholar

Milliken, F. J. and Martins, L. L. (1996). Searching for common threads: Understanding the multiple effects of diversity in organizational groups. Academy of Management Journal, 21, 402–433.Google Scholar

Mun, E. and Jung, J. (2018). Change above the glass ceiling: Corporate social responsibility and gender diversity in Japanese firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 63(2), 409–440.Google Scholar

Murray, A. I. (1989). Top management group heterogeneity and firm performance. Strategic Leaders and Leadership, 10(1), 125–141.Google Scholar

Nguyen, H. and Faff, R. (2012). Impact of board size and board diversity on firm value: Australian evidence. Corporate Ownership and Control, 4, 24–32.Google Scholar

Nielsen, S. (2010). Top management team diversity: A review of theories and methodologies, International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(3), 301–316.Google Scholar

Official Gazette (T.C. Resmi Gazete), 11/02/2011, No:28201.Google Scholar

Official Gazette (T.C. Resmi Gazete), 30/12/2011, No:28158.Google Scholar

Öngen, D. E. (2007). The relationships between sensation seeking and gender role orientations among Turkish university students. Sex Roles, 57, 111–118.Google Scholar

Özdemir, F. (2016). Çelişik duygulu cinsiyetçilik üzerinde dini yönelim tiplerinin yordayici gücü (The predictive power of religious orientation type on ambivalent sexism), Nesne, 4, 89–107.Google Scholar

Özkan, T. and Lajunen, T. (2005). Masculinity, femininity, and the Bem sex role inventory in Turkey. Sex Roles, 52, 103–110. PDP (2018). Public Disclosure Platform. Available at www.kap.org.tr/en/, accessed April 11, 2018,Google Scholar

Pelled, L. H. (1996). Demographic diversity, conflict, and work group outcomes: an intervening process theory. Organizational Science, 7, 615–631.Google Scholar

Pelled, L., Eisenhardt, K. and Xin, K. (1999). Exploring the black box: An analysis of work group diversity, conflict, and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 1–28.Google Scholar

Pitcher, P. and Smith, A. D. (2001). Top management team heterogeneity: Personality, power, and proxies. Organization Science, 12, 1–18.Google Scholar

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

Richardson, G., Taylor, G. G. and Lanis, R. (2016). Women on the board of directors and corporate tax aggressiveness in Australia: An empirical analysis. Accounting Research Journal, 29(3), 313–331.Google Scholar

Rindova, V. (1999). What corporate boards have to do with strategy: A cognitive perspective. Journal of Management Studies, 36, 953–75.Google Scholar

Roberto, M. A. (2003). The stable core and dynamic periphery in top management teams. Management Decision, 41, 120–131.Google Scholar

Rudman, L. A. (1998). Self-promotion as a risk factor for women: The costs and benefits of counterstereotypical impression management. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 629–645.Google Scholar

Rudman, L. A. and Fairchild, K. (2004). Reactions to counterstereotypic behavior: The role of backlash in cultural stereotype maintenance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 157–176.Google Scholar

Rudman, L. A. and Kilianski, S. E. (2000), Implicit and explicit attitudes toward female authority. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 1315–1328.Google Scholar

Rudman, L. A., Moss-Racusin, C. A., Phelan, J. E. and Nauts, S. (2012). Status incongruity and backlash effects: Defending the gender hierarchy motivates prejudice against female leaders, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 165–179.Google Scholar

Rudman, A. and Phelan, J. E. (2008). Backlash effects for disconfirming gender stereotypes in organizations, Research in Organizational Behavior, 28, 61–79.Google Scholar

Sabanci University. (2017). Women on Board Turkey, 5th Annual Report, Corporate Governance Forum of Turkey.Google Scholar

Sakalli, N. (2001). Beliefs about wife beating among Turkish college students: The effects of patriarchy, sexism, and sex differences. Sex Roles, 44, 599–610.Google Scholar

Sakalli-Uğurlu, N. (2002), Çelişik duygulu cinsiyetçilik ölçeği: geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması (Ambivalent sexism inventory: a study of reliability and validity). Türk Psikoloji Dergisi (Turkish Journal of Psychology), 17, 47–58.Google Scholar

Sakalli-Uğurlu, N. and Beydoğan, B. (2002). Turkish college students’ attitudes toward women managers: The effects of patriarchy, sexism, and gender differences. Journal of Psychology, 136(6), 647–656.Google Scholar

Sambharya, R. B. (1996). Foreign experience of top management teams and international diversification strategies of U.S. multinational corporations. Strategic Management Journal, 17, 739–46.Google Scholar

Schwartz, S. H. (1994). Beyond individualism-collectivism: New cultural dimensions of values. In Kim, U., Triandis, H. C., Kagitcibasi, C., Choi, S.-C. and Yoon, G., eds., Individualism and collectivism: Theory, method and applications, pp. 85–119. London: Sage.Google Scholar

Sexton, D. L. and Bowman-Upton, N. (1990). Female and male entrepreneurs: Psychological characteristics and their role in gender related discrimination. Journal of Business Venturing, 5, 29–36.Google Scholar

Sharma, S. and Henriques, I. (2005). Stakeholder influences on sustainability practices in the Canadian forest products industry. Strategic Management Journal, 26(2), 159–180.Google Scholar

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

Sümer, H. C. (2006). Women in management: Still waiting to be full members of the club. Sex Roles, 55, 63–72.Google Scholar

Stulmacher, A. F. and Poitras, J. (2010), Gender and job role congruence: A field study of trust in labor mediators. Sex Roles, 63, 489–499.Google Scholar

TCMA [Turkish Capital Markets Association] (2014). The handbook of the Turkish Capital Markets. Istanbul: TCMA Publication.Google Scholar

TISK (2016). Corporate social responsibility for All Project Turkey, sustainability reporting, National Review Report. available at http://tisk.org.tr/en/wp-content/uploads/192016/04/CSR.pdf accessed February 25, 2018.Google Scholar

TurkStat (2017). Laborforce statistics. Available from www.tuik.gov.tr/PreHaberBultenleri.do?id=24630 accessed August 25, 2017.Google Scholar

UNDP/EU Commission (2008). Turkey Corporate Social Responsibility Baseline Report. available from http://kssd.org/site/dl/uploads/CSR_Report_en.pdf accessed April 28, 2018.Google Scholar

Ward, S. J. and King, L. A. (2018). Gender differences in emotion explain women’s lower immoral intentions and harsher moral condemnation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 44, 653–669.Google Scholar

Welbourne, T. M., Cycyota, C. S. and Ferrante, C. J. (2007). Wall street reaction to women IPOs: An examination of gender diversity in top management teams. Group & Organization Management, 32, 524–547.Google Scholar

Westphal, J. D. (1999). Collaboration in the boardroom: Behavioral and performance consequences of CEO-board social ties. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 7–24.Google Scholar

Wiersema, M. F. and Bantel, K. A. (1992). Top management team demography and corporate strategic change. Academy of Management Journal, 35(1), 91–121.Google Scholar

Williams, K. Y. and O’Reilly, C. A. (1998). Demography and diversity in organizations: a review of 40 years of research. Research in Organizational Behavior, 20, 77–140.Google Scholar

Wright, M., Filatotchev, I., Hoskisson, R. E. and Peng, M. W. (2005). Strategy research in emerging economies: Challenging the conventional wisdom. Journal of Management Studies, 42, 1–33.CrossRef Google Scholar

World Commission on Economic Development [WCED] (1987). Our common future. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

World Economic Forum (2016). The global gender gap report. Available at http://reports.weforum.org/global-gender-gap-report- 192016/ accessed April 25, 2018.Google Scholar

World Economic Forum (2016). Gender parity and human capital. Global gender gap Report. Available from http://reports.weforum.org/global-gender-gap-report- 192016/rankings/ accessed April 25, 2018.Google Scholar

Yang, Q., Xue, Y. and Yurtoglu, B. B. (2007). Does the Strategic Role and the Control Role of the Board of Directors Exist in Chinese Listed Companies? (Project No. 07JC630057) and (Project No. 2008BJB018), Shanghai, China: Social Science of Educational Minister project and Shanghai Social Science.Google Scholar

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Why this information is here

This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.

Accessibility Information

Accessibility compliance for the HTML of this chapter is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.