corporate reputation, corporate social responsibility, board diversity, boards of directors, gender composition,

No abstract

This study contributes to the work on board composition and firm corporate social responsibility by extending it to the environmental domain. It evaluates the relationship between boards of directors’ composition and environmental corporate social responsibility (ECSR) by integrating literatures on board composition, firm corporate social responsibility, and individual differences in attitudes toward and information about environmental issues. Using disclosed company data and the natural environment ratings data from Kinder Lydenberg Domini (KLD) Inc. for 78 Fortune 1000 companies, the study finds that a higher proportion of outside board directors is associated with more favorable ECSR and higher KLD strengths scores. Firms with boards composed of three or more female directors received higher KLD strengths scores. And, boards whose directors average closer to 56 years in age and those with a higher proportion of Western European directors are more likely to implement environmental governance structures or processes. Our results also reinforce growing concerns around unidimensional KLD measures.

Research Question Whether and how women directors influence firms' engagement in socially responsible business practices and social reputation among diverse stakeholders is unclear due to conflicting empirical evidence, the lack of a coherent theory linking these variables, and inattention to the national contexts in which these relationships occurs. Research Findings Results from our meta‐analysis of 87 independent samples suggest that, while generally positive, the female board representation–social performance relationship is even more positive in national contexts when boards may be more motivated to draw on the resources that women directors bring to a board (i.e., among firms operating in countries with stronger shareholder protections) and in contexts where intra‐board power distribution may be more balanced (i.e., in countries with higher gender parity). Theoretical Implications Future studies should more attentively examine how firms' institutional contexts enhance or mitigate the relationship between women's representation on boards and corporate social performance. Our findings also highlight the need for a comprehensive understanding of the social performance‐related knowledge, perspectives, and values that men and women bring to boards. Practitioner/Policy Implications Our results suggest that, to enhance any benefits of diversity for corporate social performance, efforts be directed at holding boards more accountable toward diverse stakeholders and improving the status of women in society and in the workforce.

Workforce diversity refers to the composition of work units in terms of the cultural or demographic characteristics that are salient and symbolically meaningful in the relationships among group members. Although generally thought of as the purview of management research, the topic of workforce diversity draws from and is relevant to research from sociology and psychology. In this review, we highlight two issues: (a) the importance of the substantial research on inequality to an adequate understanding of workforce diversity and (b) the need to link discussions of workforce diversity to the structural relationships among groups within the society. We organize the review in terms of three dimensions of the relationships among groups: power, status, and numbers (or composition). We highlight research from sociology, psychology, and management and show similarities and gaps across these fields. We also briefly discuss the outcomes of workforce diversity in the workplace.

Reviewing a body of work presents unique opportunities for making a theoretical contribution. Review articles can make readers think theoretically differently about a given field or phenomenon. Yet, review articles that advance theory have been historically under‐represented in Journal of Management Studies. Accordingly, the purpose of this editorial is to propose a multi‐faceted approach for fashioning theoretical contributions in review articles, which we hope will inspire more authors to develop and submit innovative, original, and high‐quality theory‐building review articles. We argue that advancing theory with review articles requires an integrative and generative approach. We propose a non‐exhaustive set of avenues for developing theory with a review article: exposing emerging perspectives, analysing assumptions, clarifying constructs, establishing boundary conditions, testing new theory, theorizing with systems theory, and theorizing with mechanisms. As a journal, Journal of Management Studies is a journal of ideas – new ideas; ideas drawn from reflections on extant theory and ideas with potential to change the way we understand and interpret theory. With this in mind, we think that advancing theory with review articles is an untapped source of new ideas.

No abstract

No abstract