Manuscript Type: EmpiricalResearch Question/Issue: The increased attention to women on corporate boards presents new challenges to governance research. In this paper we go beyond demography and open the "black box" of board behavior by drawing upon theories of gender differences and group effectiveness.c org_784 136..148 Research Findings/Insights: A unique survey of 201 Norwegian firms is used. The findings suggest that the ratio of women directors is positively associated with board strategic control. In addition, we find that the positive effects of women directors on board effectiveness are mediated through increased board development activities and through decreased level of conflict. However, our results show no evidence for a positive association between women directors and open debate. Nonetheless, open debate enhances board's strategic and operational control. Theoretical/Academic Implications: Recognizing the limitations of traditional governance theories to explain the role and contributions of women on corporate boards, this paper draws upon group effectiveness and gender differences theories to shed some light on whether and how women make a difference to board effectiveness in strategic and operational control. Practitioner/Policy Implications: Women's ability to make a contribution to the board may be attributable to their different leadership styles. The presence of women on corporate boards seems to increase board effectiveness through reducing the level of conflict and ensuring high quality of board development activities.

This research reexamines the equivocal relationship between top management team (TMT) diversity and firm performance. Combining upper echelons theory with insights from institutional theory, we establish a new, timely dimension of TMT diversity—nationality diversity—and develop an integrated multilevel framework explaining how its performance implications vary across contextual settings. We find that nationality diversity is positively related to performance; and this effect is stronger in (a) longer tenured teams, (b) highly internationalized firms, and (c) munificent environments. More generally, our research demonstrates that the consequences of TMT diversity depend on the (1) specific attributes of diversity being considered and (2) firm and industry conditions under which strategic decisions take place. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

No abstract

This paper reviews empirical research on top management team (TMT) diversity. A number of scholars have concluded that upper echelons findings, in particular in terms of the consequences of TMT heterogeneity, have been inconclusive. This review conducts an in-depth analysis of conceptual and methodological issues related to upper echelons diversity studies and offers some directions for future research. Sixty journal articles, published in ten top international journals over a 22-year period (1984-2005), were analyzed. The results suggest that upper echelons research is increasingly multidisciplinary in nature; however, in-depth inquiries into the antecedents of TMT composition and the multilevel contextual influences on the implications of TMT heterogeneity are still needed. This review finds that clarity about level of analysis, both theoretically and empirically, remains an important issue in the field and thus a multilevel approach is strongly encouraged. Moreover, the complexity of diversity as a theoretical construct needs to be acknowledged and operationalized accordingly in upper echelons studies.

This paper addresses recent calls to narrow the micro–macro gap in management research (Bamberger, 2008), by incorporating a macro-level context variable (country) in exploring micro-level determinants of board effectiveness. Following the integrated model proposed by Forbes and Milliken (1999), we identify three board processes as micro-level determinants of board effectiveness. Specifically, we focus on effort norms, cognitive conflicts and the use of knowledge and skills as determinants of board control and advisory task performance. Further, we consider how two different institutional settings influence board tasks, and how the context moderates the relationship between processes and tasks. Our hypotheses are tested on a survey-based dataset of 535 medium-sized and large industrial firms in Italy and Norway, which are considered to substantially differ along legal and cultural dimensions. The findings show that: (i) Board processes have a larger potential than demographic variables to explain board task performance; (ii) board task performance differs significantly between boards operating in different contexts; and (iii) national context moderates the relationships between board processes and board task performance. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

In times of vivid debates about the role of women on corporate boards, this article investigates the contribution of women directors to board decision-making and strategic involvement. Based on survey data from multiple respondents in 120 Norwegian firms, we find that women directors influence board strategic involvement through their contribution to board decision-making, which in turn depends on women directors' professional experiences and the different values they bring along. Drawing upon stereotype threat theory, we further find that perception of women as unequal board members may limit their potential contribution to board decision-making. European Management Review (201 0) 7, 16-29.

Drawing on knowledge-based, organizational learning, and social capital perspectives, we propose and test an integrated framework in which knowledge tacitness and trust act as mediating mechanisms in the relationship between partner characteristics and alliance outcomes. We distinguish between learning and innovation outcomes and suggest that while innovation may result from alliance learning, it can also be created by combining separate knowledge bases "without" learning from each other. We contend that tacitness and trust play differing roles in the pursuit of learning and innovation and test this proposition on a sample of 120 international strategic alliances. Copyright (c) Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2009.

No abstract