Birds of a feather flock (even more) together: An intergroup relations perspective on how #MeToo‐related media coverage affects the evaluation of prospective corporate directors

Abstract

This study examines how incumbent director reactions to media coverage of the #MeToo movement have impacted the evaluation of prospective corporate directors. We argue that heightened intergroup anxiety related to male-female interactions leads incumbents to seize on social attributes that bolster category-based trust in the reliability of prospective directors' interpersonal behavior. We predict that in response to #MeToo coverage, incumbents evaluate board candidates more positively when they share demographic characteristics or have prior social connections, and these effects are strengthened when incumbents socially identify with the firm. Empirical analyses using a longitudinal survey of evaluations of director candidates support these predictions. Our findings suggest how social movements can produce unintended consequences by inadvertently triggering psychological processes that partially offset the anticipated benefits of the movement. Managerial Summary: Increased coverage of #MeToo has heightened concerns among board members about male-female interactions on the board. Our

Director’s Identifications to Multiple Identities, Social Groups, and Board Oversight Roles: A Scoping Review

“…The in-group favoritism explains why employee representative directors may strategically decide to maximize the stakeholder (the employee) benefits in the boardroom (Adams et al, 2011). In the nominating committee of a multi-ethnic board, out-group salience is evident when Malay or Chinese members of the nominating committee form the majority, leading to a reduction in board diversity and affect their board tasks (Pirzada et al, 2017), and concern about the #MeToo movement triggers stress among nominating committee members, leading them to recommend potential new board members with similar demographic characteristics (Bednar et al, 2022). For outside directors who identified themselves as the in-group members with the majority usually end-up being a conformist, decreasing the monitoring role and are likely to be reappointed (Yoo & Koh, 2022).…”

“…Likewise, Cannella et al (2015) also found that both directors (the family-founder and lone-founder) strategically appoint external directors with similar experiences and serve longer to maintain their sense of belonging to the firms and prevent their untrustworthiness. Similarly, ORID’s strength helps to appoint new board members with similar demographics to ensure no issues arise related to the #MeToo movement to protect the organization’s image (Bednar et al, 2022). The result is in tandem with the proposition that the stronger the ORID, the higher the directors value the organizations’ essence.…”

“…However, their counterparts in private companies perform the tasks of monitoring and providing resources equally well. The level of identification with the organization also leads directors to support the appointment of new directors who are demographically similar and connected to the existing board to maintain the organization's positive image (Bednar et al, 2022).…”

Organizational hubris: Its antecedents and consequences for stakeholder relationships

“…Further, our paper contributes to strategy process research aiming to understand how the media (e.g., Bednar et al, 2022), analysts (e.g., Benner & Ranganathan, 2012), and other stakeholders (e.g., Li et al, 2022) shape strategy formation. While organizations frequently seek out positive coverage (Westphal et al, 2012), our work suggests that organizational hubris is a potential dark side of public adulation that can have long‐lasting implications.…”

Corporate Boards with Street Smarts? How Diffuse Street Protests Indirectly Shape Corporate Governance

“…Although many governance researchers have studied the antecedents of demographic diversity in the boardroom, including organizational predictors (Hillman, Shropshire, and Cannella, 2007) and industry peer pressure (Knippen, Shen, and Zhu, 2019), we know little about whether local events at the community level can impact boardroom diversity and corporate governance. Of particular relevance, a recent study by Bednar, Westphal, and McDonald (2022) found that media coverage of the #MeToo social movement can influence how incumbent directors evaluate prospective director candidates. In addition, McDonnell and Cobb (2020) found that social activism directly targeting firms can prompt the departure of directors who hold similar values as those of the activists.…”