Does board gender diversity reduce workplace sexual harassment?

Abstract

Research Question/IssueWe contrast the predictions of gender socialization theory and “fem‐power washing” (deceptively positioning as a firm promoting female empowerment without any tangible actions) to investigate whether promoting female directors on the board of directors associates with a reduction in the prevalence of firm‐level workplace sexual harassment (SH).Research Findings/InsightsWe estimate the incidence rate of SH through textual analysis of US employees' job reviews published online during the period 2011–2021. We find that an increase of one female director is associated with a 21.81% decrease in workplace SH and that firms with high board gender diversity synchronize the reduction in SH with improved social policies (e.g., policies to better employee relations, health and safety, or diversity challenges). Our results do not support the fem‐power washing theory but rather imply that nominating female directors may have a profound impact on the firm's ethical culture.Theoretical/Academic ImplicationsThis study validates the ethical dimension of corporate governance: Nominating female directors impacts a firm harassment culture and, by extension, a firm's ethical and corporate culture. This study adds to the governance literature that debates the merits of board gender diversity by highlighting an oft‐ignored channel through which board diversity affects firm value: ethics and corporate culture.Practitioner/Policy ImplicationsFor boards of directors, having more female directors can curb workplace SH, a behavior that is associated with a severe and lasting negative effect on firm value. For practitioners, regulators, and the business community, this study reinforces the merits of aiming towards more gender‐balanced boards.

Employer ratings in social media and firm performance: Evidence from an explainable machine learning approach

“…Social media provides academics with a new fruitful source of information to be exploited in applied research (e.g., Chen et al, 2021; Li et al, 2022; Marty et al, 2020; Nie & Jia, 2021). Social media can be seen as a two‐way channel where the information flow from social media to companies has profound effects on company practices (Li et al, 2022; Nie & Jia, 2021) and, on the other hand, the flow of information from companies to social media reveals interesting knowledge of the inner workings of corporations previously hidden from outside researchers (Au et al, 2021; Green et al, 2019; Marty et al, 2020). This will create challenges on company disclosure practices as traditional disclosure channels are challenged by new rivals from social media (Andrew & Baker, 2020; Linnenluecke et al, 2017).…”

Discrimination announcements, employee opinion, and capital structure: Evidence from the EEOC

“…Specifically, employee surveys, the best place to work awards, the opinion of corporate analysts, and the opinion of industry leaders can impact firm outcomes (Green et al., 2019). There is also more evidence that discrimination‐related issues, such as sexism, have adverse effects on corporate finance (Au, Dong et al., 2022; Au, Tremblay et al., 2022; Lins et al., 2022). However, these studies have yet to analyze the relationship between employee discrimination publicity and employee opinion of the CEO and firm.…”