2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.ribaf.2016.09.004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

European board structure and director expertise: The impact of quotas

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
11
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
1
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…independence (Lending and Vähämaa, 2017). So, the increasing level of board independence can be seen both as evidence of the impact of governance rules and a consequence of more womenoriented boards (Terjesen et al, 2016) 4 The increasing level of gender diversity in the boardroom can also be interpreted as a gradual diffusion of the stakeholder perspective in corporate governance and finance.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…independence (Lending and Vähämaa, 2017). So, the increasing level of board independence can be seen both as evidence of the impact of governance rules and a consequence of more womenoriented boards (Terjesen et al, 2016) 4 The increasing level of gender diversity in the boardroom can also be interpreted as a gradual diffusion of the stakeholder perspective in corporate governance and finance.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There are three main controversial topics of discussion surrounding the debate on the legitimacy of quotas: 1) the justice of quota implementation (Brandth & Bjørkhaug 2015;Hall & Woermann, 2014;Lansing & Chandra, 2012;Terjesen & Sealy, 2016); 2) the compromise of meritocracy by quotas (Dale-Olsen et al, 2013;Kakabadse et al, 2015;Koch, 2015;Lansing & Chandra, 2012;Lending & Vähämaa, 2017;Terjesen & Sealy, 2016); 3) and the implementation of work-life balance policies (Holst & Wrohlich, 2017;Koch, 2015;Lansing & Chandra, 2012;Sandberg, 2013;Wiersema & Mors, 2016).…”
Section: Quotas: Controversies and Dilemmasmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Matters of fairness do not only derive from a selection process based on demographics but also include doubts around meritocracy (Kakabadse et al, 2015). Gender quotas may compromise selection processes based on qualifications, leading to gender bias and to the unnatural selection of qualified candidates from the underrepresented gender (Lending & Vähämaa, 2017). Some authors also warn of the risk of tokenism, reverse-discrimination, cases of nepotism and opposition to quotas among existing women directors, who may then feel stigmatized (Dale-Olsen et al, 2013;Koch, 2015;Lansing & Chandra, 2012).…”
Section: Quotas: Controversies and Dilemmasmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Understanding how a board of directors actually functions and how boards may contribute to financial outcomes has generated major research interest for some time now, and the corporate governance literature has highlighted the key role played by board effectiveness in firms' success. In particular, board diversity has gained significant attention from researchers, investors and policymakers (Mensi-Klarbach, 2014;Lending and Vähämaa, 2017) and has become a priority in most countries with regard to improving the governance of firms. As a result, there is an ongoing debate concerning whether board diversity actually leads to value creation (Kılıç and Kuzey, 2016;Gordini and Rancati, 2017).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%