2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.jeconbus.2010.05.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Gender differences in executive compensation: Variation with board gender composition and time

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

10
65
2
1

Year Published

2011
2011
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 73 publications
(87 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
10
65
2
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Next, we need to identify who were the key executive team members for this sample of banks by applying a similar coding method as Elkinawy andStater (2011) andBertrand andHallock (2001) and making a complete rank-ordering of all of the titles in determining which title is the highest (see Table 2). …”
Section: Data Sources and Sample Periodmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Next, we need to identify who were the key executive team members for this sample of banks by applying a similar coding method as Elkinawy andStater (2011) andBertrand andHallock (2001) and making a complete rank-ordering of all of the titles in determining which title is the highest (see Table 2). …”
Section: Data Sources and Sample Periodmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, Smith et al (2013) indicate that a female chairman on the board of directors has a negative effect on the chances for the promotion of a female to CEO. On the other hand, Matsa and Miller (2011) and Elkinawy and Stater (2011) find a positive spillover effect of the presence of female board members on the probability of having female top executives among the listed U.S. companies. To address this issue, we use the female CEO dummy as an additional explanatory variable in the estimations for the presence and the ratio of female directors.…”
Section: Female Directorsmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…4 Studies from the viewpoint of female labor mainly focus on the issue of the gender gap in compensation (e.g., Bell, 2005;Elkinawy and Stater, 2011;Bugeja et al, 2012) and discrimination in promotion by gender (Bertrand and Hallock, 2001;Elkinawy and Stater, 2011;Matsa and Miller, 2011;Gayle et al, 2012;Conyon, 2014). 5 On the other hand, the major interests of the studies in the field of finance and corporate governance are the effect of the female director on company performance (e.g., Carter et al, 2003;Wolfers, 2006;Adams and Ferreira, 2009;Gul et al, 2011;Ahern and Dittmar, 2012;Dezsö and Ross, 2012;Pathan and Faff, 2013;Matsa and Miller, 2013;Gregory-Smith et al, 2014) and the different management styles of female leaders (e.g., Gul et al, 2011;Huang and Kisgen, 2013;Matsa and Miller, 2014).…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We focus only on CEOs because it is the most homogenous of all executive roles. Hence we do not need to define the different executive roles and assume that executives holding the same title across firms have the same responsibilities (Elkinawy and Stater, 2011;Bertrand and Hallock, 2001). An additional advantage of our study is, that in comparison to prior studies examining whether CEO (as opposed to all executives) pay differs with gender, this study uses a larger and more recent sample of CEO firm-years than examined in prior research.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The propensity score matching technique used in this study identifies control firms within year and industry using firm size (sales), board size and percentage of female directors as matching variables. We include the percentage of female directors as a control because previous research reports that firms are more likely to have female executives when the board comprises a greater proportion of female directors (Elkinawy andStater, 2011, Bell, 2005). Our results indicate that the use of propensity score matching identifies control firms that are statistically similar across multiple dimensions to firms with a female CEO.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%