On the same page? Differences between male and female board members on the benefits of a gender-balanced representation

Abstract

Purpose This study aims to analyze the interplay between male and female board members’ beliefs about women’s competence to fill board positions (valence), the perceived benefits of a greater gender-balanced boardroom (value) and the significance attributed to the gender quota law as a relevant instrument in eliciting change in board composition. Design/methodology/approach Looking through the lens of expectancy-value theory, the authors investigate whether the perceived benefits of a gender quota law mediate the path between the beliefs about women’s competence to become board members and the perceived benefits of a greater gender-balanced representation in the boardroom. In addition, the authors investigate whether female and male board members share the same beliefs about a gender-balanced representation. Findings The results show that there are differences in beliefs about women’s competencies to become board members and the perceived benefits of a greater gender-balanced boardroom. Female board members hold stronger beliefs on the competence of women to fill board positions and, thus, assign greater importance to the gender quota law, which, in turn, impacts the greater significance attributed to equal representation of women in the boardroom. Practical implications The findings shed new light on the debate concerning gender quotas aimed at promoting gender-balanced boardrooms by pointing out that differences in value expectations between male and female board members may prevent intraboard gender-equal dynamics. Originality/value The study contributes to the literature by adding new insights on how male and female board members perceive the value of legally bound gender quotas, in association with their beliefs about women’s competence to fill board positions (valence) and their expectations in terms of the beneficial outcomes of a more gender-balanced board composition.

Is a critical mass of women always enough to improve firm performance? The importance of the institutional context

“…In these contexts, women are more likely to experience a sense of meritocracy and believe that their qualifications and capabilities have earned them their seat at the table (Hamplová et al , 2022; Casaca et al , 2022). This perception enhances their confidence and engagement, ultimately resulting in a more meaningful contribution to company performance as part of a critical mass of women on boards (Guedes et al , 2023).…”

“…The presence of women in top corporate positions continues to be a highly debated and relevant topic (Martinez-Jimenez et al , 2020; Gharbi and Othmani, 2022). This is evidenced by the increasing number of countries implementing “binding gender quotas” and the growing demand from institutional investors for companies to adopt gender equality practices and policies (Terjesen et al , 2015; Iannotta et al , 2016; Byron and Post, 2016; Guedes et al , 2023; Perrault, 2015). Beyond moral or ethical considerations surrounding gender diversity at the top of companies (Terjesen and Sealy, 2016), the topic continues to attract researchers who are interested in examining the potential benefits of including women on corporate boards.…”

Gender diversity on corporate boards: importance of female traits/characteristics as perceived by university students

“…Expectancy theory focusses on the perceived (what is expected) benefits women bring to corporate boards. Guedes et al. (2023, p. 518) argue that “the value attributed to a greater gender-balanced board is related to whether individuals perceive the outcome as beneficial”.…”