Board Diversity: More than a Gender Issue?

Michael A. Adams
{"title":"Board Diversity: More than a Gender Issue?","authors":"Michael A. Adams","doi":"10.21153/DLR2015VOL20NO1ART497","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There has been extensive research conducted on the importance of corporate governance around the world. The research seems to demonstrate that, regardless of whether corporations are based in common law or civil code systems, their longevity and sustainability arise from good corporate governance. However, the evidence does not clearly demonstrate a correlation between a particular organisation’s governance structure and practices and its share price. Around the world the question of board diversity is gaining in importance. The beginning of the debate in the 1960s centred on gender. While it is essential to conduct a debate on gender diversity, other aspects of diversity should also be considered. Race, culture and even age may have a direct impact on the performance of a board. Australian companies, particularly those listed on the ASX, have a poor record of instituting any type of diversity. The USA and European Union have a much wider range of policies to promote diversity on corporate boards. The key question is how best to regulate to promote diversity across gender, race, culture and age. The historical approach of regulating diversity by setting targets and requiring disclosure does not seem to have delivered substantial change. Is it the right time to impose mandatory requirements, or are there other alternative strategies? Without doubt change is required, but there will be opposition.","PeriodicalId":43081,"journal":{"name":"Deakin Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Deakin Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21153/DLR2015VOL20NO1ART497","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

There has been extensive research conducted on the importance of corporate governance around the world. The research seems to demonstrate that, regardless of whether corporations are based in common law or civil code systems, their longevity and sustainability arise from good corporate governance. However, the evidence does not clearly demonstrate a correlation between a particular organisation’s governance structure and practices and its share price. Around the world the question of board diversity is gaining in importance. The beginning of the debate in the 1960s centred on gender. While it is essential to conduct a debate on gender diversity, other aspects of diversity should also be considered. Race, culture and even age may have a direct impact on the performance of a board. Australian companies, particularly those listed on the ASX, have a poor record of instituting any type of diversity. The USA and European Union have a much wider range of policies to promote diversity on corporate boards. The key question is how best to regulate to promote diversity across gender, race, culture and age. The historical approach of regulating diversity by setting targets and requiring disclosure does not seem to have delivered substantial change. Is it the right time to impose mandatory requirements, or are there other alternative strategies? Without doubt change is required, but there will be opposition.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
董事会多元化:不仅仅是性别问题?
公司治理的重要性在世界范围内得到了广泛的研究。这项研究似乎表明,无论公司是建立在普通法体系还是民法典体系的基础上,它们的寿命和可持续性都源于良好的公司治理。然而,证据并没有清楚地证明特定组织的治理结构和实践与其股价之间存在相关性。在世界各地,董事会多元化的问题正变得越来越重要。在20世纪60年代,争论的焦点是性别。虽然必须就性别多样性进行辩论,但也应考虑到多样性的其他方面。种族、文化甚至年龄都可能对董事会的表现产生直接影响。澳大利亚公司,尤其是在澳交所上市的公司,在实行任何形式的多元化方面都记录不佳。美国和欧盟有更广泛的政策来促进公司董事会的多样性。关键问题是如何最好地监管以促进跨性别、种族、文化和年龄的多样性。历史上通过设定目标和要求披露信息来管理多样性的做法,似乎并没有带来实质性的变化。现在是实施强制性要求的合适时机吗,还是有其他替代策略?毫无疑问,改革是必要的,但也会有反对意见。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Recommendations on the Optimal Constitutional Recognition of the First Nations in Australia Damages for Wrongful Fertilisation: Reliance on Policy Considerations ‘The Foundation of Choice of Law: Choice and Equality’ by Sagi Peari Dissonance in Global Financial Law The Peripatetic Nature of EU Corporate Tax Law
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1