{"title":"董事会性别多样性、公司风险和中间机制:荟萃分析","authors":"Sylvia Maxfield, Liu Wang","doi":"10.1111/corg.12572","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Research question</h3>\n \n <p>The primary focus of this meta-analysis is to synthesize previously discordant findings on the relationship between board gender diversity (BGD) and different types of firm risk and to explore potential moderating and mediating mechanisms underlying these relationships.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Research findings</h3>\n \n <p>We statistically combine the results from 193 studies and find a negative association between BGD and firm risk. Further investigation indicates that different measures of risk lead to systematically different effect sizes. Our meta-analysis structural equation modeling (MASEM) analysis reveals that BGD's impact on risk operates primarily through the monitoring rather than advising function of the board. Regarding the moderating role of national institutions, we find that several aspects of the national institutional context (e.g., investor protection, gender equality, and national culture) influence the relationship between BGD and different types of risk.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Theoretical implications</h3>\n \n <p>Overall, our results suggest that agency theory has more explanatory power than resource dependence theory for understanding the association between BGD and risk, and women's board representation is more likely to reduce downside risk than upside risk. Our moderating effect analysis also highlights interesting avenues for further research on the interplay of BGD and different risks in national environments with varying institutional attributes.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Practitioner/policy implications</h3>\n \n <p>Our meta-analysis offers important practical implications for corporate risk management, suggesting that BGD significantly mitigates downside risks associated with poor corporate transparency without stifling board support for corporate decisions shaping future growth potential. In an era of rising board vulnerability to litigation for insufficient transparency, this study contributes evidence supporting trends toward greater gender diversity.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":48209,"journal":{"name":"Corporate Governance-An International Review","volume":"32 6","pages":"934-953"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Board gender diversity, firm risk, and the intermediate mechanisms: A meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Sylvia Maxfield, Liu Wang\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/corg.12572\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Research question</h3>\\n \\n <p>The primary focus of this meta-analysis is to synthesize previously discordant findings on the relationship between board gender diversity (BGD) and different types of firm risk and to explore potential moderating and mediating mechanisms underlying these relationships.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Research findings</h3>\\n \\n <p>We statistically combine the results from 193 studies and find a negative association between BGD and firm risk. Further investigation indicates that different measures of risk lead to systematically different effect sizes. Our meta-analysis structural equation modeling (MASEM) analysis reveals that BGD's impact on risk operates primarily through the monitoring rather than advising function of the board. Regarding the moderating role of national institutions, we find that several aspects of the national institutional context (e.g., investor protection, gender equality, and national culture) influence the relationship between BGD and different types of risk.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Theoretical implications</h3>\\n \\n <p>Overall, our results suggest that agency theory has more explanatory power than resource dependence theory for understanding the association between BGD and risk, and women's board representation is more likely to reduce downside risk than upside risk. Our moderating effect analysis also highlights interesting avenues for further research on the interplay of BGD and different risks in national environments with varying institutional attributes.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Practitioner/policy implications</h3>\\n \\n <p>Our meta-analysis offers important practical implications for corporate risk management, suggesting that BGD significantly mitigates downside risks associated with poor corporate transparency without stifling board support for corporate decisions shaping future growth potential. In an era of rising board vulnerability to litigation for insufficient transparency, this study contributes evidence supporting trends toward greater gender diversity.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48209,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Corporate Governance-An International Review\",\"volume\":\"32 6\",\"pages\":\"934-953\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Corporate Governance-An International Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/corg.12572\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Corporate Governance-An International Review","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/corg.12572","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Board gender diversity, firm risk, and the intermediate mechanisms: A meta-analysis
Research question
The primary focus of this meta-analysis is to synthesize previously discordant findings on the relationship between board gender diversity (BGD) and different types of firm risk and to explore potential moderating and mediating mechanisms underlying these relationships.
Research findings
We statistically combine the results from 193 studies and find a negative association between BGD and firm risk. Further investigation indicates that different measures of risk lead to systematically different effect sizes. Our meta-analysis structural equation modeling (MASEM) analysis reveals that BGD's impact on risk operates primarily through the monitoring rather than advising function of the board. Regarding the moderating role of national institutions, we find that several aspects of the national institutional context (e.g., investor protection, gender equality, and national culture) influence the relationship between BGD and different types of risk.
Theoretical implications
Overall, our results suggest that agency theory has more explanatory power than resource dependence theory for understanding the association between BGD and risk, and women's board representation is more likely to reduce downside risk than upside risk. Our moderating effect analysis also highlights interesting avenues for further research on the interplay of BGD and different risks in national environments with varying institutional attributes.
Practitioner/policy implications
Our meta-analysis offers important practical implications for corporate risk management, suggesting that BGD significantly mitigates downside risks associated with poor corporate transparency without stifling board support for corporate decisions shaping future growth potential. In an era of rising board vulnerability to litigation for insufficient transparency, this study contributes evidence supporting trends toward greater gender diversity.
期刊介绍:
The mission of Corporate Governance: An International Review is to publish cutting-edge international business research on the phenomena of comparative corporate governance throughout the global economy. Our ultimate goal is a rigorous and relevant global theory of corporate governance. We define corporate governance broadly as the exercise of power over corporate entities so as to increase the value provided to the organization"s various stakeholders, as well as making those stakeholders accountable for acting responsibly with regard to the protection, generation, and distribution of wealth invested in the firm. Because of this broad conceptualization, a wide variety of academic disciplines can contribute to our understanding.