企业董事会招聘女性的决策:性别重要吗?

Sneha Bhardwaj
{"title":"企业董事会招聘女性的决策:性别重要吗?","authors":"Sneha Bhardwaj","doi":"10.1108/edi-08-2021-0188","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThe author provides an insider view of women directors' selections on corporate boards from the empirical setting of India and find if the recruitment practices in this space discriminate against women.Design/methodology/approachThe study collected data from a diverse cohort of 27 directors through semi-structured interviews. The data were analysed by applying an interpretative inductive approach and using the software NVivo's 12-plus version.FindingsThe author’s findings show that board recruiters present different selection criteria and processes to women candidates depending upon heterogeneity among candidates' professional standing. Recruiters view women directors as a diverse cohort and value resourceful and experienced women when making recruitment decisions; these women directors are also found influencing directors' selection processes.Originality/valueThe results question the underlying assumptions of prejudice against women as posited by the feminist and social identity theorists without accounting for the heterogeneity among women and situations. By proposing the female-gender stereotyping deactivation theory in top leadership matters, such as board selections, the author argues that stereotyping becomes irrelevant in the strategic decisions of board selections. This new theorisation about women's access to leadership roles will help the cause of women empowerment both at a cognitive and practical level. Future researchers can test the gender deactivation theory among women leaders in diverse cultural contexts by looking at the intra-cohort differences among women leaders.","PeriodicalId":72949,"journal":{"name":"Equality, diversity and inclusion : an international journal","volume":"28 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Decision-making in the recruitment of women on corporate boards: does gender matter?\",\"authors\":\"Sneha Bhardwaj\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/edi-08-2021-0188\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"PurposeThe author provides an insider view of women directors' selections on corporate boards from the empirical setting of India and find if the recruitment practices in this space discriminate against women.Design/methodology/approachThe study collected data from a diverse cohort of 27 directors through semi-structured interviews. The data were analysed by applying an interpretative inductive approach and using the software NVivo's 12-plus version.FindingsThe author’s findings show that board recruiters present different selection criteria and processes to women candidates depending upon heterogeneity among candidates' professional standing. Recruiters view women directors as a diverse cohort and value resourceful and experienced women when making recruitment decisions; these women directors are also found influencing directors' selection processes.Originality/valueThe results question the underlying assumptions of prejudice against women as posited by the feminist and social identity theorists without accounting for the heterogeneity among women and situations. By proposing the female-gender stereotyping deactivation theory in top leadership matters, such as board selections, the author argues that stereotyping becomes irrelevant in the strategic decisions of board selections. This new theorisation about women's access to leadership roles will help the cause of women empowerment both at a cognitive and practical level. Future researchers can test the gender deactivation theory among women leaders in diverse cultural contexts by looking at the intra-cohort differences among women leaders.\",\"PeriodicalId\":72949,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Equality, diversity and inclusion : an international journal\",\"volume\":\"28 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Equality, diversity and inclusion : an international journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/edi-08-2021-0188\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Equality, diversity and inclusion : an international journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/edi-08-2021-0188","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

作者从印度的经验背景出发,对公司董事会中女性董事的选择提供了一个局内人的视角,并发现在这个空间中的招聘实践是否歧视女性。设计/方法/方法本研究通过半结构化访谈收集了27位董事的数据。通过应用解释性归纳方法并使用NVivo的12 +版本软件对数据进行分析。作者的研究结果表明,董事会招聘人员根据候选人专业地位的异质性,对女性候选人提出了不同的选择标准和流程。招聘人员将女性董事视为一个多元化的群体,在做出招聘决定时重视足智多谋、经验丰富的女性;这些女性董事还影响了董事的选择过程。原创性/价值研究结果质疑了女权主义者和社会身份理论家对女性偏见的潜在假设,而没有考虑到女性和情况的异质性。通过提出女性-性别刻板印象在高层领导事务(如董事会选择)中的钝化理论,作者认为刻板印象在董事会选择的战略决策中变得无关紧要。这一关于女性获得领导角色的新理论将有助于在认知和实践层面上赋予女性权力。未来的研究者可以通过观察女性领导者的群体内差异来检验不同文化背景下女性领导者的性别失活理论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Decision-making in the recruitment of women on corporate boards: does gender matter?
PurposeThe author provides an insider view of women directors' selections on corporate boards from the empirical setting of India and find if the recruitment practices in this space discriminate against women.Design/methodology/approachThe study collected data from a diverse cohort of 27 directors through semi-structured interviews. The data were analysed by applying an interpretative inductive approach and using the software NVivo's 12-plus version.FindingsThe author’s findings show that board recruiters present different selection criteria and processes to women candidates depending upon heterogeneity among candidates' professional standing. Recruiters view women directors as a diverse cohort and value resourceful and experienced women when making recruitment decisions; these women directors are also found influencing directors' selection processes.Originality/valueThe results question the underlying assumptions of prejudice against women as posited by the feminist and social identity theorists without accounting for the heterogeneity among women and situations. By proposing the female-gender stereotyping deactivation theory in top leadership matters, such as board selections, the author argues that stereotyping becomes irrelevant in the strategic decisions of board selections. This new theorisation about women's access to leadership roles will help the cause of women empowerment both at a cognitive and practical level. Future researchers can test the gender deactivation theory among women leaders in diverse cultural contexts by looking at the intra-cohort differences among women leaders.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Who gets to choose: a global perspective on gender, work and choice in the post-pandemic workplace What is there to be happy about? The impact of race and resilience in the United States A key to recovery for working mothers? Psychological detachment and the roles of relaxation, mastery and control on boundary violations Investigating the gender pay gap in the Maltese financial and insurance sector: a macro and micro approach The effects of national and international tourism on income inequality: evidence from Asia-Pacific economies
×
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