Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-zklqj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-31T16:10:07.400Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Board Gender Quotas: Exploring Ethical Tensions From A Multi-Theoretical Perspective

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 February 2016

Siri Terjesen  and
Ruth Sealy
Siri Terjesen
Affiliation:
American University, Norwegian School of Economics
Ruth Sealy
Affiliation:
City University London
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

Despite 40 years of equal opportunities policies and more than two decades of government and organization initiatives aimed at helping women reach the upper echelons of the corporate world, women are seriously underrepresented on corporate boards. Recently, fifteen countries sought to redress this imbalance by introducing gender quotas for board representation. The introduction of board gender quota legislation creates ethical tensions and dilemmas which we categorize in terms of motivations, legitimacy, and outcomes. We investigate these tensions through four overarching theoretical perspectives: institutional, stakeholder, social identity, and social capital. We outline a future research agenda based on how these tensions offer greater focus to research on quotas and more broadly to ethics and diversity in organizations in terms of theory, anticipated ethical tensions, data, and methodology. In sum, our review seeks to synthesize existing multidisciplinary research and stimulate future enquiry on this expanding set of legislation.

Keywords

Affirmative ActionBoardCorporate GovernanceDirectorsGenderQuota

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Business Ethics Quarterly , Volume 26 , Issue 1 , January 2016 , pp. 23 - 65
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Business Ethics 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Adams, R. B., & Ferreira, D. 2009. Women in the boardroom and their impact on governance and performance. Journal of Financial Economics, 94: 291–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adams, R. B., de Haan, J., Terjesen, S., & van Ees, H. 2015. Board diversity: Moving the field forward. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 23(2): 77–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Agle, B. R., Donaldson, T., Freeman, R. E., Jensen, M. C., Mitchell, R. K., & Wood, D. J. 2008. Dialogue: Toward superior stakeholder theory. Business Ethics Quarterly, 18(2): 153–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aguilera, R. V., & Cuervo-Cazurra, A. 2004. The spread of codes of good governance worldwide: What’s the trigger? Organization Studies, 25(3): 415–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aguilera, R. V., & Jackson, G. 2003. The cross-national diversity of corporate governance: Dimensions and determinants. Academy of Management Review, 28(3): 447–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aguilera, R. V., Judge, W. E., & Terjesen, S. 2015. Corporate governance deviance: A middle range theory. Working paper.Google Scholar
Ahern, K. R., & Dittmar, A. K. 2012. The changing of the boards: The impact on firm valuation of mandated female board representation. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 127(1): 137–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Albrecht, G. H. 2003. How friendly are family friendly policies? Business Ethics Quarterly, 13(2): 177–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andorfer, V. A., & Liebe, U. 2013. Consumer behavior in moral markets. On the relevance of identity, justice beliefs, social norms, status, and trust in ethical consumption. European Sociological Review, 29(6): 1251–1265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Armstrong, J., & Walby, S. 2012. Gender quotas in management boards. European Parliament.Google Scholar
Arnardóttir, A. A., & Sigurjonsson, O. 2014. Corporate board selection practices in the wake of gender quota legislation in Iceland. Working paper.Google Scholar
Arnardóttir, A., & Sigurjónsson, O. 2015. Board selection in times of gender quotas. Working paper presented at Conference on Gender Equality, Reykjavik, Iceland.Google Scholar
Arnold, D. G. 2012. Global justice and international business. Business Ethics Quarterly, 23(1): 125–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arnórsdóttir, R. E. 2012. Gender quotas on corporate boards in Iceland: Attitudes within the Icelandic business community. MSc dissertation, Copenhagen Business School, Copenhagen.Google Scholar
Ashforth, B. E., & Mael, F. 1989. Social identity theory and the organization. Academy of Management Review, 14: 20–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arya, B., & Salk, J. E. 2006. Cross-sector alliance learning and effectiveness of voluntary codes of corporate social responsibility. Business Ethics Quarterly, 16(2): 211–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Atewologun, D., & Sealy, R. 2014. Experiencing privilege at ethnic, gender and senior intersections. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 29(4): 423–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bacchi, C. L. 1996. The politics of affirmative action: Women, equality and category politics. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
Banerjee, S. B. 2010. Governing the global corporation: A critical perspective. Business Ethics Quarterly, 20(2): 265–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnard, J. W. 2006. More women on corporate boards: Not so fast. William & Mary Journal of Women & Law, 13(3): 703–726.Google Scholar
Battilana, J. 2006. Agency and institutions: The enabling role of individuals’ social position. Organization, 13(5): 653–676.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Becker, G. S. 1975. Human capital: A theoretical and empirical analysis with special reference to education. New York: NBER.Google Scholar
Berger, J., Cohen, B. P., & Zeldich, M. Jr. 1972. Status characteristics and social interaction. American Sociological Review, 37(3): 241–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berger, J., Fisek, M. H., & Norman, R. Z. 1977. Status characteristics and social interaction: An expectation-states approach. pp. 91–134. Elsevier.Google Scholar
Bergstø, K. 2013. Women mean business: Why and how Norway legislated gender balance on the boards of listed companies. In Machold, S., Huse, M., Hansen, K., & Brogi, M. (Eds.), Getting women on corporate boards: A snowball starting in Norway: 21–23. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Bertrand, M., Black, S. E., Jensen, S., & Lleras-Muney, A. 2014. Breaking the glass ceiling? The effect of board quotas on female labor market outcomes in Norway. Working paper no. w20256, NBER, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Besley, T., Folke, O., Persson, T., & Rickne, J. 2013. Gender quotas and the crisis of the mediocre man: Theory and evidence from Sweden. Working paper no. 985, IFN.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bilimoria, D., & Piderit, S. 1994. Board committee membership: Effects of sex-based bias. Academy of Management Journal, 37(6): 1453–1477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bilimoria, D., & Wheeler, J. V. 2000. Women corporate directors: Current research and future directions. Women in Management: Current Research Issues, 2: 138–163.Google Scholar
BoardEx. 2015. Authors’ calculations from data. August 1.Google Scholar
Bøhren, Ø., & Staubo, S. 2014. Does mandatory gender balance work? Changing organizational form to avoid board upheaval. Journal of Corporate Finance, 28(1): 152–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bøhren, Ø., & Staubo, S. 2015. Mandatory gender balance and board independence. European Financial Management. DOI: 10.1111/eufm.12060.Google Scholar
Bolsø, A., Bjørkhaug, H., & Sørensen, S. 2013. Gender-balanced corporate boards. In Machold, S.et al. (Eds.), Getting women on corporate boards: A snowball starting in Norway: 136–137. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Bosse, D. A., & Phillips, R. A. 2015. Agency theory and bounded self-interest. Academy of Management Review. doi:10.5465/amr.2013.0420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bourdieu, P. 1993. The field of cultural production. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Bourez, V. 2005. Women on boards: Moving beyond tokenism. European Professional Women’s Network.Google Scholar
Branson, D. M. 2012. An Australian perspective on a global phenomenon: Initiatives to place women on corporate boards of directors. Legal Studies Research Paper Series.Google Scholar
Branson, R. 2012. Richard Branson on why we need more women on boards. Entrepreneur. http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/224476.Google Scholar
Brogi, M. 2013. Italy’s lessons learnt from Norway. In Machold, S.et al. (Eds.), Getting women on corporate boards: A snowball starting in Norway: 187–190. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Bromley, P., & Powell, W. W. 2012. From smoke and mirrors to walking the talk: Decoupling in the contemporary world. Academy of Management Annals, V(I): 1–48.Google Scholar
Buchanan, J. M., & Tullock, G. 1962. The calculus of consent: Logical foundations of constitutional democracy. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund.Google Scholar
Cabo, R. de M., Terjesen, S., Gimeno, R., & Escot, L. 2015. The Spanish quota: A missed opportunity? Working paper.Google Scholar
Carrasco, A., Francoeur, C., Labelle, R., Laffarga, J., & Ruiz-Barbadillo, E. 2015. Appointing women to boards: Is there a cultural bias? Journal of Business Ethics, 129(2): 429–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casey, C., Skibnes, R., & Pringle, J. K. 2011. Gender equality and corporate governance: Policy strategies in Norway and New Zealand. Gender, Work, and Organization, 18(6): 613–630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Catalyst. 2015. Quick take: Women on boards. http://www.catalyst.org/knowledge/women-boards.Google Scholar
Chatman, J. A., & O’Reilly, C. A. 2004. Asymmetric reactions to work group sex diversity among men and women. Academy of Management Journal, 47(2): 193–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Choudhury, B. 2015. Gender diversity on boards: Beyond quotas. European Business Law Review, 26(1): 229–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clayton, S. D., & Tangri, S. S. 1989. The justice of affirmative action. In Blanchard, F. A. & Crosby, F. (Eds.), Affirmative action in perspective: 177–192. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coleman, J. S. 1988. Social capital and the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94: S95–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collier, J., & Roberts, J. 2001. An ethic for corporate governance. Business Ethics Quarterly, 11(1): 67–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Connelly, B. L., Tihanyi, L., Crook, T. R., & Gangloff, K. A. 2014. Tournament theory: Thirty years of contests and competitions. Journal of Management, 40(1): 12–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dahlerup, D. 2002. Three waves of feminism in Denmark. In Griffin, G. & Braidotti, R. (Eds), Thinking differently: A reader in European women’s studies: 341–350. London and New York: Zed.Google Scholar
Dahlerup, D. (Ed.). 2013. Women, quotas and politics. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dahlerup, D. 2015. About quotas. In Quota project: Global database of quotas for women. http://www.quotaproject.org.Google Scholar
Dahlerup, D., & Freidenvall, L. 2005. Quotas as a ‘fast track’ to equal representation for women: Why Scandinavia is no longer the model. International Feminist Journal of Politics, 7(1): 26–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dale-Olsen, H., Schøne, P., & Verner, M. 2013. Diversity among Norwegian boards of directors: Does a quota for women improve firm performance? Feminist Economics, 19(4): 110–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davies, M. 2011. Women on boards. London: GEO/BIS. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/women-on-boards-review.Google Scholar
Dawkins, C. 2015. Agonistic pluralism and stakeholder engagement. Business Ethics Quarterly, 25(1): 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Anca, C., & Gabaldon, P. 2014. The media impact of board member appointments in Spanish-listed companies: A gender perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 122(3): 425–438.Google Scholar
Dhir, A. A. 2015. Challenging boardroom homogeneity: Corporate law, governance & diversity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DiMaggio, P. 1988. Interest and agency in institutional theory. In Zucker, L. (Ed.), Institutional patterns and organizations culture and environment: 3–21. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.Google Scholar
DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. (Eds.). 1991. The new institutionalism in organizational analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Doh, J. 2012. Corporate social strategy: Stakeholder engagement and competitive advantage. Business Ethics Quarterly, 22(4): 776–778.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doldor, E., Sealy, R., & Vinnicombe, S. Forthcoming. Accidental activists: Headhunters as marginal diversity actors in institutional change towards more women on boards. Human Resource Management Journal.Google Scholar
Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. E. 1995. The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. Academy of Management Review, 20(1): 65–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dubbink, W. 2005. Democracy and private discretion in business. Business Ethics Quarterly, 15(1): 37–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eagly, A. H., & Karau, S. J. 2002. Role congruity theory of prejudice towards female leaders. Psychological Review, 109(3): 573–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Economist. 2014. The spread of gender quotas for company boards. May 25.Google Scholar
Eesley, C. E., DeCelles, K., & Lenox, M. 2015. Through the mud or in the boardroom: Examining activist types and their strategies in targeting firms for social change. SSRN working paper. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2574046.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eesley, C., & Lenox, M. J. 2006. Firm responses to secondary stakeholder action. Strategic Management Journal, 27(8):765–781.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elstad, B., & Ladegård, G. 2010. Women on corporate boards: Key influencers or tokens? Journal of Management and Governance, 16(4): 595–615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ely, R. J. 1994. The effects of organizational demographics and social identity on relationships among professional women. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39(2): 203–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ely, R. J. 1995. The power in demography: Women’s social constructions of gender identity at work. Academy of Management Journal, 38(3): 589–634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engelstad, F. & Teigen, M. 2012. Firms, boards and gender quotas: Comparative perspectives. Bingley: Emerald.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
European Commission. 2012. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/gender-equality/other-institutions/good-practices/review-seminars/seminars_2012/decision_making_en.htm.Google Scholar
Eurosif. 2014. European SRI study. http://www.eurosif.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Eurosif-SRI-Study-20142.pdf. Accesed December 1, 2015.Google Scholar
Fagan, C., & González Menéndez, M. 2012. Conclusions. In Women on corporate boards and in top management: European trends and policy. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldman, M. S., Bell, J., & Berger, M. T. 2004. Gaining access: A practical and theoretical guide for qualitative researchers. Lanham, MD: Rowman Altamira.Google Scholar
Ferreira, D. 2015. Board diversity: Should we trust research to inform policy? Corporate Governance: An International Review, 32(2): 108–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisher, D. H., & Fowler, S. B. 1995. Imagining moral leadership in business: Image, identity and difference. Business Ethics Quarterly, 5(1): 29–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foust-Cummings, H. 2013. Research and considerations regarding women on boards. In Machold, S.et al. (Eds.), Getting women on corporate boards: A snowball starting in Norway: 60–63. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Francoeur, C., Labelle, R., & Sinclair-Desgagné, B. 2008. Gender diversity in corporate governance and top management. Journal of Business Ethics, 81(1): 83–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeman, R. E. 1984. Stakeholder management: Framework and philosophy. Mansfield, MA: Pitman.Google Scholar
Freeman, R. E., Harrison, J. S., & Wicks, A. C. 2007. Managing for stakeholders: Survival, reputation, and success. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Freidenvall, L., Dahlerup, D., & Skjeie, H. 2006. The Nordic countries: An incremental model. In Dahlerup, D. (Ed.), Women, quotas and politics: 55–82. Oxford and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Fullinwider, R. K. 1980. The reverse discrimination controversy: A moral and legal analysis. Institute for Philosophy and Public Policy. College Park: University of Maryland.Google Scholar
Gabaldon, P., de Anca, C., Mateos de Cabo, R., & Gimeno, R. 2015. Searching for women on boards: An analysis from the supply and demand perspective. Corporate Governance: International Review, forthcoming.Google Scholar
Gilbert, D. U., & Rasche, A. 2007. Discourse ethics and social accountability: The ethics of SA 8000. Business Ethics Quarterly, 17(2): 187–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
González Menéndez, M. C., & Martínez González, L. 2012. Spain on the Norwegian pathway: Towards a gender-balanced presence of women on corporate boards. In Fagan, C.et al. (Eds.), Women on corporate boards and in top management: European trends and policy: 169–197. Chippenham: Palgrave-MacMillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodman, J., & Arenas, D. 2015. Engaging ethically: A discourse ethics perspective on social shareholder engagement. Business Ethics Quarterly, 25(2): 163–189. doi: 10.1017/beq.2015.8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodpaster, K. E. 2010. Business ethics: Two moral provisos. Business Ethics Quarterly, 20(4): 740–742.Google Scholar
Goodstein, J. D., & Wicks, A. C. 2007. Corporate and stakeholder responsibility: Making business ethics a two-way conversation. Business Ethics Quarterly, 17(3): 375–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gopalan, S., & Watson, K. 2015. An agency theoretical approach to corporate board diversity. San Diego Law Review, 52(1): 1–66.Google Scholar
Granovetter, M. S. 1973. The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6): 1360–1380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gray, T. 2015. Quota mechanics in Panama, 1999–2014: Se obedece, pero no se cumple. Bulletin of Latin American Research, 34(3): 289–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guillaume, Y. R. F., Dawson, J. F., Woods, S. A., Sacramento, C. A., & West, M. A. 2013. Getting diversity to work at work: What we know and what we still don’t know. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 86: 123–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Håpsnes, T., & Buvik, M. P. 2013. Evaluation of NHO’s Female Future program: A leadership development program with expertise and resources in center. SINTEF Research Center.Google Scholar
Harrison, J. S., Bosse, D. A., & Phillips, R. A. 2010. Managing for stakeholders, stakeholder utility functions, and competitive advantage. Strategic Management Journal, 31(1): 58–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrison, J. S., & Wicks, A. C. 2013. Stakeholder theory, value, and firm performance. Business Ethics Quarterly, 23(1): 97–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harvey, B., & Schafer, A. 2001. Managing relationships with environmental stakeholders: A study of UK water and electricity utilities. Journal of Business Ethics, 30(3): 243–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haslam, S. A. 2004. Psychology in organizations: The social identity approach. Sage: London.Google Scholar
Heidenreich, V. 2013. Consequences of the Norwegian gender quota regulation for public limited company boards. In Machold, S.et al. (Eds.), Getting women on corporate boards: A snowball starting in Norway: 119–125. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Heilman, M. E., McCullough, W., & Gilbert, D. 1996. The other side of affirmative action: Reactions of nonbeneficiaries to sex-based preferential selection. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84(4): 346–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hess, D. 2007. Social reporting and new governance regulation: The prospects of achieving corporate accountability through transparency. Business Ethics Quarterly, 17(3): 453–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hess, D. 2008. The three pillars of corporate social reporting as new governance regulation: Disclosure, dialogue, and development. Business Ethics Quarterly, 18(4): 447–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hillman, A. J., Cannella, A. A., & Paetzold, R. L. 2000. The resource dependence role of corporate directors: Strategic adaptation of board composition in response to environmental change. Journal of Management Studies, 37(2): 235–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hillman, A. J., Nicholson, G., & Shropshire, C. 2008. Directors’ multiple identities, identification, and board monitoring and resource provision. Organization Science, 19(3): 441–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoel, M. 2008. The quota story: Five years of change in Norway. In Vinnicombe, S.et al. (Eds.), Women on corporate boards of directors: 79–87. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Holst, E., & Kirsch, A. 2015. Executive board and supervisory board members in Germany’s large corporations remain predominantly male. DIW Economic Bulletin, 5(4): 35–47.Google Scholar
Htun, M. 2004. Is gender like ethnicity? The political representation of identity groups. Perspectives on Politics, 2(3): 439–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huse, M., & Seierstad, C. 2013. Getting women on corporate boards: Consequences of the Norwegian gender balance law. European Financial Review, December/January: 37–39.Google Scholar
Huse, M. 2012. The ‘golden skirts’: Lessons from Norway about women on corporate boards. In Gröschl, S. & Takagi, J. (Eds.), Diversity quotas, diverse perspectives: The case of gender: 11–23. Surrey, UK: Gower Publishing.Google Scholar
Huse, M. 2013a. The political process behind the gender balance law. In Machold, S.et al. (Eds.), Getting women on corporate boards: A snowball starting in Norway: 9–16. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Huse, M. 2013b. Characteristics and background of the Norwegian women directors. In Machold, S.et al. (Eds.), Getting women on corporate boards: A snowball starting in Norway: 69–77. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Huse, M., Nielsen, S., & Hagen, I. M. 2009. Boards of directors, codetermination and women directors: Societal and business case CSR illustrations from Norway. Journal of Business Ethics, 89(4): 581–597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Husted, B. W., & Allen, D. B. 2011. Corporate social strategy: Stakeholder engagement and competitive advantage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ingley, C. B., & Van der Walt, N. T. 2003. Board configuration: Building better boards. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Effective Board Performance, 3(4): 5–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Institute of Business Ethics. 2011. Business ethics and board diversity, Issue 21. http://www.ibe.org.uk/userassets/briefings/ibe_briefing_21_business_ethics_and_board_diversity.pdf.Google Scholar
Jensen, M. C. 2002. Value maximization, stakeholder theory, and the corporate objective function. Business Ethics Quarterly, 12(2): 235–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joecks, J., Pull, K., & Vetter, K. 2013. Gender diversity in the boardroom and firm performance: What exactly constitutes a “critical mass?” Journal of Business Ethics, 118(1): 61–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johns, G. 2006. The essential impact of context on organizational behavior. Academy of Management Review, 31(2): 386–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jonsdottir, T. 2010. The impact of gender demography on male and female role interpretations and contributions: A qualitative study of non-executive directors of Icelandic boards. Cranfield University thesis.Google Scholar
Jonsdottir, T., Singh, V., Terjesen, S., & Vinnicombe, S. M. 2015. Directors’ identity in pre- and post-crisis Iceland: Effects of board life stage and gender. Gender in Management: An International Review, 30(7): 572–594.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kakabadse, N. K., Figueroa, C., Nicolopoulou, K., Hong Yang, J., Kakabadse, A. P, & Ozbilgin, M. F. 2015. Gender diversity and board performance: Women’s experiences and perspectives. Human Resource Management, 54(2): 265–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kanter, R. M. 1977. Men and women of the corporation. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Karam, C. M., & Jamali, D. 2013. Gendering CSR in the Arab Middle East: An institutional perspective. Business Ethics Quarterly, 23(1): 31–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kesner, I. F. 1988. Directors’ characteristics and committee membership: An investigation of type, occupation, tenure and gender. Academy of Management Journal, 31(1): 66–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, T. W., Monge, R., & Strudler, A. 2015. Bounded ethicality and the principle that “ought” implies “can.” Business Ethics Quarterly, 25(3): 341–361. doi: 10.1017/beq.2015.25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, B. G. 2008. A political mediation model of corporate response to social movement activism. Administrative Science Quarterly, 53(3): 395–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, A. A., & Lenox, M. J. 2000. Industry self-regulation without sanctions: The chemical industry’s responsible care program. Academy of Management Journal, 43(4): 698–716.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klandermans, B., & Staggenborg, S. (Eds.). 2002. Methods of social movement research. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Klettner, A., Clarke, T., & Boersma, M. 2014. Strategic and regulatory approaches to increasing women in leadership: Multi-level targets and mandatory quotas as levers for cultural change. Journal of Business Ethics, 122(1): 145–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kogut, B., Colomer, J., and Belinky, M. 2014. Structural equality at the top of the corporation: Mandated quotas for women directors. Strategic Management Journal, 35(6): 891–902.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Konrad, K. M., Kramer, V., & Erkut, R. S. 2008. The impact of three or more women on corporate boards. Organizational Dynamics, 37(2): 145–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kozlowski, S. W., & Klein, K. J. 2000. A multilevel approach to theory and research in organizations: Contextual, temporal, and emergent processes. In Klein, K. J. & Kozlowski, S. W. J. (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions, and new directions: 3–90. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Kwon, S. W., & Adler, P. S. 2014. Social capital: Maturation of a field of research. Academy of Management Review, 39(4): 412–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labelle, R., Francoeur, C., & Lakhal, F. 2015. To regulate or not to regulate: Early evidence on the means used around the world to promote gender diversity in the boardroom. Gender, Work & Organization, 22(4): 339–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lau, D. C., & Murnighan, J. K. 1998. Demographic diversity and faultlines: The compositional dynamics of organizational groups. Academy of Management Review, 23(2): 325–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawrence, T., Suddaby, R., & Leca, B. 2011. Institutional work: Refocusing institutional studies of organization. Journal of Management Inquiry, 20(1): 52–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leavitt, K. N., Mitchell, T. R., & Peterson, J. G. 2010. Theory pruning: Strategies to reduce our dense theoretical landscape. Organizational Research Methods, 13(4): 644–667.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levinthal, D. A., & March, J. G. 1993. The myopia of learning. Strategic Management Journal, 14(S2): 95–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, P., & Simpson, R. 2012. Kanter revisited: Gender, power and (in)visibility. International Journal of Management Reviews, 14(1): 141–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Løyning, T. 2011. Kjønnskvotering, kvinner og styrenettverk. Tidsskrift for kjønnsforskning, 35(3): 180–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lyness, K. S., & Heilman, M. E. 2006. When fit is fundamental: Performance evaluation and promotions of upper-level female and male managers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(4): 777–785.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Machold, S. 2013. Institutionalizing women’s representation on boards: An introduction to the advocacy movement. In Machold, S.et al. (Eds.), Getting women on corporate boards: A snowball starting in Norway: 27–36. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Machold, S. & Hansen, K. 2013. Policy approaches to gender diversity on boards: An introduction to characteristics and determinants. In et al. (Eds.), Getting women on corporate boards: A snowball starting in Norway: 167–178. Cheltenham: Edward ElgarCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Machold, S., Huse, M., Hansen, K., & Brogi, M. (Eds.). 2013. Getting women on to corporate boards: A snowball starting in Norway. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mahoney, J., & Thelen, K. 2010. Explaining institutional change: Ambiguity, agency, and power. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Matsa, D. A., & Miller, A. R. 2013. A female style in corporate leadership? Evidence from quotas. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 5: 136–169.Google Scholar
May, D. R., Chang, Y. K., & Shao, R. 2015. Does ethical membership matter? Moral identification and its organizational implications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(3): 681–694.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mayhew, K. 2013. Government and business: An introduction. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 29(2): 249–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McAdam, D., McCarthy, J. D., & Zald, M. N. (Eds.). 1996. Comparative perspectives on social movements: Political opportunities, mobilizing structures, and cultural framing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McFarland, L. A., & Ployhart, R. E. 2015. Social media: A contextual framework to guide research and practice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(6): 1653–1677.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McNamee, S. J., & Miller, R. K. J. 2004. The meritocracy myth. Lanham, MD: Rodman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
McKinsey & Company, Inc. 2008. Women matter 2: Female leadership, a competitive edge for the future. France. http://www.mckinsey.com/Features/Women_Matter.Google Scholar
Meier, P. 2013. Quotas, quotas everywhere: From party regulations to gender quotas for corporate management boards. Another case of contagion. Representation, 49(4): 453–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, J. B., & Rowan, B. 1991. Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. In Powell, W. & DiMaggio, P. (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis: 41–62. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. 1997. Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review, 22(4): 853–886.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, R. K., Weaver, G. R., Agle, B. R., Bailey, A. D., & Carlson, J. 2015. Stakeholder agency and social welfare: Pluralism and decision making in the multi-objective corporation. Academy of Management Review. doi: 10.5465/amr.2013.0486.Google Scholar
Mollerstrom, J. 2015. Quotas and cooperation. Harvard University working paper.Google Scholar
Morris, A. D. 1992. Frontiers in social movement theory. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Nahapiet, J., & Ghoshal, S. 1998. Social capital, intellectual capital and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 38(2): 242–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
NHO. 2013. Female Future. https://www.nho.no/Prosjekter-og-programmer/Female-Future/. Last accessed December 5, 2015.Google Scholar
Nielsen, S., & Huse, M. 2010. Women directors’ contributions to board decision-making and strategic involvement: The role of equality perception. European Management Review, 7(1): 16–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Noon, M. 2010. The shackled runner: Time to rethink positive discrimination? Work, Employment & Society, 24(4): 728–739.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
North, D. C. 1990. Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nygaard, K. 2011. Forced board changes: Evidence from Norway. Norwegian School of Economics. Department of Economics Discussion Paper5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Connell, L. L., Stephens, C. U., Betz, M., Shepard, J. M., & Hendry, J. R. 2005. An organizational field approach to corporate rationality: The role of stakeholder activism. Business Ethics Quarterly, 15(1): 93–111.Google Scholar
O’Reilly, C. A. III, Caldwell, D. F., & Barnett, W. P. 1989. Work group demography, social integration, and turnover. Administrative Science Quarterly, 34(1): 21–37.Google Scholar
OECD. 2015. Women and men in OECD countries. http://www.oecd.org.Google Scholar
Oswick, C., & Noon, M. 2014. Discourses of diversity, equality and inclusion: Trenchant formulations or transient fashions? British Journal of Management, 25(1): 23–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pache, A. C., & Santos, F. 2010. When worlds collide: The internal dynamics of organizational responses to conflicting institutional demands. Academy of Management Review, 35(3): 455–476.Google Scholar
Pacheco, D., York, J. G., Dean, T. J., & Sarasvathy, S. D. 2010. The coevolution of institutional entrepreneurship: A tale of two theories. Journal of Management, 36(4): 974–1010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pande, R., & Ford, D. 2012. Gender quotas and female leadership: A review. Background paper for the World Development Report. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/9120.Google Scholar
Parmar, B. L., Freeman, R. E., Harrison, J. S., Wicks, A. C., Purnell, L., & De Colle, S. 2010. Stakeholder theory: The state of the art. Academy of Management Annals, 4(1): 403–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pathan, S., & Faff, R. 2013. Does board structure in banks really affect their performance? Journal of Banking & Finance, 37(5): 1573–1589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perrault, E. 2015. Why does board gender diversity matter and how do we get there? The role of shareholder activism in deinstitutionalizing old boys’ networks. Journal of Business Ethics, 128(1): 149–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peters, K., & Ryan, M. K. 2010. Fitting in and getting on: Understanding career motivation in male and female surgeons. London: Royal College of Surgeons.Google Scholar
Peters, K., Ryan, M. K., & Haslam, S. A. 2014. Marines, medics and machismo: Lack of fit with masculine occupational stereotypes discourages men’s participation. British Journal of Psychology. doi: 10.1111/bjop.12106.Google ScholarPubMed
Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. 1978. The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Phillips, R., Freeman, R. E., & Wicks, A. C. 2003. What stakeholder theory is not. Business Ethics Quarterly, 13(4): 479–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Piaget, J. 1926. The language and thought of the child. New York: Harcourt.Google Scholar
Piekkari, R., Oxelheim, L., & Randøy, T. 2015. The silent board: How language diversity may influence the work processes of corporate boards. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 23(1): 25–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pollach, I. 2012. Taming textual data: the contribution of corpus linguistics to computer-aided text analysis. Organizational Research Methods, 15(2): 263–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Portes, A. 2014. Downsides of social capital. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(52): 18407–18408.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Post, C., & Byron, K. 2015. Women on boards and firm financial performance: A meta-analysis. Academy of Management Journal. doi: amj.2013.0319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reding, V. 2012. The route to more women on supervisory boards: An intelligent quota instead of inflexible requirement. Speech to the European Commission. November 27.Google Scholar
Reding, V. 2013. Winning the board game: Europe’s economy needs more women in business. In Machold, S.et al. (Eds.), Getting women on corporate boards: A snowball starting in Norway: 201–209. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Reskin, B. 1998. The realities of affirmative action. Washington, DC: American Sociological Association.Google Scholar
Roberts, H. 2014. Cable: Gender quotas useful ‘nuclear deterrent’. HR Magazine, 8 July.Google Scholar
Robin, D., & Babin, L. 1997. Making sense of the research on gender and ethics in business: A critical analysis and extension. Business Ethics Quarterly, 7(4): 61–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenblum, D. 2009. Feminizing capital: A corporate imperative. Berkeley Business Law Journal, 6(1): 55–95.Google Scholar
Rousseau, D. M., & Fried, Y. 2001. Location, location, location: Contextualizing organizational research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22(1): 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruef, M., & Scott, W. R. 1998. A multidimensional model of organizational legitimacy: Hospital survival in changing institutional environments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 43(4): 877–904.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ryan, M. K., & Haslam, S. A. 2007. The glass cliff: Exploring the dynamics surrounding the appointment of women to precarious leadership positions. Academy of Management Review, 32(2): 549–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Santana, A. 2012. Three elements of stakeholder legitimacy. Journal of Business Ethics, 105(2): 257–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schein, V. E. 1975. Relationships between sex role stereotypes and requisite management characteristics among female managers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60(3): 340–344.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schein, V. E. 2007. Women in management: Reflections and projections. Women in Management Review, 22(1): 6–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scherer, A. G., & Palazzo, G. 2007. Toward a political conception of corporate responsibility: Business and society seen from a Habermasian perspective. Academy of Management Review, 32(4): 1096–1120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scherer, A. G., Palazzo, G., & Matten, D. 2009. Introduction to the special issue: Globalization as a challenge for business responsibilities. Business Ethics Quarterly, 19(3): 327–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schreck, P., van Aaken, D., & Donaldson, T. 2013. Positive economics and normativistic fallacy: Bridging the two sides of CSR. Business Ethics Quarterly, 23(2): 297–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, J. 2012. Social network analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Scott, W. R. 1995. Institutions and organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Sealy, R. 2010. Changing perceptions of meritocracy in senior women’s careers. Gender in Management: An International Journal, 25(3): 184–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sealy, R. & Doherty, N. 2012. Women in finance: A springboard to corporate board positions? London: Association of Chartered and Certified Accountants.Google Scholar
Sealy, R., Turner, C., Pryce, P., & Vinnicombe, S. 2015. Women on boards: Progress following the 2012 Corporate Governance Code. Cranfield, UK: Cranfield School of Management.Google Scholar
Seierstad, C. 2015. Beyond the business case: The need for both utility and justice rationales for increasing the share of women on boards. Corporate Governance: An International Review. doi: 10.1111/corg.12117.Google Scholar
Seierstad, C., & Opsahl, T. 2011. For the few not the many? The effects of affirmative action on presence, prominence, and social capital of women directors in Norway. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 27: 44–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seierstad, C., Warner-Søderholm, G., Torchia, M., & Hues, M. 2015. Increasing the number of women on boards: The role of actors and processes. Journal of Business Ethics. doi: 10.1007/s10551-015-2715-0.Google Scholar
Selznick, P. 1994. The moral commonwealth: Social theory and the promise of community. Berkeley: UC Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seo, M. G., & Creed, W. D. 2002. Institutional contradictions, praxis, and institutional change: A dialectical perspective. Academy of Management Review, 27(2): 222–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shah, S. K., & Corley, K. G. 2006. Building better theory by bridging the quantitative-qualitative divide. Journal of Management Studies, 43(8): 1821–1835.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sheridan, A., Ross-Smith, A., & Lord, L. 2014. Institutional influences on women’s representation on corporate boards: An Australian case study. Equality, Diversity, and Inclusion: An International Journal, 33(2): 140–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sigurjonsson, T. O., Arnardóttir, A. A., Vaiman, V., & Rikhardsson, P. 2015. Managers’ views on ethics education in business schools: An empirical study. Journal of Business Ethics, 130(8): 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simpson, R., Ross-Smith, A., & Lewis, P. 2010. Merit, special contribution and choice – how women negotiate between sameness and difference in their organizational lives. Gender in Management: An International Journal, 25(3): 198–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singh, V., Point, S., & Moulin, Y. 2015. French supervisory board gender composition and quota threat: Changes from 2008 to 2011. Gender in Management: An International Journal, 30(7): 551–571.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singh, V., Point, S., Moulin, Y., & Davila, A. 2015. Legitimacy profiles of women directors on top French company boards. Journal of Management Development, 34(7): 803–820.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singh, V., Terjesen, S., & Vinnicombe, S. 2008. Newly appointed directors in the boardroom: How do men and women differ? European Management Journal, 26(1): 48–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, A. 2014. German boardrooms to face legal quotas for women. Newsweek. http://www.newsweek.com/german-boardrooms-face-legal-quotas-women-287372.Google Scholar
Smith, W. K., Gonin, M., & Besharov, M. L. 2013. Managing social-business tensions: A review and research agenda for social enterprise. Business Ethics Quarterly, 23(3): 407–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, W. K., Besharov, M. L., Wessels, A. K., & Chertok, M. 2012. A paradoxical leadership model for social entrepreneurs: Challenges, leadership skills, and pedagogical tools for managing social and commercial demands. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 11(3): 463–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Son Hing, L.S., Bobocel, D. R., & Zanna, M. P. 2002. Meritocracy and opposition to affirmative action: making concessions in the face of discrimination. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 83(3): 493–509.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sørensen, S. Ø. 2013. Likestilling uten kjønn? En studie av hvordan kjønnskvotering til bedriftsstyrer ble montert som politisk reform. PhD thesis, NTNU.Google Scholar
Stansbury, J. 2009. Reasoned moral agreement: Applying discourse ethics within organizations. Business Ethics Quarterly, 19(1): 33–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Staubo, S. 2010. Do female directors increase board independence? Mimeo, Oslo: Norwegian School of Management.Google Scholar
Storvik, A., & Teigen, M. 2010. Women on board: The Norwegian experience. Berlin: Friedrich-Ebert-Foundation.Google Scholar
Strøm, R. Ø. 2015. Gender discrimination before mandated quotas? Evidence from Norway: 1989–2002. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 31(3): 303–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suchman, M. C. 1995. Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3): 571–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sweigart, A. 2012. Women on board for change: The Norway model of boardroom quotas as a tool for progress in the United States and Canada. Northwestern Journal of International Law and Business, 32(4): 81–105.Google Scholar
Szydlo, M. 2015. Gender equality on the boards of EU companies: Between economic efficiency, fundamental rights and democratic legitimisation of economic governance. European Law Journal, 21(1): 97–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Syed, J., & Van Buren, H. J. 2014. Global business norms and Islamic views of women’s employment. Business Ethics Quarterly, 24(2): 251–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. 1979. An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In Austin, W. G. & Worchel, S. (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations: 33–47. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.Google Scholar
Tatli, A., Vassilopoulou, J., & Özbilgin, M. 2013. An unrequited affinity between talent shortages and untapped female potential: The relevance of gender quotas for talent management in high growth potential economies of the Asia Pacific region. International Business Review, 22(3): 539–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teigen, M. 2002. Kvotering til styrevev: mellom offentlig regulering og privat handlefrihet. Tidsskrift for samfunnsforskning, 1: 73–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teigen, M. 2010. Presentation at European Commission. Brussels, Belgium. April 26.Google Scholar
Teigen, M. 2011. Gender quotas on corporate boards. In Niskanen, K., (Ed.), Gender and power in the Nordic countries: 87–109. Oslo: NIKK.Google Scholar
Teigen, M. 2012a. Gender quotas on corporate boards: On the diffusion of a distinct national policy reform. Comparative Social Research, 29(1): 115–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teigen, M. 2012b. Gender quotas for corporate boards in Norway: Innovative gender equality policy. In Fagan, C.et al. (Eds.), Women on corporate boards and in top management: European trends and policy: 70–90. Chippenham: Palgrave-MacMillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teigen, M. 2015a. Kjønnsbalanse i styre og ledelse av norsk næringsliv. In Teigen, M. (Ed.), Virkninger av styrekvotering i norsk næringsliv. Oslo: Gyldendal.Google Scholar
Teigen, M. (Ed.). 2015b. Virkninger av kjønnskvotering i norsk næringsliv. Oslo: Gyldendal akademisk. http://www.socialresearch.no/Publications/Reports/2015/2015-0022.Google Scholar
Teigen, M., & Wängnerud, L. 2009. Tracing gender equality cultures: Elite perceptions of gender equality in Norway and Sweden. Politics & Gender, 5(1): 21–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Terjesen, S., Aguilera, R., & Lorenz, R. 2015. Legislating a woman’s seat on the board: Institutional factors driving gender quotas for boards of directors. Journal of Business Ethics, 128(2): 233–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Terjesen, S., Sealy, R., & Singh, V. 2009. Women directors on corporate boards: A review and research agenda. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 17(3): 320–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tienari, J., Holgersson, C., Meriläinen, S., & Höök, P. 2009. Gender, management and market discourse: The case of gender quotas in the Swedish and Finnish media. Gender, Work, and Organization, 16(4): 501–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Torchia, M., Calabrò, A., & Huse, M. 2011. Women directors on corporate boards: From tokenism to critical mass. Journal of Business Ethics, 102(2): 299–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Prooijen, A., & Ellemers, N. 2015. Does it pay to be moral? How indicators of morality and competence enhance organizational and work team attractiveness. British Journal of Management, 26(2): 225–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Zomeren, M., Postmes, T., & Spears, R. 2012. On conviction’s collective consequences: Integrating moral conviction with the social identity model of collective action. British Journal of Social Psychology, 51(1): 52–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vaiman, V., Sigurjonsson, T. O., & Davidsson, P. Á. 2011. Weak business culture as an antecedent of economic crisis: The case of Iceland. Journal of Business Ethics, 98(2): 259–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vasi, I. B., & King, B. G. 2012. Social movements, risk perceptions, and economic outcomes: The effect of primary and secondary stakeholder activism on firms’ perceived environmental risk and financial performance. American Sociological Review, 77(4): 573–596.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Velkova, I. 2015. Quotas for women on corporate boards: The call for change in Europe. Hamburg: Anchor.Google Scholar
Vinnicombe, S., Doldor, E., Sealy, R., Pryce, P., & Turner, C. 2015. The Female FTSE board report 2015: Putting the UK progress into a global perspective. Cranfield, UK: Cranfield University.Google Scholar
Virtanen, A. 2012. Women on the boards of listed companies: Evidence from Finland. Journal of Management and Governance, 16(4): 571–593.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vroom, V. H. 1964. Work and Motivation. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
Westphal, J. D., & Milton, L. P. 2000. How experience and network ties affect the influence of demographic minorities on corporate boards. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45(2): 366–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, T. I. 1992. Business, ethics, and Carol Gilligan’s “two voices”. Business Ethics Quarterly, 2(1): 51–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Withers, M. C., Corley, K., & Hillman, A. J. 2012. Stay or leave: Director identities and voluntary exit from the board during organizational crisis. Organization Science, 23(3): 835–850.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, D. 1991. Corporate social performance revisited. Academy of Management Review, 16(4): 691–718.CrossRefGoogle Scholar