Published Online:31 May 2016https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2014.0716
Abstract
We conduct a comprehensive synthesis of the research on how female representation in the upper echelons (i.e., top management teams and chief executive officer positions) might affect firm performance. To help resolve longstanding theoretical, empirical, and substantive debates, we present an integrative conceptual framework based on the overarching concepts of unique resource portfolios, team decision-processes, and role incongruence perceptions. We test predictions from this framework using meta-analytic techniques on a sample of 146 primary studies conducted in 33 different countries. We find that female representation in the upper echelons in general is positively and weakly related to forms of long-term financial performance, but negatively and weakly related to short-term stock market returns. We observe that reduced strategic risk-taking is a mediating mechanism that explains why financial performance is improved. We also show that financial performance improvements are accentuated in environmental and organizational contexts that provide greater decision latitude to executives. Finally, we discuss and provide preliminary tests for extending these effects to other stakeholders (corporate social performance) and different time intervals for performance.
*References signified with an asterisk were included in the meta-analytic summary.
REFERENCES
- 2012. Beyond the glass ceiling: Does gender matter? Management Science, 58: 219–235. Google Scholar
- * 2011. Shareholders and stakeholders: How do directors decide? Strategic Management Journal, 32: 1331–1355. Google Scholar
- * 2007. Gender differences in CEO compensation: Evidence from the USA. Women in Management Review, 22: 208–224. Google Scholar
- * 2012. Managerial characteristics, corporate governance and corporate performance: The case of Nigerian quoted companies, AERC Research Paper, Vol. 241: 1–46: African Economic Research Consortium. Google Scholar
- * 2012. Gender differences in corporate financial decisions and performance. Working paper, Culverhouse College of Commerce, The University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL. Google Scholar
- * 2013. Gender diversity and economic performance of firms: Evidences from emerging market. Journal of Economic Development, Management, IT, Finance & Marketing, 5: 100–110. Google Scholar
- 1979. Organizations and environments. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Google Scholar
- 1997. Individualism, collectivism, and decision styles of managers in Kuwait. The Journal of Social Psychology, 137: 629–637. Google Scholar
- * 2010. Risky business... for whom? Gender, self-vs. other-orientation and risk in managerial decision-making. Working paper, Darden School of Business Administration, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA. Google Scholar
- * 2013. Female CEO’s: A study of their appointment performance and market reaction. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Aarhus University. Google Scholar
- 2001. Boys will be boys: Gender, overconfidence, and common stock investment. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116: 261–292. Google Scholar
- 2010. Sarbanes-Oxley and corporate risk-taking. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 49: 34–52. Google Scholar
- 2002. Gaining and sustaining competitive advantage. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Google Scholar
- 1994. Managerial ownership, debt policy, and the impact of institutional holdings: An agency perspective. Financial Management, 23: 38–50. Google Scholar
- 1996. Neosexism among male managers: Is it a matter of numbers? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 26: 2189–2203. Google Scholar
- 1975. Human capital (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar
- * 2011. Intellectual human capital dependence, family-friendly firms, and the advancement of women. Journal of Business Diversity, 11: 66–87. Google Scholar
- * 2016. Managerial positions of women in Spanish exporting SMEs. Spanish Journal of Finance and Accounting, 45: 300–326. Google Scholar
- 2016. Using meta-analytic structural equation modeling to advance strategic management research: Guidelines and an empirical illustration via the strategic leadership-performance relationship. Strategic Management Journal, 37: 477–497. Google Scholar
- 2011. New perspectives on gender. In Ashenfelter O.Card D. (Eds.), Handbook of labor economics, Vol. 4B: 1543–1590. Amsterdam: North-Holland. Google Scholar
- 2003. Managing with style: The effect of managers on firm policies. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118: 1169–1208. Google Scholar
- * 2012. The impact of CEO characteristics on the value of the firm: A quantitative and empirical approach covering recession and stable periods. Unpublished Master’s thesis, University of Exeter. Google Scholar
- * 2006. The relationship between women corporate directors and women corporate officers. Journal of Managerial Issues, 18: 47–61. Google Scholar
- * 2013. TMT diversity at work. The role of non family managers in family business: Results from a survey. Working paper, LUISS Guido Carli University. Google Scholar
- 1998. Meta-analysis may be another useful research tool, but it is not a panacea. In Ferris G. R. (Ed.), Research in personnel and human resources management, vol. 16: 359–397. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Google Scholar
- 2009. Introduction to meta-analysis. West Sussex, UK: John Wiley & Sons. Google Scholar
- * 2014. Corporate socially responsible investments: CEO altruism, reputation, and shareholder interests. Journal of Corporate Finance, 26: 164–181. Google Scholar
- 2004. The regulation of labor. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 119: 1339–1382. Google Scholar
- 1980. A risk/return paradox for strategic management. Sloan Management Review, 21: 17–33. Google Scholar
- 2005. Construct measurement in strategic management research: Illusion or reality? Strategic Management Journal, 26: 239–257. Google Scholar
- 1989. The relationship between sex role stereotypes and requisite management characteristics revisited. Academy of Management Journal, 32: 662–669.Link , Google Scholar
- 1991. Testing a causal model of corporate risk taking and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 34: 37–59.Link , Google Scholar
- 2001. Risk in strategic management research. In Hitt M. A.Freeman E.Harrison J. S. (Eds.), The Blackwell handbook of strategic management: 259–288. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing. Google Scholar
- 2010. Risk taking and strategic decision making. In Nutt P. C.Wilson D. C. (Eds.), Handbook of decision making: 307–325. West Sussex, UK: Wiley-Blackwell. Google Scholar
- 1972. Sex-role stereotypes: A current appraisal. The Journal of Social Issues, 28: 59–78. Google Scholar
- * 2014. The strategic engagement of narcissistic CEOs in earnings management. Working paper, University of Oldenburg, Oldenburg, Germany. Google Scholar
- * 2010. The portrayal of women in Canadian corporate annual reports. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 27: 210–223. Google Scholar
- 2000. Women on corporate boards of directors: Understanding the context. In R. Burke & M. Mattis (Eds.), Women on Corporate Boards of Directors: International Challenges and Opportunities: 179–196. Dordrecht, NL: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Google Scholar
- 1999. Gender differences in risk taking: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 125: 367–383. Google Scholar
- 2012. Shareholder influence over director nomination via proxy access: Implications for agency conflict and stakeholder value. Strategic Management Journal, 33: 1431–1451. Google Scholar
- * 2008. Top management team functional background diversity and firm performance: Examining the roles of team member colocation and environmental uncertainty. Academy of Management Journal, 51: 768–784.Link , Google Scholar
- 1990. Determinants of financial performance: A meta-analysis. Management Science, 36: 1143–1159. Google Scholar
- 1999. Gender effects on social influence and emergent leadership. In Powell G. N. (Ed.), Handbook of Gender & Work: 203–222. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. Google Scholar
- 2011. Business group affiliation, performance, context, and strategy: A meta-analysis. Academy of Management Journal, 54: 437–460.Link , Google Scholar
- 2001. Top management teams, global strategic posture, and the moderating role of uncertainty. Academy of Management Journal, 44: 533–545.Link , Google Scholar
- 2004. Upper echelons research revisited: Antecedents, elements, and consequences of top management team composition. Journal of Management, 30: 749–778. Google Scholar
- 2003. Testing a model of reasoned risk‐taking: Governance, the experience of principals and agents, and global strategy in high‐technology IPO firms. Strategic Management Journal, 24: 803–820. Google Scholar
- * 2013. Trends in executive gender pay and incentive gaps: The role of board diversity. Working paper, Carroll School of Management, Boston College, Newton, MA. Google Scholar
Catalyst . 2013. Quick take: Statistical overview of women in the workplace. New York: Catalyst. Available at http://www.catalyst.org/knowledge/statistical-overview-women-workforce (accessed December 28, 2013.) Google Scholar- 2007. Termination risk and managerial risk taking. Journal of Corporate Finance, 13: 170–188. Google Scholar
- * 2012. Board gender diversity and going concern audit opinions. Working paper, Queensland University of Technology. Google Scholar
- 2007. It’s all about me: Narcissistic chief executive officers and their effects on company strategy and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52: 351–386. Google Scholar
- 2011. Executive personality, capability cues, and risk taking: How narcissistic CEOs react to their successes and stumbles. Administrative Science Quarterly, 56: 202–237. Google Scholar
- * 2014. Determinants of CEO power and characteristics of managerial profile: Implications for risk-taking in listed Tunisian firms. International Journal of Economics and Finance, 6: 140–151. Google Scholar
- * 2016. Female board representation and corporate acquisition intensity. Strategic Management Journal, 37: 303–313. Google Scholar
- * 2014. Effects of corporate governance on micro finance institutions financial sustainability in Kenya. European Journal of Business and Management, 6: 71–81. Google Scholar
- 1972. Organizational structure, environment and performance: The role of strategic choice. Sociology, 6: 1–22. Google Scholar
- * 2016. Do managers matter for corporate innovation? Journal of Corporate Finance, 36: 206–229. Google Scholar
- 1992. A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112: 155–159. Google Scholar
- * 2014. Options are a CEO’s best friend: Executive compensation in Swedish listed corporations. IUP Journal of Corporate Governance, 13: 40–71. Google Scholar
- * 2012. CEO compensation and corporate governance in China. Corporate Governance, 20: 575–592. Google Scholar
- * 2011. Leadership change and shareholder value: How markets react to the appointments of women. Human Resource Management, 50: 501–519. Google Scholar
- * 2013. Women and top leadership positions: Towards an institutional analysis. Gender, Work and Organization, 21: 91–103. Google Scholar
- * 2015. Do minority leaders affect corporate practice? Analyzing the effect of leadership composition on governance and product development. Strategic Organization, 13: 117–140. Google Scholar
- 2014. It depends: Environmental context and the effects of faultlines on top management team performance. Organization Science, 25: 633–652. Google Scholar
- * 2009. Market reaction to the announcement of a male-to-female CEO turnover. Working paper, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University, Australia. Google Scholar
- 1998. The leniency contract and persistence of majority and minority influence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74: 1437–1450. Google Scholar
Credit Suisse . 2014. The CS gender 3000: Women in senior management. Zurich, Switzerland: Credit Suisse. Google Scholar- * 2015. Do risk-taking incentives induce CEOs to invest? Evidence from acquisitions. Journal of Corporate Finance, 32: 1–23. Google Scholar
- 2009. Gender differences in preferences. Journal of Economic Literature, 47: 448–474. Google Scholar
- 2007. How national systems differ in their constraints on corporate executives: A study of CEO effects in three countries. Strategic Management Journal, 28: 767–789. Google Scholar
- 2011. Differences in managerial discretion across countries: How nation-level institutions affect the degree to which CEOs matter. Strategic Management Journal, 32: 797–819. Google Scholar
- * 2014. CEO career variety: Effects on firm-level strategic and social novelty. Academy of Management Journal, 57: 652–674.Link , Google Scholar
- * 2014. Gender diversity and securities fraud. Working paper, Schulich School of Business, York University Canada. Google Scholar
- * 2013. Are young and female CEOS more forthcoming with earnings forecasts? Working paper, Naveen Jindal School of Management, University of Texas at Dallas, Dallas, TX. Google Scholar
- 1999. A decade of corporate women: Some progress in the boardroom, none in the executive suite. Strategic Management Journal, 20: 93–99. Google Scholar
- 2003. Meta-analyses of financial performance and equity: Fusion or confusion? Academy of Management Journal, 46: 13–26.Link , Google Scholar
- 1998. Meta-analytic reviews of board composition, leadership structure, and financial performance. Strategic Management Journal, 19: 269–290. Google Scholar
- 2005. Strategic management studies are a special case for meta-analysis, vol. 2: 31–63. Bingley: Research Methodology in Strategy and Management. Google Scholar
- * 2013. Do women in top management affect firm performance? Evidence from Indonesia. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society, 13: 288–304. Google Scholar
- * 2012. Does the decision to hire a chief risk officer depend on the CEO’s personal level of risk aversion? Unpublished Master’s thesis, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands. Google Scholar
- * 2015. The impact of family involvement on SMEs’ performance: Theory and evidence. Journal of Small Business Management, 53: 924–948. Google Scholar
- 1977. Attributing causes for one’s own performance: The effects of sex, norms, and outcome. Journal of Research in Personality, 11: 59–72. Google Scholar
Deloitte . 2011. Only skin deep? Re-examining the business case for diversity: 1–20: Deloitte Australia. Google Scholar- * 2010. When executive rake in millions: Meanness in organizations. Paper presented at the 23rd Annual International Association of Conflict Management Conference, Boston, MA. Google Scholar
- 1984. Dimensions of organizational task environments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29: 52–73. Google Scholar
- * 2013. Do they walk the talk? Gauging acquiring CEO and director confidence in the value creation potential of announced acquisitions. Academy of Management Journal, 56: 1679–1702.Link , Google Scholar
- * 2012. Does female representation in top management improve firm performance? A panel data investigation. Strategic Management Journal, 33: 1072–1089. Google Scholar
- 2016. Is there an implicit quota on women in top management? A large-sample statistical analysis. Strategic Management Journal, 37: 98–115. Google Scholar
- 1984. Risky shift and gender of the advocate: Information theory versus normative theory. Group & Organization Management, 9: 189–200. Google Scholar
- * 2004. Diversity and tomorrow’s profits: Women in corporate leadership. Milwaukee, WI: Milwaukee Women Inc. Google Scholar
- 2013. Strength in numbers or guilt by association? Intragroup effects of female chief executive announcements. Strategic Management Journal, 34: 1488–1501. Google Scholar
- 2009. Unions and profits: A meta-regression analysis. Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, 48: 146–184. Google Scholar
- 2012. The impact of categorical status, numeric representation, and work group prestige on preference for demographically similar others: A value threat approach. Organization Science, 23: 386–401. Google Scholar
- 2003. Few women at the top: How role incongruity produces prejudice and the glass ceiling. In van Knippenberg D.Hogg M. A. (Eds.), Leadership and power: Identity processes in groups and organizations: 79–94. London: SAGE Publications. Google Scholar
- 2007. Female leadership advantage and disadvantage: Resolving the contradictions. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 31: 1–12. Google Scholar
- 2013. Women as leaders: Leadership style versus leaders’ values and attitudes. Paper presented at the Gender and Work: Challenging Conventional Wisdom Symposium, Harvard Business School, Boston, MA. Google Scholar
- 2016. When passionate advocates meet research on diversity, does the honest broker stand a chance? The Journal of Social Issues, 72: 199–222. Google Scholar
- 2002. Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders. Psychological Review, 109: 573–598. Google Scholar
- 1995. Gender and the effectiveness of leaders: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 117: 125–145. Google Scholar
- 1992. Gender and the evaluation of leaders: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 111: 3–22. Google Scholar
- 2008. Men, women and risk aversion: Experimental evidence. In C. Plott & V. Smith (Eds.), Handbook of experimental economics results, vol. 1: 1061–1073. New York, NY: Elsevier. Google Scholar
Economist Intelligence Unit . 2012. Women’s economic opportunity 2012. Available at: https://www.eiu.com/public/topical_report.aspx?campaignid=weoindex2012. Accessed: September 3, 2013. Google Scholar- . 1988. Politics of strategic decision making in high-velocity environments: Toward a midrange theory. Academy of Management Journal, 31: 737–770.Link , Google Scholar
- * 2011. Diversity, a source of strength? Top management team diversity in the Netherlands and its effect on performance. Unpublished Master’s thesis, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands. Google Scholar
- * 2008. Top-management-teams’ compensation packages. Working paper, Austral University, Buenos Aires, Argentina. Google Scholar
- * 2016. CEO gender, corporate risk-taking, and the efficiency of capital allocation. Journal of Corporate Finance, 39: 193–209. Google Scholar
- 1970. Efficient capital markets: A review of theory and empirical work. The Journal of Finance, 25: 383–417. Google Scholar
- 1991. Efficient capital markets: II. The Journal of Finance, 46: 1575–1617. Google Scholar
- * 2012. More than connectedness – Heterogeneity of CEO social network and firm value. Working paper, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY. Google Scholar
- 2014. The 2013 chief executive study: Women CEOs of the last 10 years: Strategy&. Available at: https://www.strategyand.pwc.com/media/file/Strategyand_The-2013-Chief-Executive-Study.pdf. Accessed: January 22, 2015. Google Scholar
- 2000. The adoption of outside boards by small private US firms. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 12: 291–309. Google Scholar
- 1990. Top-management-team tenure and organizational outcomes: The moderating role of managerial discretion. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35: 484–503. Google Scholar
- 2009. Strategic leadership. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
- 1934. Statistical methods for research workers (5th ed.). Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd. Google Scholar
- 2000. Environmental ethical decision making in the US metal-finishing industry. Academy of Management Journal, 43: 642–662.Link , Google Scholar
- * 2013. The impact of CFO gender on bank loan contracting. Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance, 28: 53–78. Google Scholar
- 2008. Gender diversity in corporate governance and top management. Journal of Business Ethics, 81: 83–95. Google Scholar
- 1999. Choice shift and group polarization. American Sociological Review, 64: 856–875. Google Scholar
- * 2012. Do powerful CEOs determine microfinance performance? Journal of Management Studies, 49: 718–742. Google Scholar
- * 2010. The influence of gender diversity on corporate performance. Spanish Accounting Review, 13: 53–88. Google Scholar
- * 2012. Are CEOs in public U.S. firms overpaid? New evidence from private firms. Working paper, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. Google Scholar
- 2004. Individualism and collectivism. In House R. J.Hanges P. J.Javidan M.Dorfman P. W.Gupta V. (Eds.), Culture, leadership, and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 societies: 437–512. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Google Scholar
- * 2013. Mergers and acquisitions: The role of gender in Europe and the United Kingdom. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Tilburg University, Tilburg, Netherlands. Google Scholar
- * 2013. Female CEOs. Working paper, Bentley University, Waltham, MA. Google Scholar
- 2009. The role of gender stereotypes in perceptions of entrepreneurs and intentions to become an entrepreneur. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33: 397–417. Google Scholar
- 1993. Top management team size, CEO dominance, and firm performance: The moderating roles of environmental turbulence and discretion. Academy of Management Journal, 36: 844–863.Link , Google Scholar
- 2007. Upper echelons theory: An update. Academy of Management Review, 32: 334–343.Link , Google Scholar
- 1995. Assessing managerial discretion across industries: A multimethod approach. Academy of Management Journal, 38: 1427–1441.Link , Google Scholar
- 1987. Managerial discretion: A bridge between polar views of organizational outcomes. Research in Organizational Behavior, 9: 369–406. Google Scholar
- * 2015. Structural interdependence within top management teams: A key moderator of upper echelons predictions. Strategic Management Journal, 36: 449–461. Google Scholar
- 1984. Upper echelons: The organization as a reflection of its top managers. Academy of Management Review, 9: 193–206.Link , Google Scholar
- 2014. Toward more accurate contextualization of the CEO effect on firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 35: 473–491. Google Scholar
- 1977. The population ecology of organizations. American Journal of Sociology, 82: 929–964. Google Scholar
- 2008. Meta-regression in Stata. The Stata Journal, 8: 493–519. Google Scholar
- * 2014. On the presence and absence of CEO gender effects on management control choices: An empirical investigation. Working paper, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium. Google Scholar
- 2007. What’s the difference? Diversity constructs as separation, variety, or disparity in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 32: 1199–1228.Abstract , Google Scholar
- 2006. How important are job attitudes? Meta-analytic comparisons of integrative behavioral outcomes and time sequences. Academy of Management Journal, 49: 305–325.Link , Google Scholar
- 1998. Beyond relational demography: Time and the effects of surface-and deep-level diversity on work group cohesion. Academy of Management Journal, 41: 96–107.Abstract , Google Scholar
- 2002. Time, teams, and task performance: Changing effects of surface-and deep-level diversity on group functioning. Academy of Management Journal, 45: 1029–1045.Link , Google Scholar
- 2006. What is diversity and how should it be measured. In Konrad A. M.Prasad P.Pringle J. K. (Eds.), Handbook of workplace diversity: 191–216. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Google Scholar
- 2017. Publication bias in strategic management research. Journal of Management, 43: 400–425. Google Scholar
- 1999. Stakeholders, social responsibility, and performance: Empirical evidence and theoretical perspectives. Academy of Management Journal, 42: 479–485.Link , Google Scholar
- * 2015. An examination of the impact of executive compensation disparity on corporate social performance. Strategic Organization, 13: 200–223. Google Scholar
- 2014. When accuracy isn’t everything: The value of demographic differences to information elaboration in teams. Group & Organization Management, 40: 35–61. Google Scholar
- 2012. The global gender gap report 2012. Geneva, Switzerland: World Economic Forum. Google Scholar
- 2009. Beyond Baron and Kenny: Statistical mediation analysis in the new millennium. Communication Monographs, 76: 408–420. Google Scholar
- 1997. Explaining the premiums paid for large acquisitions: Evidence of CEO hubris. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42: 103–127. Google Scholar
- 1985. Statistical methods for meta-analysis. Orlando, FL: Academic Press. Google Scholar
- 2009. Structure! Agency!(and other quarrels): A meta-analysis of institutional theories of organization. Academy of Management Journal, 52: 61–85.Link , Google Scholar
- * 2012. Essays on upper echelons & strategic renewal: A multilevel contingency approach. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands. Google Scholar
- * 2015. Do female and ethnically diverse executives endure inequity in the CEO position or do they benefit from their minority status? An empirical examination. Strategic Management Journal, 36: 1115–1134. Google Scholar
- * 2013. Entrepreneurs’ improvisational behavior and firm performance: A study of dispositional and environmental moderators. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 7: 138–150. Google Scholar
- * 2015. CEO gender, ethical leadership, and accounting conservatism. Journal of Business Ethics, 127: 351–370. Google Scholar
- 2001. Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions and organizations across nations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Google Scholar
- 2007. Bridging faultlines by valuing diversity: Diversity beliefs, information elaboration, and performance in diverse work groups. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 92: 1189–1199. Google Scholar
- * 2011. What are the determinants of board performance: Skin in the game, composition, diversity, size? Working paper, Australian School of Business, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia. Google Scholar
- * 2017. Does one size fit all? Investigating pay–future performance relationships over the “seasons” of CEO tenure. Journal of Management, 43: 864–891. Google Scholar
- 2003. Environmental dynamism and strategic decision-making rationality: An examination at the decision level. Strategic Management Journal, 24: 481–489. Google Scholar
- * 2008. Corporate governance mechanisms for monitoring or empowering CEOs? A study of Chinese listed firms. Working paper, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. Google Scholar
- 2013. Gender and corporate finance: Are male executives overconfident relative to female executives? Journal of Financial Economics, 108: 822–839. Google Scholar
- * 2013. The impact of CEO characteristics on corporate sustainable development. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 20: 234–244. Google Scholar
- * 2014. Corporate executive’s gender and audit fees. Managerial Auditing Journal, 29: 527–547. Google Scholar
- * 2010. Executive remuneration in Western Europe: Gender and other determinants of executive remuneration within Euronext 100 firms. Unpublished master’s thesis, Tilburg University, Tilburg, Netherlands. Google Scholar
- 2009. Team-level predictors of innovation at work: A comprehensive meta-analysis spanning three decades of research. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 94: 1128–1145. Google Scholar
- * 2016. Women on boards and corporate social responsibility. Sustainability, 8: 300. Google Scholar
IMF . 2014. Recovery strengthens, remains uneven World economic outlook: a survey by the staff of the International Monetary Fund. Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund. Google Scholar- 1986. Group polarization: A critical review and meta-analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50: 1141–1151. Google Scholar
- * 2014. The impact of organisational and managerial acquisition experience on M&A performance. Working paper, The Australian National University, Australia. Google Scholar
- 1994. Decision making, risk and gender: Are managers different? British Journal of Management, 5: 123–138. Google Scholar
- 2011. Bridging domains in workplace demography research: A review and reconceptualization. Journal of Management, 37: 521–552. Google Scholar
- 2009. The role of context in work team diversity research: A meta-analytic review. Academy of Management Journal, 52: 599–627.Link , Google Scholar
- * 2011. Women in top management and agency costs. Journal of Business Research, 64: 180–186. Google Scholar
- 1977. Men and women of the corporation. New York, NY: Basic Books. Google Scholar
- * 2015. Do women in top management teams have an effect on company performance: Evidence from Scandinavia. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Lund University, Lund, Sweden. Google Scholar
- * 2013. Analysis of effects of gender diversity on voluntary disclosure of corporate governance in corporate annnual reports. Diponegoro Journal of Accounting, 2: 1–15. Google Scholar
- 2013. Meta-analytic reviews in the organizational sciences: Two meta-analytic schools on the way to MARS (the Meta-analytic Reporting Standards). Journal of Business and Psychology, 28: 123–143. Google Scholar
- * 2010. The impact of female CEO announcement on corporate value in Korean companies. Unpublished master’s thesis, Seoul National University, Seoul, South Korea. Google Scholar
- 2012. The impact of women top managers and directors on corporate environmental performance. Working paper, University of California, Davis, Davis, CA. Google Scholar
- 2004. Meta-analyses of post-acquisition performance: Indications of unidentified moderators. Strategic Management Journal, 25: 187–200. Google Scholar
- 2011. Are leader stereotypes masculine? A meta-analysis of three research paradigms. Psychological Bulletin, 137: 616–642. Google Scholar
- * 2005. A few good women—On top management teams. Journal of Business Research, 58: 1712–1720. Google Scholar
- * 2011. Who gets the carrot and who gets the stick? Evidence of gender disparities in executive remuneration. Strategic Management Journal, 32: 301–321. Google Scholar
- 2011. The influence of top management team’s corporate governance orientation on strategic renewal trajectories: A longitudinal analysis of Royal Dutch Shell plc, 1907–2004. Journal of Management Studies, 48: 984–1014. Google Scholar
- * 2007. Relationship between corporate governance and firm performance: An African perspective. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch, South Africa. Google Scholar
- 1999. Corporate ownership around the world. The Journal of Finance, 54: 471–517. Google Scholar
- 1998. Law and finance. Journal of Political Economy, 106: 1113–1155. Google Scholar
- 2008. World economic outlook: IMF predicts slower world growth amid serious market crisis, IMF Survey Magazine. Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund. Google Scholar
- * 2013. CEO gender, executive compensation and firm performance in Chinese‐listed enterprises. Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, 21: 1136–1159. Google Scholar
- 2012. Wall street vs. main street: Firm strategies for defending legitimacy and their impact on different stakeholders. Organization Science, 23: 47–66. Google Scholar
- 2013. Successfully combining meta-analysis and structural equation modeling: Recommendations and strategies. Journal of Business and Psychology, 28: 251–261. Google Scholar
- * 2012. Incentive schemes and female leadership in financial firms. Working paper, University College of Borås, Borås, Sweden. Google Scholar
- 1996. Economic “short-termism”: The debate, the unresolved issues, and the implications for management practice and research. Academy of Management Review, 21: 825–860.Link , Google Scholar
- * 2007. She’-e-os: Gender effects and investor reactions to the announcements of top executive appointments. Strategic Management Journal, 28: 227–241. Google Scholar
- * 2011. The relationship between gender diversity and corporate profitability: The top 100 companies on the JSE Ltd. Unpublished master thesis, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa. Google Scholar
- 2014. Ethnic diversity deflates price bubbles. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 111: 18524–18529. Google Scholar
- 2010. CEO hubris and firm risk taking in China: The moderating role of managerial discretion. Academy of Management Journal, 53: 45–68.Link , Google Scholar
- * 2014. Speaking of corporate social responsibility. Working paper, Tilburg University, Netherlands. Google Scholar
- 1972. Leadership and organizational performance: A study of large corporations. American Sociological Review, 37: 117–130. Google Scholar
- 2008. The impact of transformational CEOs on the performance of small- to medium-sized firms: Does organizational context matter? The Journal of Applied Psychology, 93: 923–934. Google Scholar
- 2001. Practical meta-analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Google Scholar
- * 2014. Do women directors improve firm performance in China? Journal of Corporate Finance, 28: 169–184. Google Scholar
- 2013. Social category diversity promotes premeeting elaboration: The role of relationship focus. Organization Science, 24: 757–772. Google Scholar
- * 2011. The effect of gender on stock price reaction to the appointment of directors: The case of the FTSE 100. Applied Economics Letters, 18: 1225–1229. Google Scholar
- 1994. Highly confident but wrong: Gender differences and similarities in confidence judgments. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86: 114–121. Google Scholar
- * 2009. Board composition, board activity and ownership concentration: The impact on firm performance. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 7: 42–61. Google Scholar
- 2008. The effect of CEOs on firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 29: 1357–1367. Google Scholar
- * 2010. The impact of CEO characteristics on corporate social performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 93: 53–72. Google Scholar
- 1987. Managerial perspectives on risk and risk taking. Management Science, 33: 1404–1418. Google Scholar
- * 2009a. Can demographic diversity in top management team contribute for greater financial performance? An empirical discussion. The Journal of International Social Research, 2: 274–286. Google Scholar
- * 2009b. Demographic diversity in top level management and its implications on firm financial performance: An empirical discussion. International Journal of Business and Management, 4: 176–188. Google Scholar
- * 2013. Social network contingency, symbolic management, and boundary stretching. Strategic Management Journal, 34: 1367–1387. Google Scholar
- * 2013. Who is governing whom? Executives, governance, and the structure of generosity in large U.S. firms. Strategic Management Journal, 34: 483–497. Google Scholar
- 1998. Sex stereotyping in the executive suite: “Much ado about something”. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 13: 127–138. Google Scholar
- * 2009. CEO gender: Effects on valuation and risk. Quarterly Journal of Finance and Accounting, 48: 23–40. Google Scholar
- * 2011. The CEO effect: A longitudinal, multi-level analysis of the relationship between executive orientation and corporate social strategy. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Western Ontario, Ontario, Canada. Google Scholar
- * 2011. Transaction cost economics and corporate governance: The case of CEO age and financial stake. Managerial and Decision Economics, 32: 141–158. Google Scholar
- 1992. Group polarization as conformity to the prototypical group member. British Journal of Social Psychology, 31: 1–19. Google Scholar
- 1999. Risk and return in organizational decision making. Academy of Management Journal, 42: 330–339.Link , Google Scholar
- 1997. Event studies in management research: Theoretical and empirical issues. Academy of Management Journal, 40: 626–657.Link , Google Scholar
- 2000. Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: Correlation or misspecification? Strategic Management Journal, 21: 603–609. Google Scholar
- 2001. Women’s career advancement: The relative contribution of human and social capital. Group & Organization Management, 26: 312–342. Google Scholar
- 2013. Family firm governance, strategic conformity, and performance: Institutional vs. strategic perspectives. Organization Science, 24: 189–209. Google Scholar
- 1986. Chief executive personality and corporate strategy and structure in small firms. Management Science, 32: 1389–1409. Google Scholar
- 1990. Strategic risk and corporate performance: An analysis of alternative risk measures. Academy of Management Journal, 33: 756–779.Link , Google Scholar
- 2009. Demographic diversity in the boardroom: Mediators of the board diversity–firm performance relationship. Journal of Management Studies, 46: 755–786. Google Scholar
- * 2016. Owners’ preferences for CEOs characteristics: Did the world change after the global financial crisis? Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society, 16: 116–134. Google Scholar
- * 2007. Influence of firm performance and gender on CEO compensation. Applied Economics, 39: 1107–1113. Google Scholar
- * 2013. The determinants of women’s involvement in top management teams: Opportunities or obstacles for family-controlled firms? In Smyrnios K. X.Poutziouris P. Z.Goel S. (Eds.), Handbook of research on family business: 301–322. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing. Google Scholar
- 1990. Women and minorities in management. The American Psychologist, 45: 200–208. Google Scholar
- * 2005. Commitment to employees: Does it help or hinder small business performance? Small Business Economics, 24: 97–111. Google Scholar
- 1976. The group polarization phenomenon. Psychological Bulletin, 83: 602–627. Google Scholar
- 2014. Bridging yesterday, today, and tomorrow: CEO temporal focus, environmental dynamism, and rate of new product introduction. Academy of Management Journal, 57: 1810–1833. Google Scholar
- 2010. CEO personality, strategic flexibility, and firm performance: The case of the Indian business process outsourcing industry. Academy of Management Journal, 53: 1050–1073.Link , Google Scholar
- 2013. Good learners: How top management teams affect the success and frequency of acquisitions. Strategic Management Journal, 35: 1483–1507. Google Scholar
- * 2009. Impact of gender diversity on voluntary disclosure in annual reports. Accounting & Taxation, 1: 101–113. Google Scholar
- 1982. An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Google Scholar
- 1986. Differential contributions of majority and minority influence. Psychological Review, 93: 23–32. Google Scholar
- 2007. Can directors impact performance? A case‐based test of three theories of corporate governance. Corporate Governance, 15: 585–608. Google Scholar
- 2002. A review of research on the negative accounting relationship between risk and return: Bowman’s paradox. Omega, 30: 1–18. Google Scholar
- 2013. Risk taking in diverse groups: Gender matters. Working paper, The University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK. Google Scholar
- * 2012. Women in the boardroom: Symbols or substance? Working paper, Graduate School of Business, Stanford University, Stanford, California. Google Scholar
- * 2013. The effects of women in board of directors and top management on financial performance: Evidence from Turkey. The Journal of Accounting and Finance, 60: 107–126. Google Scholar
OECD . 2012. The business case for women’s economic empowerment. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Google Scholar- * 2014. Beyond human capital explanations for the gender pay gap among executives: Investigating board embeddedness effects on discrimination. Business Research, 7: 351–380. Google Scholar
- * 2013. Antecedents and consequences of top management team characteristics. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS. Google Scholar
- * 2007. Strategic decision making: The effects of cognitive diversity, conflict, and trust on decision outcomes. Journal of Management, 33: 196–222. Google Scholar
- 2006. Mediating role of strategic choice between top management team diversity and firm performance: Upper echelons theory revisited. Journal of Business and Management, 12: 111–126. Google Scholar
- 2003. Corporate social and financial performance: A meta-analysis. Organization Studies, 24: 403–441. Google Scholar
- 1999. Meta-analysis, level of analysis, and best estimates of population correlations: Cautions for interpreting meta-analytic results in organizational behavior. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 84: 260–270. Google Scholar
- * 2012. Board diversity and financial firm performance in Dutch listed firms. Unpublished master thesis, University of Twente, Enschede, Netherlands. Google Scholar
- * 2011. Gender diversity in board of directors and top management: The case of Turkish banks. Actual Problems of Economics, 1: 311–319. Google Scholar
- * 2015. Are female CEOs and chairwomen more conservative and risk averse? Evidence from the banking industry during the financial crisis. Journal of Business Ethics, 131: 577–594. Google Scholar
- 2011. Gender quotas and female leadership. Washington, DC: World Bank. Google Scholar
- 2004. The presentation of CEOs in the press, 1990-2000: Increasing salience, positive valence, and a focus on competency and personal dimensions of image. Journal of Public Relations Research, 16: 93–125. Google Scholar
- * 2013. Female-led firms: Performance and risk attitudes. Working paper, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland. Google Scholar
- * 2015. Age, gender, and risk-taking: Evidence from the S&P 1500 executives and firm riskiness. Working paper, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden. Google Scholar
- * 2015. Human capital and CEO compensation during institutional transitions. Journal of Management Studies, 52: 117–147. Google Scholar
- * 2007. Two essays on women executives and corporate decisions. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Clear Water Bay, Hong Kong. Google Scholar
- * 2014. CEO and chairperson characteristics and firm performance. Journal of Management and Governance, 18: 185–205. Google Scholar
- * 2010. Female executives and earnings management. Managerial Finance, 36: 629–645. Google Scholar
- * 2012. CEO servant leadership: Exploring executive characteristics and firm performance. Personnel Psychology, 65: 565–596. Google Scholar
- * 2013. Gender diversity, firm performance, and corporate decisions. Paper presented at the AIDEA 2013 Conference, Lecce, Italy. Google Scholar
- 2013. Diversity as knowledge exchange: The roles of information processing, expertise, and status. In Q. Roberson (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of diversity and work: 157–178. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
- 2009. Is the pain worth the gain? The advantages and liabilities of agreeing with socially distinct newcomers. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35: 336–350. Google Scholar
- 2006. When surface and deep-level diversity collide: The effects on dissenting group members. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 99: 143–160. Google Scholar
- 2015. Women on boards and firm financial performance: A meta-analysis. Academy of Management Journal, 58: 1546–1571.Link , Google Scholar
- 2006. Withholding inputs in team contexts: Member composition, interaction processes, evaluation structure, and social loafing. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 91: 1375–1384. Google Scholar
- 1994. Exploring strategic judgment: Methods for testing the assumptions of prescriptive contingency theories. Strategic Management Journal, 15: 311–324. Google Scholar
- * 2013. The initial public offering of high-technology firms: Female executive managers and innovation. Paper presented at the 35th DRUID Celebration Conference, Barcelona, Spain. Google Scholar
- * 2014. CEO grandiose narcissism and firm performance: The role of organizational identification. The Leadership Quarterly, 25: 958–971. Google Scholar
- * 2015. Does female management influence firm performance? Evidence from Luxembourg banks. Working paper, University of St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland. Google Scholar
- * 2011. Female participation in TMT and firm performance: Evidence from Chinese private enterprises. Nankai Business Review International, 2: 140–157. Google Scholar
- 2009. Measuring organizational performance: Towards methodological best practice. Journal of Management, 35: 718–804. Google Scholar
- 2003. The stable core and dynamic periphery in top management teams. Management Decision, 41: 120–131. Google Scholar
- 2007. Does female board representation influence firm performance? The Danish evidence. Corporate Governance, 15: 404–413. Google Scholar
- 1979. The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results. Psychological Bulletin, 86: 638–641. Google Scholar
- 1996. Foreign subsidiary compensation strategy: An agency theory perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 39: 678–703.Link , Google Scholar
- 1970. Increasing risk: I. A definition. Journal of Economic Theory, 2: 225–243. Google Scholar
- 2005. The glass cliff: Evidence that women are over-represented in precarious leadership positions. British Journal of Management, 16: 81–90. Google Scholar
- 2007. The glass cliff: Exploring the dynamics surrounding the appointment of women to precarious leadership positions. Academy of Management Review, 32: 549–572.Link , Google Scholar
- * 2014. Modeling diversity management practices in corporate ethics: The spillover effect. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Kennesaw State University, Kennesaw, GA. Google Scholar
- 1977. Constraints on administrator discretion: The limited influence of mayors on city budgets. Urban Affairs Review, 12: 475–498. Google Scholar
- * 2014. Gender diversity and firm financial performance: Evidence from Hong Kong and China. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of Macau, Macau. Google Scholar
- 2007. Swinging for the fences: The effects of CEO stock options on company risk taking and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 50: 1055–1078.Link , Google Scholar
- 2001. A global look at psychological barriers to women’s progress in management. The Journal of Social Issues, 57: 675–688. Google Scholar
- 1992. Sex role stereotyping and requisite management characteristics: A cross cultural look. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13: 439–447. Google Scholar
- 2012. The vicarious wisdom of crowds: Toward a behavioral perspective on investor reactions to acquisition announcements. Strategic Management Journal, 33: 1247–1268. Google Scholar
- 2004. Stakeholder rights and corporate governance: A cross-national study of hostile takeovers. Administrative Science Quarterly, 49: 263–295. Google Scholar
- 2008. Monte Carlo method for assessing mediation: An interactive tool for creating confidence intervals for indirect effects [Computer software]. Available at: http://quantpsy.org/. Accessed: May 6, 2015. Google Scholar
- * 2016. Four years on: Are the gazelles still running? A longitudinal study of firm performance after a period of rapid growth. International Small Business Journal, 34: 391–411. Google Scholar
- * 2014. Impact of boards gender diversity on firms profitability: Evidence from banking sector of pakistan. European Journal of Business and Management, 6: 296–307. Google Scholar
- 1995. Risk taking: A managerial perspective. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation. Google Scholar
- 1964. Capital asset prices: A theory of market equilibrium under conditions of risk. The Journal of Finance, 19: 425–442. Google Scholar
- * 2011. The gender gap in executive compensation: The role of female directors and chief executive officers. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 639: 258–278. Google Scholar
- * 1997. Women in management and firm financial performance: An exploratory study. Journal of Managerial Issues, 9: 355–372. Google Scholar
- 2010. The role of the interlocking director and board receptivity in the diffusion of practices. Academy of Management Review, 35: 246–264.Link , Google Scholar
- * 2011. Labor market gender disparity and corporate performance in Japan. Working paper, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA. Google Scholar
- * 2014. Women’s participation in senior management positions: Gender social relations, law and corporate governance. Working paper, University of São Paulo, Brazil. Google Scholar
- * 2006. Do women in top management affect firm performance? A panel study of 2,500 Danish firms. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 55: 569–593. Google Scholar
- * 2012. The token women. Working paper, Monash University, Australia. Google Scholar
- 2002. The law of group polarization. Journal of Political Philosophy, 10: 175–195. Google Scholar
- * 2008. Women in elite positions in listed corporations in the Philippines. Philippine Management Review, 15: 51–64. Google Scholar
- 2005. The wisdom of crowds. New York, NY: Anchor Books. Google Scholar
- * 2013. Corporate environmental performance: Determinants and real effects. Working paper, University of Macau, Macao. Google Scholar
- * 2015. How CEO hubris affects corporate social (ir)responsibility. Strategic Management Journal, 36: 1338–1357. Google Scholar
- 2010. The psychological meaning of words: LIWC and computerized text analysis methods. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 29: 24–54. Google Scholar
- 2010. Making the business case for gender equality, Forbes Magazine. Available at: https://www.forbes.com/2010/11/09/gender-gap-business-case-diversity-forbes-woman-leadership-harvard-women-public-policy.html. Posted: November 9, 2010. Google Scholar
The Economist . 2005. Women in business: The conundrum of the glass ceiling, The Economist, Vol. 376: 63–65. Google ScholarThe World Bank 2014. Enterprise surveys: Gender. Available at: http://www.enterprisesurveys.org/. Washington DC: The World Bank. Accessed: February 27, 2014. Google Scholar- * 2011. Empirical research on board size, board composition, board activity, ownership concentration and their effects on performance of Vietnamese listed companies. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of Borås, Borås, Sweden. Google Scholar
- * 2012. Internationalization, TMT gender diversity and firm performance in Mexican firms. International Journal of Strategic Management, 12: 13–26. Google Scholar
- 1967. Organizations in action. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Google Scholar
- * 2010. What is the impact of top management team diversity on firm performance in western Europe? Unpublished master thesis, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands. Google Scholar
- 2000. Composition of the top management team and firm international diversification. Journal of Management, 26: 1157–1177. Google Scholar
- * 2014. The double-edged nature of board gender diversity: Diversity, firm performance, and the power of women directors as predictors of strategic change. Organization Science, 25: 609–632. Google Scholar
- * 2012. How successful are women in breaking the glass ceiling? Evidence from the US market. In S. Boubaker & D. K. Nguyen (Eds.), Board directors and corporate social responsibility: 22–38. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar
- * 2014. Female bank executives: Impact on performance and risk taking. Working paper, Wilfrid Laurier University, Waterloo, ON, Canada. Google Scholar
- 1985. Organization evolution: A metamorphioc model of inertia and reorientation. In Staw B.Cummings L. L. (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior, vol. 7: 171–222. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Google Scholar
- * 2013. Isolated islands in the upper apex of organisations: In search of interaction between the board of directors and the top management team. Corporate Ownership and Control, 10: 80–90. Google Scholar
- * 2012. Why do some firms have socially homogeneous boards? Indian Journal of Corporate Governance, 5: 2–23. Google Scholar
- * 2011. The limited contribution of the use of nonfinancial performance measures in incentive bonus contracts. Unpublished master’s thesis, Tilburg University, Tilburg, Netherlands. Google Scholar
- * 2011. Diversity faultlines, shared objectives, and top management team performance. Human Relations, 64: 307–336. Google Scholar
- 2004. Work group diversity and group performance: An integrative model and research agenda. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 89: 1008–1022. Google Scholar
- 1997. Agency influences on risk reduction and operating performance: An empirical investigation among strategic groups. Journal of Business Research, 39: 219–230. Google Scholar
- * 2014. Corporate governance context on women’s representation in top management positions and listed companies value. Review of Research and Social Intervention, 44: 229–252. Google Scholar
- 1995. Theory testing: Combining psychometric meta‐analysis and structural equations modeling. Personnel Psychology, 48: 865–885. Google Scholar
- * 2013. Determinants of chief executive officer compensation. The International Journal of Business and Finance Research, 7: 29–42. Google Scholar
- * 2008. How feminine is corporate America? A recent overview. The Journal of Economic Inequality, 6: 185–209. Google Scholar
- * 2007. Wall street reaction to women in IPOs: An examination of gender diversity in top management teams. Group & Organization Management, 32: 524–547. Google Scholar
- 2000. How experience and network ties affect the influence of demographic minorities on corporate boards. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45: 366–398. Google Scholar
- 1990. Confusion of confidence intervals and credibility intervals in meta-analysis. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 75: 315–321. Google Scholar
- 1992. Top management team demography and corporate strategic change. Academy of Management Journal, 35: 91–121.Link , Google Scholar
- 2011. CEO dismissal: The role of investment analysts. Strategic Management Journal, 32: 1161–1182. Google Scholar
- 2006. Influences of top management team incentives on firm risk taking. Strategic Management Journal, 28: 81–89. Google Scholar
- * 2010. Legitimacy and the financing of Chinese technological start-ups. Paper presented at the Service Systems and Service Management International Conference, Tokyo, Japan. Google Scholar
- * 2015. The effects of TMT faultline configuration on a firm’s short-term performance and innovation activities. Journal of Management & Organization, 21: 558–572. Google Scholar
- * 2014. The impacts of top management team characteristics on entrepreneurial strategic orientation. Management Decision, 52: 378–409. Google Scholar
- 2011. Group diversity and decision quality: Amplification and attenuation of the framing effect. International Journal of Forecasting, 27: 41–49. Google Scholar
- * 2012. Affects of female directors on firms performance in Pakistan. Modern Economy, 03: 817–825. Google Scholar
- * 2014. CEO duality structure and firm performance in Pakistan. Asian Journal of Accounting and Governance, 5: 57–69. Google Scholar
- * 2014. Mediation or moderation? The role of R&D investment in the relationship between corporate governance and firm performance: Empirical evidence from the Chinese IT industry. Corporate Governance, 22: 501–517. Google Scholar
- 2010. Once an outsider, always an outsider? CEO origin, strategic change, and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 31: 334–346. Google Scholar
- * 2014. An empirical study for corporate risk index: CEO characteristics affecting corporate risk-taking. Journal of Applied Sciences, 14: 3520–3525. Google Scholar
- 2013. Group polarization on corporate boards: Theory and evidence on board decisions about acquisition premiums. Strategic Management Journal, 34: 800–822. Google Scholar
- 2011. Misperceiving the beliefs of others: How pluralistic ignorance contributes to the persistence of positive security analyst reactions to the adoption of stock repurchase plans. Organization Science, 22: 869–886. Google Scholar
