Suchergebnisse

Diversität ist das gesellschaftspolitische Gebot der Stunde. Auch in der Corporate Governance findet das Konzept trotz Unsicherheiten über seinen Inhalt, seine Anforderungen und seine positiven Effekte, breite Akzeptanz. Entsprechende Regulierungsangebote, sei es in Form einer Geschlechterquote oder Mindestbeteiligungsgebots, einer Zielgrößenpflicht, oder einer Diversitätsempfehlung, werden in Deutschland aber nur zögerlich aufgenommen. In den Vereinigten Staaten verbuchen derweil private Diversity Stewardship-Kampagnen institutioneller Investoren beachtliche Erfolge. Fraglich ist, ob diese Initiativen auch in deutschen Aktiengesellschaften einen Kulturwandel anstoßen können.

AbstractWe find that the likelihood of a female CEO appointment increases with the proportion of female directors on the board. However, this positive relation is significant only in the subsample of firms where one of the directors is appointed CEO, and is insignificant in firms where the new CEO is not from the board. The results are consistent with the explanation that female directors constitute a supply of viable candidates for the CEO position, rather than female directors affecting the likelihood of female CEO appointments by interpreting noisy signals about the abilities of female candidates.

AbstractThis paper investigates the occurrence of network‐based appointments and its impact on board diversity. I use data on independent board appointments between 2006 and 2012 in large publicly listed firms in the USA, and exploit directors' CVs to uncover past social connections between candidates and current directors along various dimensions—from employment, education, army and social activities. I first estimate the probability of obtaining a board seat when being socially connected to members of the recruiting board. Using different assumptions to recreate the unobserved pool of candidates, I find that being socially connected to someone on the board increases the chances of obtaining the board seat between 35.8 and 41.1 percentage points, after controlling for a large set of firm and director characteristics together with firm and director fixed effects. I then study the change in board diversity following these appointments. While appointments of new independent directors affect board diversity positively, those that are made through networks are not significantly different. However, this is likely the result of appointing directors from a significantly homogeneous sample of individuals, whether connected or not, and suggests that in order to increase board diversity, efforts should be directed towards increasing diversity in the pool of candidates.

Purpose– The purpose of this paper is to investigate the effect of board diversity on the extent to which firms invest in R & D.Design/methodology/approach– Based on data collected about the composition of the board of directors, the authors determine statistically if the characteristics of directors predicts the extent to which firms invest more in R & D.Findings– The authors find, unexpectedly, that tenure diversity lead firms to invest less in R & D, while education diversity and gender diversity makes firms invest more. Gender diversity positively moderates education diversity as well, strengthening the effect found.Research limitations/implications– The sample of firms the authors include in the paper is restricted due to the overwhelming difficulty in collecting data about the composition of boards of directors, and their backgrounds.Practical implications– The paper offers insights into how boards of directors might need to be composed in order to try have firms invest more in R & D.Social implications– Innovative firms are more competitive and more sustainable. Knowing what contributes to a firm's investment in R & D is thus of great social value.Originality/value– The authors include a much larger set of diversity measures than any previously published study, and provide counter-intuitive findings that have implications for practice, society, as well as theory about team composition.

There has been extensive research conducted on the importance of corporate governance around the world. The research seems to demonstrate that, regardless of whether corporations are based in common law or civil code systems, their longevity and sustainability arise from good corporate governance. However, the evidence does not clearly demonstrate a correlation between a particular organisation's governance structure and practices and its share price. Around the world the question of board diversity is gaining in importance. The beginning of the debate in the 1960s centred on gender. While it is essential to conduct a debate on gender diversity, other aspects of diversity should also be considered. Race, culture and even age may have a direct impact on the performance of a board. Australian companies, particularly those listed on the ASX, have a poor record of instituting any type of diversity. The USA and European Union have a much wider range of policies to promote diversity on corporate boards. The key question is how best to regulate to promote diversity across gender, race, culture and age. The historical approach of regulating diversity by setting targets and requiring disclosure does not seem to have delivered substantial change. Is it the right time to impose mandatory requirements, or are there other alternative strategies? Without doubt change is required, but there will be opposition.