Human Capital and Professional Network Effects on Womens (and Mens) - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Human Capital and Professional Network Effects

• n Women’s (and Men’s) Odds of Corporate

Board Directorships

Renuka Hodigere

Discussant: Estefania Santacreu-Vasut

19/12/2013

Research Questions and Methodology

Role of human capital and networks on women’s appointment Different criteria for men and women Data from Boardex on company boards

• compare characteristics of women appointed to public boards

to those of men appointed at the same time

Theory

Social categorization theory (Bettencours, Dorr, Charlton & Hume 2001 among others) “when compositional change is imposed upon a homogeneous group there is a tendency to select the minority member most different from the majority group”

Main Findings: Interpretation

Women director’s “human capital and professional network characteristics do not fully explain their selection.” Regulatory, legislative, public relations pressures. Why does the model fits better the sample of men?

• sample size! 180 women compared to 306 men
• women candidates are a more selective and homogeneous

group (in fact std deviations of their characteristics are much smaller) see table 2

• what are the characteristics of men appointed in boards with

no women (which are excluded from the sample in the paper)

• It would be nice to show descriptive statistics (table 1) for

men and women separately.

Suggestions (1): Scope of Analysis

Expand the analysis worldwide or to more countries to explore regulatory and legislative differences

• The case of Europe: huge diversity across countries
• Deloitte (2011): “The European Union is taking steps to

guarantee the equality between women and men, as mentioned in the Treaty of Rome of 1957. Viviane Reding, European Commissioner, has proposed legislation requiring a 30 percent rate by 2015, expanding to 40 percent by 2020”

Suggestions (2): Ownership and Appointment

Look at ownership of the companies in the sample and headquarter location Look at the industry: what type of firms? size? healthcare versus utilities or finance Maybe do firm-level analysis: probability that a firm has at least

• ne women in board as function of firm characteristics

Suggestions (3): Nomination Process

“In December 2009, the SEC approved a rule that would require disclosure of whether, and if so how, a nominating committee considers diversity in identifying nominees for director. If the nominating committee or the board has a policy with regard to the consideration of diversity in identifying director nominees, the rule requires disclosure of how this policy is implemented and how the nominating committee or the board assesses the effectiveness of its

• policy. The SEC rule does not define diversity, but instead, allows

companies to define the term. Therefore, diversity can include, but not be limited to, gender, background, race, and education. These rules were effective 28 February 2010.” Sample includes companies on the SP 500 list between 2005 and

• 2010. Why stop at 2010? Can you know if committee considers

diversity or not?

Suggestions (4): Other

Do you have information on type of board? executive or supervisory? How many women are there among individuals nominated from institutional investors and founder families? How do companies that do not appoint a single women on board differ from those that appoint at least one, and from those that appoint more than one?