ISSN:1582-2559

GENERAL MANAGEMENT

The Effect of Gender Diversity and

Intellectual Capital Disclosure: Empirical
Evidence of Indonesian-Listed Firms
Dharmendra1*, Tubagus ISMAIL2, Lia UZLIAWATI3, Imam Abu HANIFAH4
1Ph.D(Scholar) of Accounting, Sultan Ageng Tirtayasa University, Serang, Indonesia,
Email: dharmendra.dclana@gmail.com
2Professor: Department of Accounting, Ph.D. Program, Sultan Ageng Tirtayasa University, Serang, Indonesia,

Email: adeismail73@gmail.com
3,4Department of Accounting, Ph.D. Program, Sultan Ageng Tirtayasa University, Serang, Indonesia,

Email: uzliawati@untirta.ac.id3,imamabuhanifah@untirta.ac.id4
*Corresponding Author

Received: 11.03.2022 Accepted: 13.06.2022 Published: 01.10.2022 DOI: 10.47750/QAS/23.190.34

Abstract

The aim of this study is to determine the influence of gender diversity on the board of directors exert on corporate
intellectual capital disclosure. This study uses financial companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange in 2015 -
2018. Purposeful sampling was used in the sampling process. Supplementary data was obtained from the company’s
annual report that was got from the Indonesia Stock Exchange. Panel data regression analysis was used as the
research method. We find that gender diversity is a complementary corporate governance mechanism that has a
significant positive effect on levels of disclosure of IC information. This appears due to the presence of women on
boards serving to prompt stronger monitoring and oversight behavior. This study contributes to the management
accounting literature and upper echelon theory. The findings would be useful to Indonesian practitioners, especially
those in management positions in financial companies and financial institutions.

Keywords: Intellectual Capital Disclosure, Gender Diversity, Board of Directors, Women’s Director.

(IC) began to flourish, especially after the emergence of norms

1. Introduction
In the last decade, intellectual capital is considered important
to be revealed and discussed, because it contains intangible
assets that are used to determine the value of the company. In
addition, intellectual capital is also considered necessary by the
company's management to protect the needs of information
users, so that the asymmetry of information between the two can
be minimized. IC quality is closely related to corporate
mechanisms governance implemented by the company.
Responsibility for the IC lies in corporate governance, and
depending on the objectives, characteristics company, as well
as government policy. According to Firer and Williams (2003)
knowledge-based management has become a new mantra for
organizations. Modern designers who hope to continue
competing in an environment in where there is ever-increasing
pressure and a competitive world. One of an important element
of corporate governance is the existence of a board. Existence
company organs (board of commissioners and directors) are
evidence application of the principles of good corporate
governance at a minimum level (Surya and Yustiavandana,
2006). Zhou and Panbunyuen (2008) stated that the diversity of
composition this board member can be determined from various
perspectives such as background racial/ethnic background,
nationality, gender and age, background education, board size,
industry background, ownership structure, and experience.
Intellectual capital is a content that in recent times began too
constantly bandy. In Indonesia, the miracle of intellectual capital
on impalpable means. According to SFAS 19, impalpable means
are non-monetary means that can be linked and has no physical
form and held for use in the yield or deliver goods or services,
leased to others, or for executive purposes (IAI 2007). Precise
dimension and exposure of the IC companies cannot set despite
some recognition of the benefits of IC in promoting the value and
competitive advantage.
The first regulatory initiatives seeking gender balance on
company boards were introduced in 2003 in Norway. Public
companies were needed to have at least 40 percent of either
gender as board members by 2008. In Malaysia, the Law of
Commercial Governance (2012) needed public companies to
have at least 30 per cent of women on their boards by 2016. In
Spain, the Equality Law (Law 3/2007) pressed companies to
increase the proportion of women on boards to 40% by 2015.
The diversity in the firm board members is believed to affect
the value of the firm both in the short and long term. Where in
that case connected to the effectiveness of the organizations
and monitoring to enhance the firm performance in various
contexts of developed countries and developing countries (Amin
and Sunarjanto, 2016). Female board of directors is suitable to
improve the capability of lobbying that has an impact on the
adding profit generated by the firm (Garcia, 2016). The trend that
causes women to hold positions in the firm top operation
continues to increase (Kusuma et al.,2018). The existence of
gender diversity in the board is suitable to improve the image of
the firm that has a positive effect in improving the company

Q UAL IT Y 324
Access to Success Vol. 23, No. 190/ October 2022

GENERAL MANAGEMENT
performance (Arulvel & Pratheepkanth, 2019). Yet, the result of
board gender diversity on firm performance are still mixed. While
some benefactions find modest positive effects other studies
show no effects or even point towards the presence of a
negative impact.
Commanded gender proportion for directors that have been
introduced in several European countries can reduce firm value.
Some studies investigated the preface of gender proportions in
Norway as a natural trial, by assessing a 40 percent proportions
on the women’s board of directors, and found, negative
performance effects (Martínez and Rambaud, 2019; Carter et
al., 2010). Gender diversity on the board of directors has been
considered as a twofold view (Milliken F & Martins L L, 1996)
meaning that increased diversity can affect in advantages and
disadvantages regarding the issues, a board composed of
different directors affects firm performance either positively or
negatively because it may exert in enhancing firm's
transparency practices about both financial and nonfinancial
activities (Vitolla et al., 2020).
This study will review the impact of gender diversity on
intellectual capital (IC) disclosure of Indonesian- Listed Firms.
Over decades, resourced based view (RBV) has emerged as an
influential theory of the strategic choices companies make to
attain and sustain competitive advantage in dynamic capability
view. At its core, the RBV explains how managers use internal
resources to achieve and sustain the advantage. The intuitive
appeal of this argument has encouraged scholar to apply the
RBV in a wide range of organizational and industry settings
(Barney, 2001a, b; Barney, Wright, & Ketchen, 2001; Crook,
Ketchen, Combs, & Todd, 2008; Nason & Wiklund, 2018;
Newbert, 2007). The upper echelon view postulates that
directors act according to their individual gests, values,
personalities, and other related human factors (Hambrick and
Mason 1984). At the same time, there exists a ‘‘business case
for diversity” positing that different teams can serve a broader
diapason of customers and solve a wider range of problems
(Hamilton et al., 2012).
Conflicts are ubiquitous to human interactions and hence to
associations (Amason, 1996). From the organizational
perspective, the company is viewed with some approaches
dealing with similar problems, substantially gender stereotyping
of directorial positions (Schein, 2007). It highlights discrimination
as being the result of categorizing individuals according to group
membership in a way that decision-making is influenced by
conceptions. In general, women conceptions are “viewed as
lower suitable for directorial jobs when compared to the
conceptions of male, white, middle-aged workers (Goldman et
al., 2006),” who feel to represent hard or specialized capabilities
(i.e., knowledge, capabilities, self-confidence, fierceness, and
dominance). The fact that these demands are crucial to
accessing high-status directorial and professional jobs
contributes to the problem; indeed, when women are associated
with female soft capabilities (i.e., teamworking, communication,
and emotional support). The limited knowledge, experience, and
view of the male directors will be balanced by the involvement
of women directors who show new ideas and innovative insights
their contribution may add value to problem-solving through their
communication and easiness of gaining information from
different sources and to support the better IC (Sánchez, 2017).
Some corporate governance experts argue that high
diversity in the board structure can improve performance
company finances. In the past, the board of commissioners was
an award for an elite group of people with similar socio-
economic backgrounds, degrees academic, educational, and
professional training, and as a result they share the same view
of business practices. Nevertheless, today's dynamic global
325
ISSN:1582-2559
business environment and development phenomena the market
demands recognition of the power of a wider stakeholder, this
shows an increase in board diversity will increase the taking
decision. Increasing board diversity can reduce the process
narrow-sighted decision making and open opportunities broader
scope, placing the company in a better position in the act and
survive in an ever-changing business environment (Gormley
1996; Kotz 1998). Therefore, this research attempts to:
To assess the general ICD level and the components on the
selected sample company annual report in Indonesia.
Observing the arrangement of gender diversity and ICD
Observing control variables such as Sales, Leverage,
Profitability, Ownership, Company Age, and ICD
Literature Review
Gender Diversity and IC Disclosure
According to the experimenters, gender diversity boards
have effective conversations relating to company disclosures,
encourage farther comprehensive decision analyses (Rasmini
et al., 2014) and evaluation of qualitative attributes analogous
as IC in making conclusions (Boulouta, 2013). This view refers
to the upper echelon theory. According to the upper echelon
theory, that top executives view their situations through their
own highly personalized lenses (Hambrick and Mason 1984).
Individualized construal of strategic situations arises because of
differences among executives in their experiences, values,
personalities, and other human factors. To survive, firms must
obtain resources from (actors in) the external terrain.
Independent directors bring greater expertise, experience,
character, and external connection to the company (Haniffa and
Cooke, 2005). Equipped with expertise and experience,
independent directors impact the board to extend disclosure
beyond that reflects ritualistic, innocent adherence to specified
morals to reveal IC’s applicability to stakeholders (Li et al.,
2008). The board of directors must have different views, skills,
and professional experiences to create an emphasized value
from a resource-based perspective. Diversity member profiles
(including gender) gives the board a variety of capabilities, a
collection of resources and expertise, a range of different
leadership experiences, and the capacities to induce new ideas
(García, 2016).
The number of women directors is appreciatively associated
to the board strategic control. While functional control tasks are
more routine, strategic control tasks are partner figure, more
complex and creative, and bear a broader range of perspectives.
Former study on gender differences suggests that whereas
there are no overall differences in effectiveness between women
and men, there are some gender related differences for some
behavior and ability in some situations (Yukl, 2002). The view of
gender - grounded differences of leadership operate at the
individual position, they can be applied in the environment of
boards to explain how board gender composition (a platoon
position construct) affects board effectiveness.
Aspects of gender differences that are important to
understanding leadership pertain to agentic and cooperative
attributes (Eagly, Johannesen-Schmidt, & van Engen 2003).
Agentic characteristics, which are credited more explosively to
men than women, include being assertive, ambitious,
aggressive, independent, t one - confident, enterprising, and
competitive. In work situations, collaborative gusted might
include speaking tentatively, not drawing attention to oneself,
accepting others’ positions, supporting, and shooting others,
QUALITY
Vol. 23, No. 190/October 2022 Access to Success

GENERAL MANAGEMENT
and contributing to the result of relational and interpersonal
problems (Eagly & Johannesen-Schmidt, 2001). Also, study on
gender differences suggests that women may bear else than
men and be more effective in the performance of certain tasks
over others (Eagly, Karau, & Makhijani 1995). The diverse
expertise is essential to ensure that the board’s responsibility to
supervise managerial decisions regarding investments, cash
flow, dividends, financial statements, and so forth, that is
decisions concerning the firm financial requiring strong
quantitative back-ground knowledge and skills. Gender diversity
is considered to increase a board’s collaborative intelligence
and contribute to the increase of available talent for the
management function and the highest supervision of the
company (Chen et al. 2018). Tentatively, not drawing attention
to oneself, accepting others’ positions, supporting, and shooting
others, and contributing to the result of relational and
interpersonal problems (Eagly & Johannesen-Schmidt, 2001).
Also, study on gender differences suggests that women may
bear else than men and be more effective in the performance of
certain tasks over others (Eagly, Karau, & Makhijani 1995). The
diverse expertise is essential to ensure that the board’s
responsibility to supervise managerial decisions regarding
investments, cash flow, dividends, financial statements, and so
forth, that is decisions concerning the firm financial requiring
strong quantitative back-ground knowledge and skills. Gender
diversity is considered to increase a board’s collaborative
intelligence and contribute to the increase of available talent for
the management function and the highest supervision of the
company (Chen et al. 2018).
The importance of gender representation is based on the
belief that women will increase marketable effectiveness by
increasing the competence, expertise, collaborative judgment,
and intelligence of the board (Saeed & Sameer, 2017). There is
a strong assumption that the company’s performance will
increase because women directors are more qualified than men
in numerous skills such as multitasking, risk management, and
communication (An et al., 2015). In comparison to male
members, women directors tend to have better interpersonal
skills, show greater trustworthiness, their communication style is
more participative and process- oriented, which may improve
decision-making processes by creating an atmosphere of
greater communication of information and by encouraging the
board to consider different perspectives and to incorporate
further varied opinions into a discussion (Jelinek and Adler,
1988; Eagly and Johnson, 1990; Daily and Dalton, 2003;
MacLeod Heminway, 2007).Therefore, gender diversity
improves the environmental information by correcting the
problem of asymmetric information in the capital market.
Two major factors explain the propensity of women
executive directors to reduce information asymmetry. The first,
women executive directors employ “a further trust-structure
leadership style than men” that their commitment toward trust
development requires further information exchange and lower
information asymmetry (Srinidhi et al., 2011). The second,
women executive directors exhibit greater perseverance in
supervision. The better monitoring claimed by gender diversity
caused better managerial oversight, increased translucency,
and broader information. Therefore, the presence of women
directors improves operation control and enhance the
independence of corporate boards, thereby perfecting the
translucency and exposure quality of the firm. This will affect in
the exposure of intellectual capital information because higher
levels of women’s representation on the board of directors’ hint
at market knowledge and better identification with customers
and employees. Board gender diversity is appreciatively
associated with higher levels of intellectual capital information
published in sustainability reports.
Q UAL IT Y
Access to Success Vol. 23, No. 190/ October 2022
ISSN:1582-2559
Gender diversity on corporate boards influences corporate
governance outcomes that in turn impact performance
(Rodrigues, Tejedo-Romero, and Craig, 2017). By the same
token, found that women directors have higher expectations of
board task performance than their male colleagues. As such,
women directors are more likely to commit to the development
of board practices that will ensure the effective performance of
board tasks (Fondas, 2000). This is because the presence of
women on boards leads to stronger monitoring and oversight
geste. Rodrigues, Tejedo-Romero, and Craig (2017) findings
encouraged support for program that will increase current
situations of representation of women on corporate boards and
impact the setting of corporate governance conditions relating to
exposure by capital request controllers. Therefore, women
directors increase boards’ covering capability, and accordingly,
boards with women directors are associated with lower
circumstance of corporate financial fraud and increased
translucency. Therefore, it can be argued that women directors
would be associated with advance intellectual capital. Based on
the information above, the hypothesis in this research is:
H1: There is a relationship between gender diversity on the
board of directors and IC disclosure
Leverage and IC Disclosure
Leverage which means the amount of assets measured by
debt financing, where the debt here is not from investors or
shareholders but from creditors. Companies that have a high
proportion of debt in their capital structure will bear higher
agency costs than companies with a small proportion of debt.
H2: There is a relationship between Leverage and IC
disclosure
Companies Age and IC Disclosure
The age of the company is the beginning of the company
carrying out operational activities so that it can maintain the
company's going concern or maintain its existence in the
business world. The longer the age of the company, the more
visible the company's existence (going concern), so that the
more extensive disclosures are made related to creating
confidence in outsiders in the quality of the company. The
relationship is to foster confidence in outsiders, independent
commissioners are also an important factor for the disclosure of
intellectual capital.
H3: There is a relationship between Companies Age and IC
disclosure
Ownership and IC Disclosure
Concentration of ownership is the number of outstanding
shares owned by shareholders in a company. The greater the
level of ownership, the greater the voting power in the
company's decision making.
H4: There is a relationship between Ownership and IC
disclosure
Profitability and IC Disclosure
Profitability is the ratio used to measure the level of the
effectiveness of the company's management (management) as
indicated by the number of profits generated from sales and
326

GENERAL MANAGEMENT
investments. According to Setianto (2014), shows that the
profitability of the investment in capital intellectual property in
signaling significant use in the form of investment. Thus, the
higher
the company's profitability, the the company will disclose
more extensive information about capital intellectual.
H5: There is a relationship between Profitability and IC
disclosure
Sales and IC Disclosure
Companies in a growing condition require more adequate
disclosure because in this case it can reduce the occurrence of
information asymmetry (Haniff, Hisham, and Rashid, 2005).
Under conditions of growth, the
company will be more disclose various information needed
by the parties who interested in more detail. The results of
research by Taliyang, Latif, and Mustafa (2011) in Malaysia
found that the effect of company growth on intellectual capital
disclosure. On the side on the other hand, Lina (2013) failed to
find any influence on company growth on the disclosure of
intellectual capital.
H6: There is a relationship between Sales and IC disclosure
Description
Companies in financial sector were listed on IDX during
2015-2018
Companies in financial sector were not listed sequently
during 2015-2018
Companies in financial sector without data of diversity of
board and director
The amount of sample
Table 1: Sample Selections
Variable
The dependent variable is the intellectual capital disclosure
that is measured by observing the existence of intellectual
capital disclosure comprising mortal capital, structural capital,
and relational capital. This dimension was carried out by relating
the factors of intellectual capital disclosure, pertaining to the
intellectual capital disclosure Index (ICI). This refers to former
research on ICI dimension (Cerbioni and Parbonetti, 2007).
Where di = 0 and di = 1 if the disclosure item was found; di = 0
if the disclosure item was not found; and m = number of
intellectual capital particular (factors) that the company can
disclose. The independent variable is gender diversity. This
variable is the primary variable that will be examined, and
several other variables will be also used. Numerous former
studies have used the percentage of women executive directors
in companies (%) to measure gender diversity of the board
(Tejedo- Romero et al., 2017). In several former types of study,
dummy variables were used to measure gender diversity. Still,
in this study, the percentage and number of women executive
directors are used as the dimension of gender diversity. To
observe whether gender diversity influences intellectual capital
disclosure or not, control variables were included. The control
variables used were variables that have been delved similar as
327
ISSN:1582-2559
Materials and Methods
Data and Sample
The object of research that used in this study was financial
sector companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange
during the years 2015-2018. The financial sector consists of
companies of banking, insurance, securities companies, and
financial institutions. The banking sector was chosen because
the banking industry is one of the most intensive sectors of
intellectual capital (Firer and Williams, 2003). In addition, from
an intellectual aspect, the overall banking sector worker is more
homogeneous compared to other profitable sectors (Kubo and
Saka, 2002). Bank and insurance can be categorized as an
industry based on the intellect to innovate in products and
services, as well as the knowledge and flexibility is a critical point
that determines the success of the business (Sianipar, 2009).
The selection of the sample was based on non-probability
sampling method rather purposive sampling method, which is
the sampling technique with consideration/specific criteria. The
criteria used to elect the sample in this study are as follows. 1.
Sample of companies listed and published annual reports during
the observation period 2015-2018. 2. The company were borne
the data of diversity of board and intellectual capital in periodic
reports during the observation period 2015-2018.
Amount of observation
356
(60)
(143)
153
sales (SALES), leverage (LEV), return on assets (ROA, return
on equity (ROE) and ownership of the firm (OWNR).
Methodology
The significant of intellectual capital disclosure has been
examined using two research styles, namely content analysis,
and questionnaire check, but the content analysis is more
common and wide among trials (Ienciu, 2014). The content
analysis attempts to deconstructs information that is published
completely, objectively, and reliably. In this study, the content
was anatomized using software rather than manually. Analysis
of computerized content has been used in former disquisition
involving large samples (Vergauwen, Bollen, & Oirbans, 2007).
The use of the tools helps in achieving an advance position of
replication trust capability and impartiality. Cerbioni and
Parbonetti (2007) used 25 terms of IC disclosure in her study.
The study comprised three Internal Capital (i), comprising 9 item
analogous as patens, brand, trademark, operational gospel,
corporate culture, information systems, operational processes,
network system and exploration design. External Capital (ExC)
comprising 10 particulars analogous as brands, customers,
customers loyalty, company names, distribution channels,
business collaboration, favorable contracts, empowering
agreements, financial contracts, and franchising agreements (ii)
Employee Competence (EC) comprising 6 items such as know-
how, education, vocational qualification, work related capability,
QUALITY
Vol. 23, No. 190/October 2022 Access to Success
 ISSN:1582-2559

GENERAL MANAGEMENT
work related competence, and entrepreneurial spirit. The
determination of the unit of analysis is carried out after the terms
are classified. Frequency crosschecking is carried out using
direct word search from several random pdf documents and no
significant differences were found. Thus, the trust ability of the
data extraction process is ensured. This study uses all periodic
reports without making a difference between voluntary and
obligatory exposure.
(t) is used for all observed companies (i). The reason for using
panel data is to control the heterogeneity of individuals and
certain unobserved times that are isolated with explanatory
variables. By using time series and cross-sectional data, the
specific unobserved individual effects can be controlled. The ICI
value is a linear combination of explanatory variables, including
gender diversity and vector control variables (Z). Mathematically
the relationship between the two primary variables is stated as
follows:

𝐼𝐶𝐼𝑖,𝑡= α + 𝛽1𝐺𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑡+𝛽2𝑍𝑖𝑡+𝑉𝑖𝑡 (2) Referring to model 2,

Model Analysis the model explored to be:
Panel data analysis is used to test the proposed hypothesis. 𝐼𝐶𝐼𝑖,𝑡= α + 𝛽1𝐺𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑡 +𝛽2𝑆𝐴𝐿𝐸𝑆𝑖𝑡 + 𝛽3𝐿𝐸𝑉𝑖𝑡+𝛽4𝑅𝑂𝐴𝑖𝑡+
The panel data used is balanced data because the same period 𝛽5𝑅𝑂E𝑖𝑡+ 𝛽6OWN𝑖𝑡+ 𝛽7AGE𝑖𝑡+ 𝑉𝑖𝑡

Variable Type Variable Name Symbol Variabel Definition

Dependent Intellectual Capital ICI
Variable Index

Independent Gender Diversity Gender The percentage of women on

Variable board of directors (Board
Directors)
Control Variable Sales Sales Period Sales Value
Leverage Lev Leverage
Profitability ROA Return on Assets
ROE Return on Equity
Ownership OWNR Variable Dummy, 1 for public and 0
for others
Company’s Age AGE The Age of company is count from
the beginning of company
establishment
Table 2: Variable Operational Definitions

others. ExC comprises all relations a company entertains with

Result And Discussion
Content Analysis
The classified intellectual capital disclosure done by the
companies based on market capitalization is presented in Figure
1. The Particulars bared and the total score of each intellectual
capital elements is presented. In the companies with large
capitalization, it was observed that of the total 25 particulars, 21
particulars were borne by the company. In this study, Internal
Capital (IC) consists of 9 particulars, External Capital (ExC)
consists of 10 particulars, and Employee Competence (EC)
consists of 6 terms EC refers to the capability, training and
education, and experience and value characteristics of an
association’s workforce (knowledge, capabilities, skills,
experience, know-how, capabilities, and expertise of the mortal
members). These groups show that EC is more dominant than
external subjects, similar as partners, suppliers, clients,
trademarks, brand names, and reputation. Regarding IC,
particulars similar as networking systems (18 percent),
leadership (14.4 percent), and R&D (13 percent) are more
frequently disclosed. Also, particulars such as trademark,
organizational cultures, information systems, and process
management are frequently disclosed. Knowledge asset is the
least disclosed item. Regarding EC, employee particulars (12
percent) and training (14 percent) are more frequently disclosed.
Such as work atmosphere, expertise, remuneration, and
incentives are also disclosed in the company’s annual report.
Regarding ExC, the item investor (14 percent) is more frequently
disclosed. The item client capital is the least disclosed term
(0.14 percent). Pertaining to the IC items, it can be concluded
that large companies in Indonesia have disclosed more IC items
(21 of 25 particulars).

ROA ROE OWNR AGE

ROA 1.000
ROE .424** 1.000
OWNR .258** 0.067 1.000
AGE .488** .279** -.254 1.000
Table 4: Person Correlation Matrix

*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)

Q UAL IT Y 328
Access to Success Vol. 23, No. 190/ October 2022
 ISSN:1582-2559

GENERAL MANAGEMENT

Multiple Linear Regression
Analysis to observe the influence of the gender diversity
variable and control variables on intellectual capital disclosure,
regression analysis was performed as shown in Table 5.
Regression using data for 2015-2018 was estimated for all
companies with a sample of 153 companies.
Based on the results shown in Table 5, probability value of
lower than 5%; this means that the independent variable can
explain the ICD variables significantly. Gender variables impact
IC disclosure in companies; the influence is negative which
means that the actuality of gender diversity has a negative
impact on the disclosure of the company’s IC. There are
suggestions that this finding is caused by the coercion to have
women on corporate boards; thus, it has a negative impact on
the company (Ahern & Dittmar, 2012; Triana et al., 2013).

For All Models

N 612
Adjusted R2 0.384
F Statistics 3.57
Prob. 0.001
Intercept 23.563

Variable Dependent = ICD

Independent Variable Beta p value
Gender -0.004 0,687
Sales 0,455 0,039**
LEV -0.452 0.07*
ROA ROE 0,326 0.421
0.221 0,123
OWNR 0.045 0.61
AGE** -0.315 0,002**
*Sig. 10%, **Sig. 5%

Table 5: Regression Result

IC disclosure for companies. This is because shareholders
do not pay attention to this element. Also, IC is not explicitly
reported in Based on the results shown in Table 5, companies
probability value of lower than 5%; this means that the
independent variable can explain the ICD variables significantly.
Gender variables influence IC disclosure in companies; the
influence is negative which means that the existence of gender
diversity has a negative impact on the disclosure of the
company’s IC. There are indications that this finding is caused
by the compulsion to have women on corporate boards; thus, it
has a negative impact on the company (Ahern & Dittmar, 2012;
Triana et al., 2013). There is no impact of gender variables on
large companies because in Indonesia there is no accreditation
for companies to report IC components in the company’s
financial statements. Also, IC is not explicitly reported in. Testing
of variables influencing the IC disclosure shows different results.
The gender diversity variable has no influence on IC disclosure
in large companies. However, it has a negative influence on

329 QUALITY
Vol. 23, No. 190/October 2022 Access to Success
 ISSN:1582-2559

GENERAL MANAGEMENT
small companies. Other variables such as profitability, leverage,
size of the firm, and type of firm influence
Indonesia. This means that the existence of women on the board
of directors has not influenced the innovation of the company
and IC disclosure in the company. Further research is expected
IC disclosure in Indonesia. Regression to use a different approach to identifying IC disclosures, such as
analysis show that gender using a questionnaire in identifying the disclosure of IC
components in the company.
diversity has not directly influenced IC disclosure in

Therefore, we can observe that the terms workers, investors,

and leadership are disclosed more constantly in the annual
reports of companies with large capitalization as well as small
capitalization. The position and quality of IC disclosure varied
significantly among companies. The main reason is the lack of
mindfulness and inadequate mechanisms to measure IC. Also,
the nature of IC reporting is not mandatory, and there is no
generally accepted framework, which also causes low IC
disclosure in Indonesia. It can be concluded that companies with
large capitalization disclosed more IC particulars than
companies with small capitalization.
Multivariate Analysis
Descriptive Statistics
Descriptive statistics of all independent and dependent
variables for 2015-2018 are presented in Table 3. Based on the
results in Table 3, the average value of IC disclosure is (57.8).
SALES, ROE, and AGE variables have the same pattern as the
IC variable. This means that these variables are close to our
estimates.

Variable Obs Mean Std.Dev. Min Max

ICD 612 57.87 51.21 5 50

Gender 612 0.090 0.081 0 0.5
Sales (In) 612 20.12 0.96 15.15 19.11
LEV 612 5.25 2.62 -5.22 19.20
ROA 612 17.55 18.32 0,058 71,51
ROE 612 33.38 87.23 -122,4 882,3
OWNR 612 0.463 0.23 0 1
AGE 612 42.18 35.62 900 112
Table 6: Descriptive Statistics Panel A The company with large capitalization (IDX30)

is present in Table 4. Correlation analysis is demanded before

Correlation Analysis running a regression to examine multicollinearity problems.
Each correlation coefficient of lower than 0.82 indicates that
The correlation analysis between all independent variables there is no problem with multicollinearity.

Table 4: Person Gender Sales LEV

Correlation Matrix
Gender 1.000
Sales 0.064 1.000
LEV .148* .264** 1.000
ROA .285** -0.027 -.172*
ROE 0.0733 0.008 .563**
OWNR -0.124 -.462** -.465**
AGE 0.071 0,09 0,094

on intellectual capital disclosure. The results of the study prove

Conclusion
This study investigates the relationship between IC
disclosure situations and corporate attributes of companies
listed on the IDX. The research also investigates the influence
of gender diversity on ICD in Indonesia. The sample selected
was 153 companies. The results of this research enrich the
findings of other researchers related to IC disclosure in
Southeast Asia, especially Indonesia. Although Indonesia is not
a knowledge-grounded economy, there are multitudinous
driving forces similar as globalization and the increasing number
of information technology use. The results showed that the
variable independent research used in the study had no effect
that there are still many other factors outside of research that
affect intellectual capital performance. This opens more
opportunities for research that next about intellectual capital
disclosure.
References
[1] Amason, A. C. (1996). Distinguishing the effects of
functional and dysfunctional conflict on strategic
decision making: Resolving a paradox for top
management teams. Academy of Management Journal,

Q UAL IT Y 330
Access to Success Vol. 23, No. 190/ October 2022

GENERAL MANAGEMENT
39: 123-148.
[2] Amin, N. N., & Sunarjanto. (2016). Pengaruh diversitas
dewan komisaris dan board of director terhadap kinerja
perusahaan. Fokus manajerial Jurnal Manajemen and
Kewirausahaan, 11(3), 51–66.
[3] Arulvel, K. K., & Pratheepkanth, P. (2019b). Board
composition and firm performance: The Sri Lankan case.
Arabian Journal of Business and Management Review
(Oman Chapter), 8(1), 40–49.
[4] Austin, D. H. (1993). “An Event-Study Approach to
Measuring Innovative Output: The Case of
Biotechnology.” American Economic Review 83, 253–
258.
[5] Barney, J. B. (2001a). Is the resource-based “view” a
useful perspective for strategic management research?
Yes. Academy of Management Review, 26: 41-56.
[6] Barney, J. B. (2001b). Resource-based theories of
competitive advantage: A ten-year retrospective on the
resourcebased view. Journal of Management, 27: 643-
650.
[7] Barney, J., Wright, J., & Ketchen, D. J, Jr. (2001). The
resource-based view of the firm: Ten years after 1991.
Journal of Management, 27: 625-641.
[8] Basuki, B., & Sianipar, M. (2012). Intellectual capital and
its impact on financial profitability and investors’ capital
gain on shares intellectual capital. Journal of Economics,
Business, and Accountancy Ventura, 15(1), 101–116.
[9] Bontis, N., Chua Chong Keow, W. and Richardson, S.
“Intellectual capital and business performance in
Malaysian industries”, Journal of Intellectual Capital, Vol.
1 No. 1, pp. 85-100 (2000).
[10] Boulouta, I. (2013). “Hidden connections: the link
between board gender diversity and corporate social
performance”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 113 No.
2, pp. 185-197.
[11] Carter, D. A., Souza, F. D., Simkins, B. J., & Simpson,
[12] W. G. (2010). The Gender and Ethnic Diversity of US
Boards and Board Committees and Firm. 18(5), 396–
414.
[13] Chen J, Leung WS, Evans KP (2018) Female board
representation, corporate innovation and frm
performance. J Empir Financ 48:236–254.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jempfin.2018.07.003
[14] Crook, T. R., Ketchen, D. J., Jr., Combs, J. G., & Todd,
[15] S. Y. (2008). Strategic resources and performance: A
meta-analysis. Strategic Management Journal, 29:
1141-1154.
[16] Cyert, R. M., & March, J. G. (1963). A behavioral theory
of the firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: PrenticeHall.
[17] Daily, C.M., Dalton, D.R. (2003). Women in the
boardroom: a business imperative. J. Bus. Strategy 24
(5), 8-9.
[18] Damanpour, F. and Gopalakrishnan, S. (2001). “The
dynamics of the adoption of products and process
innovations in organizations”, Journal of Management
Studies, Vol. 38, pp. 45- 65.
[19] Dwipayani, A., & Putri, M. A. (2016). Factors influencing
intellectual capital disclosure. E-Jurnal Ekonomi Dan
Bisnis Universitas Udayana, 11(5), 3793– 3822.
[20] Dzenopoljac, V., Yaacoub, C., Elkanj, N., & Bontis, N.
(2017). Impact of intellectual capital on corporate
performance: evidence from the Arab region. Journal of
Intellectual Capital, 18(4), 884–903.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-01- 2017-0014.
331
ISSN:1582-2559
[21] Eagly, A.H., Johnson, B.T. (1990). Gender and
leadership style: a meta-analysis. Psychol. Bull. 108 (2),
233-256.
[22] Eagly, A. H., Johannesen-Schmidt, M. C., & van Engen,
[23] M. L. (2003). Transformational, transactional, and
laissez-faire leadership styles: A meta-analysis
comparing women and men. Psychological Bulletin, 129:
569–591.
[24] Eagly, A. H. & Johannesen-Schmidt, M. C. (2001). The
leadership styles of women and men. Journal of Social
Issues, 57: 781– 797.
[25] Firer, S., and S. M. Williams. (2003). “Intellectual Capital
and Traditional Measures of Corporate Performance.”
Journal of Intellectual Capital Vol. 4, No. 3: 348-360.
[26] Fondas, N. (2000). Women on boards of directors:
Gender bias or power threat? In R. J. Burke & M. Mattis
(Eds.), Women on corporate boards of directors:
International challenges and opportunities: Dordrecht:
Kluwer Academic Publishers.
[27] García, C. Q. (2016). Impact of female managers on the
IPO of high-tech companies: the mediating effect of
patents and product development. Elsevier, 2(22), 63–
69.
[28] Garcia-Meca, E., Garcia-Sanchez, I.-M., & Martines-
Ferrero, J. (2015). Board diversity and its effects on bank
performance: An international analysis. Journal of
Banking & Finance, 53, 202–214.
[29] Ghosh, S. (2017). Why is it a man’s world, after all?
Women on bank boards in India. Economic Systems,
41(1), 109–121.
[30] https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecosys.2016.05.007.
[31] Goldman, B. M., Gutek, B. A., Stein, J. H., and Lewis, K.
(2006). Employment discrimination in organizations:
antecedents and consequences. J. Manag. 32, 786–
830. doi: 10.1177/0149206306293544.
[32] Hall, B. H.; A. B. Jaffe; and M. Trajtenberg. (2005).
“Market Value and Patent Citations.” RAND Journal of
Economics 36, 16–38.
[33] Hambrick DC, Mason PA (1984) Upper echelons: the
organization as a reflection of its top managers. Acad
Manag Rev 9(2):193–206.
https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1984.4277628
[34] Hamilton, Barton H, Nickerson, Jack A., Owan, Hideo.
(2012). Diversity and productivity in production teams.
Adv. Econ. Anal. Participatory Lab.- Managed Firms 13,
99–138.
[35] Haniffa, R. and Cooke, T.E. (2005). “Impact of culture
and governance structure on corporate social reporting”,
Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Vol. 24 No. 5,
pp. 391-430.
[36] Hunt, J., and M. Gauthier-Loiselle. (2010). “How Much
Does Immigration Boost Innovation?” American
Economic Journal: Macroeconomics 2, 31–56.
[37] Jelinek, M., Adler, N.J. (1988). Women: world-class
managers for global competition. Acad. Manage. Exec.
2 (1), 11-19.
[38] Kamath, B. (2017). Determinants of intellectual capital
disclosure: Evidence from India. Journal of Financial
Reporting and Accounting, 15(3), 367–391.
https://doi.org/10.1108/jfra-01- 2016-0003.
[39] Kusuma, S. Y., Sudarman, & Astusik, D. (2018).
Pengaruh diversitas gender dewan terhadap kinerja
keuangan pada perbankan yang terdaftar di BEI Periode
2014-2017. Equilibrium: Jurnal Ekonomi Syariah, 6(2),
QUALITY
Vol. 23, No. 190/October 2022 Access to Success

GENERAL MANAGEMENT
253–269.
[40] Lenciu, N. M. (2014). Intellectual capital disclosure from
the literature perspective. International Journal of
Learning and Intellectual Capital, 11(2), 166–183.
https://doi.org/10.1504/ IJLIC.2014.060808.
[41] MacLeod Heminway, J. (2007). Sex, trust, and corporate
boards. Hastings Womens Law J 18, 173-193.
[42] Martín-Ugedo JF, Mínguez-Vera A, Rossi F (2019)
Female directors and frm performance in Italian and
Spanish listed frms: does masculinity matter? Academia
Revista Latinoamericana De Administración 32(3):411–
436. https://doi. org/10.1108/ARLA-06-2018-0124
[43] Milliken F J, Martins L L. (1996). Searching for common
threads: Understanding the multiple effects of diversity
in organizational groups. Academy of Management
Review 21: 402– 433.
[44] Mulyadi, M. S., & Panggabean, R. R. (2017). Intellectual
capital reporting: case study of high intellectual capital
corporations in Indonesia. International Journal of
Learning and Intellectual Capital, 14(1), 1-10.
doi:10.1504/IJLIC.2017.10000621.
[45] Nason, R., & Wiklund, J. (2018). An assessment of
resource-based theorizing on firm growth and
suggestions for the future. Journal of Management, 44:
1820-1853.19.
[46] Newbert, S. L. (2007). Empirical research on the
resource-based view of the firm: An assessment and
suggestions for future research. Strategic Management
Journal, 28: 121-146.
[47] Ordonez de Pablos, P. (2003). Intellectual capital
reporting in Spain: A comparative view. Journal of
Intellectual Capital. https://doi.
org/10.1108/14691930310455397.
[48] Pakes, A. (1985). “On Patents, R & D, and The Stock
Market Rate of Return.” Journal of Political Economy 93,
390–409.
[49] Purnomosidhi, B. (2006). “Praktik Pengungkapan Modal
Intelektual pada Perusahaan Publik di BEJ.” Jurnal Riset
Akuntansi Indonesia Vol. 9, No. 1: 1-20.
[50] Qureshi, M. A., Kirkerud, S., Theresa, K., & Ahsan, T.
(2020). The impact of sustainability (environmental,
social, and governance) disclosure and board diversity
on firm value: The moderating role of industry sensitivity.
Business Strategy and the Environment, 29, 1199–1214.
https://doi. org/10.1002/bse.2427.
[51] Rasmini, N.K., Wirakusuma, M.G. and Yuniasih, N.W.
(2014). “The effect of board diversity on the extent of
intellectual capital disclosure (Empirical study in
Indonesian Stocks Exchange)”, Asia Pacific Journal of
Accounting and Finance, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 45-58.
Q UAL IT Y
Access to Success Vol. 23, No. 190/ October 2022
ISSN:1582-2559
[52] Sánchez MS (2017) Women on Corporate Boards and
Firm Performance: Evidence from Spain. (Bachelor’s
Degree in Business Administration and Management-
English track), Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona.
[53] Santos-Rodrigues, H., Gupta, P., & Carlson, R. (2015).
Exploiting intellectual capital for economic renewal.
International Journal of Innovation Science, 7(1), 13–26.
https://doi. org/10.1260/1757-2223.7.1.13.
[54] Tayles, M., Pike Richard, H. and Sofian, S. (2007).
“Intellectual capital, management accounting practices
and corporate performance: perceptions of managers”,
Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, Vol. 20
No. 4, pp. 522-548.
[55] Tejedo-Romero, F., Rodrigues, L. L., & Craig, R. (2017).
Women directors and disclosure of intellectual capital
information. European Research on Management and
Business Economics, 23(3), 123–131. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.iedeen.2017.06.003.
[56] Triana, M., Miller, T. L., & Trzebiatowski, T. M. (2013).
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(2), 609–632.
https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2013.0842.
[57] Van Ees, H., Gabrielsson, J., & Huse, M. (2009). Toward
a behavioral theory of boards and corporate
governance. Corporate Governance: An International
Review, 17(3), 307– 319.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-
8683.2009.00741.x.
[58] Vergauwen, P., Bollen, L., & Oirbans. (2007). Intellectual
capital disclosure and intangible value drivers: An
empirical study. Management Decision, 45(7),1163–
1180.https://doi. org/10.1108/00251740710773961.
[59] Verrecchia, R.E. (1983). “Discretionary disclosure”,
Journal of Accounting and Economics, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp.
179-94.
[60] Vishnu, S., & Gupta, V. K. (2015). Performance of
intellectual capital in the Indian healthcare sector.
International Journal of Learning and Intellectual Capital,
12(1), 47–60. https://doi.
org/10.1504/IJLIC.2015.067831.
[61] Vitolla, F., Raimo, N., Marrone, A., & Rubino, M. (2020).
The role of boardof directors in intellectual capital
disclosure after the advent of inte-grated
reporting.Corporate Social Responsibility and
Environmental Management,27, 2188–2200.
https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1957.
[62] Widiastuty. (2016). Determinants of intellectual capital
(intellectual capital) in public companies in Indonesia
and its implications for firm value. Simposium Nasional
Akuntansi, XIX, 1–29.
[63] Yukl, G. (2002). Leadership in Organizations. Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
332