Masterthesis-BoardCompositionandGenderDiversity Removed

Board Composition and Gender Diversity
Table of Contents
Abstract ...................................................................................................................................................... vi
List of figures ............................................................................................................................................. 3
1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 5
1.1. Rationale of the study ............................................................................................................... 5
1.1.1. Motivation to undertake this study .......................................................................................... 7
1.2. Problem statement ..................................................................................................................... 8
1.3. Research Question ................................................................................................................... 10
1.4. Research approach .................................................................................................................. 10
1.5. Outline of the document .......................................................................................................... 11
2. Literature review .................................................................................................................... 13
2.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 13
2.2. Board composition ................................................................................................................... 13
2.3. Gender Diversity at workplace ............................................................................................... 17
2.4. Board Composition and Gender diversity at workplace ...................................................... 22
2.5. Research objectives ................................................................................................................. 25
2.6. Conceptual model .................................................................................................................... 26
3. Methodology ............................................................................................................................ 29
3.1. Research strategy..................................................................................................................... 29
3.2. Research Setting ...................................................................................................................... 30
3.3. Data sources ............................................................................................................................. 30
3.4. Data Collection......................................................................................................................... 32
3.5. Data analysis ............................................................................................................................ 35
3.6. Validity and reliability ............................................................................................................ 37
3.7. Research ethics......................................................................................................................... 38
4. Findings.................................................................................................................................... 39
4.1 Independent Variable .............................................................................................................. 39
4.1.1 Key findings about independent variables ............................................................................ 40
4.1.2 Relation among Independent variables ................................................................................. 44
4.2 Dependent variables ................................................................................................................ 45
4.2.1 Key Findings about Dependent Variables ............................................................................. 46
4.2.2 Relation among Independent variables ................................................................................. 51
4.3 Relation between Board Composition and gender diversity at workplace ......................... 54
5. Discussion & Conclusion ........................................................................................................ 60
1
5.1 Summary & answers to the research questions .................................................................... 60

5.2 Discussion and reflections ....................................................................................................... 62
5.3 Implications & Recommendations ......................................................................................... 63
5.4 Future Research....................................................................................................................... 65
References ................................................................................................................................................. 67
Appendix A: Percentage of board seats held by women (industry wise .............................................. 75
Appendix B: Board Composition (IV-Independent Variable).............................................................. 76
Appendix C: Percentage of Women in the workforce (DV1) ............................................................... 78
Appendix D: KPIs of Gender Diversity at workplace (DV2) ................................................................ 80
Appendix E: Measures taken by companies to achieve gender diversity (For coding above2) ......... 82
Appendix F: Factor Matrix of dependent variables .............................................................................. 83
2
1. Introduction
1.1. Rationale of the study
In this era of diversity and inclusion, the gender diversity specifically has become
significantly important. Gender diversity helps to create an equitable society and also
helps to achieve economic growth. Gender diverse workforce can solve many problems
like aging workforce and lack of talented workforce globally and can also add $12
trillion to global GDP by 2025 (Hunt et al., 2018). Moreover, gender diversity at work
promotes gender equality in the society (Desvaux et al. 2017).Gender diversity helps to
achieve better performance in every domain of society whether it is science (Bert,
2018), NGO (Grosser, 2011) or purely business organization (Desjardins, 2018).
Women participation in science , research, and medical promoted gender diversity at
societal level (Nielsen, Bloch, & Schiebinger, 2018).Also, Gender diversity enhances
societal improvement and also promotes the economic development by improving GDP
of a country (Grosser, 2011).
Many researchers proved that gender diversity in management is related to better
organizational performance positively and thus achieving effectiveness and efficiency in
the organizational activities (Berkhemer-Credaire & Sonnabend, 2018). In an
organization, diverse workforce helps to increase the customer satisfaction level,
corporate governance and thus enhance organizational performance (Adams & Ferreira,
2009).The number of woman employees at various hierarchies of organization has been
increasing significantly during these past few years. The corporate governance practices
and corporate social responsibilities led to change the board composition in the recent
years (Nagaraju & Paramashivaiah, 2016). Now women are holding top managerial
5
position in an organization and they are working in those sectors and industries which
were previously considered to be male dominated (refer to Appendix A). In 2017, about
31.5% of boards globally had at least three women (30%) in the board, 4.1 % more
from 2016 but only 17.3% of women representation has been made in corporate board
by women (Catalyst, 2018). In Asia, the companies with the women in top management
performed better (44% more in terms of return on equity) than their competitors
(Desvaux et al., 2017).
Board of directors plays an influential role in setting vision, values and strategy,
achieving mission and goals of an organization (Kagzi & Guha, 2018). Independent
board director provides transparency and checks on the firm. It is believed that large
board size is very costly and less efficient (Arora & Sharma, 2016). Diverse board
positively related to firm’s CSR commitments and overall performance of a firm
(Emmot & Worman, 2008) and also promotes corporate reputation (Garcia-Meca &
Palacio, 2018). Hence, Researchers suggested that diverse people should be appointed
for the post of independent director in the board to enhance firm’s performance (Arora
& Sharma, 2016). Researchers also found that having a large number of female on the
corporate board will reduced the variations in the financial accounts of company and
hence related to better corporate performance (Lenard, Yu, York, & Wu, 2014). The
presence of female directors are positively associated with a stronger commitment of
firm to CSR compared with firms with all-male boards (Cook & Glass, 2017).
Consistent to this view, regulators are urged to have stringent regulations for achieivng
a gender balanced board to strengthen corporate governance.
In India, Women contributes only 17% to GDP output of India. By reducing the gender
gap, India has the highest potential to boost its national GDP by 2025 by adding 68
6
million women in non-farm sectors (Desvaux et al. 2017).Indian Companies Act 2013
and 49th clause of listing agreement of Securities exchange board of India (SEBI) have
made mandatory for all listing companies in India to have at least one-woman director
and to have at least one- third of total number of directors as independent directors in
the board. After these legislations, the proportion of women director in the board has
been increase from 4.9% in 2013 to 13.7% in 2016 (Kapur & Arora, 2017).But
according to report of KPMG (2017), 50% of Indian companies are hiring women
directors mainly to fulfil the legislative obligations which shows that there is a stronger
need to comply rather than the rationale that diversity adds value in the board. This fact
supports the argument that the legal compliance indicator does not influence the board
composition (Mishra & Mohanty, 2014). To include women director in the board of a
company is taken as philanthropic measure in CSR paradigm which creates premises for
debate on gender issues (Vilke, Raisiene, & Simanaviciene, 2014). Thus, the focus of
this paper is to gain understanding about the board composition, its characteristics and
its influence on promoting gender diversity in an organization.
1.1.1. Motivation to undertake this study
The reason why I chose this topic is because of my societal background. I grew up in a
small province in India where gender inequality is at its peak. That environment made
me to study this societal issue in business management area. Over the years, I observed
that how rarely women can be found at top positions in an organization. I noticed the
number of barriers women have to face to reach to those top positions. All these things
motivated me to study the topic of gender diversity in an organization.
7
I chose companies comprises in top Index of India called Nifty 50, because it is an
indicator of overall Indian economy. The presence of women in the medium and small
industries of India has already been very high, even most of medium and small
enterprises run by women in India (Singh & Raina, 2013). But there are less than 12 %
women representation at top executive positions in big corporates of India (Desvaux et
al., 2017).
By reading various articles, I found out that gender diversity is crucial to every domain
of the society and thus gender diversity leads to gender equal society. Gender diversity
is very vital issue not just for the society also for the business. The top managerial
people in the company can influence the corporate culture and brings more gender
diverse workforce at workplace (Schwab et al., 2016). So, I decided to study this topic
to enhance my knowledge about gender diversity and to give insights about the relation
of board composition and gender diversity.
1.2. Problem statement
In the past, researchers have done immense studies about diversity & inclusion and the
benefits of board independence and board diversity. In this dynamic environment,
diversity is an important concept and issue to be tackled by firm. Diversity means
treating and valuing everyone as an individual (Emmot & Worman, 2008).The
composition of women population in total working population worldwide is more than
50% but they contribute to only 37% of global GDP. Globally, there are only 22% of
women in the parliamentary and ministry roles and 25% in management position
(Desvaux et al. ,2017). Thus, Women are still under-represented at every level in
8
management whether it is entry level position (46%) or C-Suite level position (19%)
(Women in the workplace, 2016).
There are studies done to find the causality of board diversity and how board diversity
impacts firm’s performance. But there is not much research has been done on how
board gender diversity influences the gender diversity in an organization; how gender
diverse boards promotes the idea of gender diversity at the workplace; how diversity
attracts inclusivity in an organization. More women in the workplace helps a company
to increase its organizational effectiveness by performing better than their competitors.
Gender diverse organization are more productive and attracts talented people in their
workforce (Turban, Wu, & Zhang, 2019).Gender diversity in the workplace promotes
effectiveness in decision making by providing creative solutions to the problems , it
enhances the consumer purchases by better targeting them than male employees and in
turn lead to overall organizational effectiveness (Hunt, Layton, & Prince, 2014). One of
the five dimensions of promoting gender diversity at workplace is CEO and top
management commitment towards diversity and in this sense corporate board is key to
achieve gender diversity in an organization (Desvaux et al., 2017). The more women in
the board, the more likely the chances of promoting the gender diversity at workplace
by providing the platform for career advancement to women in the workplace. This in
turn boost the organisational performance directly and indirectly because there are more
potential candidates prepared for the top positions (Marinova, Plantenga, & Remery,
2016). Also, the board independence impacts the image and influences the decision of
top management (Bohren & Strom, 2010). Hence, it is important to study the
relationship between board and its characteristics to gender diversity in the organisation.
For the understanding of Board diversity, I used “critical mass” theory. Critical mass
9
theory has its roots in measuring the women participation in the politics. Critical mass
or 30% is the percentage, which has been seen as “women making a difference” in
terms of their representations, making their voices heard (Mansbridge, 2006). I read
various articles and I found that critical mass has been a reliable method used by
majority of scholars to measure gender diversity in various empirical settings. Critical
mass theory refers to have the minimum numbers of women directors (at least three
women or 30% of total strength of the board) constitute the desired critical mass to
influence firm performance and to hear the ideas and voices of female directors (Arena,
Cirillo, & Mussolino, 2015). This paper aims to investigate the relationship between
Board size, board independence and board diversity on gender equity and gender
diversity in an organization.
1.3. Research Question
The central research question of this study is:
How does board composition influence the gender diversity at the workplace?
To answer this question, the following minor research questions have been formulated:
1. Does board size influence gender diversity at the workplace?
2. Does board independence influence gender diversity at the workplace?
3. Does gender diverse board influence gender diversity at the workplace?
1.4. Research approach
This research paper is using quantitative research approach. I build premises by using
research done by researches in the past in the field of board diversity, board
independence, ideal board size, corporate social responsibility, Performance indicators
10
of gender diversity, and overall gender diversity at workplace. To collect my data, this
research paper is using content analysis method because content analysis method is
widely used in the field of social sciences like gender or diversity issues (Grosser,2011).
Content analysis is used to find the trends in the information communicated by an
organization and it can also reveal the intentions of an organization to deal with
specific issues by converting qualitative variables into quantitative form (Bowen, 2009).
Hence, this research paper is using quantitative research approach (because all variables
are converted into quantitative variables) to answer the major and minor research
questions mentioned in this research paper.
1.5. Outline of the document
This research paper is structured as follows (Blumberg, Cooper, & Schindler, 2011):
• Abstract: a summary of the research paper containing the rationale of study,
how the study has been undertaken and what are the key findings.
• Chapter 1: This chapter includes the rationale of the study, why this study is
important and what to be investigated in the paper, what are major and minor
research questions and what is research approach used to undertake the research
in the paper.
• Chapter 2: This chapter includes the literature background of the research topic,
what has been relevant research has been done so far on the research and thus
define the objective of the research undertaken in this paper. A conceptual
model has been formulated on the basis of literature review and research
objective
11
• Chapter 3: It includes the data and methodology part of the research. It
mentioned about the empirical settings to be used while conducting the research,
the data collection method and how the collected data is analyzed to answer the
research question.
• Chapter 4: This chapter presented the important findings of the research and the
answered the research questions after analyzing the gathered data in an
understandable and simplified manner.
• Chapter 5: It discussed the findings of the research while reflecting on the
literature background of the research topic and hence concluded the research
paper. It also contains the limitations of this research paper and thus provides the
premises for future research.
12
2. Literature review
2.1. Introduction
This chapter presents the literature available on the topic of gender diversity and board
composition. It also discussed the findings of the research done in the past on these
topics to form a literature summary and thus to build premises to frame a conceptual
model.
In first section of this chapter, the general introduction of the topics like gender
diversity & Corporate board and their relevance to this research paper is given. The
second section focus on the board specifically discussed the board size, board
independence and board gender diversity. The thirds section is dedicated to gender
diversity at workplace. The fourth section presented the findings of the past researches
about the relationship of board composition and gender diversity at workplace.
2.2. Board composition
Board of directors are an important part of an organization. They are obliged to fulfil the
numerous responsibilities. For example, all the strategic decisions are taken by board of
directors for the organizational efficiency (Sener & Karaye, 2014). Muller(2014) found
that there are various characteristics of board that affect the board composition and
board decision. Some of the characteristics are age of the board, size of the board, board
independence, board diversity (in terms of ethnicity, race or gender) etc. It is difficult to
say which board characteristic is more important. However, the ideal board composition
is that one which can serve the interest of the stakeholders of the organization (Labelle,
Francoeur, & Lakhal, 2015). The more women in the board, the more likely the chances
of promoting the gender diversity at workplace by providing the platform for career
13
advancement to women in the workplace (Marinova, Plantenga, & Remery, 2016). The
board independence impacts the image of an organisation and influences the decision
of top management by monitoring the policies formulation closely (Bohren & Strom,
2010). Hence, the most relevant features of the board for this paper are board size, board
independence and board gender diversity.
2.2.1. Board size
Board size means the total number of directors constituted in a board of an
organization. Board size impacts is an important characteristic of a board
because it impacts the decision taken by board of directors significantly (Rashid,
2018). Finding an optimal, appropriate and adequate board size is a matter of
debate in the past studies. Some researchers favor the large board size that it
would provide an effective decision making and to provide check and balance on
the working of an organization (Garcia-Meca & Palacio, 2018). Whereas other
researchers supported smaller board size because large board size are very costly
(Arora & Sharma, 2016) and less efficient as larger board size delay the decision
making by lowering the group consensus and brings conflicts danger to the
board members (Labelle, Francoeur, & Lakhal, 2015). Hence, there is no
consensus about the ideal board size as some researchers prefer larger board size
while others prefer smaller board size (Sabatier, 2015).
2.2.2. Board Independence
Board independence refers to the total number of independent directors or
proportion of independent directors to insiders or non-independent
directors in a corporate board of an organization. Board independence is a
14
corporate governance mechanism which means appointment of
independent directors in the board to promote good governance practices in
an organization (Sener & Karaye, 2014). Independent directors are those
professionals who are outsiders, independent from the management of a
company and also termed as non-executive directors (Fuzi, Halim, & M.K.,
2016). Agency theory of corporate governance says that the members of
management of a company work for their own interests, not for the interest
of corporate stakeholders (Routray & Bal, 2016). Thus, Independent
directors work independently from the management and they are appointed
for the best interest of stakeholders of an organization (Sener & Karaye,
2014). Independent directors monitor the activities of management to
safeguard the interest of organizational stakeholders. They also promote
corporate image because it is believed that independent directors are more
socially responsible (Fuzi, Halim, & M.K., 2016). Independent directors
provide independent thinking to the board, gives their unbiased & impartial
business decisions because they are not dependent on the management for
their performance appraisals, promotion etc. like other members of
management (Routray & Bal, 2016). Independent directors also act as
mediators between board of a company and its management (Rashid,
2018). But, Bohren & Strom (2010) found that indepndent directors brings
ineffeciency in board decisions by delaying the process of decision making.
Whereas Marinova, Plantenga, & Remery (2016) argues that board
independence is positively related to effective decision making because
independent directors makes information available for monitoring and
15
counselling the acitvities of the board. So, there is debate about the ideal
number of independent directors in the board.
2.2.3. Board Gender diversity
Boardroom diversity means the mix of intellectual and social capital that a board of
directors comprises collectively and draws upon in undertaking its governance and CSR
function (Walt, Ingley, Shergill, & Townsend, 2006). Board diversity comprises a
variety of corporate board composition based on the variety of attributes. Board
diversity can be defined as per three criteria: observable, structural and demographic
criteria (Kagzi & Guha,2018). Board diversity defined refers to the aggregation of
characteristics of the members of the board in terms of gender, age, nationality ,race,
professional background, education and industry experience (Arena, Cirillo, &
Mussolino, 2015). Diversity helps to have a better understanding of the firm’s varied
stakeholders and marketplace and Board gender diversity improves firm’s performance
and helps a firm to gain competitive advantage (Christopher Groening, 2019). Hence,
Board diversity is always linked with gender diversity. Though gender is mere a part of
board diversity on the basis of observable criteria of definition of board diversity. Board
Gender diversity is defined as the diversified composition of the board with a proper
(defined with critical mass theory) representation of gender in the corporate board
(Haldar, Shah, & Rao, 2015).Board gender diversity is measured with the critical mass
theory in various studies which says that 30 % or three women in the board is an ideal
mass for gender diverse board (Mansbridge, 2006 ; Arena, Cirillo, & Mussolino,
2015).Women in the board also provides efficiency to the board and its decision making
capacities by providing various perspectives and make board more interactive and
16
active by promoting and appreciating different solutions to problems (Hamzah &
Zulkafli, 2014). To measure the relation between gender diverse board and financial
results of a company, Mckinsey developed a tool called Organizational Health Index,
which includes nine criteria. Those nine criteria are Direction, accountability, leadership
team, motivation, innovation, capabilities, external orientation, coordination and
control, work environment and values. Based on these criteria, it has been found that
board with critical mass (three) or more than three women has better results than the
corporate board having no women member in the board (Desvaux et al., 2017). Thus,
gender diverse board helps to attain competitive advantage to an organization on the
basis of above nine criteria.
2.3. Gender Diversity at workplace
In the era of #me too social movement, gender issues are gained an immense
importance at workplace. “Gender and gender in organization” itself have become
complex concepts over the years (Hearn, 2019). Gender issues in an organization are
referred to equal opportunities for women, gender equality and gender diversity
(Grosser, 2011). When a firm implements policies to resolve these issues by achieving
gender diversity in their workplace, it helps that firm to gain corporate reputation
(Velte, 2016 ; Garcia-Meca & Palacio, 2018 ) and attain competitive advantage through
their better talent management practices (Desvaux et al., 2017 ; Hunt, Layton, & Prince,
2014). Women employees have better decision-making skills than men employees and
they also provide better solutions to the problems than men (Jyothi & Mangalagiri,
2019). Gender diverse organization are more likely to attain healthy work environment
and improves job satisfaction of the employees by reducing conflicts and fostering
collaboration between employees (Pitts & Wise, 2010). Cullen & Murphy (2017) argues
17
that gender diversity at workplace is very important and significant for the success of an
organization as it provides several benefits to organization such as enhance corporate
image, increase innovation, attract customers and promote good governance
practices.Also, gender diversity is important because of legal, ethical and social
considerations and it helps to attract potential talent for the organization (Hunt, Layton,
& Prince, 2014). Female employees are achievers and outperforms their male
counterparts in terms of performance in a group (Fenwick & Neal, 2001). Even then
women employees have less opportunities to grow (Banerjee, 2012). Providing equal
opportunities to women employees is not just a responsibility but it is a matter of social
justice to them (Baez, Garcia, Munoz, & Barroso, 2018). Women employees show
more concern to the problems of their fellow employees than men employees at
workplace because they faced the gender inequalities or they know the problems face by
women employees better than men employees (Riach & Brewis, 2019). Hence, women
employees is needed at all levels of organization (McCarthy, September 2012)
The observable and easily measurable criteria of gender diversity at workplace is the
percentage of women in the workforce of an organization. However, Gender diversity
itself is a broad concept and it includes indicators such as equal opportunities available
to women employees, the balance in the work and life of women, safety of women at
workplace, skill upgradation training provided to women, career growth opportunities
provided to them (Joshi, 2018). Gender diversity indicators are important variables to be
taken into consideration while evaluating gender diversity at workplace because these
indicators evaluates actions, commitments, policies taken by an organization to promote
gender diversity at workplace and provides recommendations for gender diversity
planning (Demetriades, 2007; ESCAP, 2013). The indicators like equal opportunities
18
for career growth, women in top management, recruitment of women in workforce and
work life balance reduces the inequalities at workplace (Tsushima & Kaur,2015; Ali
Syed, 2016).
It is found that gender diverse organizations (leading companies of gender diversity
index constitute by Mckinsey 2018 study) have more women at the C-suite positions in
those companies (Hunt, Prince, Dixon-Fyle, & Yee, 2018). Women in management
position helps to reduce the gender gap in the organization by promoting equal pay
policies, flexible work hours, review the recruitment and promotion policies by gender
and provide work environment which is women friendly (Stojmenovska, 2018). Based
on the literature above, I formulated two sub variables of gender diversity at workplace.
These are 1) percentage of women in the workforce and 2) KPIs of gender diversity at
workplace.
2.3.1. Percentage of Women in the workforce
To find the gender diversity status of an organization, researchers used critical mass
theory to measure the ideal proportion of women in the workforce. Critical mass
theory (as elaborated in chapter 1) says that gender diverse workforce refers to 30%
women in the workforce of an organization (Mansbridge, 2006). As discussed
earlier, more women in the workplace brings various benefits to the organization
such as social, economic , legal, demographics and technical benefits (Hunt,
Layton, & Prince, 2014). Women in the workforce is a sign of gender inclusion and
women empowerment which attracts potential women candidates to an organization
(Bendl & Schimdt, 2012). Hence, gender diversity in the workforce is that variable
which helps to bring more women employees to the organization and improves
gender diversity at workplace (Budescu & Budescu, 2012).

19
2.3.2. KPIs of gender diversity at workplace
The studies done by Abouzahr, Taplett, & Krentz (2018) found five key performance
indicators to measure the gender diversity at workplace which are recruitment,
representation, advancement, equal pay and retention. Joshi (2018) & Grosser (2011)
discussed few gender diversity initiative such as training, career growth, pay,
recruitment of women in the workforce. Jayne & Dipboye (2004) also gave gender
diversity indicators such as safety, training, representation and promotion. Based on
these literature, I am focussing on five KPIs or key performance indicators to measure
the gender diversity at workplace. These five KPIs are discussed below:
2.3.2.1. Recruitment: Recruitment of more women in the workforce is an
important key factor to achieve gender diversity at workplace. (Evans,
2012). Recruitment of women employees build up the corporate image
of an organization and establish that organization as gender diverse
organization (Joshi, 2018).
2.3.2.2. Work life Balance: Work life balance is an important gender
diversity indicator. The policies for management of work and life of
women employees are originated from societal dynamic (Bacchi,
2016). Work life balance constitutes child-care facilities, creche
facilities, parental leave, maternity leave, flexible work hours,
reserved parking for pregnant women employees etc. (Muzio &
Tomlinson, 2012).
2.3.2.3. Career Growth: The real gender diversity starts with availability
of equal career advancement opportunities to the women employees

20
(Ziegler, Graml, & Weissenrieder, 2012). Career growth constitutes
all those indicators which empower a woman employee such as
promotion, education, vocational training opportunities, skill
upgradation opportunities etc. (Agarwal, Pande, & Sharma, 2016)
2.3.2.4. Equal Pay: Women are always paid less as compared to their
male counterparts. The gender gap in remuneration is a vicious
cumulative phenomenon which grows more with the age of women
employees. In other words, women are less rewarded for experience
as compared to men with the same experience level (Riach & Brewis,
2019).
2.3.2.5. Representation: Gender diversity in the top management or
women at C-suite positions (CEO, CFO etc.) is one of the important
principles of UN WOMEN program called Women’s empowerment
principles (Grosser & Moon, 2017). Hence, Women as corporate
leaders of a company creates more opportunities for the women and
brings gender diversity at workplace (Ziegler, Graml, &
Weissenrieder, 2012).
To measure these key performance indicators is very complex as they are very
subjective and hence these types of qualitative variables has studied by researchers by
using codes such as 0 ,1 and 2 so that they can be studied easily by using statistical tools
by converting these variables into quantitative forms (Saburova & Maysuradze, 2015).
For example, variables is coded as 0 when the indicator is not mentioned at all, variable
is coded as 1when the indicator in question is mentioned generically (i.e. without giving
21
any concrete targets or elaborations) and 2 is attributed when the indicator is not just
mentioned but also specified in terms of targets or objectives.
2.4. Board Composition and Gender diversity at workplace
Sabatier (2015) found strong influence of board characteritics on gender diversity at
workplace. The board characteristics relevant to this paper are board size, board
independence and Board gender diversity. However, there is not much literature
available on the direct influence of board composition and gender diversity at
workplace. But some researcher have discussed about these concepts which are given
below:
➢ Board size and gender diversity at workplace: Some researcher supported the
idea that organization with small boards are more efficient and positively related
to firm’s performance and helps in recruiting the more women in the workforce
(Kaur & Vij, 2017). But it is also found that firm’s performance and firm’s
diversity is negatively influenced by the large board size (Sen & Mukherjee,
2019). Whereas some researchers claimed that financial performance of
company enhances with larger board size and it promotes diversity in the
workforce (Haldar, Shah, & Rao, 2015). But larger board size brings delay to the
important decision making regarding the promotion of gender diversity (Labelle,
Francoeur, & Lakhal, 2015). Hence, large board size is negatively related the
diversity of workforce (Sabatier, 2015). Whereas, larger board size also brings
expertise to the board and improve decision making, organizational effectiveness
and enhance corporate image of the firm by taking ethical consideration into
account such as gender diversity issues (Labelle, Francoeur, & Lakhal, 2015).
22
So, there is a greater debate around the optimal size of corporate board and its
impacts on gender diversity at workplace.
➢ Board Independence and gender diversity at workplace: The study done in the
past has found that the presence of independent directors on the boards and their
expertise has a positive impact on the level of involvement of female employees
with the organization (Srivastava, Das, & Pattanayak, 2018). Independent
directors have been defined as “outside directors” or as “Non-executives” and
the inclusion of independent director monitors the firm’s activities and helps to
promote corporate image of an organization (Kılıç & Kuzey, 2016). Independent
boards positively and significantly influence the financial performance of an
organization and it brings diversity to an organization (Haldar, Shah, & Rao,
2015). Independence of board helps to bring diverse workforce in an
organization and promotes diversity and inclusion (Sen & Mukherjee, 2019).
The responsible firms have more independent directors which in turn take care
of interest of all stakeholders also, the interest of its women employees
(Heikkurinen, 2018). Hence, independent board helps to attain a greater number
of women in the workforce and thus promotes gender diversity at workplace.
Independent board director provides transparency and checks on the firm
performance. So, Researchers suggested that diverse people should be appointed
for the post of independent director in the board to enhance diversity dynamics
of organizational workforce (Arora & Sharma, 2016).
23
➢ Board gender diversity and gender diversity at workplace: Board diversity is
defined as the variety in the board in terms of color, age, nationality, race,
gender, education, origin, culture, lifestyle and other characteristics which
makes a person a distinctive individual (Jhunjhunwala & Mishra, 2012).To have
gender diverse board is an important part of corporate social responsibility. CSR
is defined as a governance process and the commitment of companies to achieve
sustainable economic development to exceed ethical, legal, commercial and
public expectations (Grosser, 2011). To achieve gender diversity at workplace is
an important aspect of Corporate social responsibility practices of an
organization and it is found that women in the top position of the organization
positively impacts the career growth of women in the lower position and thus
enhance the gender diversity at workplace (Marinova, Plantenga, & Remery,
2016). Women also possess structural differences when they make decision
related to investment and banking by using CSR information preferences than do
men (Nath, Holder-Webb, & Cohen, 2013). Board with “critical mass” are
positively related to CSR disclosure and Assurance statements (Fernandez-
Feijoo, Romero, & Ruiz, 2012). Labelle, Francoeur, & Lakhal (2015) found that
women directors are more likely to act as an independent director and monitors
the activities of board and formulate organisational policies by keeping in
consideration about the interest of organisational stakeholders. Thus, Gender
composition in a board is a type of specific diversity that is positively related to
CSR, corporate governance and presents gender diverse image of the
organization (Moreno-Gómez, Lafuente, & Vaillant, 2018). But some studies
have also found that there is a difference of perceptions between men and
24
women member in the corporate board about of gender inclusion in the board
composition as well as in the workforce of an organization (Sheridan & Milgate,
2003). Those varied perceptions lead to gender stereotyping. Gender
stereotyping is a stumbling block to women’s upward mobility in the corporate
hierarchy (Sahoo & Lenka, 2016:314). Researchers have also found that
affirmative action policies of providing equal opportunities to women are failed
due to gender stereotyping (Hughes & Kerfoot, 2002). Gender stereotyping is a
roadblock to achieve gender diversity at workplace because it creates “lack of fit
“perceptions and hinders the women to be at “perceived male gender typed
position” which are mainly top management positions in an organization
(Heilman, 2012). Hence, women in the board is very significant to provide equal
opportunities to the women at workplace and enhancing corporate image of an
organization by taking societal and ethical considerations into account (Bohren
& Strom, 2010)
2.5. Research objectives
This research paper serves the following research objectives:
1. To evaluate the relationship between board size and gender diversity (on the
basis of key performance indicators) at workplace
2. To evaluate the relationship between board independence and gender diversity
at workplace.
3. To evaluate the relationship between number of women directors in a board and
gender diversity in an organization.
25
4. To evaluate the relationship between board composition and number of women
in the workforce in an organization.
2.6. Conceptual model
The conceptual model is drawn on the basis of literature review and research question.
The independent and dependent variables (as elaborated in above sections) are as below:
Independent variables: In this conceptual model, Board composition is an independent
variable because change in board influences the gender diversity at workplace or in an
organization. Thus, Board size, board independence and board diversity are independent
variables.
Dependent variables: Gender diversity at workplace is a dependent variable in this
conceptual model. Gender diversity at workplace is defined as heterogeneous
composition of workforce in terms of gender with proper and adequate representation of
gender in the workforce of an organization (Haldar, Shah, & Rao, 2015). To study
gender diversity at workplace, this paper has categorized this dependent variable into
two sub- variables which are percentage of women in the workforce and key
performance indicators of gender diversity at workplace (as discussed separately above)
26
Figure 1: Conceptual Model
27
3. Methodology
This chapter discuss about the context of the research of this paper, the strategy used to
conduct this research and the tools used to collect and analyze the data. The further
elaboration about how the data is collected, processed and measured and necessary
considerations like research ethics are given in separate sections. Hence, this chapter is
categorized into eight sections which are research strategy, research setting, data
sources, data collection, data analysis, validity and reliability, research ethics and
research feasibility respectively (Páez, 2015).
3.1. Research strategy
This paper examines the Integrated annual reports of top 30 Indian companies that are
listed on National Stock Exchange of India, for the period of accounting year 2017-2018
(the recent financial year) to answer the research question. Here top 30 companies refer
to top 30 public companies that are listed on NIFTY 50 index, based on market
capitalization (in Indian Rupees), as of the effective close of NIFTY 50 index on
Monday, December 10, 2018 which is closing data of index. (National stock exchange
of India, 2019). In India, corporate governance and CSR made mandatory for
companies to follow certain steps to achieve gender diversity at workplace. This paper
is focusing on top Indian companies for answering the research question because these
top companies which are listed on National stock exchange of India and part of NIFTY
50 index , are benchmark of overall Indian corporate world and hence other companies
see these top companies as benchmark , leader and follows them (Srivastava, Das, &
Pattanayak, 2018).Based on my method review table, I will use Quantitative content
analysis method to conduct this research because in the field of Business ethics and
29
social sciences research, content analysis is always a significant and widely used and
accepted method (Lock & Seele, 2015). Content analysis means technique for analysis
of written information systematically in terms of codes generated on the basis of code
guide (a broad document containing the premises of codes given to study the content)
(Saburova & Maysuradze, 2015). Quantitative content analysis is a method of
interpretation of written information in terms of codes like 0,1,2 etc. which in this thesis
is used to study the companies’ ethical and social behavior (Lock & Seele, 2015).
Nowadays, many companies make its agenda to have gender diverse workforce and
report gender diversity information within diversity framework. Hence, this paper is
using quantitative content analysis method to examine where companies report about
gender equality, board diversity, board independence, and gender diversity.
3.2. Research Setting
The empirical setting of this research is India, because this paper is focusing on top
companies of India to conduct the research. The top 30 listed companies which are part
of the national index of Nifty 50 of national stock exchange of India are point of focus
of this study. The nifty 50 index is a diversified index comprises the top companies
from 13 sectors of Indian economy (NSE, 2019). These companies are treated as leader
and various other companies look upon them and follows them. Hence. It is treated as
benchmark of the Indian economy (Sen & Mukherjee, 2019).
3.3. Data sources
To collect my data, I used already existing data or secondary data sources. The data
sources used in this paper are integrated annual reports of companies listed on Nifty 50
index of National stock exchange of India. Integrated Annual reports consists of
30
Financial reports, board of directors’ report and business responsibility and
sustainability report. I am using integrated annual report because it provides holistic
picture of a company with the achievements, its commitments, and targets of the future
(Cook & Glass, 2017). Researchers like Hoffmann (2018), Pivac (2017) & Nagaraju &
Paramashivaiah (2016) used integrated annual reports to study the topics of business
ethics and social sciences, integrated annual reports is the most effective data sources
because they provide financial as well as non-financial information which are
mandatory to report (Hoque, 2017). Public listed companies also provides information
which are voluntary but reporting these information helps to create their corporate
reputation (Christopher Groening, 2019).There are many benefits of using integrated
annual report as data sources in research as integrated annual reports (of public listed
companies) are easily available, saves cost and time and these companies follows
guidelines while reporting their financial and non-financial information but it also have
some disadvantages like quality and reliability is very less and also it contains error and
it is very subjective to answer the qualitative research questions (Hui C Cheng, 2014).
To reduce these disadvantages, I am using quantitative content analysis of these
companies reports because the data in quantitative form represents reliability. Integrated
annual reports are prepared by the companies itself and hence company try to present
the positive picture of company but to reduce this limitation there are strict obligations
& guidelines of reporting mandated by the bodies like SEBI ( Securities exchange board
of India), Companies Act 1956, Companies Act 2013, Securities Commission
Regulation Act 1956 (Nagaraju & Paramashivaiah, 2016). Integrated annual reports will
help to interpret the practices followed by companies to promote gender diversity at
31
workplace. Hence, the integrated annual reports published on websites of these top
public listed Indian companies will serve as data source.
3.4. Data Collection
To collect the data form the data sources, I collected the integrated annual reports from
the official websites of these top 30 public companies. I used careful screening of these
data sources (integrated annual reports). Based on the literature review and the research
question, this paper used the content analysis method to study the secondary source of
data (integrated annual reports. Content analysis method is widely accepted method for
business ethics research to analyze the data which is in form of text to answer the
research question (Erlingsson & Brysiewicz, 2017).
The data related to independent variables was collected by studying the board of
directors’ report which presents the overall board composition and features of the board
of a company. The data for independent variables is collected as follows:
32
Table 1: Definitions of independent variables, Methods of measurement and Legislation related to variables
Independent Variables Definition Measurement Legislation related to Public

companies (Indian companies
(Board composition) (Board of Directors’
Act 2013)
report)
Board Size (BS) Board size means the total Total Number of Minimum no of directors:3
number of directors in the directors mentioned in
Maximum no of directors:15
board (Rashid, 2018). the board of directors’
report
Board Independence (BI) Proportion of independent = (no of independent At least one-third or 30%
directors in the board (Sener directors*100)/BS independent directors
& Karaye, 2014).
Board Gender diversity Proportion of women = (no of women At least one woman director
(BGD) directors in the board directors*100) BS
(Christopher Groening,
2019).
The data related to dependent variables (Gender diversity at workplace) is collected as
follows:
➢ Percentage of women in the workforce: This variable refers to the proportion of
women in the workforce and is easily collected by studying the business
responsibility and sustainability reports where companies mentions about how
many women are part of their workforce. It is measure in terms of percentage by
using the formula {= (no of women in the workforce*100)/Total number of
employees}. There is no legislation regarding the composition of workforce, but
it is mandatory for companies to report on the proportion of women in the
workforce as per Indian companies act 2013.
➢ Key Performance Indicators of gender diversity at workplace: To collect the
data on this variable, I used quantitative content analysis because this variable
33
requires subjective interpretation of the data (Krippendorff, 2013). Content
analysis method systematically evaluates text and helps to convert qualitative
data into quantitative data and thus bridge the gap between quantitative and
qualitative method of research (Andrevski, 2019). This paper used this technique
and coded the data systematically by identifying keywords. For example, I
searched the document by using the keywords like woman/gender/female etc.
(Lovas, 2017) Then codes are given in form of quantitative numbers 0,1 &2 on
the basis of the mentioning the specific keywords in the integrate annual reports
(Muehlenaus, 2010). For example, variables is coded as 0 when the indicator is
not mentioned at all, variable is coded as 1when the indicator in question is
mentioned generically (i.e. without giving any concrete targets or elaborations)
and 2 is attributed when the indicator is not just mentioned but also specified in
terms of targets, commitments, actions, initiatives or objectives (Tsushima &
Kaur, 2015). This is elaborated below in the table (Table 3-2).
Table 2: Coding of KPIs of gender diversity at workplace based on Abouzahr et al. ( 2018);Grosser (2011) & Lovas
(2017)
Key performance Codes Constituents Legislation Keywords (I used)

indicators
Recruitment It includes Women No legislation Recruitment,

recruited in the women/female/gender
- No mention - 0
workforce and employees, workforce,
- Generic - 1
retention of women retention, workforce
mention
employees composition.
- Specific - 2
mention
Work life balance It includes the The Sexual Gender/female/women,
maternity leave Harassment of maternity, leave, child,
- No mention - 0
(ML), Paternity Women at parking, work hours,
- Generic
leave (PL), safety Workplace Act, paternity, safety, work life,
Mention - 1
(S), child-care 2013 work from home, welfare.
34
- Specific - 2 facilities (CCF), The Maternity

mention reserved parking Benefit
for pregnant (Amendment)
women employees, Act, 2017
and flexible work mandates 12-26
hours (FWH) weeks of
maternity leave.
Career growth It includes Training No legislation Gender/female/women
(T), Vocational training, empowerment,
- No mention - 0
Education (VE), promotion, education,
- Generic
Promotion (P), women/gender/female
Mention - 1
women employees, skill upgradation,
- Specific - 2
empowerment development.
mention
programs
Equal Pay It includes equal Mentions in Gender/female/women,
- 0 pay policies and Indian gender gap, Equality, equal,
- No mention
equal pay review constitution remuneration/salary/pay,
- Generic
- 1
Mention
- Specific
mention
- 2
Representation In includes women No legislation Women/gender/female,
- 0 at managerial and manager, leader, leadership,
- No mention
at C-suite position empowerment, gender
- Generic
- 1 (CEO, CFOs etc.) diversity, representation,
Mention
- Specific
mention
- 2
3.5. Data analysis

Based on the quality of variables, the three different data analysis methods are used in
this research paper. Further elaboration on the data analysis is given below:
➢ The research question of this research paper is related to studying and finding
the relation of board composition and gender diversity in these top listed thirty
companies. Every unit (company) of the population is studied in this paper and
hence these companies are census for this research. So, I will use descriptive
statistics to analyze the data to answer the research question (Blumberg, Cooper,
& Schindler, 2011).Descriptive statistics is the tool to measure, summarize and

35
analyze the features of the quantitative data. It is the first step of the research and
it is used to present the findings in an organized manner so that further analysis
can be done on the dataset (Kaur, Stoltzfus, & Yellapu, 2018). To presents the
findings in a simple and understandable manner, this research paper is using
Mean and median of data collected in form of quantitative variables.
➢ Key performance indicators of gender diversity at workplace (sub-part of
dependent variables) is collected and coded in form of ordinal variable (0,1&2).
So, it is hard to analyze these variables (KPIs) together with other part of
dependent variable (percentage of women in the workforce) which is a discrete
form of quantitative data. Hence, to analyze the dependent variable together, it is
important to make the ordinal data correlated (by using Polychoric correlation)
so that they can be studied together (the data must be correlated before finding
any causal relationship). For that, Polychoric correlation method is used.
Polychoric correlation method is a data analyzing method which helps to find
the correlation among ordinal variables and to obtain a Polychoric correlation
matrix which is needed in factor analysis (discussed below) of the dependent
variables (Lorenzo-Seva & Ferrando, 2014).To find the Polychoric correlation, I
used FACTOR program.
➢ The next step is to get the measurable results out of dependent variable which
can be analyzed next to find the answer to the research question. For that
purpose, I used factor analysis method to get the data in simplified manner (to
make the data correlated so that causal relationship test can be done next) and
the relation among multiple number of correlated variables and to reduce the
36
number of observed variables to variables which are highly related (Baglin,
2014). I used RealStats in excel for the factor analysis.
➢ The last step is to find the answer of the research question (relationship between
board composition and gender diversity at workplace) and to get the conclusion,
the Multinomial logistics regression method of descriptive statistics is used
(because the data is now simplified).for multinomial logistics correlation, I used
SPSS software to measure this.
3.6. Validity and reliability
Validity is defined as the reflection on the data collection methods and to know that
specific data collection method is providing all the relevant information which will be
intended to use to answer the research question (Blumberg, Cooper, & Schindler, 2011).
To increase the validity of data collection methods, I used quantitative content analysis
method which is widely used by scholars of social science (Macnamara, 2005). It is
firstly used by Max Weber in 1911and since then it has gained attention of researchers
because of its vast application to social sciences and business ethics research studies. As
discussed earlier, this method is providing all the necessary information which is
required to answer the research question of this paper. It reduces the biasness of
because it uses the secondary data (in this paper integrated annual reports) which is not
reported for the purpose of research (Krippendorff, 2013). It fulfil the gap of
quantitative and qualitative data collection methods (Andrevski, 2019). The data
collected from the integrated annual reports is reliable because annual reports are made
by group of auditors by following all the reporting guidelines and obligations and
signed by all the board members and all the top executives of the company (Hoffmann,
37
2018). Hence, the integrated annual reports are reliable to study and to analyze to find
the relationship between board composition and gender diversity at workplace.
3.7. Research ethics
Research ethics is an important practice while conducting a research which includes
transparency of research process, confidentially and consent of participants of research
(Blumberg, Cooper, & Schindler, 2011). In this paper, I used integrated annual reports
of the public companies. The public companies have to make their integrated annual
reports public which is a part of corporate governance practices to disclose all the
necessary and relevant information to the public .These companies (because they are
public) welcome the research (based on their annual reports) mentions that ( in their
annual reports) that these reports can be studied for future research and provides the
rights to disclose the information obtained after the study of these reports. Hence
disclosing of the findings is an important constituents of research ethics. So, research
ethics like transparency in reporting, are duly considered while data collection, data
analysis and reporting of findings in this research paper.
38
4. Findings
This chapter presents the outcomes obtained after the analysis of the data to answer the
major and minor research questions (Al-Mandi, 2017). In this chapter, the important
findings of the thesis discussed in a structured and simplified manner.
The data collected after the careful screening of the integrated annual reports of top 30
listed companies of India. The integrated annual reports have various reports embedded
within like board of directors’ report, financial reports, business responsibility and
sustainability report. As per Indian companies Act 1956 and SEBI guidelines, it is
mandatory for every listed company to present the above-mentioned reports in their
integrated annual reports. As the reports are made according to the SEBI guidelines,
thus the integrated annual reports of these top listed companies are comparable. This
chapter is categorized into three sections. The first section presents the findings for the
independent variables. The second section presents important findings of dependent
variables. The third section is dedicated to presents the findings about the relation
between board composition and gender diversity at the workplace.
4.1 Independent Variable
The Board composition, which is the independent variable in this research has three
categories: board size, board independence and board gender diversity. To collect the
data about board composition, I did a quantitative content analysis of the integrated
annual reports of companies. The board size includes total number of members in the
board (Rashid, 2018). Board independence means the percentage of independent
39
directors in the board (Sener & Karaye, 2014)and the board gender diversity refers to
the percentage of women director in the board (Nath, Holder-Webb, & Cohen, 2013).
4.1.1 Key findings about independent variables
While studying the annual reports of these top companies ,I found that The
median and average values of all the independent variables are almost equal
which means the dataset is evenly distributed & symmetrical (S., 2011). The
data is not hugely variated and it means can be analyzed further to find the
relation between independent variables and dependent variables by applying
multinomial logistic regression (explained in section 4.3). The other interesting
findings I noticed are (Figure 4 -1):
Board Composition of Top 30 listed Companies
Figure 2: Chart of Board composition of Top 30 listed companies
40
Board gender diversity
Board Gender diversity is defined as the diversified composition of the board with a
proper (defined with critical mass theory) representation of gender in the corporate
board (Haldar, Shah, & Rao, 2015). The key findings about the board gender diversity
of the corporate board of these top 30 companies are:
➢ There are only one -tenth (three companies out of thirty) companies who
scored critical mass (30 percent or more) in their corporate board. These
three companies are Titan (luxurious goods sector), Infosys (IT sector) and
most interesting one is Ultra tech Cement (Construction sector).
➢ There are nine companies which has less than 10 percentage of women
directors in their board.
➢ Out of the thirty companies reviewed; two companies have no women in
their corporate board. Both of these companies operate in the oil and gas
industry (Figure 4-2). Hence it can be argued that these two companies are
not complying with the mandate of having at least one-woman director in the
board according to Indian companies Act, 2013.
➢ The median value of number of women in the board is 1 and the average
gender diversity is 1.5. In terms of percentage, the median percentage of
board gender diversity is 11 percent while the average percentage is 14
percent. These values indicate that these top companies have only 1 woman
(on average) in their board, which is even less than half of the critical mass
(3 women director or 30 % of board members are women) in the corporate
board.
41
Board Independence
Board independence refers to the total number of independent directors or proportion of
independent directors to insiders or non-independent directors in a corporate board of an
organization (Sener & Karaye, 2014). The key findings about the board independence of
the corporate board of these top 30 companies are:
➢ Out of thirty companies, almost every company has more than 50 percent or
half of board size is composed by independent directors which represents the
fact that board of these top companies are highly independent.
➢ Out of thirty companies, the lowest percentage of independent directors is
33% (Figure 4-2). There are two companies which have lowest number of
independent directors in the board which are L&T (construction sector) and
Power Grid corporation of India (Power Sector). The highest percentage of
independent members in the board is 73% which is achieved by HCL tech
(IT sector). According to Indian Companies Act 2013, it is mandatory for
public listed companies to have at least one third or 33% independent
directors in the board. Hence it can be argued that all top 30 publicly listed
companies of India are complying the rules.
➢ The Median and average Board independence is 6.5 or 53% which is 20%
higher than the mandate of Indian companies Act 2013.It indicates that all
these top listed companies are serious regarding the mandate of Indian
companies act of having one-third (33%) independent directors in their
board.
42
Board Size
Board size means the total number of directors constituted in a board of an organization
(Rashid, 2018). The key findings about the board size of the corporate board of these
top 30 companies are:
➢ According to Indian Companies Act 2013, The minimum number of
directors appointed by a public company is two while the maximum number
of directors a company can appoint is 15. If a company wish to appoint more
than 15 directors in the board, it can appoint them by passing a special
resolution (the resolution passed with more than two-third majority of
shareholders).
➢ The minimum board size in this top listed thirty companies is 8 while the
maximum is 22. The company with minimum board size of 8 is Bajaj
Finsery and belongs to financial sector and the company with maximum
board size is L&T which belongs to construction sector ( Figure 4-2)
➢ The Median board size as well as average board size is 12. Hence, it can be
argued that almost every company of these top listed thirty companies has
large board size.
43
Sector wise Corporate Board composition
Figure 3: Pivot chart of sector and board composition
4.1.2 Relation among Independent variables
To find the relation among independent variables, I used content analysis method.
Content analysis is used to find the trends in the information communicated by an
organization and it can also reveal the intentions of an organization to deal with
specific issues (Rose, Spinks, & Canhoto, 2015). The relation (not a causal relation but
a correlation) I found among the board size, board independence and the board gender
diversity are discussed below:
➢ Board size and Board Independence: The company with the highest board
independence (HCL Tech) has lower board size than average board size while
the company with the highest board size has the lower board independence than
average board independence
44
➢ Board size and board gender diversity: The companies (Infosys, Ultratech
cement /7 Titan company) who scored critical mass in their board in terms of
gender diversity has less than or equal to median board size (12 directors or less
than 12 directors in the corporate board).
➢ Board Independence and Board gender diversity: The Companies with 3 or
more than 3 women directors in the board have also scored more than or equal to
average score of board independence. The companies which have only one third
of independent directors in the board also could not achieve critical mass in their
corporate board and has only one or less than one-woman director in the board.
4.2 Dependent variables
The dependent variables have two portions: the percentage of women in the workforce
and the key performance indicators of gender diversity at the workplace. The percentage
of women in the workforce for each company was found by careful screening of
integrated annual reports. Data about gender diversity indicators, the second component
of gender diversity at the workplace was more complicated to assess because these
variables are subjective. To enable a statistical analysis of these gender diversity
indicators – recruitment, work-life balance, career growth, equal pay and representation
– I coded the integrated annual reports by means of ordinal variables of 0, 1 and 2;
where 0 was attributed when the indicator was not mentioned at all, 1 was attributed
when the indicator in question was mentioned generically (i.e. without giving any
concrete targets or elaborations) and 2 was attributed when the indicator was not just
mentioned but also specified in terms of targets or objectives. For example: In terms of
recruitment of women, Reliance Industries Limited has only 5 % women in their

45
workforce and it wants to achieve 15% women (target) in their workforce by 2030, thus
this is coded as 2 under the indicator “recruitment”. While, most of the companies just
mentioned about the number of female employees in their workforce, which is coded as
1 under indicator “recruitment” (because it is generically mentioned without any target
or given emphasis on the practices to attract the women talent in the company)
However, most of the companies did not even mention about Equal pay in their reports
and that is coded as 0 under indicator “Equal Pay”.
4.2.1 Key Findings about Dependent Variables
Percentage of Women in the workforce
➢ Out of thirty Companies, only four have more than 30 percent women (Critical
mass) in their workforce (Figure 4-3). These companies are Wipro, Infosys, TCS
and Hindustan Unilever and out of these four , three ( Wipro, Infosys & TCS)
belongs to IT (Information & Technology) sector and Hindustan Unilever
works in FMCG (Fast moving consumer goods) sector.
➢ There are five companies where women comprised less than five percent of the
total workforce. Out the five companies, two are financial services companies,
two are automobile companies and one is construction company. But the most
important finding is that out of the five companies, three companies (Bajaj
Finsery, Bajaj Auto & Bajaj Finance) belongs to the single conglomerate
company group which is Bajaj group.
➢ Bank and IT sector has more participation of women in their workforce than any
other sector (Figure 4 - 4) All banking sector companies has more than 15 %
women in their workforce. There are four IT companies which are part of these
46
thirty companies and all of these companies performed very well in terms of
women participation in the workforce. Even out of these four companies, three
are able to achieve more than critical mass (33%) participation of women in
their workforce.
➢ The median number of women in the workforce is 2515 and the median value of
percentage of women in the workforce is 12% which is less than half of critical
mass of women participation.
Percentage of Women in the workforce of Top 30 listed Companies
Figure 4: Chart representing the women in the workforce
47
Sector wise women contribution in the workforce
Figure 5: Chart representing sector wise women contribution in the workforce
Key Performance Indicator of gender diversity at workplace
The important findings under the dependent variable-KPI of gender diversity at
workplace are mentioned below (Figure 4 - 5):
➢ Recruitment: There is not a single company which did not mention about the
women employees’ recruitment. Thus, there is no company which scored 0
under recruitment. Out of thirty companies, there are only eight companies
(27%) which scored 2s under this indicator and there are 22 companies which
scored 1’s. Three of them are from IT sector, two from automobile sector, one
from mining, one from FMCG and one from conglomerate. For example: Coal
India, which is a mining company, started a program called WIPS (Women in
Public Sector) to attract the women talent in the mining sector.
48
➢ Work Life balance: In the indicator of work life balance, 20 companies scored
2s and 10 companies scored 1s. There is no company which did not mention the
points related to work life balance indicator. It indicates that almost every
company is concern about the needs of its women employees and they care for
their safety & welfare. For example, On the International women’s day ICICI
Bank created Work from Home platform for its women employees. Asian Paints
gives various types of leave such as childcare leave, adoption/surrogate leave for
the welfare and benefit of its women employees.
➢ Career Growth: Out of thirty companies, there are 14 companies which scored
2s under the indicator of career growth. Many companies started training
programs to upgrade the skills of women employees. For example, HCL Tech
started a program called iBelieve for the career growth of their women
employees. There is no company which scored 0 under career growth indicator
which indicates these companies are focusing on the growth of their women
employees.
➢ Equal Pay: There are only 7 companies which scored 1s and 23 companies got
0s under this indicator of equal pay which shows that for those companies, equal
pay is not an issue of concern at all. These seven companies mentioned
generically about equal pay or gender pay in their integrated annual reports. For
example, Coal India (Mining sector) and Induslnd Bank mentioned that they
have 1:1 ratio of remuneration policy of remuneration of male employees to
female employees. There is not a single company mentioned specifically about
gender pay gap and equal pay review policy in their integrated annual reports.
49
➢ Representation: Out of thirty companies, there are nine companies did not
mention about women participation in their top management. There are 15
companies mentioned generically about women participation in the top
hierarchy of the company and there are six companies mentioned specifically
about their target/aspirations/actions to promote women in the top managerial
positions. For example, Mahindra & Mahindra (Automobile sector) started a
program called Women Leader Program to prepare women employees for the
future top managerial roles. Hindustan Unilever company (FMCG sector)
mentioned that they have one-third women employees at managerial positions
due to results of UFLP (Unilever future leader’s program).
Gender diversity KPIs score of Top 30 listed companied of India
Figure 6:Gender diversity KPIs score
50
Hence, Most of these top companies performed well in context of career growth and
work life balance. But there are only seven companies mentioned about equal pay or
gender pay in their reports. Thus, out of five gender diversity indicators or KPIs, these
companies more focused only on work life balance as the median value of the indicator
work life balance is 2 while career growth and recruitment scored 1 as median value.
However, gender diversity indicators like equal pay or representation has hardly
mentioned by these companies.
4.2.2 Relation among Independent variables
Polychoric Correlation
As discussed in chapter 3;section 3.5, the data must be correlated before finding any
causal relationship. The Key Performance Indicators are coded in the form of ordinal
variables as discussed above. To measure the correlation among these ordinal variables
(0,1 & 2), Polychoric correlation method is used (Roscino & Pollice, 2006). As Likert
scale is widely used in social research, Polychoric Correlation became more significant
because it gives better and more accurate results than the other methods of obtaining the
factor solutions (Tello & Moscoso, 2008). Polychoric correlation method is a data
analyzing method which helps to find the correlation among ordinal variables and to
obtain a Polychoric correlation matrix which will be used in factor analysis (discussed
below) of the dependent variables (Lorenzo-Seva & Ferrando, 2014). While measuring
the Polychoric correlation, it is assumed that the data is normally distributed, bivariate
and continuous. I used FACTOR program to compute the correlation among Key
performance indicator of gender diversity because Factor program is highly
recommended and powerful tool for analysis of ordinal variables (Baglin, 2014). The
51
outcomes I obtained are given in Figure 4-6. As the dataset here contain census not a
sample of population, hence the confidence interval value would be ignored. The
skewness of work life balance is negative, which indicates that data is asymmetrical and
skewed on left side or negatively skewed. Other variables are positively skewed. The
skewness of variables is within the acceptable range, but Equal pay is more positively
skewed than other variables. According to this, the dataset is highly skewed because the
range lies from -1 to +1. Variance of this data spread from 0.5 (Representation) to 0.1
(Equal Pay), thus it can be said that overall this data is not highly spread. The kurtosis
value is in negative for all these variables which indicates that the central peak of
normal distribution of dataset is shorter and most of data points are lies in the center
(Hair, Hult, Ringle, & Sarstedt, 2017). By above findings, it can be said that the Key
performance indicators are correlated to each other and this data set of dependent
variables can be studied to find the relationship between board composition
(independent variable) and gender diversity at workplace (dependent variable)
52
Polychoric Correlation of Dependent variable- KPIs of gender diversity
Figure 7:Polychoric correlation using FACTOR program
53
4.3 Relation between Board Composition and gender diversity at workplace
Factor Analysis
As discussed in chapter 3; section 3.5, Factor Analysis is used to simplify the data and
helps to find the relation among multiple number of correlated variables and to reduce
the number of observed variables to variables which are highly related (Baglin, 2014).
Factor analysis tool in RealStats is used to find the Correlation among dependent
variables. As shown in scree plot (Figure 4-7), there are three variables which are
significant out of five variables of KPIs (independent variables). The three highly
related variables (in order) are: Work life balance, career growth and recruitment. As
shown in Correlation matrix (Figure 4-8 & figure 4.9), the variables are positively
related to each other. However, the extraction of factor is done by interpreting the
eigenvalues. Only Recruitment (2.3) has more than 1 as eigenvalue, thus number of
factors in our dataset is only 1 which is recruitment. On looking at the Factor Score
matrix (figure 4.10) extracted with the factor analysis shows that recruitment is
positively related to career growth because negative values are not considered. The
further analyzation of the dependent variables KPIs with the number of women in the
workforce is done to find out the relation of board independence on gender diversity at
workplace.
54
Factor analysis of dependent variables
Figure 8: Scree Plot of Gender diversity at workplace
Correlation Matrix
Figure 9: Full Load Matrix
55
Figure 10: Partial Correlation of dependent variable
Factor Scores Matrix
Figure 11: Factor Score Matrix
Multinomial Logistic Regression
As the data is correlated now, the causal relationship can be found by using the
descriptive statistics method (because this paper is studying census) .Factors obtained
56
after factor analysis are multi-level discrete in nature and thus multinomial logistic
regression method is considered to find out the causality of independent variable on
dependent variable because factor analysis does not tell about the causal relationship. I
used SPSS software to find out this causal relationship. The outcomes I found are given
in Figure 4-11 & figure 4.12:
As shown in likelihood ratio test, it is found that board size affects the representation of
women at the workplace positively which means larger the board size, higher gender
diversity would be found at the workplace (in terms of representation of women in the
managerial and C- suite positions). The number of independent directors also affects
the gender of diversity (in terms of representation of women in the managerial and C -
suite positions) at workplace which means higher the number of independent directors
in the board, the higher is the gender diversity at workplace. Hence the board size and
board independence are positively related to the representation of women at the
managerial and C-suite position in these companies. So, it can be said that board gender
diversity does not affect the gender diversity at workplace. For example, looking at the
board gender diversity of these companies, there are only one-tenth of companies which
have achieved critical mass of women in their board (figure 4-1) but in terms of women
in the workforce (figure 4-3) and KPIs of gender diversity (figure 4-5), these companies
did not perform better than other companies. The other dependent variables
(recruitment, equal pay, career growth, work life balance) are not significantly affected
by the board composition of these top companies. The parameter tests indicate the
relation between the board composition with number of women in the workforce
considering the effects of KPIs of gender diversity at workplace.
57
Multinomial Logistic Regression Analysis using SPSS
Figure 12: Multinomial Logistic regression analysis of dependent and independent variables
58
Summary of Multinomial Regression Analysis
Figure 13: Summary of Multinomial logistic regression analysis
59
5. Discussion & Conclusion
This chapter reflects on the research question again to presents the concluding remarks
and it provides the recommendations and implications for future research. This chapter
is structured into four sections. The first section presents the answer to research
questions in a summarized manner. The second section discussed the findings while
reflecting on the literature review. The third section provided the implications of this
research and the fourth section provides the recommendations for future research while
reflecting on the limitations of this research.
5.1 Summary & answers to the research questions
The major and minor research questions of this study are answered by reflecting on the
ways in which the findings presented in Chapter 5 relate to the literature presented in
Chapter 2. The answer to minor research questions are given below:
1. Does board size influence gender diversity at workplace?
After analysis, I found that board size influences the gender diversity in an
organization. Because in likelihood ration test, I found that board size has
positive value which means there is evident of gender diversity at workplace is
affected by board size. It means higher the board size, higher is gender diversity
at workplace (higher percentage of women in the workforce & in terms of
representation of women in the top managerial and C-suite positions) .
2. Does board independence influence gender diversity at the workplace?
As discussed in Chapter 4, the board independence affects the gender diversity
at workplace (higher percentage of women in the workforce & in terms of
representation of women in the top managerial and C-suite positions) . The
60
analysis part of this paper shows that board independence is positively correlated
with the gender diversity at workplace.
3. Does board gender diversity influence gender diversity at workplace?
In this research, I found that board gender diversity has positive relation to the
gender diversity at workplace (higher percentage of women in the workforce &
in terms of representation of women in the top managerial and C-suite positions)
but as the likelihood ratio test indicates it is not significantly influenced the
gender diversity at workplace. This is an interesting findings, the more reflection
on this is given below under Reflection section.
On the basis of the answers to the minor research questions, the answer to the major
research question of this paper is given below:
➢ How does board composition influence the gender diversity at the workplace?
Board composition influences the gender diversity at workplace through its size and
independence. Board size and board independence have significant effect on the gender
diversity at workplace (higher percentage of women in the workforce & in terms of
representation of women in the top managerial and C-suite positions) . Interestingly,
gender diversity at workplace is not significantly influenced by board gender diversity
of the organization.
Reflection
As the gender awareness program are increasing, the corporate board effect on the
gender diversity is also became important topic to discussed. In India, there are many
changes have been done after Companies Act 2013 to achieve best practices in the area
of achieving gender diversity in the companies. The top listed companies in India comes
61
from different sector and thus they are benchmark to other companies and set an
example for them. After this study it is found that even in the big companies (in terms of
highest market capitalization) the issues related to gender diversity like recruitment of
women in the workforce, gender gap in terms of remuneration & availability of
opportunities, still persists, but they have taken steps to ensure gender diversity at their
workplace. For example, Reliance Industries Limited has just one woman in its
corporate board who is spouse of the owner of the company. But there are companies
like Infosys (IT sector) which scored better in all variables (Board size-9, Board
diversity 33%, Board independence-67%, Women in the workforce- 36, average KPIs
score is 6 out of 10). Hence, the companies with median or average board size of 9-12
performed better in terms of gender diversity because they have more women in their
workforce and they also achieved better score in the KPIs. The companies with average
independent directors in their corporate board also performed better in achieving
women in their workforce. Thus, it can be argued that board size & board independence
effects the gender diversity at workplace. While Board gender diversity has not much
impact on the women participation in the workforce as well as in KPIs of gender
diversity at workplace.
5.2 Discussion and reflections
Board of directors set an image of an organization and the policies related to social and
ethical issues like gender diversity is impacted by the board characteristics (Humbert &
Gunther, 2017). The board of these top thirty companies are taking initiative to embed
the gender diversity within their culture. For example, corporate board of Infosys and
Ultratech achieved the critical mass (33% women in the board) in their board and thus
62
they have initiated the programs to achieve the gender diversity at workplace. For
example, Infosys started the women leader program to prepare women for the future top
managerial roles and UltraTech provides various types of leaves (paternity & maternity)
and child caretaker to their women employees to promote gender diversity.
The future of women in the jobs is changing very rapidly and there is a major shift of
women workforce from lower productivity sectors to higher productivity sectors and it
would increase the GDP of India by 23% (Madgavkar, Manyika, & Krishnan, 2019)
Hence, it is important to achieve gender diversity in every sectors. From the findings, it
is evident above, the sectors like mining, oil & gas which are regarded as male
dominated sectors are taking initiatives to achieve gender diversity at workplace. For
example, ONGC (oil & gas sectors) organized programs for achieving gender diversity
at workplace such as women empowerment and gender sensitization. The other key
interesting findings are the relation between board gender diversity and the gender
diversity at workplace. I found positive but insignificant relation between board gender
diversity and gender diversity at workplace. This finding appear to validate existing
analysis that suggest that women are often used as “token” representatives in boards
which means appointment of women directors just to fulfil the legal obligations without
the necessary shifts in corporate governance and culture (appointing at least one women
director in the board as per Indian companies act, 2013 ) (Fenwick & Neal, 2001;
Revesez, 2019).
5.3 Implications & Recommendations
This study can be applied on achieving the gender diversity in various organization. As
the variables discussed herein are not studied together before. Hence, there is an ample
space of further research in this direction to find out the relation of board composition
63
and the gender diversity. These variables can be used for further study in the area of
gender diversity in different empirical settings. There is a scope of study the relation of
independent women director in the board and the gender diversity in the workforce.
Also, this dataset can be used to find the sectoral board composition and sectoral
workforce composition. Companies with better gender diversity in the workforce has
taken gender diversity issues very seriously. For example, Infosys scored almost perfect
in all variables and they have the Women Leader program, Women skill upgradation
training program, sexual Harassment policies and internal complaint committee for
complaint redressal. Companies like Ultra tech (construction sector) has taken a step
forward of providing paternity leave to its employees to promote gender sensitivity
among its employees and also to create a sense of belongingness by taking care of the
family.
Best Practices undertaken by gender diverse companies
The best performing sectors in terms of gender diversity are mainly IT & Banking
sector because it performs well in every variable whether it is dependent or independent.
The companies which scored relatively better than the other companies are focusing on
following practices (Appendix E):
➢ Companies like Bharti Airtel launched flagship programs to improve gender
awareness, women empowerment and to achieve gender diversity at their
workplace.
➢ Companies like Reliance are providing its employees various types of leaves for
the welfare of women employees and also it ensured reserved parking space for
the pregnant women employees. Some companies give more than 26 weeks
64
maternity leave to its women employees which sets an example for other
companies too.
➢ The companies related to mining & energy sector has avoided gender issues for
long but now they have also taken first step towards achieving gender diversity
in their companies. For example, Women in Public Sector program of Coal
India. But still they have to do a lot in the direction of achieving more women
participation in their workforce.
➢ Companies like Mahindra & Mahindra has taken serious step to remove the
pipeline effect or gender gap in the upper level of management. They launched
Women leader program to prepare Women leader for tomorrow.
5.4 Future Research
This paper is an attempt to find the relation between board composition and gender
diversity at workplace. However, it has some limitations on which future research can
be done.
➢ This research paper just focused and studied the top thirty companies. This
indicates that all the findings cannot be applicable on the other companies which
are smaller in terms of market capitalization. These companies are leader of the
sectors where they belong from and other companies in that sectors follows the
practices adopted by these leading companies. So, if these companies do not take
initiative to achieve gender diversity at their workplace, the other average and
smaller companies would not even think about the issue of gender diversity.
Hence, the future study can be done on the small companies of a specific sector
to find the relation of board composition and gender diversity at workplace.
65
➢ This paper studied the companies which are part of Nifty 50 index but there are
other indexes like Nifty 100, Sensex which are also indicators of Indian
economy. Hence, the companies which are part of these index can also be
studied in future.
➢ This paper is related to Indian context only and Indian legislations are
considered to conduct this research but there are other developing countries
where gender diversity issues are much more needed to be studied.
➢ This study focused on integrated annual reports because the interviewing of the
top women executives of these top listed companies would not have been
feasible for this research paper. Hence, this study just looked on the official text
(de jure realities) to answer the research questions. For future studies, the
interview of the executives and board of directors and survey of women
employees (de facto realities) can explain more on the relationship of board
composition and gender diversity at workplace .Also, interviewing women
directors would helps to study why board gender diversity is not able to translate
into gender diversity at workplace.
66
References
Abouzahr, K., Taplett, F. B., & Krentz, M. (2018). Measuring what matters in gender diversity.
Boston Consultany Group. Retrieved from
https://www.bcg.com/publications/2018/measuring-what-matters-gender-diversity.aspx
Adams, R., & Ferreira, D. (2009). Women in the boardroom and their impact on governance and
performance. Journal of Financial Economics, 291-309.
Agarwal, A., Pande, A., & Sharma, P. P. (2016). Women empowerment in India through
corporate social responsibility :policies & challenges: a case study of NTPC Ltd.
International Journal of Research in Comemrce & Management, 7(12), 50-53.
Ali, F., & Syed, J. (2016). From rhetoric to reality: a multilevel analysis of gender equality in
Pakistani organisation. Gender, Work & Organisations, 1-15.
Al-Mandi, M. Y. (2017, January). The relationship between strategic thinking and strategic
management practices in higher education institutions in Yemen. Master Thesis.
Maastricht School of Management.
Andrevski, G. (2019). Research & methodology: content analysis as a research technique.

Content and textual analysis. Retrieved from
terry.uga.edu/management/contentanalysis/research
Arena, C., Cirillo, A., & Mussolino, D. (2015). Women on board: evidence from a maculine
industry. Corporate Governance, 15 (3), 339-356.
Arora, A., & Sharma, C. (2016). Corporate governance and firm performance in developing
countries: evidence from India. Corporate Governance, 16(2), 420-436.
Bacchi, C. (2016). Policies as gendering practices: re-viewing categorical distinctions. Journal of

Women, Politics & Policy, 1-22.
Baez, A., Garcia, A., Munoz, F., & Barroso, J. (2018). Gender diversity, corporate governance
and firm behavior: the challenge of emotional management. European Research on
Mangement and Business Economics, 24, 121-129.
Baglin, J. (2014). Improve your exploratory factor analysis for ordinal data. Practical
Assessment Research & Evaluation , 19(5), 1-15.
Baglin, J. (2014). Improving your exploratory factor analysis for ordinal data: a demonstration
using factor. Practical Assessment Research & Evaluation, 19(5), 1-15.
Banerjee, P. (2012). The burgeoning field of gender , work & organisation . International
Conference of the Journal Gender, Work & Organisation (pp. 1-15). Chicago: Gender ,
Work & Organisation.
67
Bendl, R., & Schimdt, A. (2012). Gender mainstreaming : an assessment of its conceptual value
for gender equality. Gender. Work & Organisation, 1-18.
Berkhemer-Credaire, B., & Sonnabend, S. (2018). Boardroom diversity : a strategic imperative.

The 2020 Women on Boards Gender diversity index.
Bert, A. (2018). 3 reasons gender diversity is crucial to science. Elsevier.
Blumberg, B., Cooper, D. R., & Schindler, P. S. (2011). Business research methods. Berkshire:
McGraw-Hill Education.
Bohren, O., & Strom, O. (2010). Governance and politics : regulating independence and
diversity in the board room. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 37(9), 1281-
1308.
Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative

Research Journal, 9(2), 27-40.
Budescu, D., & Budescu, M. (2012). How to measure diversity when you must. Psychological
Methods, 17(2), 215-227.
Catalyst. (2018, December). Retrieved from Catalyst workplaces that work for women:
https://www.catalyst.org/knowledge/women-corporate-boards#footnote1_rgf9738
Christopher Groening. (2019). When do investors value board gender diversity? Corporate
Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society, 19(1), 60-79.
Cook, A., & Glass, C. (2017). Women on corporate boards:Do they advance corporate social
responsibility? Human relations . UK: Sage publications.
Cullen, P., & Murphy, M. P. (2017). Leading the debate for the business case for gender
equality , perilous for whom? Gender, Work & Organisation, 1-17.
Demetriades, J. (2007). Gender indicators : what , why and how ? BRIDGE: Development-
Gender, 1-10.
Desvaux, G., Devillard, S., & Labaye, E. (Oct 2017). Women matter : ten years of insights into
gender diversity . McKinsey & Company.
Emmot, M., & Worman, D. (2008). The steady rise of CSR and diversity in the workplace.
Strategic HR Review, 7(5), 28-33.
Erlingsson, C., & Brysiewicz, P. (2017). A hands-on guide to doing content analysis. African
Journal of Emergency Medicine, 7, 93-99.
ESCAP. (2013). Developing a regional core set of gender statistics and indicators in Asia and
the Pacific. UN Conference on Gender , Statistics and Gender Indicators (pp. 1-39).
Thailand, Bangkok: ESCAP Statistics Division.
68
Evans, C. (2012). "Recruitment initiatives aimed at increasing the gender diversity within ITEC
employment : not so "gender" neutral. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International
Journal,, 31(8), 741-752.
Fenwick, G. D., & Neal, D. J. (2001). Effect of gender composition on group performance.
Gender , Work & Organisation, 8(2), 205-225.
Fernandez-Feijoo, B., Romero, S., & Ruiz, S. (2012). Does board gender composition affect
corporate social responsibility reporting? International Journal of Business and Social
Science, 3(1), 31-38.
Francoeur, C., Labelle, R., & Sinclair-Desgagne', B. (2008). Gender diversity in corporate
governance and top management. Journal of Business Ethics, 83-95.
Fuzi, S. F., Halim, S. ‘., & M.K., J. (2016). Board independence and firm performance. 5th
International Conference on Marketing and Retailing. 37, pp. 460-465. Procedia
Economics and Finance.
Garcia-Meca, E., & Palacio, C. J. (2018). Board composition and firm reputation: the role of
business experts , support specialists and community influentials . Business Research
Quarterly, 1-13.
Grosser, K. (2011, March). Corporate social responsibilty , gender equality and organisational
change: A feminist perspective. PhD Thesis. United Kingdom: University of Nottingham.
Grosser, K., & Moon, J. (2017). CSR and feminist organisation studies: towards an integrated
theorization for the analysis of gender issues. Journal of Business Ethics, 1-22.
Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). A primer on partial least squares
structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). (Vol. 2). CA: Thousand Oaks: SAGE.
Haldar, A., Shah, R., & Rao, S. N. (2015). Gender diversity in large listed companies. Corporate
Ownership & Control, 12(3), 573-580.
Hamzah, A. H., & Zulkafli, A. H. (2014). Board diversity and corporate expropriation.
International Conference on Accounting Studies. 164, pp. 562-568. Kuala Lumpur,
Malaysia: Procedia-Social and Behavioural Science.
Hearn, J. (2019). Gender, work & organisation: a gender , work and organisational analysis.
Gender ,Work & Organisation, 26, 31-39.
Heikkurinen, P. (2018). Strategic corporate responsibility: a theory review and synthesis.

Journal of Global Responsibility, 2041-2069.
Heilman, M. E. (2012). Gender stereotypes and workplace bias. Research in Organizational

Behavior, 32, 113-135.
69
Hoffmann, E. (2018). Between mandatory and voluntary: non-financial reporting by German

companies. Sustainability Management Forum, 26, 47-63.
Hoque, M. E. (2017). Why companies should adopt integrated reporting. International Journal of
Economics and Financial Issues, 7(1), 241-248.
Hughes, C., & Kerfoot, D. (2002). Rethinking gender, work and organisation. Gender, Work and
Organization, 9 (5), 473-481.
Hui C Cheng, M. P. (2014). Secondary analysis of existing data: opportunities and

implementation. Shanghai Archivesof Psychiatry, 26(6), 371-375.
Humbert, A. L., & Gunther, E. A. (2017). The gender diversity index. preliminary considerations
and results. Gender Diversity Impact: Improving Research & Innovation through
Diversity, 1-32.
Hunt, V., Layton, D., & Prince, S. (2014). Diversity Matters. Mckinsey & Company.
Hunt, V., Prince, S., Dixon-Fyle, S., & Yee, L. (2018). Delivering through diversity. McKinsey &
Company.
Inanga, E., & Adelegan, O. (2013). Principles of accounting. Ibadan, Nigeria: HEBN Publishing.
Jayne, M., & Dipboye, R. (2004). Leveraging diversity to improve business performance:
research findings and recommendations for organisations. Human Resource
Mangement, 43(4), 409-424.
Jhunjhunwala, S., & Mishra, R. K. (2012). Board diversity and corporate performance: the indian
evidence. The IUP Journal of Corporate Governance, 71-79.
Joshi, R. (2018). Does gender diversity improve firm performance. Future of work. India: Just
Jobs Network.
Jyothi, P., & Mangalagiri, J. (2019). Would firm performance be bteer with women directors?
evidence from India. Vision, 1-9.
Kagzi, M., & Guha, M. (2018). Board demographic diversity: a review of literature. Journal of
Strategy and Management, 11(1), 33-51.
Kagzi, M., & Guha, M. (2018). Does board demographic diversity influence firm performance:
evidence from Indian knowledge intensive firms. Benchmarking: An International
Journal, 25(3), 1028-1058.
Kapur, M., & Arora, P. (2017). Towards gender balanced boards. KPMG.
Kaur, M., & Vij, M. (2017). Board characteristics and firm performance: evidence from banking
industry in India. Asian Journal of Accounting and Governance, 8, 9–53.
70
Kaur, P., Stoltzfus, J., & Yellapu, V. (2018). Descriptive statistics. International Journal of
Academic Medicine, 4(1), 60-63.
Kılıç, M., & Kuzey, C. (2016). The effect of board gender diversity on firm performance:
evidence from Turkey. Gender in Management: An International Journal, 31(7), 434-
455.
Krippendorff, K. (2013). Content Analysis: An Introduction to its methodology. (2. edn., Ed.) CA:
SAGE: Thousand Oaks.
Labelle, R., Francoeur, C., & Lakhal, F. (2015). To regulate or no to regulate? early evidencec
on the means used around the world to promote gender diversity in the boardroom.
Gender, Work & Organisation, 22(4), 339-363.
Lenard, M. J., Yu, B., York, E. A., & Wu, S. (2014). Impact of board gender diversity on firm risk.
Managerial Finance, 40(8), 787-803.
Lock, I., & Seele, P. (2015). Quantitative content analysis as a method for business ethics
research. Business Ethics: A European Review, 24(1), 24-40.
Lorenzo-Seva, U., & Ferrando, P. J. (2014). POLYMAT-C: a comprehensive SPSS program for
computing the polychoric correlation matrix. Behavior Research Methods, 47(3), 884-
889.
Lovas, J. (2017, October). Exploring gender equality and women's empowerment:a critical
examination of select L'oreal corporate documents. Master of Gender studies Thesis, 1-
195. Newfoundland: Memorial University of Newfoundland.
Macnamara, J. (2005). Media content analysis: Its uses, benefits and Best Practice
methodology. Asia Pacific Public Relations Journal, 6(1), 1-34.
Madgavkar, A., Manyika, J., & Krishnan, M. (2019). The future of women at work: transition in
the age of automation. Mckinsey Global Institute.
Mansbridge, J. (2006). Do women represent women: rethinking critical mass debate. Politics &
Gender, 2(6), 491-530.
Marinova, J., Plantenga, J., & Remery, C. (2016). Gender diversity and firm
performance:evidence from Dutch and Danish boardrooms. The International Journal of
Human Resource Management, 27(15), 1777-1790.
McCarthy, L. (September 2012). Gender and CSR in the value chain: three perspectives. CRCC
Conference, (pp. 1-22). Bordeaux.
Mishra, S., & Mohanty, P. (2014). Corporate governance as a value driver for firm performance:
evidence from India. Corporate Governance, 14 (2), 265-280.
71
Moreno-Gómez, J., Lafuente, E., & Vaillant, Y. (2018). Gender diversity in the board, women’s
leadership and business performance. Gender in Management: An International
Journal, 33 (2), 104-122.
Muehlenaus, I. A. (2010). Lost in visualisation: using quantitative content analysis to identify ,

measure, and categorise political cartographic manipulations. 1-272.
Muzio, D., & Tomlinson, J. (2012). Research gender, inclusion and diversity in contemporary
professions and professional organisation. Gender, Work & Organisation, 19(5), 455-
467.
Nagaraju, R. C., & Paramashivaiah, P. (2016). Corporate governance mechanism in India: a

case study of selected firms from ten sectors. International Journal of Research in
Commerce and Management, 7(12), 1-10.
Nath, L., Holder-Webb, L., & Cohen, J. (2013). Will Women Lead the Way? Differences in
Demand for Corporate Social Responsibility Information for Investment Decisions.
Journal of Business Ethics, 118(1), 85-102.
Nielsen, M. W., Bloch, C. W., & Schiebinger, L. (2018). Making gender diversity work for
scientific discovery and innovation. Nature Human Behaviour, 1-9.
Páez, O. (2015, August). The impact of an intrapreneurial culture on innovation in consulting

companies in Quito,Ecuador. Master Thesis . Maastricht, Netherlands: Maastricht
School of Management.
Pitts, D., & Wise, L. R. (2010). Workforce diversity in the new millennium: prospects for
research. Review of Public Personnel Adminstration, 30(1), 44-69.
Pivac, S. (2017). Analysis of annual report disclosure quality for listed companies in transition
countries. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 30 (1), 721-731.
Rashid, A. (2018). Board independence and firm performance: evidence from Bangladesh.
Future Business Journal, 4, 34-49.
Revesez, R. (2019). Goodbye to tokenism: the fight for more gender equality. Raconteur.
Riach, K., & Brewis, J. (2019). The organisational gendering of adulting: negotiating age and
gender in the workplace. Interdisciplinary Perspective on Equality and Diversity, 5(1), 1-
29.
Roscino, A., & Pollice, A. (2006). A generalization of the polychoric correlation coefficient. Data
Analysis, Classification and the Forward Search, 135-142.
Rose, S., Spinks, N., & Canhoto, A. I. (2015). Quantitative content analysis. Management
Research: Applying the Principles, 1-9.
72
Routray, S. K., & Bal, R. K. (2016). Board composition, board gender diversity and firm
performance: evidence from India. Parikalpana: KIIT Journal of Management, 107-120.
S., M. (2011). Measures of central tendency: median and mode. Journal of Pharmacology and
Pharmacotherapeutics, 2(3), 214-015.
Sabatier, M. (2015). A women’s boom in the boardroom: effects on performance?,. Applied

Economics, 47(26), 2717-2727.
Saburova, M., & Maysuradze, A. (2015). A low effort approach to quantitative content analysis.
KESW:CCIS, 168-181.
Sahoo, D. K., & Lenka, U. (2016). Breaking the glass ceiling: opportunity for the organization.
Industrial and Commercial Training, 48(6), 311-319.
Schwab, A. (2016). Managerial gender diversity and firm performance: an integration of different
theoretical perspectives. IOWA state University, 1-38.
Sen, S. S., & Mukherjee, T. (2019). Board Gender diversity and firm's performance: evidence
from India. Journal of Commerce & Accounting Research, 8(1), 35-45.
Sener, I., & Karaye, A. B. (2014). Board composition and gender diversity: comparison of
Turkish and Nigerian listed companies. !0th International Strategic Management
Conference. 150, pp. 1002-1011. Procedia- Social and Behavioral Sciences.
Sheridan, A., & Milgate, G. (2003). "She says, he says”: women’s and men’s views of the
composition of boards. Women in Management Review, 18 (3), 147-154.
Singh, A., & Raina, M. (2013). Women entrepreneurs in micro, small and medium enterprises.
International Journal of Management and Social Sciences Research, 4-8.
Srivastava, V., Das, N., & Pattanayak, J. K. (2018). Women on boards in India: a need or
tokenism? Management Decision, 56(8), 1769-1786.
Stojmenovska, D. (2018). Management gender composition and the gender pay gap: evidence
from British pande data. Gender, Work & Organisation, 1-27.
Tello, F. P., & Moscoso, S. C. (2008). Polychoric versus Pearson correlations in exploratory and
confirmatory factor analysis of ordinal variables. Quality & Quantity, 44(1), 153-166.
Top 30 companies of nifty 50. (2019, July 22). doi:nseindia.com
Tsushima, R., & Kaur, H. (2015). Gender inequality in the workplace in India. Gender and
Economic POlicy Discussion Forum, 1-18.
Turban, S., Wu, D., & Zhang, L. (2019). When gender diversity makes firm more productive.
Harvard Business Review.
73
Velte, P. (2016). Women on management board and ESG performance. Journal of Global
Responsibility, 7(1), 98-109.
Vilke, R., Raisiene, A. G., & Simanaviciene, Z. (2014). Gender and corporate social
responsibility: ‘big wins’ for business and society? 19th International Scientific
Conference : Economics and Management 2014. 156, pp. 198 – 202. Riga, Latvia:
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences.
Walt, N. V., Ingley, C., Shergill, G., & Townsend, A. (2006). Board configuration: are diverse
boards better boards? Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business In
Society, 6 (2), 129-147.
(Sep 2016). Women in the workplace. Mckinsey & Company.
Ziegler, Y., Graml, R., & Weissenrieder, C. (2012). Gender diversity culture check. International
Journal of Economics and Management Engineering, 6(10), 2544-2548.
74
Appendix A: Percentage of board seats held by women (industry wise)
Figure 14: Percentage of board seats held by women (Berkhemer-Credaire & Sonnabend,
2018:5)
75

Masterthesis-BoardCompositionandGenderDiversity Removed

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Masterthesis-BoardCompositionandGenderDiversity Removed

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Board Composition and Gender Diversity

5.1 Summary & answers to the research questions .................................................................... 60

1.1. Rationale of the study

achieve better performance in every domain of society whether it is science (Bert,

2018), NGO (Grosser, 2011) or purely business organization (Desjardins, 2018).

Women participation in science , research, and medical promoted gender diversity at

of a country (Grosser, 2011).

Many researchers proved that gender diversity in management is related to better

organizational performance positively and thus achieving effectiveness and efficiency in

the organizational activities (Berkhemer-Credaire & Sonnabend, 2018). In an

organization, diverse workforce helps to increase the customer satisfaction level,

2009).The number of woman employees at various hierarchies of organization has been

(Desvaux et al., 2017).

positively related to firm’s CSR commitments and overall performance of a firm

presence of female directors are positively associated with a stronger commitment of

a gender balanced board to strengthen corporate governance.

its influence on promoting gender diversity in an organization.

1.1.1. Motivation to undertake this study

motivated me to study the topic of gender diversity in an organization.

women representation at top executive positions in big corporates of India (Desvaux et

of board composition and gender diversity.

1.2. Problem statement

benefits of board independence and board diversity. In this dynamic environment,

diversity is an important concept and issue to be tackled by firm. Diversity means

treating and valuing everyone as an individual (Emmot & Worman, 2008).The

composition of women population in total working population worldwide is more than

(Women in the workplace, 2016).

attracts inclusivity in an organization. More women in the workplace helps a company

to increase its organizational effectiveness by performing better than their competitors.

effectiveness in decision making by providing creative solutions to the problems , it

majority of scholars to measure gender diversity in various empirical settings. Critical

1.3. Research Question

The central research question of this study is:

1. Does board size influence gender diversity at the workplace?

2. Does board independence influence gender diversity at the workplace?

3. Does gender diverse board influence gender diversity at the workplace?

1.4. Research approach

independence, ideal board size, corporate social responsibility, Performance indicators

Content analysis is used to find the trends in the information communicated by an

questions mentioned in this research paper.

1.5. Outline of the document

• Abstract: a summary of the research paper containing the rationale of study,

define the objective of the research undertaken in this paper. A conceptual

• Chapter 3: It includes the data and methodology part of the research. It

answered the research questions after analyzing the gathered data in an

understandable and simplified manner.

• Chapter 5: It discussed the findings of the research while reflecting on the

premises for future research.

about the relationship of board composition and gender diversity at workplace.

2.2. Board composition

independence and board gender diversity.

2.2.1. Board size

Board size means the total number of directors constituted in a board of an

organization. Board size impacts is an important characteristic of a board

because it impacts the decision taken by board of directors significantly (Rashid,

2018). Finding an optimal, appropriate and adequate board size is a matter of

the working of an organization (Garcia-Meca & Palacio, 2018). Whereas other

board members (Labelle, Francoeur, & Lakhal, 2015). Hence, there is no

while others prefer smaller board size (Sabatier, 2015).

2.2.2. Board Independence

Board independence refers to the total number of independent directors or

proportion of independent directors to insiders or non-independent

directors in a corporate board of an organization. Board independence is a