Board gender diversity: Why a critical mass of female directors may be ineffective

What is it about?

A recent article in the corporate communications literature showed convincing support for the critical mass theory concerning gender diversity in corporate boards. However, a small amount of research does not support this. In this article, we aim to present evidence to answer the important question: Why a critical mass of three women on a corporate board may be ineffective? This article adopts a conceptual research approach by observing and analysing published work in the current field. This approach is supported by recent articles published in the corporate communications literature. Conceptual research provides insights into existing research to understand the research topic better. The article presents the many reasons why an ineffective critical mass of women on corporate boards may arise, all of which create a dysfunctional conflict between women board members: inexperienced and unqualified women appointed as a result of quotas; personal/relationship conflict; multiple identities of women directors; self-isolation from other women directors; family and non-family women directors in family firms; insider directors, those with close ties to agents; women executive and non-executive directors; male-dominated corporate environments; and physical board meetings compared with online meetings. It should aid CEOs/Chairpersons in fully understanding and appreciating the dynamics of board-level discussions, particularly women directors' contributions. The study identifies and better explains how an ineffective critical mass may arise. It is believed to be the first article to provide a decisive perception of board-level conflicts between women directors by focusing on the reasons for an ineffective critical mass.

Featured Image