Access denied: Low mentoring of women and minority first-time directors and its negative effects on appointments to additional boards

Academy of Management Journal

Volumn 56, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 1169-1198

  McDonald, Michael L ^a   Westphal, James D ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT SAN ANTONIO   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84885001679     PISSN: 00014273     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.5465/amj.2011.0230     Document Type: Article

References (112)

1. Adams, R. B., & Ferreira, D. 2009. Women in the board-room and their impact on governance and perfor-mance. Journal of Financial Economics, 94: 291-309.
2. Allen, T. D., Eby, L. T., Poteet, M. L., Lentz, E., & Lima, L. 2004. Career benefits associated with mentoring for protégés: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psy-chology, 89: 127-136.
3. Alliance for Board Diversity. 2010. Missing pieces: Women and minorities on Fortune 500 boards: 2010 Alliance for Board Diversity census. Alliance for Board Diversity.
4. Anderson, R. C., Reeb, D. M., Upadhyay, A., & Zhao, W. 2011. The economics of director heterogeneity. Fi-nancial Management, 40(1): 5-38.
5. Bagozzi, R. P. 2011. Measurement and meaning in infor-mation systems and organizational research: Meth-odological and philosophical foundations. MIS Quarterly, 35: 261-292.
6. Bagozzi, R. P., Yi, Y., & Phillips, L. W. 1991. Assessing construct validity in organizational research. Ad-ministrative Science Quarterly, 36: 421-458.
7. Bednar, M. K., & Westphal, J. D. 2006. Surveying the corporate elite: Theoretical and practical guidance on improving response rates and response quality in top management survey questionnaires. In D. Ketchen & D. Bergh (Eds.), Research methodology in strategy and management, vol. 3: 37-56. Green-wich, CT: JAI.
8. Bhagat, S., & Black, B. 2002. The non-correlation between board independence and long-term firm perfor-mance. Journal of Corporation Law, 27: 231-274.
9. Bilimoria, D., & Piderit, S. K. 1994. Board committee membership: Effects of sex-based bias. Academy of Management Journal, 37: 1453-1477.
10. Bollen, K. A. 1989. Structural equations with latent variables. New York: Wiley.
11. Brewer, M. B. 1979. In-group bias in the minimal inter-group situation: A cognitive-motivational analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 86: 307-324.
12. Brewer, M. B. 1999. The psychology of prejudice: In-group love or out-group hate? Journal of Social Is-sues, 55: 429-444.
13. Brewer, M. B., & Brown, R. J. 1998. Intergroup relations. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (4th ed.), vol. 2: 282-316. Boston: McGraw-Hill.
14. Broad, D. B. 1996. The social register: Directory of Amer-ica's upper class. Sociological Spectrum, 16: 173-181.
15. Browne, M. W. 1984. Asymptotically distribution-free methods for the analysis of covariance structures. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 37: 62-83.
16. Burke, R. 2000. Company size, board size, and the num-bers of women corporate directors. In R. Burke & M. Mathis (Eds.), Women on corporate boards of di-rectors: International challenges and opportuni-ties: 118-125. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer.
17. Burris, V. 2002. The two faces of capitalism: Corpora-tions and individual capitalists as political actors. American Sociological Review, 66: 361-381.
18. Byrne, B. M. 1998. Structural equation modeling with LISREL, PRELIS, and SIMPLIS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. New York: Erl-baum.
19. Byrne, D. 1971. The attraction paradigm. New York: Academic.
20. Campbell, K., & Minguez-Vera, A. 2008. Gender diversity in the boardroom and firm financial performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 83: 435-451.
21. Carter, D. A., D'Souza, F., Simkins, B. J., & Simpson, W. G. 2010. The gender and ethnic diversity of US boards and board committees and firm financial per-formance. Corporate Governance: An Interna-tional Review, 18: 396-414.
22. Carter, D. A., Simkins, B. J., & Simpson, W. G. 2003. Corporate governance, board diversity, and firm value. Financial Review, 38(1): 33-53.
23. Chatterjee, S., & Harrison, J. S. 2001. Corporate gover-nance. In M. A. Hitt, R. E. Freeman, & J. S. Harrison (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of strategic manage-ment: 543-563. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
24. Cialdini, R. B., Kallgren, C. A., & Reno, R. R. 1991. A focus theory of normative conduct: A theoretical re-finement and reevaluation of the role of norms in human behavior. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology: 201-234. New York: Academic.
25. Cycyota, C. S., & Harrison, D. A. 2006. What (not) to expect when surveying executives: A meta-analysis of top manager response rates and techniques over time. Organizational Research Methods, 9: 133-160.
26. Daily, C. M., Certo, S. T., & Dalton, D. R. 1999. A decade of corporate women: Some progress in the board-room, none in the executive suite. Strategic Man-agement Journal, 20: 93-99.
27. Dalton, D. R., Daily, C. M., Ellstrand, A. E., & Johnson, J. L. 1998. Meta-analytic reviews of board composi-tion, leadership structure, and financial perfor-mance. Strategic Management Journal, 19: 269-290.
28. Davis, G. F. 1993. Who gets ahead in the market for corporate directors: The political economy of multi-ple board memberships. Academy of Management Proceedings: 202-206.
29. Davis, G. F., Yoo, M., & Baker, W. E. 2003. The small world of the American corporate elite. Strategic Or-ganization, 1: 301-326.
30. Demb, A., & Neubauer, F.-F. 1992. The corporate board: Confronting the paradoxes. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
31. DeVellis, R. F. 2003. Scale development: Theory and applications (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
32. Diamantopoulos, A., & Winklhofer, H. M. 2001. Index construction with formative indicators: An alterna-tive to scale development. Journal of Marketing Research, 38: 269-277.
33. DiTomaso, N., Post, C., Smith, D. R., Farris, G. F., & Cordero, R. 2007. Effects of structural position on allocation and evaluation decisions for scientists and engineers. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52: 175-207.
34. Domhoff, G. W. 1974. The Bohemian Grove and other retreats. New York: Harper and Row.
35. Domhoff, G. W. 2002. Who rules America? Power and politics (4th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
36. Dovidio, J. F., & Gaertner, S. L. 2010. Intergroup bias. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (5th ed.), vol. 2: 1084-1121. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
37. Dovidio, J. F., Gaertner, S. L., Validzic, A., Matoka, K., Johnson, B., & Frazier, S. 1997. Extending the bene-fits of recategorization: Evaluation, self-disclosure, and helping. Journal of Experimental Social Psy-chology, 33: 401-420.
38. Eby, L. T., Allen, T. D., Evans, S. C., Ng, T., & DuBois, D. 2008. Does mentoring matter? A multidisciplinary meta-analysis comparing mentored and non-men-tored individuals. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 72: 254-267.
39. Erhardt, N., Werbel, J., & Shrader, C. 2003. Board of director diversity and firm financial performance. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 11: 102-111.
40. Finkelstein, S., Hambrick, D. C., & Cannella, A. A., Jr. 2009. Strategic leadership: Theory and researchon executives, top management teams, and boards. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
41. Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J., Glick, P., & Xu, J. 2002. A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82: 878-902.
42. Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. 2008. Social cognition: From brains to culture. New York: McGraw-Hill.
43. Fondas, N., & Sassalos, S. 2000. A different voice in the boardroom: How the presence of women directors affects board influence over management. Global Focus, 12(2): 13-22.
44. Frost, P. J. 2003. Toxic emotions at work: How compas-sionate managers handle pain and conflict. Bos-ton: Harvard Business School Press.
45. Geletkanycz, M. A., & Hambrick, D. C. 1997. The external ties of top executives: Implications for strategic choice and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42: 654-681.
46. Gersh, D. 1987. The corporate elite and the introduction of IQ testing in American public schools. In M. Schwartz (Ed.), The structure of power in America: 163-184. New York: Holmes and Meier.
47. Glick, W. H., Huber, G. P., Miller, C. C., Doty, D. H., & Sutcliffe, K. M. 1990. Studying changes in organiza-tion design and effectiveness: Retrospective event histories and periodic assessments. Organization Science, 1: 293-312.
48. Heckman, J. J., & Borjas, G. J. 1980. Does unemployment cause future unemployment? Definitions, questions and answers from a continuous time model of het-erogeneity and state dependence. Econometrica, 47: 247-283.
49. Helfat, C. E., Harris, D., & Wolfson, P. J. 2007. The pipe-line to the top: Women and men in the top executive ranks of US corporations. Academy of Management Perspectives, 20(4): 42-64.
50. Hewstone, M., Hantzi, A., & Johnston, L. 1991. Social categorization and person memory: The pervasive-ness of race as an organizing principle. European Journal of Social Psychology, 21: 517-528.
51. Hewstone, M., Rubin, M., & Willis, H. 2002. Intergroup bias. In S. T. Fiske, D. L. Schacter, & C. Zahn-Waxler (Eds.), Annual review of psychology, vol. 53: 575-604. Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews.
52. Hillman, A. J., Cannella, A. A., & Harris, I. C. 2002. Women and racial minorities in the boardroom: How do directors differ? Journal of Management, 28: 747-763.
53. Hillman, A. J., & Dalziel, T. 2003. Boards of directors and firm performance: Integrating agency and resource dependence perspectives. Academy of Manage-ment Review, 28: 383-396.
54. Hillman, A. J., Shropshire, C., & Cannella, A. A. 2007. Organizational predictors of women on corporate boards. Academy of Management Journal, 50: 941-952.
55. Izraeli, D. 2000. Women directors in Israel. In R. Burke & M. Mathis (Eds.), Women on corporate boards of directors: International challenges and opportuni-ties: 75-96. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer.
56. Jones, E. E., & Goethals, G. R. 1972. Order effects in impression formation: Attribution context and the nature of the entity. In E. E. Jones, D. E. Kanouse, H. H. Kelley, R. E. Nisbett, S. Valins, & B. Weiner (Eds.), Attribution: Perceiving the causes of behav-ior: 27-46. Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press.
57. Jost, J. T., & Hunyadi, O. 2005. Antecedents and conse-quences of system-justifying ideologies. Current Di-rections in Psychological Science, 14: 260-265.
58. Kallgren, C. A., Reno, R. R., & Cialdini, R. B. 2000. A focus theory of normative conduct: When norms do and do not affect behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26: 1002-1012.
59. Kammeyer-Mueller, J. D., & Judge, T. A. 2008. A quanti-tative review of mentoring research: Test of a model. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 72: 269-283.
60. Kesner, I. F. 1988. Directors' characteristics and commit-tee membership: An investigation of type, occupa-tion, tenure, and gender. Academy of Management Journal, 31: 66-84.
61. Kram, K. E. 1985. Mentoring at work: Developmental relationships in organizational life. Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman.
62. Kroll, M., Walters, B. A., & Wright, P. 2008. Board vigi-lance, director experience, and corporate outcomes. Strategic Management Journal, 29: 363-382.
63. Lankau, M. L., Carlson, D. S., & Nielson, T. R. 2006. The mediating influence of role stressors in the relation-ship between mentoring and job attitudes. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 68: 308-322.
64. Levine, M., Prosser, A., Evans, D., & Reicher, S. 2005. Identity and emergency intervention: How social group membership and inclusiveness of group boundaries shape helping behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31: 443-453.
65. Long, J. S. 1997. Regression models for categorical and limited dependent variables. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
66. Lorsch, J. W., & MacIver, E. 1989. Pawns or potentates: The reality of America's corporate boards. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
67. Lyness, K. S., & Heilman, M. E. 2006. When fit is funda-mental: Performance evaluations and promotions of upper-level female and male managers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91: 777-785.
68. MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., Hoffman, J. M., West, S. G., & Sheets, V. 2002. A comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects. Psychological Methods, 7: 83-104.
69. Maner, J. K., & Gailliot, M. T. 2007. Altruism and egoism: Prosocial motivations for helping depend on rela-tionship context. European Journal of Social Psy-chology, 37: 347-358.
70. Miller, T., & del Carmen Triana, M. 2009. Demographic diversity in the boardroom: Mediators of the board diversity-firm performance relationship. Journal of Management Studies, 46: 755-786.
71. Mills, C. W. 1956. The power elite. New York: Oxford University Press.
72. Mizruchi, M. S. 2004. Berle and Means revisited: The governance and power of large U.S. corporations. Theory and Society, 33: 579-617.
73. Montoya, R. M., & Horton, R. S. 2004. On the importance of cognitive evaluation as a determinant of interper-sonal attraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86: 696-712.
74. Muthen, B. 1984. A general structural equation model with dichotomous, ordered categorical, and contin-uous latent variable indicators. Psychometrika, 49: 115-132.
75. Muthen, L. K., & Muthen, B. O. 2007. Mplus 4.1: User's guide. Los Angeles: Muthen & Muthen.
76. Nielsen, S., & Huse, M. 2010. The contribution of women on boards of directors: Going beyond the surface. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 18: 136-148.
77. O'Neal, D., & Thomas, H. 1996. Developing the strategic board. Long Range Planning, 29: 314-327.
78. Oakley, J. G. 2000. Gender-based barriers to senior management positions: Understanding the scarcity of female CEOs. Journal of Business Ethics, 27: 321-334.
79. Otten, S., & Mummendey, A. 2000. Valence-dependent probability of ingroup favoritism between minimal groups: An integrative view on the positive-negative asymmetry in social discrimination. In D. Capozza & R. Brown (Eds.), Social identity processes: 33-48. London: Sage.
80. Palmer, D., & Barber, B. M. 2001. Challengers, elites, and owning families: A social class theory of corporate acquisitions in the 1960s. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46: 87-120.
81. Peterson, C. A., & Philpot, J. 2006. Women's roles on US Fortune 500 boards: Director expertise and commit-tee memberships. Journal of Business Ethics, 72: 177-196.
82. Pollock, T. G., Fischer, H. M., & Wade, J. B. 2002. The role of politics in repricing executive stock options. Academy of Management Journal, 45: 1172-1182.
83. Ratcliffe, R. 1987. The inner circle and bank lending policy. In M. Schwartz (Ed.), The structure of power in America: 154-162. New York: Holmes and Meier.
84. Rose, C. 2007. Does female board representation influ-ence firm performance? The Danish evidence. Cor-porate Governance: An International Review, 15: 404-413.
85. Scott, J. 1991. Networks of corporate power: A compara-tive assessment. In W. R. Scott & J. Blake (Eds.), Annual review of sociology, vol. 17: 181-203. Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews.
86. Shook, C. L., Ketchen, D. J., Hult, G. T. M., & Kacmar, K. M. 2004. Research notes and commentaries: An assessment of the use of structural equation model-ing in strategic management research. Strategic Management Journal, 25: 397-404.
87. Shrader, C., Blackburn, V., & Iles, P. 1997. Women in management and firm value: An exploratory study. Journal of Managerial Issues, 9: 355-372.
88. Simon, B., Sturmer, S., & Steffens, K. 2000. Helping in-dividuals or group members? The role of individual and collective identification in AIDS volunteerism. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 4: 497-506.
89. Smith, N., Smith, V., & Verner, M. 2006. Do women in top management affect firm performance? A panel study of 2500 Danish firms. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 55: 569-593.
90. Sobel, M. E. 1982. Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equations. In S. Lein-hardt (Ed.), Sociological methodology: 290-312. Washington: American Sociological Association.
91. Son Hing, L. S., Bobocel, D. R., & Zanna, M. P. 2002. Meritocracy and opposition to affirmative action: Making concessions in the face of discrimination. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83: 493-509.
92. Srull, T. K., & Wyer, R. S., Jr. 1989. Person memory and judgment. Psychological Review, 96: 58-83.
93. Stevens, J. M., Steensma, H. K., Harrison, D. A., & Coch-ran, P. L. 2005. Symbolic or substantive document? The influence of ethics codes on financial execu-tives' decisions. Strategic Management Journal, 26: 181-195.
94. Stürmer, S., Snyder, M., Kropp, A., & Siem, B. 2006. Empathy-motivated helping: The moderating role of group membership. Personality and Social Psy-chology Bulletin, 32: 943-956.
95. Stürmer, S., Snyder, M., & Omoto, A. M. 2005. Prosocial emotions and helping: The moderating role of group membership. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88: 532-546.
96. Terjesen, S., Sealy, R., & Singh, V. 2009. Women direc-tors on corporate boards: A review and research agenda. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 17: 320-337.
97. Tihanyi, L., Johnson, R. A., Hoskisson, R. E., & Hitt, M. A. 2003. Institutional ownership differences and inter-national diversification: The effects of boards of di-rectors and technological opportunity. Academy of Management Journal, 46: 195-211.
98. Underhill, C. M. 2006. The effectiveness of mentoring programs in corporate settings: A meta-analytical re-view of the literature. Journal of Vocational Behav-ior, 68: 292-307.
99. Useem, M. 1984. The inner circle. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
100. Useem, M., & Karabel, J. 1986. Pathways to top corporate management. American Sociological Review, 51: 184-200.
101. Verkuyten, M., Drabbles, M., & van den Nieuwenhuijzen, K. 1999. Self-categorization and emotional reactions to ethnic minorities. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29: 605-620.
102. Webb, E. J., Campbell, D. T., Schwartz, R. D., & Sechrest, L. 1966. Unobtrusive measures: Non-reactive re-search in the social sciences. Chicago: Rand Mc-Nally.
103. Wellington, S., & Spence, B. 2001. Be your own mentor: Strategies from top women on secrets to success. New York: Random House.
104. Westphal, J. D. 1999. Collaboration in the boardroom: Behavioral and performance consequences of CEO-board social ties. Academy of Management Jour-nal, 42: 7-24.
105. Westphal, J. D., & Khanna, P. 2003. Keeping directors in line: Social distancing as a control mechanism in the corporate elite. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48: 361-398.
106. Westphal, J. D., & Stern, I. 2006. The other pathway to the boardroom: Interpersonal influence behavior as a substitute for elite credentials and majority status in obtaining board appointments. Administrative Sci-ence Quarterly, 51: 169-204.
107. Westphal, J. D., & Stern, I. 2007. Flattery will get you everywhere (especially if you are a male Caucasian): How ingratiation, boardroom behavior, and demo-graphic minority status affect additional board ap-pointments at U.S. companies. Academy of Man-agement Journal, 50: 267-288.
108. Yzerbyt, V., & Demoulin, S. 2010. Intergroup relations. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (5th ed.), vol. 2: 1084-1121. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
109. Zahra, S. A., & Stanton, W. W. 1988. The implications of board of directors' composition for corporate strat-egy and performance. International Journal of Man-agement, 5: 229-236.
110. Zelechowski, D., & Bilimoria, D. 2004. Characteristics of women and men corporate inside directors in the U.S. Corporate Governance: An International Re-view, 12: 337-342.
111. Zweigenhaft, R. L., & Domhoff, G. W. 2003. Blacks in the white elite: Will the progress continue? New York: Rowman & Littlefield.
112. Zweigenhaft, R. L., & Domhoff, G. W. 2006. Diversity in the power elite: How it happened, why it matters. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.