smh businessday:

Top publicly listed companies that employ more women on their boards make more money, a new study shows, boosting the case for regulations that require big business to set policies to increase gender diversity.

The La Trobe Business School study, which coincides with International Women's Day, examined about 300 of Australia's top 500 listed companies between 2005 and 2011.

Called Board Diversity and Financial Performance in the Top 500 Australian Firms, its findings, which have been published previously in the Australian Accounting Review, represent further evidence of the positive impact increased board diversity is having on Australian companies' financial performance.

The study, by La Trobe Business School head Paul Mather and co-reserachers Dr Alireza Vafaei and Professor Kamran Ahmed, ruled out purely coincidental links between financial performance and women on boards.

"What the study clearly shows is that it's women on boards affecting performance and it's not that better-employing firms are simply employing more women," Professor Mather said.

Workplace Gender Equality Agency data shows women accounted for 43 per cent of new appointments to ASX 200 boards in January 2016. 

But the balance is still far from equal, because 12 per cent of the ASX 200 still do not have a woman on their board.

It's not just boards that are lacking in female representation. Of the 3745 organisations that have key management personnel, 25.1 per cent do not have female staff at that level.

Another study by leadership mentoring firm Mind Group looked at the lack of female chief executives and found that stereotypes about what a chief executive looks like are entrenched. It asked 100 working Australians – half male and half female – aged between 23 and 72 from different industries and organisations what an Australian chief executive looks like.

The result was that 97 per cent pictured a middle-aged male, while only 3 per cent pictured a middle-aged female. Furthermore, 99 per cent pictured their typical chief executive as "white" or "caucasian".

Professor Mather said while firms still had trouble finding women for key roles, more diverse boards resulted in different perspectives that helped produce better decisions. "Aside from the social justice issues, it makes economic sense," he said. 

The motivation for the study followed amendments made to ASX Corporate Governance Principles that require companies to set policies for increasing board diversity.

Since 2011, Australia's top companies have been benchmarking their practices against the ASX recommendations, and if they don't they have to disclose their reasons. The study found that this in itself had led to more women moving on to boards.

But the study was not pushing the case for mandatory quotas. "That's a whole different policy argument," Professor Mather said. "We're simply saying that having more women on boards adds economic value. And how we achieve that, whether it's more of the same policies or by taking a broader route, is a separate debate."

The La Trobe study findings do not apply to smaller companies. Mr Mather said future work could investigate the effect of board diversity and its interaction with various factors such as tenure and expertise on firm performance.

This is not the first time research has shown more women equals more profit. Companies with gender-diverse boards performed an average of 2 per cent better a year than ASX 200 companies, previous Centre for Gender Economics and Innovation and Infinitas Asset Management research found, and more than 7 per cent better a year than companies with no women on their boards.

Really? You putting yourself above others?

Do you like to be fed bread or grain?

Women tend to have an easier time forming relationships.
They tend to be more fluid in relationships.
They (if they are feminine) tend to be very nurturing.
They also tend to be better at verbal communication skills.


All of these skills are very useful to a business, especially the types of businesses we now see which tend to be more about networking, creativity and marketing skills (ie , they are very reliant on relationships and communication).

So, yes, they are welcome on boards .

Not as the commander in chief though Boges.
Not as the CEO.
Strong masculine grounded icey resilient, unflinching qualities are required for that position.

Think of them as perfect for the "best supporting actress' award

bogarde73 wrote on Mar 8^th, 2016 at 9:40am:


And I am guessing there are other studies that conclude the exact opposite. I find it inconceivable that one gender is better at being CEO than another. I find it offensive that in the search for equality, the goal seems to be actually the very opposite, ie the supremacy of women. Would there be a report published that said men made better executives? Of course not. It isn't the 'done thing', even though who knows, it may even be true.

The thing I find offensive (and laughable) about the feminist and womens equality movement is that it is fundamentally a lie. It does not seek equality at all, but rather supremacy and therefore setting the scene for the inevitable backlash from men when they finally tire of being overlooked simply for being men.

What happened to promotion by virtue of performance?

donincognito wrote on Mar 8^th, 2016 at 11:28am:



Talk about destroying your own argument!  THANKS FOR PLAYING!

Yes, I've noticed that the inclusion of women on the boards of BHP, Ford and GM has been a great boon..... though someone has yet to clearly delineate HOW having women on boards actually raises profits.. in isolation.  Could be that the company is simply going through a good time.... will these studies be repeated when things get bad?  What will be the justification then?

I'd say that the profitability or otherwise of a company is more on who is on the board rather than what gender they are.....

I'm with Honky... millions can't put the noodles on the table.. and we have the luxury to discuss a few women on boards....

Sure increases my profitability....