The link between female representation in the boards of directors and corporate social responsibility: Evidence from B corps
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Prior studies have examined the link between female representation in the boards of directors (BoD) and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). However, these studies have underestimated the multidimensional nature of CSR, whereby CSR comprises different dimensions, and organizations engage in CSR activities in various degrees, thus leading to potentially contrasting performance respect to such different dimensions. Therefore, this study aims at (a) elucidating the varying mechanisms underlying the effects of the presence of women on BoD and several dimensions of CSR performance and (b) testing these effects considering multiple CSR performance measures (i.e., environmental performance, employees' well‐being, customers' management, community engagement, and ethical governance). To do so, we propose a set of hypotheses based on upper echelon and social role theories that are tested on a sample of European and US certified Benefit Corporations (B Corps). Results reveal that female representation in the BoD is not beneficial for each specific CSR dimension, albeit it is beneficial at an aggregate level. Specifically, it is positively associated with customers' management and community engagement, negatively related to environmental performance and employees' well‐being, and not significantly associated with ethical governance.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it