Does leadership gender diversity drive corporate social responsibility and organizational outcomes? The role of organization size
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
Corporate scandals, environmental damages, and employment conditions have highlighted the importance of corporate social responsibility (CSR). However, little is known about (1) the simultaneous effects of board and top management team (TMT) gender diversity on CSR, (2) the mediating role of CSR between leadership (board/TM) gender diversity and organizational outcomes, and (3) the above-noted effects vary between large versus small organizations. Drawn from social role theory, we test our hypotheses using multisource time-lagged data from 248 organizations. The results indicate that both board and TMT gender diversity are positively associated with CSR. Moreover, CSR had a positive effect on both perceived organizational performance and employee productivity, with CSR also mediating the relationship between board gender diversity and perceived organizational performance. The findings also show the moderating effect of organization size on the CSR–organizational outcomes relationship. Our results refine (differential effects of gender diversity on CSR depending on the role), extend (some unprecedented effects were found for perceived organizational performance and employee productivity), and qualify (effects were significant for large organizations) social role theory. Our research addresses the above-noted knowledge gaps and informs the contextual leadership gender diversity practice for improved CSR and organizational outcomes. JEL Classification: M12, M14
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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