Do women in the boardroom influence foreign acquisitions' premium and outcomes? Evidence from China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper examines whether gender diversity influences foreign merger and acquisition (M&A) premiums and outcomes in China. Consistent with agency and resource dependence theories, we find that female directors significantly reduce the acquisition premium paid for foreign targets. We show that the market responds positively in the short‐term (measured by cumulative abnormal returns) to the announcement of foreign acquisitions by firms with greater female representation in the boardroom. We further find significant evidence that acquirers' boards comprising more female directors experience value creation and better operating synergies (measured by buy‐and‐hold abnormal returns and changes in return on assets) in the long‐term following engagement in foreign M&A deals. Interestingly, after distinguishing between female independent and executive directors, we find that our previous finding on board gender diversity can be attributable to both the monitoring (independent directors) and supervisory (executive directors) roles played by female directors. We also find evidence accords with the argument of the critical mass of female directors' representation in the boardroom. Our results are robust after controlling for endogeneity issues using instrumental variables (IV), propensity score matching (PSM), Heckman, and firm fixed‐effects methods. Overall, our findings offer additional empirical support for the global concern by regulators for improving corporate governance practices by increasing female quotas in the boardroom.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".