Influence of Women in Leadership on Gender‐Equality, Work–Life, and Domestic Violence Coping Practices: The Role of Chief Executive Officer Gender
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 Achieving gender equality continues to pose a persistent challenge in contemporary workplaces, as indicated by the slow rate of progress and predictions that achieving gender equality may take a century. Responding to calls for a deeper understanding of how women's leadership influences organizational outcomes, we draw on social role theory to examine the relationship between women in senior leadership and gender equality management systems (GEMS), which is a comprehensive “bundle” of gender‐equality, work–life, and domestic violence coping practices, in the context of the gender of chief executive officers (CEOs). Utilizing a large‐scale, longitudinal dataset of 6620 Australian organizations spanning 7 years, our panel analyses reveal that having women in senior leadership positively influences work–life practices and domestic violence coping practices. The results also indicate that women in leadership have a positive impact on gender‐equality practices when organizations are led by a female CEO. By showing how women in senior leadership and a supportive female CEO jointly foster broader adoption of GEMS, we extend and refine social role theory. Our findings also provide robust evidence, drawn from a wide range of organizations, that the leadership of women at multiple levels plays a pivotal role in accelerating progress toward workplace gender equality.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it