MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413766899 · doi:10.1002/bse.70156

Impact of Female Executive Power on Corporate ESG Performance: The Mediating Role of Managerial Self‐Interest

2025· article· en· W4413766899 on OpenAlexaff
Xu Wang, Hanhan Han, Mengfei Zhao, Shengliang Deng

Bibliographic record

VenueBusiness Strategy and the Environment · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Diversity and Inequality
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessPower (physics)Executive powerAccountingPolitical sciencePolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The significance of the responsibility fulfillment capability for environmental, social, and governance (ESG) is increasing, with ESG performance becoming increasingly pivotal for firms seeking to bolster their competitive edge. This study empirically examines the correlation and mechanism between female executive power and corporate ESG performance, using regression analysis to focus on A‐share listed firms from 2012 to 2022. The results demonstrate that female executive power has a positive correlation with corporate ESG and ES performance. This positive correlation is ascribed to the mechanism by which female executive power diminishes managerial self‐interest and improves corporate ESG and ES performance. Furthermore, corporate digital transformation and regional digital finance development have a positive moderating effect on this relationship. This study expands prior scholarship on the determinants of corporate ESG performance by investigating the impact of executive gender diversity. Moreover, it elucidates how female executive power influences corporate ESG performance. These findings provide empirical evidence and theoretical insights for firms seeking to enhance their ESG performance for sustainable development.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.564
Threshold uncertainty score0.249

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.045
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.214 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBusiness Strategy and the EnvironmentSame topicGender Diversity and InequalityFrench-language works237,207