Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Strategic and Regulatory Approaches to Increasing Women in Leadership: Multilevel Targets and Mandatory Quotas as Levers for Cultural Change

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

While substantial evidence is emerging internationally of positive increases in the participation of women on company boards, there is less evidence of any significant change in the proportion of women in senior executive ranks. This paper describes evidence of positive changes in the number of women on boards in Australia. Unfortunately these changes are not mirrored in the senior executive ranks where the proportion of women remains consistently low. We explore some of the reasons for these disproportionate changes and examine the likely effect of the recent amendments to the Australian stock exchange’s corporate governance code designed to improve gender diversity both on boards and throughout organisations. Based on the early corporate response to these regulatory changes, it is interesting to consider whether Australia’s approach in promoting voluntary self-regulation at the corporate level may be as effective in the long run as the emerging trend in Europe to apply legislated quotas for female corporate board representation. Interview evidence is presented suggesting that the primary reasons for the lack of women in leadership are not simply lack of opportunity at the apex of the corporation, but issues at mid-management level that are unlikely to be resolved by mandatory board quotas. In some circumstances carefully monitored voluntary targets may be more effective at promoting cultural and strategic change at the heart of the corporation. In summary, mandatory quotas (set through hard law usually with sanctions for noncompliance) may achieve early and significant results in terms of female board representation. However, voluntary targets for women’s participation on boards and in executive ranks (proposed in soft regulation such as corporate governance codes and set as part of corporate strategy) may promote more effective cultural and practical change in support of greater representation of women in leadership.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Accuracy is limited when it comes to the figures on senior executives because there is no formal definition of ‘senior executive’ against which Australian companies must report. Catalyst defines ‘executive management team’ as the most senior person in the organisation (e.g. CEO or MD) and those who report directly to that person. However, since 2010 the Australian Census has also used the definition of ‘key management personnel’ used in companies remuneration reports and defined by Australian accounting standards as ‘persons having authority and responsibility for planning, directing and controlling the activities of the entity’ (EOWA 2012, p. 23).

  2. The proposed 3rd edition of the ASX Principles of Corporate Governance, under review at the time of writing, will amalgamate the three diversity recommendations and re-number as recommendation 1.5.

  3. Some of these companies may have also introduced numerical targets.

  4. For example, two companies had been dealing with a major acquisition or sale.

References

  • Adams, R. B., & Ferreira, D. (2009). Women in the boardroom and their impact on governance and performance. Journal of Financial Economics, 94(2), 291–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adams, R. B., & Funk, P. (2012). Beyond the glass ceiling: Does gender matter? Management Science, 58(2), 219–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aguilera, R. V., Rupp, D. E., Williams, C. A., & Ganapathi, J. (2007). Putting the S back in corporate social responsibility: A multilevel theory of social change in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 836–863.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • AHRC Australian Human Rights Commission. (2013). Accelerating the advancement of women in leadership: Listening, Learning, Leading Male Champions of Change 2013 available at http://www.humanrights.gov.au/male-champions-change. Last Accessed 11 November 2013.

  • AICD Australian Institute of Company Directors. (2013). Board diversity statistics. http://www.companydirectors.com.au/Director-Resource-Centre/Governance-and-Director-Issues/Board-Diversity/Statistics. Accessed 25 June 2013.

  • ASX. (2010). Corporate Governance Principles and Recommendations with 2010 Amendments (2nd ed.). Australian Securities Exchange Corporate Governance Council

  • Australian Bureau of Statistics. (1998). 4102.0—Australian social trends.

  • Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2012). 6105.0—Australian labour market statistics.

  • Australian Government, Equal Opportunity for Women in the Workplace Agency. (2012). 2012 Australian census of women in leadership.

  • Australian Government, Workplace Gender Equality Agency. (2013). How to set gender diversity targets: Guidelines for setting and meeting targets to increase gender diversity in the workplace.

  • Baldez, L. (2006). The pros and cons of gender quota laws: What happens when you kick men out and let women in? Politics & Gender, 2(01), 102–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baldwin, R., Cave, M., & Lodge, M. (2010). The Oxford handbook of regulation. Oxford: OUP.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bate, S. P. (1994). Strategies for cultural change. Oxford: Elsevier Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • BBC. (2012) EU defends women-on-boards plans. 14 November 2012. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-20322317. Accessed 26 June 2013.

  • BCA. (2013). Increasing the number of women in senior executive positions: Improving recruitment, selection and retention practices’ November 2013 available at http://www.bca.com.au/publications/increasing-the-number-of-women-in-senior-executive-positions. Last Accessed 11 November 2013.

  • Becker, H. S. (1982). Culture: A sociological view. The Yale Review, 71, 513.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beninger, A., & Carter, N. M. (2013). The great debate: Flexibility vs face time: Busting the myths behind flexible work arrangements’ catalyst 2013.

  • Black, J. (2001). Decentring regulation: Understanding the role of regulation and self-regulation in a “Post-Regulatory” world. Current Legal Problems, 54(1), 103–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blackrock. (2012). Glacial change in diversity at ASX 200 companies: Can Australia escape the imposition of diversity quotas?. Australia: Blackrock.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boardroom Partners and UTS Centre for Corporate Governance. (2010). International colloquium on diversity on boards. NSW State Library, February 2010.

  • Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2006). Qualitative research in education: An introduction to theory and methods. Allyn & Bacon

  • Braithwaite, J. (2002). Rules and principles: A theory of legal certainty. Austl. J. Leg. Phil., 27, 47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braithwaite, J. (2008). Regulatory capitalism. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Braithwaite, J. (2012). Flipping markets to virtue with qui tam and restorative justice. Accounting, Organizations and Society, Published Online.

  • Braithwaite, J. (2013) Cultures of redemptive finance. In J. O’Brien & G. Gilligan (Eds.), Integrity, risk and accountability in capital markets: Regulating culture. Oxford: Oxford Hart Publishing.

  • Bryan, E. (2013). UTS Centre for Corporate Governance UTSpeaks: Women at the summit. University of Technology Sydney Great Hall, March 2013. http://cfsites1.uts.edu.au/ccg/news-events/news-detail.cfm?ItemId=34164. Accessed 25 June 2013.

  • Burnes, B. (1996). No such thing as… a “one best way” to manage organizational change. Management Decision, 34(10), 11–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burnes, B. (2005). Complexity theories and organizational change. International Journal of Management Reviews, 7(2), 73–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carter, D. A., D’Souza, F., Simkins, B. J., & Simpson, W. G. (2010). The gender and ethnic diversity of US boards and board committees and firm financial performance. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 18(5), 396–414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carter, D. A., Simkins, B. J., & Simpson, W. G. (2003). Corporate governance, board diversity, and firm value. Financial Review, 38(1), 33–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Catalyst. (2010). 2010 catalyst census: Fortune 500 women executive officers and top earners. http://www.catalyst.org/knowledge/2010-catalyst-census-fortune-500-women-executives-and-top-earners. Accessed 25 June 2013.

  • Catalyst. (2012). 2012 catalyst census: Fortune 500 women executive officers and top earners. http://www.catalyst.org/knowledge/2012-catalyst-census-fortune-500-women-executive-officers-and-top-earners. Accessed 25 June 2013.

  • Catalyst. (2013a). Women on boards quick take. http://www.catalyst.org/knowledge/women-boards. Accessed 4 June 2013.

  • Catalyst. (2013b). Women CEOs and heads of the financial post 500. http://www.catalyst.org/knowledge/women-ceos-and-heads-financial-post-500. Accessed 4 June 2013.

  • CEDA. (2013). Women in Leadership: Understanding the gender gap, June 2013 Committee for economic development of Australia.

  • Chandler, A. (1962). Strategy and structure. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Child, J. (1972). Organizational structure, environment and performance: The role of strategic choice. Sociology, 6, 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Child, J. (1997). Strategic choice in the analysis of action. Structure, Organisations and Environment: Retrospect and Prospect, Organization Studies, 18(1), 43–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, T. (2007). The evolution of directors duties: Bridging the divide between corporate governance and corporate social responsibility. Journal of General Management, 32(3):1–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, T., & Monkhouse, E. (1995). Repensando A Empresa. Sao Paulo: Pioneira.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, B. W. (2007) Tackling unconscious bias in hiring practices: The plight of the Rooney rule. New York University Law Review 82, 870–912.

    Google Scholar 

  • Committee for Economic Development. (2012). Fulfilling the promise: How more women on corporate boards would make America and American companies more competitive. Statement by the Policy and Impact Committee of the Committee for Economic Development, Washington DC.

  • COAG Reform Council. (2013). Tracking equity: Comparing outcomes for women and girls across Australia, 21 October 2013.

  • Credit Suisse. (2012) Research Institute ‘Gender diversity and corporate performance’ August 2012.

  • Daft, R. L. (1978). A dual-core model of organizational innovation. Academy of Management Journal, 21(2), 193–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daily, C. M., Certo, S. T., & Dalton, D. R. (1999). Research notes and communications a decade of corporate women: Some progress in the boardroom, none in the executive suite. Strategic Management Journal, 20(1), 93–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daley, J., McGannon, C., & Ginnivan, L. (2012). Game-changers: Economic reform priorities for Australia. Melbourne: Grattan Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davies, E. M. (2011). Women on boards. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/31480/11-745-women-on-boards.pdf. Accessed 25 June 2013.

  • ecoDa. (2013). ecoDa’s position paper on the proposal for a Directive on improving the gender balance among non-executive directors of companies listed on stock exchanges and related measures. European Confederation of Directors’ Associations, 24 June 2013. http://www.zdruzenje-ns.si/db/doc/upl/pp___2013_06_final_redings_directive___june_2013.pdf.

  • European Union. (2012a).Women in economic decision-making in the EU: Progress Report. http://ec.europa.eu/justice/gender-equality/files/women-on-boards_en.pdf. Accessed 25 June 2013.

  • European Union. (2012b). Proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on improving the gender balance among non-executive directors of companies listed on stock exchanges and related measures. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2012:0614:FIN:en:PDF. Accessed 25 June 2013.

  • European Women’s Lobby. (2012). Women on boards in Europe: From a snail’s pace to a giant leap? EWL Report on Progress, Gaps and Good Practice. http://www.womenlobby.org/spip.php?action=acceder_document&arg=1414&cle=c2d993373741245ae62ff99905e3030f497cf139&file=pdf%2Fewl_report_women_on_boards_in_europe_27_february-2.pdf&lang=en. Accessed 25 June 2013.

  • Fairfax, L. M. (2006). Clogs in the pipeline: The mixed data on women directors and continued barriers to their advancement. Md. L. Rev., 65, 579.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fox, J. (2013). UTS Centre for Corporate Governance UTSpeaks: Women at the summit. University of Technology Sydney Great Hall, March 2013. http://cfsites1.uts.edu.au/ccg/news-events/news-detail.cfm?ItemId=34164. Accessed 25 June 2013.

  • Gladman, K., & Lamb, M. (2013). GMI ratings’ 2013 women on boards survey, April 2013. http://www3.gmiratings.com/home/2013/05/gmi-ratings-2013-women-on-boards-survey/. Accessed 25 June 2013.

  • Goldman Sachs & JBWere. (2009). Australia’s hidden resource: The economic case for increasing female participation. http://www.womenonboards.org.au/pubs/reports/091130gsjbw.pdf. Accessed 26 June 2013.

  • Gouldner, A. W. (1955). Metaphysical pathos and the theory of bureaucracy (pp. 496–507). XLIX: American Political Science Review.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gundlach, S., & Sammartino, A. (2013). Australia’s underestimated resource: Women doing business globally. Women in Global Business and University of Melbourne.

  • Hall, P., & Soskice, D. (2001) Varieties of capitalism: The institutional foundations of comparative advantage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Hefferman, M. (2013). ‘Hardwiring’ helps close gender gap. Morning Herald, 10 June 2013. http://www.smh.com.au/business/hardwiring-helps-close-gender-gap-20130609-2ny2r.html. Accessed 25 June 2013.

  • Helfat, C. E., Harris, D., & Wolfson, P. J. (2006). The pipeline to the top: Women and men in the top executive ranks of US corporations. The Academy of Management Perspectives, 20(4), 42–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herbert Smith Freehills. (2012). Corporate and employment law E-Bulletin: EU Commission publishes draft directive on board gender diversity.

  • Holgate, C. (2013). UTS Centre for Corporate Governance UTSpeaks: Women at the summit. University of Technology Sydney Great Hall, March 2013. http://cfsites1.uts.edu.au/ccg/news-events/news-detail.cfm?ItemId=34164. Accessed 25 June 2013.

  • Huse, M., Nielsen, S. T., & Hagen, I. M. (2009). Women and employee-elected board members and their contributions to board control tasks. Journal of Business Ethics, 89(4), 581–597.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huse, M., & Solberg, A. G. (2006). Gender-related boardroom dynamics: How Scandinavian women make and can make contributions on corporate boards. Women in Management Review, 21(2), 113–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, A. A., & Lenox, M. J. (2000). Industry self-regulation without sanctions: The chemical industry’s responsible care program. Academy of Management Journal, 43(4), 598–716.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klettner, A., Clarke, T., & Boersma, M. (2012). The governance of corporate sustainability: Empirical insights into the development, leadership and implementation of responsible business strategy. Journal of Business Ethics, 1–21.

  • Konrad, A. M., Kramer, V., & Erkut, S. (2008). Critical mass: The impact of three or more women on corporate boards. Organizational Dynamics, 37(2), 145–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kremer, M. (2007). How welfare states care: Culture. Gender and Parenting in Europe: Amsterdam University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • KPMG, Australian Stock Exchange. (2012). ASX corporate governance council principles and recommendations on diversity: Analysis of 31 December 2011 year end disclosures. http://www.asxgroup.com.au/media/asx_diversity_report.pdf. Accessed 26 June 2013.

  • Lewis, J. (1992). Gender and development of welfare regimes. Journal of European Social Policy, 3, 159–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, S. (1997). ‘Family Friendly’ employment policies: A route to changing organizational culture or playing about at the margins? Gender Work and Organization, 4(1), 13–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, S. (2001). Restructuring workplace cultures: The ultimate work-family challenge? Women in Management Review, 16(1), 21–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lodge, M., & Hood. C. (2010) Regulation inside government: Retro-theory vindicated or outdated? In R. Baldwin, M. Cave, & M. Lodge (2010) The Oxford handbook of regulation (pp. 590–612). Oxford: OUP.

  • Luckerath-Rovers, M. (2013). Women on boards and firm performance. Journal of Management and Governance, 17, 491–509.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lyness, K. S., & Thompson, D. E. (2000). Climbing the corporate ladder: Do female and male executives follow the same route? Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(1), 86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Machold, S., Huse, M., Hansen, K., & Brogi, M. (2013). Getting women on to corporate boards: A snowball starting in Norway. London: Edward Elgar.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Majumdar, S. K., & Marcus, A. A. (2001). Rules versus discretion: The productivity consequences of flexible regulation. Academy of Management Journal, 44(1), 170–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy, W. (2013). Childcare maze needs a productivity commission fix. Australian Financial Review, 12 June 2013. http://www.afr.com/p/opinion/childcare_maze_needs_productivity_CKb0u4e3CvamRzTuqunxuN. Accessed 25 June 2013.

  • McInerney-Lacombe, N., Bilimoria, D., & Salipante, P. F. (2009). Championing the discussion of tough issues: How women corporate directors contribute to board deliberations. In S. Vinnicombe, V. Singh, R. J. Burke, D. Billimoria, & M. Huse (Eds.), Women on corporate boards of directors. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKinsey & Company. (2007). Women matter: Gender diversity. A corporate performance driver. http://www.europeanpwn.net/files/mckinsey_2007_gender_matters.pdf. Accessed 26 June 2013.

  • McKinsey & Company. (2008). Women matter 2: Female leadership a competitive edge for the future.

  • McNulty, T., Zattoni, A., & Douglas, T. (2013). Developing corporate governance research through qualitative methods: A review of previous studies. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 21(2), 183–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyerson, D., & Martin, J. (1987). Cultural change: An integration of three different views. Journal of Management Studies, 24(6), 623–647.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen, S., & Huse, M. (2010). The contribution of women on boards of directors: Going beyond the surface. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 18(2), 136–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olsen, A. (2012). The gender agenda: Gender differences in Australian higher education. Strategy, Policy and Research in Education available at http://www.spre.com.au/download/SPREGenderAgenda2012.pdf.

  • Pegrum, D. F. (1965). Public regulation of business. Illinois: Richard Irwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perlow, L. A. (2012). Sleeping with your Smartphone: How to break the 24/7 habit and change the way you work. Harvard Business School Publishing.

  • Peters, K. R. M., & Haslam, A. (2010). Achieving the possible: Ambition and the under-representation of women surgeons. University of Exeter, Unpublished presentation cited in Sealy and Vinnicombe (2012) at 330.

  • Pfau-Effinger, B. (2004). Development of culture. Aldershot, Ashgate: Welfare States and Women’s Employment in Europe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Piderit, S. K. (2000). Rethinking resistance and recognizing ambivalence—A multidimensional view of attitudes toward an organizational change. Academy of Management Review, 25(4), 783–794.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ragins, B. R., Townsend, B., & Mattis, M. (1998). Gender gap in the executive suite: CEOs and female executives report on breaking the glass ceiling. The Academy of Management Executive, 12(1), 28–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rindfleish, J., & Sheridan, A. (2003). No change from within: Senior women managers’ response to gendered organizational structures. Women in Management Review, 18(6), 299–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rost, K., & Osterloh, M. (2010). Opening the black box of upper echelons: Drivers of poor information processing during the financial crisis. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 18(3), 212–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schein, E. H. (1983). The role of the founder in creating organizational culture. Organizational Dynamics, 12, 13–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sealy, R. H., & Singh, V. (2010). The importance of role models and demographic context for senior women’s work identity development. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(3), 284–300.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sealy, R., & Vinnicombe, S. (2012). Women and the governance of corporate boards. In T. Clarke & D. Branson (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of corporate governance. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sealy, R., & Vinnicombe, S. (2013). The Female FTSE Board Report 2013: False Dawn of Progress for Women on Boards. Cranfield University School of Management.

  • Seel, R. (2000). Culture and complexity—New insights on organisational change. Organisations & People, 7(2), 2–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seierstad, C., & Opsahl, T. (2011). For the few not the many? The effects of affirmative action on presence, prominence, and social capital of women directors in Norway. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 27(1), 44–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shah S. K., & Corley K. G. (2006) Building better theory by bridging the quantitative-qualitative divide. Journal of Management Studies 43(8), 1821–1835.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shepherd, T. (2013) Letter to Business Council of Australia member CEOs: Improving recruitment, retention and promotional opportunities for women Business Council of Australia, 4 November 2013, available at http://www.bca.com.au/publications/increasing-the-number-of-women-in-senior-executive-positions. (Last Accessed 11 November 2013) referring to BCA (2013a) ‘Action Plan for Enduring Prosperity’, Business Council of Australia July 2013.

  • Siim, B. (2000). Gender and citizenship. Politics, and agency in France, Britain and Denmark. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Singh V., Vinnicombe, S., & Kumra, S. (2006) Women in formal corporate networks: an organisational citizenship perspective. Women in Management Review 21(6), 458–482.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slaughter, A. M. (2012). Why women still can’t have it all. July/August: The Atlantic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spender, P. (2012). Gender diversity on boards in Australia—Waiting for the great leap forward? Australian Journal of Corporate Law, 27, 22–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steibler, N., & Haas, B. (2012). Advances in explaining women’s employment patters. Socio-Economic Review, 10, 343–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Storvik, A., & Teigen, M. (2010). Woman on board: The Norwegian experience. Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, Internat. Policy Analysis.

  • Teasdale, N., Fagan, C., & Shepherd, C. (2012). Women’s representation on the boards of UK-listed companies. In M. Fagan C Gonzalez & S. Gomez-Anson (Eds.), Women on corporate boards and in top management: European trends and policy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teigen, M. (2012a). Gender quotas for corporate boards in Norway: Innovative gender equality policy. In: C. Fagan, M. C. González Menéndez, & S. Gómez Anson (Eds.) Women on corporate boards and in top management: European trends and policy. (pp. 70–90). Chippenham: Palgrave-MacMillan.

  • Teigen, M. (2012b), Chapter 4 gender quotas on corporate boards: On the diffusion of a distinct national policy reform. In F. Engelstad & M. Teigen (Eds.), Firms, boards and gender quotas: comparative perspectives (Comparative Social Research, Volume 29) (pp. 115–146). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

  • Terjesen, S. A., Aguilera, R. V., & Lorenz R. Legislating a woman’s seat on the board: Institutional factors driving gender quotas for boards of directors. Journal of Business Ethics (2013). Available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2327576.

  • Terjesen, S., Sealy, R., & Singh, V. (2009). Women directors on corporate boards: A review and research. Agenda Corporate Governance: An International Review, 17(3), 320–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thorburn, K. (2013). The EU directive for gender balanced boards: What does the research say? Norwegian School of Economics, SNS Research Seminar 20 March 2013. http://www.sns.se/sites/default/files/karin_thorburns_presentation.pdf.

  • Todnem, R. (2005). Organisational change management: A critical review. Journal of Change Management, 5(4), 369–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torchia, M., Calabrò, A., & Huse, M. (2011). Women directors on corporate boards: From tokenism to critical mass. Journal of Business Ethics, 102(2), 299–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Ness, R. K., Miesing, P., & Kang, J. (2009). Understanding governance and corporate boards: Is theory a problem? European Journal of Management, 7(9), 186–199.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, M., & Kelan, E. (2013). The gender quota and female leadership: Effects of the Norwegian gender quota on board chairs and CEOs. Journal of Business Ethics, 117, 449–466.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wheland, J., & Wood, R. (2012). Targets and quotas for women in leadership: A global review of policy, practice and psychological research. Gender Equality Project, Centre for Ethical Leadership, Melbourne Business School.

  • Williams, J. C. (2004). Hitting the maternal wall. Academe, 90(6), 16–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Corporate Governance, University of Technology, Sydney, City Campus, PO Box 123, Broadway, NSW, 2007, Australia

    Alice Klettner, Thomas Clarke & Martijn Boersma

Authors
  1. Alice Klettner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Thomas Clarke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Martijn Boersma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alice Klettner.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Klettner, A., Clarke, T. & Boersma, M. Strategic and Regulatory Approaches to Increasing Women in Leadership: Multilevel Targets and Mandatory Quotas as Levers for Cultural Change. J Bus Ethics 133, 395–419 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2069-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2069-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation