Abstract
The aim of this paper is to examine the relationship between board diversity and firms’ performance. The board of directors is the highest decision-making body responsible for governing an organization on behalf of its shareholders. It performs key functions like strategy formulation, policy development, monitoring, supervising, providing leadership, and accountability. An optimal board composition is crucial for effective corporate governance and is found to have a significant influence on firms’ performance. At the same time, board diversity is reported to have a significant impact on the quality of internal audit. Firms’ performance is defined based on three different dependent variables as reported in the relevant literature. These variables refer to Return on Assets (ROA), Return on Equity (ROE) and Tobin’s Q. Data of 213 listed firms belonging to the retail industry from eight different European countries have been analyzed using correlation analysis and panel data regression. The research results have shown a positive impact of some of the independent variables on the variables referring to firms’ performance. The research results provide useful insights on how firms can benefit from their boards of directors’ diversity.
You have full access to this open access chapter, Download conference paper PDF
Keywords
1 Introduction
Corporate governance concerns the actual behavior of firms, in terms of performance, efficiency, growth, financial structure, treatment of shareholders and other interesting parties and the rules and mechanisms under which firms are operating. Their normative framework is determined by the legal and the judicial system, and the financial and labor markets. Effective corporate governance has positive impact on their profitability, on investment returns through the efficient allocation of resources, on market value, on the creation of wealth and on firms’ contribution to the overall economy [1]. The board of directors is the main institutional mechanism of corporate governance, entrusted with legal obligation by the shareholders, to ensure their interests by taking responsible and accountable strategic decision and improve firm’s organizational value and performance [2, 3]. It is the main monitoring and controlling tool to ensure the reliability of the corporate governance structure and prevent fraud with the audit committee, and the adoption and implementation of audit activities [4, 5]. The composition of the board of directors affects the effectiveness of corporate governance concerning one of its goals, which is the elimination of fraud phenomena [6, 7]. The credibility of financial reporting system depends on the quality of board of directors’ governance [8, 9].
The number of independent directors, its tenure, its size, and its diversity contribute to disciplining and quality management, increase firms’ creativity and innovation and effectively solve problems [10]. Board diversity, as a variety of composition, includes race, nationality, ethnic backgrounds, gender, age, educational, functional, and occupational backgrounds, industry experience and organizational membership, and reflects society [11]. A greater diversity is company’s competitive advantage since it enhances information resources, a better understanding of the marketplace, and broadens the cognitive and behavioral range of the board [12, 13]. Differences in opinions, approaches and oversight perspectives encourage critical thinking, bring new ideas and interaction styles, and improve decision making process. Diversity creates more open communication environment and in combination of different qualification background, reduces both financial and nonfinancial information gap [14]. The integration of directors with different characteristics is the key to improve form’s performance [15]. Heterogeneous board including people with different demographic characteristics reduce the corporate risk in an uncertain environment by encouraging its monitoring and advisory role [16].
The aim of this study is to examine the effect of firm board diversity on firm performance. To do so, data from European firms operating in the retail industry are analyzed.
2 Literature Review
The board of directors are in charge of corporate governance and monitoring, and its characteristics including the influence of board gender diversity on corporate behaviors, affects firm performance [17], financial statements, and corporate risk, respectively [18]. Heterogeneous boards provide mitigation of conflict of interests between shareholders and managers, curtail the agency problem, raise organizational credibility, and eliminate the fraudulent activities [19].
The percentage of independent and non-executive directors in board of directors determine the likelihood of fraudulent activities [20]. The more independent members participate in the board, the greater its objectivity in decisions making process.
The role of female directors in board effectiveness is crucial since it broadens board’s perspective and differentiates its decision-making attitude. Women present different viewpoints and persist in well-informed decisions which are important for effective oversight [21]. They tend to closely supervise audit activities and seek to implement accountable procedures and practices. The are more likely to provide constructive criticism and independent thinking and to join monitoring committees charged with credible and transparent reporting [22]. Their decisions are more moderate, without much risk, risk-averse and less tolerant of self-interested and opportunistic behavior than men [23]. During their management, an improvement in the quality of the financial statements and an increase in the profits of the firms is observed [24]. Their business judgments are more ethical due to their higher ethical standards which strengthen the motivation of obeying the financial statement rules [25]. Gender representation improves board performance as well as corporate accounting and financial performance since women presence reduce accounting fraud and accounting conservatism increases significantly [26]. Higher rate of fraud detection is related to female leaders since they contribute significantly to reduce firms’ propensity to engage in fraud. Gender diversity improves financial reporting quality. Firms have better performance and superior governance quality with more female corporate leaders [17].
Age diversity is associated with working experience, impacts the process and the quality of decision making, and has effects on firms’ profitability. On the one hand, it improves the resources, knowledge, and networks of the board and on the other hand, it may suffer from cognitive conflicts and lower group cohesion [26]. Age is one of the characteristics that influence individual decisions, including risk taking behavior and commitment of fraudulent activities [27]. Maturity determines the level of prudence and conservative attitude and enhances the quality of the financial statements reported and improves market performance. Older mangers tend to be more conservative and more cautious. Young managers make riskier decisions, they are more creative with a greater risk appetite, and they are more likely to manipulate earnings and committee corporate financial fraud. The older executive age prefers lower risk due to the threat to financial security and is associated more to moral development and accurate diagnosis of information for decisions [28].
Based on the above analysis, the effect of board diversity on firms’ performance becomes obvious.
3 Research Methodology
To achieve the aim of this study the Refinitiv Eikon database, which includes financial analyzes from the global economy of listed firms [29] was analyzed. More specifically, the research sample consists of 213 listed firms belonging to the retail industry. This database was chosen as it covers almost 99% of the market capitalization and is therefore considered one of the most reliable. It includes data from 72,000 listed firms from around the world with quarterly and annual figures.
Finally, a random sample of 8 European countries was taken. The country from which most firms originate is Belgium (16%) and the country from which the fewest originate is Italy (9%). The size of 213 firms was selected based on the analysis of Saunders et al. [30] referring to the definition of a representative sample. Thus, the sample is considered as representative.
The collected data were analyzed using correlation analysis and panel data regression. The level of significance is set to 5%.
Firms’ performance is measured using three different variables: ROA, ROE, and Tobin’s Q. The variables of the research are presented in the following Table 1.
4 Research Results
4.1 Correlation Analysis
To identify possible correlations between the examined variables, Pearson’s correlation coefficient is used.
Based on the following figure we obtain that ROA is positively correlated with gender diversity and board size, ROE is positively correlated with age profile and board size, while Tobin’s Q. However, all the above mentioned statistically significant correlations are found to be weak (Fig. 1).
4.2 Panel Data Regression Analysis
Three different panel data regression models are developed: one for each of the dependent variables.
Initially, Hausman’s test is used, to decide which model between the fixed effects and the random effects is more suitable [31]. In all the examined cased, the p-value of the test is lower than the level of significance. Thus, the test’s null hypothesis cannot be accepted, meaning that the fixed effects model is the proper model to be used.
The first model examines ROA as the dependent variable. Based on the results of the following table we obtain that age profile and board size positively affect profitability when defined using ROA ratio (Table 2).
The second model examines ROE as the dependent variable. Based on the results of the following table we obtain that, as in the case of ROA, age profile and board size positively affect profitability when defined using ROE ratio (Table 3).
Last, the third model examines Tobin’s Q as the dependent variable. Based on the results of the following table we obtain that also in this case, age profile and board size positively affect profitability when defined using Tobin’s Q ratio (Table 4).
5 Discussion and Conclusion
The nexus of board diversity and internal audit can play a significant role in a firm’s performance. The aim of this paper was to examine the relationship between board diversity and firms’ performance through the case of European firms operating in retail industry.
In summary, our research findings suggest that the age profile of board members and the size of the board have consistent and meaningful impacts on the financial metrics we examined. Gender diversity, on the other hand, does not appear to exhibit a strong correlation with these financial measures in this specific context. These insights provide valuable considerations for businesses and stakeholders aiming to optimize their financial performance and market valuation.
Despite the fact the regression models did not reveal an effect of gender diversity on firms’ performance, this effect is reported in several cases of the relevant literature, and it should not be neglected. This relationship can become even more important since the presence of women in the board of directors is found to positively affect the quality of internal audit as well [26].
Referring to the future research directions of the present study, it should be noted that since accounting variables are often influenced by management decisions, the use of stock market indices is important as well. Moreover, research based on the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive in accordance with the European Sustainability Reporting Standards would provide useful results, considering the importance of sustainability in firms’ performance [32, 33].
References
Love I (2010) Corporate governance and performance around the world: What we know and what we don’t. The World Bank Research Observer, 26:43–70. https://doi.org/10.1093/wbro/lkp030
Kang H, Cheng M, Gray S J (2007) Corporate governance and board composition: Diversity and independence of Australian boards. Corporate Governance, 15:194–207. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8683.2007.00554.x
Papagrigoriou A, Kalantonis P, Matsali C, Kaldis P (2021) Modern business activities and firms’ performance: the case of corporate social responsibility, evidence from the Greek listed firms in the Athens Stock Exchange. Modern Economy, 12:429–451. https://doi.org/10.4236/me.2021.122022
Almasria N A (2022) Corporate governance and the quality of audit process: An exploratory analysis considering internal audit, audit committee and board of directors. European Journal of Business and Management Research, 7:78–99. https://doi.org/10.24018/ejbmr.2022.7.1.1210
Xanthopoulou A, Delegos A, Kalantonis P, Arsenos P (2021) Exploring the effect of corporate governance on the audit effort: the case of Greek port authorities. International Journal of Economics and Business Administration (IJEBA), 9:111–129. https://doi.org/10.35808/ijeba/737
Kalantonis P, Schoina S, Kallandranis C (2021) The impact of corporate governance on earnings management: Evidence from Greek listed firms. Corporate Ownership and Control, 18(2):140–153. https://doi.org/10.22495/cocv18i2art11
Kalantonis P, Delegkos, A E, Sotirchou E, Papagrigoriou A (2022) Modern business development and financial reporting: Exploring the effect of corporate governance on the value relevance of accounting information—Evidence from the Greek listed firms. Operational Research, 22:2879–2897. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12351-021-00637-2
Farber D (2005) Restoring trust after fraud: Does corporate governance matter? The Accounting Review, 80:539–561. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr.2005.80.2.539
Balios D, Kalantonis P, Zaroulea T (2022) Corporate governance mechanisms and earnings management. Journal for International Business and Entrepreneurship Development, 14:304–328. https://doi.org/10.1504/JIBED.2022.126950
Carter D A, Simkins B J, Simpson W C (2003) Corporate governance, board diversity and firm value. The Financial Review, 38:33–53. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-6288.00034
Hassan R, Marimuthu M (2016) Corporate governance, board diversity, and firm value: examining large companies using panel data approach. Economics Bulletin, 36:1737–1750
Ferrero-Ferrero I, Fernández-Izquierdo M A, Muñoz-Torres M J (2015) Integrating sustainability into corporate governance: An empirical study on board diversity. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 22:193–207. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1333
Kalantonis P, Kallandranis C, Sotiropoulos M (2021) Leverage and firm performance: new evidence on the role of economic sentiment using accounting information. Journal of Capital Markets Studies, 5:96–107. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCMS-10-2020-0042
Halim N A A, Alias N, Haron N H (2021) The relationship between board diversity, board independence and corporate fraud. Advances in Business Research International Journal, 7:33–55. https://doi.org/10.24191/abrij.v7i1.10108
Erhardt N, Shrader C (2003) Board director diversity and firm financial performance. Corporate Governance an International Review, 11:102–111. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8683.00011
Bhat K U, Chen Y, Jebran K, Memon Z A (2020) Board diversity and corporate risk: evidence from China. Corporate Governance, 20:280–293. https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-01-2019-0001
Wang Y, Yu M, Gao S (2022) Gender diversity and financial statement fraud. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 41:106903. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2021.106903
Li N, Wahid A S (2018) Director tenure diversity and board monitoring effectiveness. Contemporary Accounting Research, 35:1363–1394. https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3846.12332
Ullah I, Zhao Q, Zeb A, Iqbal A, Khan M A (2023) Board diversity and financial reporting quality: evidence from China. Economic Research, 36: 2142812. https://doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2022.2142812
Sharma V D (2004) Board of director characteristics, institutional ownership, and fraud: evidence from Australia. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory, 23(2): 105–117. https://doi.org/10.2308/aud.2004.23.2.105
Adams R B, Ferreira D (2009) Women in the boardroom and their impact on governance and performance. Journal of Financial Economics, 94:291–309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2008.10.007
Krishnan G V, Parsons L M (2008) Getting to the bottom line: An exploration of gender and earnings quality. Journal of Business Ethics, 78:65–76. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-006-9314-z
Maulidi A, Shonhadji N F, Sari R P, Nuswantara D A, Widuri R. (2022). Are female CFOs more ethical to the occurrences of financial reporting fraud? Theoretical and empirical evidence from cross-listed firms in the US. Journal of Financial Crime, in press. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFC-07-2022-0170
Vermeir I, Van Kenhove P. (2007) Gender differences in double standards. Journal of Business Ethics, 81:281–295. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-007-9494-1
Belaounia S, Tao R, Zhao H (2020) Gender equality’s impact on female directors’ efficacy: A multi-country study. International Business Review, 29:101737. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2020.101737
Talavera O, Yin S, Zhang M (2018) Age diversity, directors’ personal values, and bank performance. International Review of Financial Analysis, 55:60–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irfa.2017.10.007
Xu Y, Zhang L, Chen H (2015) Board age and corporate financial fraud: An interactionist view. Long Range Planning, 51:815–830. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2017.08.001
Berger A N, Hasan I, Zhou M (2009) Bank ownership and efficiency in China: What will happen in the world’s largest nation? Journal of Banking and Finance, 33:113–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2007.05.016
Refinitiv Eikon. https://eikon.refinitiv.com/index.html
Saunders M, Lewis P, Thornhill A (2009) Research methods for business students, 5th edition. Pearson Education Limited
Delegkos A E, Skordoulis M, Kalantonis P, Xanthopoulou A (2022) Integrated reporting and value relevance in the energy sector: The case of European listed firms. Energies, 15:8435. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15228435
Skordoulis M, Kyriakopoulos G, Ntanos S, Galatsidas S, Arabatzis G, Chalikias M, Kalantonis P. (2022) The mediating role of firm strategy in the relationship between green entrepreneurship, green innovation, and competitive advantage: the case of medium and large-sized firms in Greece. Sustainability, 14:3286. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14063286
Skordoulis M, Ntanos S, Kyriakopoulos G L, Arabatzis G, Galatsidas S, Chalikias M (2020) Environmental innovation, open innovation dynamics and competitive advantage of medium and large-sized firms. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 6:195. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc6040195
Acknowledgements
Research was fully funded by the University of West Attica, Greece.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.
Copyright information
© 2024 The Author(s)
About this paper
Cite this paper
Sotiropoulos, M., Skordoulis, M., Kalantonis, P., Papagrigoriou, A. (2024). The Impact of Board Diversity on Firms’ Performance: The Case of Retail Industry in Europe. In: Kavoura, A., Borges-Tiago, T., Tiago, F. (eds) Strategic Innovative Marketing and Tourism. ICSIMAT 2023. Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-51038-0_85
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-51038-0_85
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-51037-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-51038-0
eBook Packages: Business and ManagementBusiness and Management (R0)