The usual arguments for adding women directors are that diverse boards are more creative and innovative, less inclined to "group

admin2022-07-26  11

问题     The usual arguments for adding women directors are that diverse boards are more creative and innovative, less inclined to "groupthink" and likely to be more independent from senior management. Numerous studies show that high proportions of women directors coincide with superior corporate performance. But there is little academically accepted evidence of a causal relationship. It may be that thriving firms allow themselves the luxury of attending to social issues such as board diversity, whereas poorly performing ones batten down the hatches.
    Women do seem to be particularly effective board members at companies where things are going wrong. A 2008 paper on the impact of female directors by Renee Adams and Daniel Ferreira of the University of Queensland and the London School of Economics found that bosses of American firms whose shares perform poorly are more likely to be fired if the firm has a relatively high number of women directors. On average, however, the paper concluded that firms perform worse as the proportion of women on the board increases. There is certainly no shortage of companies capable of producing stellar results with few or no women on the board.
    Nor is there any doubt that in many cases low female representation also reflects a broader lack of meritocracy (rule by merit) in corporate culture. In France, for instance, interlocking board memberships are common. Women, and many other deserving businesspeople, are excluded from the system. Emma Marcegaglia, head of Confindustria, Italy’s main business lobby, says the dearth of women on boards and in management mainly reflects a controlling male elite at the top of business, the members of which have hardly changed for the past 30 years.
    But what most prevents women from reaching the boardroom, say bosses and headhunters, is lack of hands-on experience of a firm’s core business. Too many women go into functional roles such as accounting, marketing or human resources early in their careers rather than staying in the mainstream, driving profits. Some do so by choice, but others fear they will not get ahead in more chauvinist parts of a business. Getting men to show up at every board meeting—another effect of having more women on boards—is all very well, but what firms really need is savvy business advice. Yet according to the European Professional Women’s Network, the pipeline of female executives is "almost empty": women occupy only 3% of executive roles on boards, compared with 12% of non-executive ones.
    That suggests that the best way to increase the number of women on boards is to ensure that more women gain the right experience further down the corporate hierarchy. That may be a slower process than imposing a quota, but it is also likely to be a more meaningful and effective one.
A 2008 paper on the impact of female directors suggests that

选项 A、women directors are not conducive to business performance.
B、the proportion of women on the board remains stable.
C、American bosses will be fired if the firm shares perform poorly.
D、companies are likely to produce bad results without women directors.

答案A

解析 根据2008 paper定位到第二段。该段第二、三句从正反两方面指出女性董事对企业的作用有限,甚至作用是负面的:女性董事越多,企业业绩越差;没有女性董事或女性董事很少的企业也能获得成功。A项中的conducive意为“有益的,有帮助的”,该项所说推断与原文相符。这篇文章没有提到女性董事比例的稳定性问题。排除B项。C项看似与第二句中研究的结论对应,但缺乏了文中的一个前提——if the firm has a relatively high number of women directors“如果企业拥有的女性董事比例较高”,C项过于绝对,排除:D项与第二段第四句的观点相反,故排除。
转载请注明原文地址:https://jikaoti.com/ti/6Jg7FFFM
0

最新回复(0)