| This dissertation has been built to shed light on the effects of board diversity on corporate social performance (CSP). I try to achieve this goal in three essays. In the first, I study the relationship theoretically, and propose hypotheses on the basis of a literature review. In the second, I test the proposed hypotheses relating board diversity and CSP. In the third, I investigate whether the relationship between board diversity and CSP remains stable over time.;In the first essay, I discuss the different definitions of board diversity in the literature. After conducting a systematic literature review, I show that (1) researchers use different definitions of both board diversity and social performance. They build their definitions of board diversity around variables representing both board structure and composition, without distinguishing between these. Similarly, social performance constructs are also widely different; (2) researchers measure board diversity differently. They use both quantitative and qualitative measures; (3) researchers measure social performance differently. Sometimes they take the more general corporate social responsibility (CSR) as a measure of corporate social performance; at other times, they use distinct components of CSR. In this first essay, I propose to distinguish between diversity of boards, which takes into account board structure variables, and diversity in boards, which uses board members' compositional variables (gender, education, experience, etc.).;The aim of the second essay is to provide statistical evidence of the relationship between board diversity and CSP using a sample of service and manufacturing firms listed on the US stock market. I measure diversity of boards and diversity in boards using diversity indices that I introduce. I have found that (1) diversity of boards has a negative, and (2) diversity in boards has a positive significant effect on CSP. Additionally, I have also found that (3) diversity of boards positively moderates the relationship between diversity in boards and CSP. In addition, using the components of each diversity index, I have found that board size (positively), director ownership (negatively), director gender (positively), director race (positively), and director tenure (positively) affect CSP.;The third essay investigates whether the relationship between board diversity and CSP is stable overtime. The results were marginal. I found that changes in diversity of boards has a negative significant effect on changes in corporate social performance. Furthermore, among components of board diversity, changes in director independence has a positive significant effect on changes in corporate social performance.;In sum, I have tried to answer the research question of the dissertation (i.e., to what extent does board diversity affect CSP?) by (a) arguing that board diversity covers both board structure (i.e., diversity of boards), and board composition (i.e., diversity in boards); (b) showing that both diversity of boards and diversity in boards, and their interactions, affect CSP; and (c) showing that these relationships are stable over time. This dissertation contributes to the strategy and corporate governance literatures by clarifying definitions and measurements, and showing that the structural component of board diversity has an effect, which differs from the compositional component of board diversity. |
