Diversity in the Boardroom: A Systematic and Interdisciplinary Review of the Literature

Sara De Masi et al.

Annals of Corporate Governance2025https://doi.org/10.1561/109.00000042article
AJG 2
Weight
0.41

What the paper says

After several decades of male Caucasian dominance, the composition of boards of directors has recently changed. Various factors, such as social pressure, the evolution of corporate law and good governance codes, have contributed to increase board (mostly, but not only) gender diversity. The growing prevalence of more diverse boards and the availability of data on directors’ demographics encouraged corporate governance scholars to investigate the antecedents and the consequences of board diversity. Early studies developed around the idea that directors’ diversity increases board experiences and perspectives, and so positively influences board effectiveness and corporate outcomes. The empirical evidence collected on board diversity’s impact on board and company results shows, however, only partial or mixed findings. Thus, the goal of this systematic and interdisciplinary literature review on board diversity is to understand the characteristics of previous studies and to summarize their main results. Our analysis identifies existing gaps, presents major theoretical and methodological barriers, and highlights future avenues to further advance research on board diversity.

2 citations

Open paper page →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1561/109.00000042

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{sara2025,
  title        = {{Diversity in the Boardroom: A Systematic and Interdisciplinary Review of the Literature}},
  author       = {Sara De Masi et al.},
  journal      = {Annals of Corporate Governance},
  year         = {2025},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1561/109.00000042},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Diversity in the Boardroom: A Systematic and Interdisciplinary Review of the Literature

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.


Evidence weight

0.41

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.25 × 0.4 = 0.10
M · momentum0.55 × 0.15 = 0.08
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.